Skip to content
ื ืื ืœื‘ืช ืš ืืžืœื” ืžื” ืื“ื ื™ ืฉืœื˜ืช ื–ื•ื ื” ืืฉื” ืžืขืฉื” ืืœื” ื›ืœ ืืช ื‘ ืขืฉื•ืช ืš ื™ื”ื•ื”
he who whispersto the daughter of yourselfshe has languished/droopingwhat/why/how!inner master of myself/pedastalsyou dominated/controlledprostitutea womana work/actionthese/mighty-one/goddessallืืช-self eternalwithin the making of yourselfHe Is
| | | | | | | | |
RBT Translation:
what/why/how! she has languished/drooping to the daughter of yourself he who whispers inner master of myself/pedastals He Is within the making of yourself ืืช-self eternal all these/mighty-one/goddess a work/action a woman adulterous/prostitute you dominated/controlled
RBT Paraphrase:
To the Daughter of Monument/Zion
How she has drooped to the daughter of yourself10 โ€” a whisper of inner master of myself He Isโ€” you controlled/domineered within your making every self eternal mighty tree the act of a woman of adultery!
A drooping tree

ืืžืœ - to droop
ืืœื” - a mighty tree (#424)

"your making of every self eternal mighty one"

Julia Smith Literal 1876 Translation:
How thy heart languished, says the Lord Jehovah, in thy doing all these, the work of a woman, an imperious harlot;
LITV Translation:
How weak is your heart, declares the Lord Jehovah, since you do all these, the work of a woman, an overbearing prostitute,
Brenton Septuagint Translation:
Why should I make a covenant with thy daughter, saith the Lord, while thou doest all these things, the works of a harlot? and thou hast gone a-whoring in a threefold degree with thy daughters.

Footnotes

Eze. 16:30

ืœื‘ืช is ืœึพ + ื‘ืช (“to [the] daughter”), not related to ืœื‘ (“heart”); the root letters ื‘–ืช identify it as “daughter,” so the meaning is determined by the root, not by phonetic similarity.

Formerly scholars tried to read it as a feminine of ืœื‘ (“heart”), comparing it to forms like ืœึดื‘ึผื•ึนืช (plural construct or collective of “heart”) or even forcing a “heart-of-you” sense. They isolated this into a one-off, once-occurring form. Some thought, like Brown-Driver-Briggs, that it was incorrect and needed to be "corrected" to "ืœึดื‘ึฐืจึดื™ืชึตืš" (which means your covenant). In all cases, no one would would translate it honestly according to what is written, but worked hard to emend the text and (magically) craft an entirely unused form for "heart" and then call it a "hapax" (single occuring) word. 

Parallel forms in the Hebrew Bible:

Verse Form Meaning
Deut. 22:17 ืœึฐื‘ึดืชึฐึผืšึธ “to your daughter”
Esther 2:7 ืœึฐื‘ึทืช “to/for a daughter”
Micah 4:8 ืœึฐื‘ึทืช “to the daughter”
Num. 30:16 ืœึฐื‘ึดืชึผื•ึน “to his daughter”
  • The form ืœื‘ืชืš in Ezekiel 16:30 is structurally parallel to these forms. It is a fully grammatical 2nd person singular feminine construct, meaning “to your daughter”, and does not require emendation.

  • Scholarly bias: The traditional translation of "your heart" is made up. The proposed emendation to ืœึดื‘ึฐืจึดื™ืชึตืšึฐ (“your covenant”) reflects a preference for theological or idiomatic sense over literal reading, rather than a textual necessity. It effectively erases what the text actually says, imposing a meaning that suit interpretive assumptions rather than the Hebrew itself.

  • Conclusion: There is no linguistic or grammatical need to “correct” ืœึดื‘ึธึผืชึตืšึฐ. It has a plain, clear meaning, and reading it as “to your daughter” is honest, straightforward translation. When the bias is not honesty, what is it? Theological bias, historical-critical bias, prescriptive bias, cognitive/expectation bias? The insistence on emendation is more about assumed awkwardness or theological expectations than textual evidence, and in all cases, not honest. The opposite of honesty in translation is projection: reading what you think “should” be there rather than what the text actually says.

The form ืืžืœื” clearly conveys “has drooped / is languishing / fading away”, fitting the Niphal perfect 3rd feminine singular.