8. CONCLUDING REFLECTIONS
By way of conclusion, I shall offer a résumé of the main lines of argument in this thesis, and then look forward to the challenges that still lie ahead for the Supyire
team as we work on the translation of Levitical sacrifices. Before any attempt is made at translation of Scripture, Wendland emphasizes
the need for a thorough exegesis of the biblical and receptor cultures see p.2. In seeking to comprehend the nature of Supyire and biblical sacrifices, I have tried to
avoid the trap of imposing any pre-conceived model of sacrifice on the source material. My concern has been to allow the source material to be pre-eminent, to
penetrate the mindset of the Israelites and Supyire worshippers, and understand how they view what is going on when they bring offerings. To do this, it has been
necessary not only to concentrate on the forms and functions of the sacrifices themselves, but to cast a look at the wider contexts: to discern how sacrifice relates
to the way they see themselves and their cosmos, and their fundamental goals in life. For the Supyire people, harmonious relationships with the multiple deities
and forces in their pantheon are never far from mind. In Leviticus, the focus is again on harmonious relations, but this time with Yahweh, the holy omnipotent God who
has redeemed his people and expects them to act in accordance with his character. This difference of focus is also reflected in how the two communities
understand the nature of sacrifice. The Levitical view is that sacrifices are effective because God provided them as a means to divert his wrath away from those whose
have sinned against him, and onto a substitute. Once the relationship has been restored, they are a means of celebrating the divine-human covenant between
Yahweh and his people. God himself has provided the means for sacrifice; as omnipotent Creator, he has no need for anyone to give him anything.
The Supyire, by contrast, believe that in making their sacrifices, they are giving to a deity something from which it is going to derive benefit, something from
which it can increase its power. The gift is given with the intention of receiving in return. As a result of his gift, he expects that the deity will be obliged to return the
favour in some way. The differences can be highlighted further by contrasting each community’s understanding of the symbolism of blood. In the Pentateuch, blood is a
symbol of the death of the substitute animal Yahweh has provided. For the Supyire,
blood is a symbol of life-giving force that has been transferred from the slaughtered animal given by the offerer to the deity.
The emphasis in the Supyire prayers that accompany their offerings is on the benefits they are seeking, in terms of health, prosperity and a large and growing
family. Although in the Pentateuch, similar blessings are promised by Yahweh to his people on condition of their obedience, the primary focus is rather on the relationship
between God and his people. “You shall be holy for I, the LORD your God, am holy” Lev 19:2.
This primary focus is reflected in the main purposes of the five Levitical sacrifices: purification
tafj, reparation va, substitution hlu, tribute hjnm and fellowship
ymlv. For God to be able to dwell in the midst of his people, they need to be purified from their sin, desecration of his name or property needs to be
repaired, and his holy wrath against sin averted. Then, and only then, are the people in a position to dedicate themselves to their Lord and enjoy fellowship with him.
Given the difference of focus, and given that the same form of sacrifice can have different purposes in the two different cultures e.g. an offering of cereal, it is
important that, if possible, the functions rather than the forms of the sacrifices be reflected in the translation.
The Supyire language can be used naturally to produce new compound words for the five sacrifices with the model: function +
sÃraga. The term sÃraga, originally Arabic, has been adopted by Supyire, where it is a general term which can
cover all sorts of offerings. Its use by the neighbouring Bambara and Jula peoples in the context of Islam, mean that Supyire are familiar with the idea of offering a
sÃraga to God. It would be wrong to conclude from the above résumé that we have arrived at
the definitive solution for the translation of the sacrifices in Lev 1-7 into Supyire. There are other factors that lie outside the scope of this study that will have some
bearing on the matter. There are wider contexts to be considered. There is the translation of sacrifices in the other books in the Pentateuch, the Old Testament, and
the whole Bible and then there is the context of the wider translation and church community in the geographical region.
The translation of the sacrifices in Lev 1-7 cannot be treated totally in isolation, for there is other biblical vocabulary in this domain, and in particular other
Kategori