Men altså, hva er det som gjør at Lilith stadig er å finne i den jødiske toraen, men ikke i det gamle testamentet? Hvis hun har blitt forkastet som en mytologisk figur; når kom man frem til dette? Henviser her til en diskusjon omkring emnet:
http://www.paracleteforum.org/archive/email/history/lilith/dialogue.html[...]"According to Hebrew legend, the first woman God created
as a companion for the first man Adam was a strong-willed lady
named Lilith. (See Graves and Patai's Hebrew Myths and Reuther's
Womanguides.) As both had been created from dust, Lilith considered
herself equal to Adam. (They differed anatomically, of course,
with the Bible referring to a male as one who 'pisseth against
the wall' [1 Sam. 25:34; 1 Kings 14:10; 21:21].) Lilith objected
to having to lie beneath Adam during sexual intercourse, but Adam
would have it no other way. Lilith up and left him, winding up
in rabbinic tradition as a baby-killing demoness who seduces sleeping
men. Lilith is mentioned in Isa. 34:14, though the KJV renders
lilith as 'screech owl.' This first wife of Adam may safely be
called the world's first uppity woman.[...]
Står jo "hebrew legende"; er det da toraen de refererer til, eller menes det andre skrifter?
Henviser til den samme diskusjonen...
"The Term lilith:
One further fact with regard to lilith
must be considered. The term occurs in a list of creatures, the
greater part of which are matter-of-fact animals or birds. A comparative
glance at a half-dozen translates of the passage Isa 34:11-14
will convince any reader that there are a great many obscure and
difficult words to be found in the list. Following Delitzsch's
translation we have: "pelican," "hedge-hog,"
"horned-owl," "raven," "wild-dog,"
"ostrich," "forest-demon" (se`ir), "night-monster."
This is a curious mixture of real and imaginary creatures. Alexander
acutely observes that there is too much or too little mythology
in the passage. One of two conclusions would seem to follow from
a list so constructed: Either all these creatures are looked upon
as more or less demonic (see Whitehouse, Hastings, Dictionary
of the Bible (five volumes), article "Demon," with which
compare West M. Alexander, Demonic Possession in the New Testament,
16), or, as seems to the present writer far more probable, none
in the list is considered otherwise than as supposed literal inhabitants
of the wilderness. The writer of Isa 34:14, who was not constructing
a scientific treatise, but using his imagination, has constructed
a list in which are combined real and imaginary creatures popularly
supposed to inhabit unpeopled solitudes.
There still remains a
by no means untenable supposition that none of the terms necessarily
are mythological in this particular passage."Med så mange forskjellige tolkninger er det jo vanskelig å vite noe som helst.. Men jeg kjenner en kar som snakker både arabisk og hebraisk, kan godt være at han har lest toraen. Kan spørre han når jeg treffer`n.
Har du lest toraen da, Pjålter?
