D — D’Ezechiel
Original French
De quelques passages singuliers de ce prophète, & de quelques usages anciens.
On sait assez aujourd’hui qu’il ne faut pas juger des usages anciens par les modernes: qui voudrait réformer la cour d’Alcinoüs dans l’Odissée, sur celle du grand Turc, ou de Louis XIV. ne serait pas bien reçu des sçavants: qui reprendrait Virgile d’avoir représenté le roi Evandre couvert d’une peau d’ours, & accompagné de deux chiens, pour recevoir des ambassadeurs, serait un mauvais critique.
Les mœurs des anciens Juifs sont encor plus différentes des nôtres, que celles du roi Alcinoüs, de Nausicas sa fille, & du bon homme Evandre. Ezéchiel esclave chez les Caldéens eut une vision près de la petite riviére de Chobar qui se perd dans l’Euphrate.
On ne doit point être étonné qu’il ait vû des animaux à quatre faces, & à quatre aîles, avec des pieds de veau, ni des roües qui marchaient toutes seules, & qui avaient l’esprit de vie; ces symboles plaisent même à l’imagination; mais plusieurs critiques se sont révoltés contre l’ordre que le seigneur lui donna de manger pendant trois cent quatre-vingt-dix jours, du pain d’orge, de froment & de millet couvert de merde.
Le prophète s’écria, pouah! pouah! pouah! mon ame n’a point été jusqu’ici pollüe; & le seigneur lui répondit, Eh bien, je vous donne de la fiente de bœuf au lieu d’excrément d’homme, & vous paitrirez vôtre pain avec cette fiente.
Comme il n’est point d’usage de manger de telles confitures sur son pain, la plupart des hommes trouvent ces commandements indignes de la majesté divine. Cependant il faut avoüer que de la bouze de vache & tous les diamants du grand Mogol sont parfaitement égaux, non seulement aux yeux d’un être divin, mais à ceux d’un vrai philosophe; & à l’égard des raisons que Dieu pouvait avoir d’ordonner un tel déjeuner au prophète, ce n’est pas à nous de les demander.
Il sufit de faire voir que ces commandements qui nous paraissent étranges, ne le parurent pas aux Juifs. Il est vrai que la sinagogue ne permettait pas du temps de St. Jérôme la lecture d’Ezéchiel avant l’âge de trente ans; mais c’était parce que dans le chapitre 18. il dit que le fils ne portera plus l’iniquité de son père, & qu’on ne dira plus, Les pères ont mangé des raisins verds, & les dents des enfans en sont agacées.
En cela il se trouvait expressément en contradiction avec Moïse, qui au chap. 28. des Nombres, assure que les enfans portent l’iniquité des pères, jusqu’à la troisième & quatrième génération.
Ezéchiel au chap. 20. fait dire encor au Seigneur, qu'il a donné aux juifs des préceptes qui ne sont pas bons. Voilà pourquoi la sinagogue interdisait aux jeunes gens une lecture qui pouvait faire douter de l’irréfragabilité des loix de Moïse.
Les Censeurs de nos jours sont encor plus étonnés du chap. 16. d’Ezéchiel; voici comme ce prophète s’y prend pour faire connaître les crimes de Jérusalem. Il introduit le seigneur parlant à une fille, & le seigneur dit à la fille: Lorsque vous nâquites, on ne vous avait point encor coupé le boyeau du nombril, on ne vous avait point salée, vous étiez toute nüe, j’eus pitié de vous; vous êtes devenüe grande, vôtre sein s’est formé, vôtre poil a paru; j’ai passé, je vous ai vüe; j’ai connu que c’était le temps des amans; j’ai couvert vôtre ignominie; je me suis étendu sur vous avec mon manteau; vous avez été à moi; je vous ai lavée, parfumée, bien habillée, bien chaussée; je vous ai donné une écharpe de coton, des brasselets, un colier; je vous ai mis une pierrerie au nez, des pendants d’oreilles, & une couronne sur la tête &c.
Alors, ayant confiance à vôtre beauté, vous avez forniqué pour vôtre compte avec tous les passants.... Et vous avez bâti un mauvais lieu.... & vous vous êtes prostituée jusques dans les places publiques, & vous avez ouvert vos jambes à tous les passants..... & vous avez couché avec des Egyptiens.... & enfin, vous avez payé des amans, & vous leur avez fait des présents, afin qu’ils couchassent avec vous..... & en payant au lieu d’être payée, vous avez fait le contraire des autres filles.... Le proverbe est, telle mère, telle fille, & c’est ce qu’on dit de vous &c.
On s’éléve encor davantage contre le chapitre 23. Une mère avait deux filles qui ont perdu leur virginité de bonne heure; la plus grande s’apellait Oholla, & la petite Oliba ..... Oholla a été folle des jeunes seigneurs, magistrats, cavaliers; elle a couché avec des Egyptiens dès sa premiére jeunesse.... Oliba sa sœur a bien plus forniqué encor avec des officiers, des magistrats & des cavaliers bien faits; elle a découvert sa turpitude, elle a multiplié ses fornications, elle a recherché avec emportement les embrassements de ceux qui ont leur membre comme un ane, & qui répandent leur semence comme des chevaux......
Ces descriptions qui effarouchent tant d’esprits faibles ne signifient pourtant que les iniquités de Jérusalem & de Samarie; les expressions qui nous paraissent libres ne l’étaient point alors. La même naïveté se montre sans crainte, dans un endroit de l’écriture. Il y est souvent parlé d’ouvrir la vulve. Les termes dont elle se sert pour exprimer l’accouplement de Boos avec Ruth, de Judas avec sa belle-fille, ne sont point deshonnêtes en Hébreu, & le seraient en nôtre langue.
On ne se couvre point d’un voile quand on n’a pas honte de sa nudité; comment dans ces temps-là aurait-on rougi de nommer les génitoires, puisqu’on touchait les génitoires de ceux à qui l’on faisait quelque promesse? c’était une marque de respect, un simbole de fidélité, comme autrefois parmi nous les seigneurs chatelains mettaient leurs mains entre celles de leurs seigneurs Paramonts.
Nous avons traduit les génitoires par cuisse. Eliezer met la main sous la cuisse d’Abraham: Joseph met la main sous la cuisse de Jacob. Cette coutume était fort ancienne en Egypte. Les Egyptiens étaient si éloignés d’attacher de la turpitude à ce que nous n’osons ni découvrir, ni nommer, qu’ils portaient en procession une grande figure du membre viril nommé Phallum, pour remercier les Dieux de la bonté qu’ils ont de faire servir ce membre à la propagation du genre humain.
Tout cela prouve assez que nos bienséances ne sont pas les bienséances des autres peuples. Dans quel temps y a-t-il eu chez les Romains plus de politesse que du temps du siécle d’Auguste? Cependant, Horace ne fait nulle difficulté de dire dans une piéce morale,
Nec metuo, nedum futuo vir rure recurrat.
Un homme qui prononcerait parmi nous le mot qui répond à futuo, serait regardé comme un crocheteur yvre; ce mot, & plusieurs autres dont se servent Horace, & d’autres auteurs, nous paraît encor plus indécent que les expressions d’Ezéchiel. Défaisons nous de tous nos préjugés quand nous lisons d’anciens auteurs, ou que nous voyageons chez des nations éloignées. La nature est la même partout, & les usages partout différents.
Musean translation
Mouseia’s complete machine-assisted Musean translation of the 73 articles in the 1764 first edition, made directly from the French and reviewed against the scan-collated French text. The author’s notes, quotations and verse are retained. Historical ethnic labels, including offensive terms, are retained from the 1764 text.
On certain singular passages in this prophet, and certain ancient customs.
It is well enough known today that ancient customs must not be judged by modern ones. Anyone who wished to reform Alcinous’ court in the Odyssey on the model of the Grand Turk’s or Louis XIV’s would not be well received by scholars. Anyone who reproached Virgil for depicting King Evander in a bearskin, accompanied by two dogs, receiving ambassadors, would be a poor critic.
The manners of the ancient Jews differ still more from ours than those of King Alcinous, his daughter Nausicaa, and good Evander. Ezekiel, a slave among the Chaldeans, had a vision beside the little river Chebar, which empties into the Euphrates.
We ought not to be astonished that he saw animals with four faces and four wings, with calves’ feet, or wheels moving by themselves and possessing the spirit of life. These symbols even please the imagination; but several critics have revolted against the Lord’s command that for three hundred and ninety days he eat bread of barley, wheat, and millet covered with shit.
The prophet cried, “Ugh! Ugh! Ugh! My soul has not been polluted until now”; and the Lord answered, “Very well, I give you ox dung instead of human excrement, and you will knead your bread with this dung.”
Since eating such preserves on one’s bread is not customary, most men find these commands unworthy of divine majesty. Yet it must be admitted that cow dung and all the Great Mogul’s diamonds are perfectly equal, not only in the eyes of a divine being but in those of a true philosopher. As for the reasons God might have had for ordering the prophet such a breakfast, it is not for us to ask them.
It is enough to show that these commands, which seem strange to us, did not seem so to the Jews. It is true that in St. Jerome’s time the synagogue did not permit Ezekiel to be read before the age of thirty; but that was because in chapter 18 he says the son will no longer bear his father’s iniquity, and people will no longer say, “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.”
In this he stood in express contradiction to Moses, who in chapter 28 of Numbers declares that children bear their fathers’ iniquity to the third and fourth generation.
In chapter 20 Ezekiel also has the Lord say that he gave the Jews precepts that are not good. That is why the synagogue forbade young people a reading that could raise doubts about the irrefutability of Moses’ laws.
The critics of our day are still more astonished by chapter 16 of Ezekiel. Here is how this prophet sets about making Jerusalem’s crimes known. He introduces the Lord speaking to a girl, and the Lord says to her: “When you were born, the gut of your navel had not yet been cut, you had not been salted, you were quite naked. I pitied you. You grew up, your breasts formed, your hair appeared. I passed by, I saw you; I recognized that it was the time for lovers. I covered your shame; I spread myself over you with my cloak; you were mine. I washed you, perfumed you, dressed you well, shod you well; I gave you a cotton scarf, bracelets, a necklace; I put a jewel in your nose, pendants in your ears, and a crown on your head, etc.
“Then, trusting in your beauty, you fornicated on your own account with every passerby … And you built yourself a brothel … And you prostituted yourself even in the public squares, and opened your legs to every passerby … And you slept with Egyptians … And finally you paid lovers, and gave them presents so that they would sleep with you … And by paying instead of being paid, you did the opposite of other girls … The proverb is, ‘Like mother, like daughter,’ and that is what is said of you,” etc.
Still stronger objections are raised against chapter 23. A mother had two daughters who lost their virginity early; the elder was called Oholah, the younger Oholibah. “… Oholah was mad for young lords, magistrates, horsemen; she slept with Egyptians from her earliest youth … Her sister Oholibah fornicated still more with officers, magistrates, and handsome horsemen; she exposed her shame, multiplied her fornications, passionately sought the embraces of those whose member is like a donkey’s and who shed their seed like horses …”
Yet these descriptions, which frighten so many weak minds, signify only the iniquities of Jerusalem and Samaria. Expressions that seem licentious to us were not so then. The same simplicity shows itself without fear in a certain passage of Scripture. It often speaks of opening the vulva. The terms it uses to express Boaz’s coupling with Ruth, Judah’s with his daughter-in-law, are not indecent in Hebrew, and would be in our language.
One does not cover oneself with a veil when one is not ashamed of nakedness. How, in those times, would people have blushed to name the genitals, since they touched the genitals of those to whom they made a promise? It was a mark of respect, a symbol of fidelity, just as formerly among us castellans placed their hands between those of their paramount lords.
We have translated genitals as thigh. Eliezer puts his hand under Abraham’s thigh; Joseph puts his hand under Jacob’s thigh. This custom was very ancient in Egypt. The Egyptians were so far from attaching shame to what we dare neither uncover nor name that they carried in procession a great figure of the virile member called the phallus, to thank the gods for their goodness in making this member serve the propagation of the human race.
All this proves well enough that our proprieties are not those of other peoples. When were the Romans more polished than in the age of Augustus? Yet Horace has no difficulty saying in a moral poem:
Nor do I fear, while I fuck, lest the husband come hurrying back from the country.
A man who uttered among us the word corresponding to futuo would be regarded as a drunken porter. This word, and several others used by Horace and other authors, seem still more indecent to us than Ezekiel’s expressions. Let us rid ourselves of all our prejudices when we read ancient authors or travel among distant nations. Nature is the same everywhere; customs everywhere differ.
Plain English translation
Mouseia’s complete machine-assisted Plain English translation of the same 73 articles, made directly from the French and reviewed against the scan-collated French text. The author’s notes, quotations and verse are retained. Historical ethnic labels, including offensive terms, are retained from the 1764 text.
Some odd passages from this prophet, and some customs of the past.
By now, we know we shouldn’t judge old customs by today’s standards. Try reshaping Alcinous’s court in the Odyssey to match the Grand Turk’s or Louis XIV’s. Scholars wouldn’t welcome that. Virgil shows King Evander in a bearskin, with two dogs beside him, receiving ambassadors. Finding fault with him for that would be bad criticism.
Ancient Jewish customs are even further from ours than those of King Alcinous, his daughter Nausicaa, or good old Evander. Ezekiel was a slave among the Chaldeans. He had a vision beside the small river Chebar, which empties into the Euphrates.
It’s no surprise that he saw creatures with four faces, four wings, and calves’ feet. Or that he saw wheels moving by themselves, with the spirit of life in them. Such symbols even appeal to the imagination. But several critics have strongly objected to a command the Lord gave him. For three hundred and ninety days, he was to eat barley, wheat, and millet bread covered with shit.
“Ugh! Ugh! Ugh!” the prophet cried. “My soul has never been polluted before!” The Lord answered, “All right, I’ll give you ox dung instead of human excrement. You’ll knead your bread with that dung.”
People don’t usually spread that kind of jam on their bread. So most people think such commands are beneath God’s dignity. Still, we have to admit something. To a divine being, cow dung and all the Great Mogul’s diamonds are completely equal. They’re equal to a real philosopher too. God may have had reasons for ordering the prophet such a breakfast. Asking what they were isn’t our business.
We need only show that the Jews didn’t find these commands strange as we do. In Saint Jerome’s day, the synagogue did forbid reading Ezekiel before age thirty. But the reason was his statement in chapter 18: a son would no longer carry his father’s guilt. People would stop saying, “The fathers ate sour grapes, and their children’s teeth feel the sting.”
That directly contradicted Moses. In chapter 28 of Numbers, Moses says children carry their fathers’ guilt into the third and fourth generations.
In chapter 20, Ezekiel also makes the Lord say he gave the Jews rules that aren’t good. That’s why the synagogue kept young people from reading him. They might start doubting whether Moses’s laws were beyond challenge.
Today’s critics find chapter 16 of Ezekiel even more shocking. To expose Jerusalem’s crimes, the prophet makes the Lord speak to a girl. The Lord tells her: “At your birth, your navel cord hadn’t yet been cut. Nobody had salted you. You were stark naked, and I pitied you. You grew up; your breasts took shape and your hair appeared. I came by and saw you. I knew the time for lovers had come. I covered your shame, stretching myself over you with my cloak. You belonged to me. I washed and perfumed you. I gave you fine clothes and shoes, a cotton sash, bracelets, and a necklace. I put a precious stone in your nose, earrings on your ears, and a crown on your head, etc.
“Then your beauty made you confident, and you had sex on your own account with every passerby… You built a brothel… You offered yourself for sex even in public squares, spreading your legs for every passerby… You slept with Egyptians… Finally, you paid lovers, giving them presents to get them into bed with you… You paid instead of getting paid, the opposite of what other girls do… ‘Like mother, like daughter,’ the saying goes. That’s what people say about you, etc.”
Chapter 23 draws even stronger protests. A mother had two daughters who lost their virginity young. Oholah was the older; Oholibah was the younger. … Oholah went wild over young lords, magistrates, and horsemen. From her earliest youth, she slept with Egyptians… Her sister Oholibah had even more sex, with officers, magistrates, and handsome horsemen. She showed her private parts and had sex again and again. She passionately wanted the embraces of men with a member like a donkey’s, who pour out semen like horses…
These descriptions alarm so many weak minds. Yet they mean nothing but the wrongdoing of Jerusalem and Samaria. We find the language too explicit; people then didn’t. Elsewhere in Scripture, the same innocence shows itself quite openly. It often mentions opening the vulva. Consider its words for Boaz sleeping with Ruth, or Judah with his daughter-in-law. They aren’t indecent in Hebrew, though they would be in our language.
You don’t put on a veil if being naked doesn’t shame you. Why would people then have blushed to mention genitals? They touched the genitals of the person they were making a promise to. This showed respect and stood for loyalty. Our castle lords once did something similar, placing their hands between their overlords’ hands.
We’ve used “thigh” to translate “genitals.” Eliezer places his hand under Abraham’s thigh; Joseph does the same under Jacob’s. This was a very old Egyptian custom. We don’t dare uncover or even name these parts. The Egyptians felt nothing shameful about them. They carried a large model of the male organ, called the Phallum, in procession. They thanked the gods for kindly using this organ to carry on the human race.
That’s proof enough that different peoples have different ideas of proper behavior. Was Rome ever more refined than under Augustus? Yet in a moral poem Horace quite freely says:
And I’m not afraid her husband will come back from the country while I’m fucking her.
Say our equivalent of futuo here, and people would take you for a drunken porter. To us, that word and several others in Horace and other writers seem even less decent than Ezekiel’s language. We should put aside all our prejudices when reading ancient writers. The same applies when we travel among faraway peoples. Everywhere, nature stays the same and customs differ.
About this section
D — D’Ezechiel is part of Pocket Philosophical Dictionary by Voltaire. This page sets the French original beside 2 direct-source translations, so any line can be checked against the source. It is article 37 of 73 in the work, which is kept in the European tradition.
Open the work page for the full contents, every edition, and the download links, or go back to Explore to browse other complete works in the European tradition. The reader keeps your place when you are signed in and lets you compare the original with each translation, one edition at a time.