"Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons? Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?"

Having no contemporaries who enjoy ancient works and imagine the Ptolemaic Greeks, albeit they have an admirable culture, had the sole understanding of the observed motions in the celestial arena, does not present a difficulty. Only by expanding the historical and technical perspectives in tandem with 21st-century technology can humanity hope to escape a disruptive subculture.

The term mazzal, literally meaning a constellation in the Zodiac, is also used of every star, as may be inferred from the following passage in the beginning of Bereshit Rabba (chap. x.); “While one star (mazzal) completes its circuit in thirty days, another completes it in thirty years.” Maimonides

https://www.ccel.org/ccel/m/maimonides/guide/cache/guide.pdf

In this instance, Maimonides is referring to Mercury whereas the ancient text refers to a seasonal or annual appearance of a star and the framework responsible for the calendar cycle of 365/366 days.

On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 2:17:55 AM UTC-6, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
> "Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
> Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus
> with his sons? Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the
> dominion thereof in the earth?"

> The term mazzal, literally meaning a constellation in the Zodiac,

I suppose, then, that Hebrew doesn't indicate the plural number in all
the places that English does, and so the passage should have been
translated as:

Can you bind the sweet influences of the Pleiades, or loose the bands
of Orion? Can you bring forth the constellations of the Zodiac in their
seasons, or can you guide Arcturus with his sons? Do you know the
ordinances of Heaven? Can you set their dominion on the Earth?

No doubt there are modern translations that have made such a
correction.

John Savard

On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 9:49:24 PM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 2:17:55 AM UTC-6, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
> > "Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
> > Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus
> > with his sons? Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the
> > dominion thereof in the earth?"
>
> > The term mazzal, literally meaning a constellation in the Zodiac,
>
> I suppose, then, that Hebrew doesn't indicate the plural number in all
> the places that English does, and so the passage should have been
> translated as:
>
> Can you bind the sweet influences of the Pleiades, or loose the bands
> of Orion? Can you bring forth the constellations of the Zodiac in their
> seasons, or can you guide Arcturus with his sons? Do you know the
> ordinances of Heaven? Can you set their dominion on the Earth?
>
> No doubt there are modern translations that have made such a
> correction.

And, indeed, they have. For example, the NIV does it as:

Can you bring forth the constellations in their seasons or lead out
the Bear with its cubs?

John Savard

On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 9:52:19 PM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 9:49:24 PM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
> > On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 2:17:55 AM UTC-6, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
> > > "Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
> > > Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus
> > > with his sons? Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the
> > > dominion thereof in the earth?"
> >
> > > The term mazzal, literally meaning a constellation in the Zodiac,
> >
> > I suppose, then, that Hebrew doesn't indicate the plural number in all
> > the places that English does, and so the passage should have been
> > translated as:
> >
> > Can you bind the sweet influences of the Pleiades, or loose the bands
> > of Orion? Can you bring forth the constellations of the Zodiac in their
> > seasons, or can you guide Arcturus with his sons? Do you know the
> > ordinances of Heaven? Can you set their dominion on the Earth?
> >
> > No doubt there are modern translations that have made such a
> > correction.
> And, indeed, they have. For example, the NIV does it as:
>
> Can you bring forth the constellations in their seasons or lead out
> the Bear with its cubs?

On the page I looked at, I saw some modern versions doing what I
would consider a mistranslation. Some refer to "the Bear with its
train" rather than sons or cubs.

That may be perfectly fine, I am not knowledgeable about the
underlying Hebrew as far as that ambiguity is concerned.

But some _other_ translations, which I presume to share the same
interpretation of the original text, refer to "the Bear with her
satellites"!

Stars don't orbit constellations, so the phrase looks bizarre.
But given "with her train" from other translations... that would
be the same as "with her fellow travellers". Which, *in Russian*,
translates to _sputniki_. *That* could then be translated into
English as "satellites".

Were Red spies trying to corrupt modern Bible translations during
the Cold War? Or is it just that the word "satellite" has a more
general meaning in English than I'm giving it credit for?

John Savard

The Decans or the system of observations that generates the 365/366-day calendar system on which the Ptolemaic framework is an outrigger as a predictive utility takes precedence when considering solar system and larger structural interpretations and conclusions.

It is the oldest system yet finds a renewal with the emergence of a satellite that roughly tracks the Earth along the ecliptic and is free of daily rotational influences-

https://sol24.net/data/html/SOHO/C3/96H/VIDEO/

The stars will replicate their position within the range of the C3 camera as the Earth's orbital position is defined that way based on the fixed reference of the foreground Sun as opposed to the looser observations within the Ptolemaic framework of the motion of the Sun against the 12 constellations.. The Decans uses 36 groups of stars in heliacal rising as a dawn appearance representing the change in position of the stars parallel to the orbital plane.

Maimonides refers Massaroth to Mercury within the Ptolemaic framework whereas the Book of Job refers Massaroth to the antecedent framework of heliacal risings and most definitely the star Sirius representing the beginning and end of the calendar year-

".. on account of the procession of the rising of Sirius by one day in the course of 4 years,.. therefore it shall be, that the year of 360 days and the 5 days added to their end, so one day shall be from this day after every 4 years added to the 5 epagomenae before the new year" Canopus Decree 238 BC

The older framework was unknown to the Islamic and Western Sun-centred astronomers so the more productive view today is to put that framework in the context of 21st-century observations from space for the purpose of rejuvenating local solar system research and specifically the current motion of Mercury as it presently is overtaking the Earth while passing from an evening to dawn appearance as it moves from left to right of our parent star.

On 05/09/2023 05:00, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 9:52:19 PM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
>> On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 9:49:24 PM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
>>> On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 2:17:55 AM UTC-6, Gerald Kelleher wrote:
>>>> "Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
>>>> Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus
>>>> with his sons? Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the
>>>> dominion thereof in the earth?"
>>>
>>>> The term mazzal, literally meaning a constellation in the Zodiac,
>>>
>>> I suppose, then, that Hebrew doesn't indicate the plural number in all
>>> the places that English does, and so the passage should have been
>>> translated as:
>>>
>>> Can you bind the sweet influences of the Pleiades, or loose the bands
>>> of Orion? Can you bring forth the constellations of the Zodiac in their
>>> seasons, or can you guide Arcturus with his sons? Do you know the
>>> ordinances of Heaven? Can you set their dominion on the Earth?
>>>
>>> No doubt there are modern translations that have made such a
>>> correction.
>> And, indeed, they have. For example, the NIV does it as:
>>
>> Can you bring forth the constellations in their seasons or lead out
>> the Bear with its cubs?
>
> On the page I looked at, I saw some modern versions doing what I
> would consider a mistranslation. Some refer to "the Bear with its
> train" rather than sons or cubs.
>
> That may be perfectly fine, I am not knowledgeable about the
> underlying Hebrew as far as that ambiguity is concerned.
>
> But some _other_ translations, which I presume to share the same
> interpretation of the original text, refer to "the Bear with her
> satellites"!
>
> Stars don't orbit constellations, so the phrase looks bizarre.
> But given "with her train" from other translations... that would
> be the same as "with her fellow travellers". Which, *in Russian*,
> translates to _sputniki_. *That* could then be translated into
> English as "satellites".

I shouldn't think so. But satellites in the pre-space age had a meaning
of aligned states or individuals around some dominant leader as well as
objects in orbit around a larger gravitationally dominant body.

> Were Red spies trying to corrupt modern Bible translations during
> the Cold War? Or is it just that the word "satellite" has a more
> general meaning in English than I'm giving it credit for?

The main problem is that American English is much more dogmatic about
meaning than original English or Japanese for example. If you are
monolingual it is very easy to assume that every word in your native
language maps onto just one word in another.

Japanese and English make much of the phonetic soundalikes with
different meanings.
"The sun rose as he rows past rose rows". for example.

(better ones available in Japanese along the lines of
裏庭には二羽, 庭には二羽鶏がいる
(uraniwa ni wa niwa, niwa ni wa niwa niwatori ga iru)

This means roughly, “There are two chickens in the backyard and two
chickens in the front yard”. Most "ni" and "wa" are different words!

Ambiguity is inherent in any translation - more so if it is across
millennia and ancient scripts. I pity realtime language interpreters
today in languages where you can negate the entire meaning of a sentence
by adding a postfix operator onto the end of it.

Even in US vs UK English there is ample scope for miscommunication.

Asking a female US secretary for a rubber would not go down well at all,
but in UK English that is a pencil eraser and not slang for a condom.

--
Martin Brown