It is not clear whether the discussion between Rabonon and R' Shimon B' Gamliel is: 1. An issur to translate the Torah. or 2. No issur but a Sefer written in another language would not qualify as Sifrei Hakodesh. According to #1 that the machlokes is simply whether a Sefer Torah written in another language has kedushas sefer torah, what would the gemara be proving from the story of Talmai that a Greek translation would have kedushas sefer torah? Who says that the 72 translations had kedushas sefer Torah! #2 must be correct - The Rabonon hold that Torah can be written in any language and have kedushas sefer Torah in any language. R' Shimon B' Gamliel argues and says that there is an issur to translate the Torah into any language other than Greek.
The Turei Even seems to concur that according to R' Shimon B"G there is an issur to translate into other languages. However, he discusses 2 possibilities whether this issur would be d'oraysa or d'rabonon. On the tzad that it is an issur d'rabonon the pasuk from yefes would only be an esmachte, but the real reason it is mutar is that since they were matir the translation by Talmai for a tzorech, the issur was removed to translate Torah (and acc. to RSBG in mishna even other seforim) into Greek. But, on the tzad that it is an issur d'oraysa and the source to be matir is a real drasha from the pasuk of yefes, it must be that the story of Talmai is cited bec. that is when they made the drasha to be matir translating into Greek.
It would seem that if the Torah was translated into another language - acc. to the first tzad since it is only an issur d'rabonon it would have kedushas sefer (like acc. to rabonon), but acc. to second tzad that it can't be translated m'doraysa it may not even have kedushas Sefer Torah.
Since we pasken like R' Shimon B' Gamliel, stone chumashim should be at least an issur d'rabonon - but the heter is the same heter to write torah not in a scroll bec. of 'eis la'asos l'hashem' - see Igros Moshe Y.D. 4:38:4.
No comments:
Post a Comment