The soul of the sluggard desires, yet has ποῦ; But the soul of the industrious is richly satisfied,
The view that the o in oxy WD is the cholem compaginis, Bottcher, § 835, meets with the right answer that this would be the only example of a vocal casus in the whole of gnomic poetry; but when on his own part (Neue Aehrenlese, § 13805) he regards wa» as the accus. of the nearer definition (=1¥523), he proceeds inadvertently on the view that the first word of the proverb is ΠΝ, while we read MNND, and ww»? is thus the nom. of the subject. ΣΝ iw? means “ bas (the sluggard’s) soul” (for Syy occurs as explanatory permutative briefly for yy wi), as 7B SYD means “its branches (i.e. of the fruitful tree),” Isa. xvii. 6. One might, it is true, add nm to the following word here, as at xiv. 13; but the siuilan expression appertaining to the syntax ornata occurs also 2 Sam. xxii. 33, Ps. Ixxi. 7, and elsewhere, where this is impracticable. Meiri appropriately compares the scheme Idx. 11. 6, she saw him, viz. the boy. With reference to the δ here violently (cf. xxviii. 1) introduced, Béttcher rightly remarks, that it is an adverb altogether like necquidquam, xiv. 6, xx. 4, Ps. Ixvili. 21, etc., thus: appetit necguidquam anima ejus, scilicet pigrt. 4b shows the meaning of the desire that has not, for there {W714 occurs, a favourite strong Mishle word (xi. 25, xxvill. 25, ete.) for ahinttand satisfaction (the LX X. here, as at xxviii, 25, ἐν ἐπιμελείᾳ, sc. ἔσονται, instead of which, Montfaucon mints πιμελείᾳ, which is, however, a word not authenticated), The slothful wishes and dreams of prosperity and abundance (cf. xxi. 25f., a parallel which the Syr. has here in view), but his desire remains unsatisfied, since the object is not gained but only lost by doing nothing; the industrious gain, and that richly, what the slothful wishes for, but in vain.
Ver. 5. Two proverbs of the character of the righteous and of the effect of righteousness:
A deceitful thing the righteous hateth;
But the godless disgraceth and putteth to shame. With 723 in the sphere of an intelligible generality (as here of falsehood, or Ps. xli. 9 of pabiisbpdneae a concrete event is 19 view, as with "225 in the following plur. a general fact is separated into its individual instances and circumstances (vid. at Ps. Ixv. 4); for 137 means not only the word in which the soul reveals itself, but also any fact in which an inner principle or a general fact or a whole comes forth to view. The righteous hateth all that bears in it the character of a falsehood (punctuate pV with Gaja, ef. xii. 19), but the godless... Should we now, with Bertheau, Hitzig, and others, translate “acteth basely and shamefully”? It is true that both Hiphs. may be regarded as transitive, but this expression gives no right contrast to 5a, and is pointless. We have seen at x. 5 that 27, like 20M, has also a causative signification: to put to shame, 1.6. bring shame upon others, and that xix. 26, where VSM Ὁ 25 are connected, this causative signification lies nearer than the intrinsically transitive. Thus it will also here be meant, that while the righteous hateth all that is false or that is tainted by falsehood, the godless on the contrary loves to disgrace and to putto shame. But it isa question whether Mx is to be derived from ΕἾ 3 = viz, and thus is of the same meaning as Ὁ); wean, Isa. xxx. 5, which there signifies pudefactum esse, is pointed #824, and is thus derived from ἃ ¥2 = wa, vid. 2 Sam. xix. 6. But &827 occurs also as Hiph. of Ὁ, and means transitively to make of an evil savour, Gen. xxxiv. 30, cf. Ex. v. 21, as well as intransitively to come into evil savour, 1 Sam. xxvii. 12. In this sense of putidum faciens, bringing into evil savour, v*x2 occurs here as at xix. 26, suitably along with 7"5n’; xix. 26 is the putidum facere by evil report (slander), into which the foolish son brings his parents, here by his own evil report, thus to be thought of as brought about by means of slander. The old translators here fall into error; Luther renders both Hiphils reflexively; only the Venet. (after Kimchi) is right: ὀζώσει (from an ὀζοῦν as trans. to ὀζεῖν) καὶ ἀτιμώσει, he makes to be of ill odour and dishonours. Ver. 6 Righteousness protecteth an upright walk, And godlessness bringeth sinners to destruction.
The double thought is closely like that of xi. 5, but is peculiarly and almost enigmatically expressed. As there, ΠΡῚΝ and MYL are meant of a twofold inner relation to God, which consists of a ruling influence over man’s conduct and a determination of his walk. But instead of naming the persons of the 777 ὍΣ and O’NDN as the objects of this influence, the proverb uses the abstract expression, but with personal reference, 77770" and NNO, and designates in two words the connection of this twofold character with the principles 6f their conduct. What is meant by 18" and ADA proceeds from the contrasted relationship of the two (cf. xxii. 12). ἫΝ signifies observare, which is not suitable here, but also tuert (τηρεῖν), to which AbD (vid. at xi. 3, and in Gesen. Thesaurus), not so much in the sense of “to turn upside down,” pervertere (as xi. 8, Ex. xxii.8), as in the sense of “ to overthrow,” evertere (as ¢.g. xxi. 12), forms a fitting contrast. He who walks forth with an unfeigned and untroubled pure mind stands under the shield and the protection of righteousness (cf. with this prosopopeeia Ps. xxv. 21), from which such a walk proceeds, and at the same time under the protection of God, to whom righteousness appertains, is well-pleasing; but he who in his conduct permits himself to be determined by sin, godlessness (cf. Zech. v. 8) from which such a love for sin springs forth, brings to destruction; in other words: God, from whom the yw, those of a perverse disposition, tear themselves away, makes the sin their snare by virtue of the inner connection established by Him between the Πυ and the destruction (Isa. ix. 17). In the LX X. this 6th verse was originally wanting; the translation in the version of Aquila, in the Complut. and elsewhere, which the Syr. follows, falsely makes nxon the subj.: τοὺς δὲ ἀσεβεῖς φαύλους ποιεῖ ἁμαρτία. Ver. 7. Two proverbs of riches and poverty:— There is one who maketh himself rich and hath nothing; There is another who representeth himself poor amid great riches. A sentence which includes in itself the judgment which xii. 9 expresses. To the Hithpa. 1230 (to make oneself of importance) there are associated here two others, in the meaning to make oneself something, without anything after it, thus to place oneself so or so, Ewald, ὃ 124a. ‘To the clauses with Ὁ there is supplied a self-intelligible i. Ver. 8 A ransom for a man’s life are his riches; But the poor heareth no threatening.
Bertheau falls into error when he understands 71¥3 of warning; the contrast points to threatening with the loss of life. The wealth of the rich before the judgment is not here to be thought of; for apart from this, that the Zord only in a single case permits, or rather ordains (Ex. xxi. 29 f.), ransom from the punishment of death, and declares it in all other cases inadmissible, Num. xxxv. 31 f. (one might indeed think of an administration of justice not strictly in accordance with the Mosaic law, or altogether accessible to bribery), 85 does not accord therewith, since the poor in such cases would fare ill, because one would lay hold on his person. But one may think e.g. on waylayers as those introduced as speaking i. 11-14. The poor has no room to fear that such will threateningly point their swords against his breast, for there is nothing to be got from him: he has nothing, one sees it in him and he is known as such. But the rich is a valuable prize for them, and he has to congratulate himself if he is permitted to escape with his life. Also in the times of war and commotion it may be seen that riches endanger the life of their possessor, and that in fortunate cases they are given as a ransom for his life, while his poverty places the poor man in safety. To you ND Hitzig fittingly compares Job iii. 18, xxxix. 7: he does not hear, he has no need to hear. Michaelis, Umbreit, Lowenstein (who calls to remembrance the state of things under despotic governments, especially in the East) also explain 8 correctly; and Fleischer remarks: pauper minas hostiles non audit, t.e. non minatur et hostis. Ewald’s syntactic refinement: “ Yet he became poor who never heard an accusation,” presents a thought not in harmony with 8a.
The three following proverbs in vers. 9-11 have at least this in common, that the two concluding words of each correspond with one another almost rhythmically.
Ver. 9 The light of the righteous burneth joyously, And the lamp of the godless goeth out. The second line =xxiv. 200, cf. xx. 20. In the Book of Job ΧΡ. 5f., Juv oye six and WT yoy 2) (cf. xxi. 17) stand together, and there is spoken of (xxix. 3) a divine 1) as well as a divine "ἰδὲ which enlightens the righteous; however, one must say that the poet, as he, vi. 3, deliberately calls the Zord “1x, and the commandment, as derived from it and separated, 3, so also here designedly calls the righteous 11x, viz. Ov “WN (iv. 18, cf. 2 Pet. i. 19), and the godless 13, viz. p\>1 73,—the former imparts the sunny daylight, the latter the light of tapers set indarkness. The authentic punctuation is ὈΡΊ ΝΣ, Ben-Naphtali’s is ‘¥ ἫΝ without Makkeph. To no” Hitzig compares the “laughing tongue of the taper” of Meidani, iii. 475; Kimchi also the “ laughing, i.e. amply measured span, pm nap,” of the Talmud; for the light laughs when it brightly shines, and increases rather than decreases; in Arab. samuha has in it the idea of joy directly related to that of liberality. ‘The
LXX. translates no incorrectly by διαπαντός, and has a distich following ver. 9, the first line of which is ψυχαὶ δόλεαι (707 WEI?) πλανῶνται ἐν ἁμαρτίαις, and the second line is from Ps. xxxvii. 210. Ver. 10 Nothing comes by pride but contention; But wisdom is with those who receive counsel. The restrictive ΡῚ (only) does not, according to the sense, belong to fi1a (by pride), but to M82, vid. under Ps. xxxii. 6 and Job ii. 10. Of jm’ = there is, vid. under x.24. Bertheau’s “ one causes ” is not exact, for “one” [man] is the most general personal subject, but in’ is in such cases to be regarded as impersonal: by pride is always asomething which causes nothing but quarrel and strife, for the root of pride isegoism. Line second is a variant to xi. 20. Bescheidenheit (modesty) is in our old [German] language exactly equivalent to Klugheit (prudence). But here the p'yny are more exactly designated as permitting themselves to be advised; the elsewhere reciprocal /Yi3 has here once a tolerative signification, although the reciprocal is also allowable: with such as reciprocally advise themselves, and thus without positiveness supplement each his own knowledge by means of that of another. Most interpreters regard 100 as a substantival clause, but why should not be carried forward? With such as permit themselves to be advised, or are not too proud to sustain with others the relation of giving and receiving, there is wisdom, since instead of hatred comes wisdom—the peaceful fruit resulting from an interchange of views. Ver. 11 Wealth by means of fraud always becomes less; But he that increaseth it by labour gains always more.
festinata (Jerome), do not necessarily suppose the phrase ban = onan, xx. 21 Keri, for wealth which comes ann is obtained in a windy (unsubstantial) manner and as if by storm, of which the proverb holds good: “so gewonnen so zerronnen” (= quickly come, quickly go). Dan needs neither to be changed into that unhebraic an (Hitzig) nor into the cognate onan (Ewald), but yet inferior to ann in the content of its idea. The contrast of one who by fraud and deception quickly arrives at wealth is one who brings it together in his hand, ἐπὶ χειρός (Venet.), i.e. always as often as he can bear it in his hand and bring it forth (Ewald, Bertheau, Elster, and Lagarde), or according to the measure of the hand, κατὰ χεῖρα (which means “according to external ability”), so that Sy, which is applied to the formation of adverbs, e.g. Ps. xxxi. 24 (Hitzig),—by both explanations Ἵν τ» has the meaning of “ gradually,”—is used as in the post-bib. Hebr. 1 Sy Ἢ Sy=pyn yp, e.g. Schabbath 156a (vid. Aruch under 5y) (distinguish from 2 = with thought, intentionally, Berachoth 526). There is scarcely a word having more significations than 7°. Connected with Sy, it means at one time side or place, at another mediation or direction; that which is characteristic here is the omission of the pronoun (ir-Dy, YP). The LXX. translates 1° Sy with the unrestrained freedom which it allows to itself by per’ εὐσεβείας, and has following πληθυνθήσεται another line, δίκαιος οἰκτείρει καὶ κυχρᾷ (from Ps, xxxvii. 26).
The figures of paradise in vers. 12 and 14 require us to take along with them the intermediate verse (13).
Ver. 12 Deferred waiting maketh the heart sick, And a tree of life is a wish accomplished.
Singularly the LX X. Κρείσσων ἐναρχόμενος βοηθῶν καρδίᾳ, followed by the Syr. (which the Targ. transcribes'): Better is he who begins to help than he who remains in hesitating expectation, by which nbnn is doubled, and is derived once from Ὁ ΠῚΠ, to wait, and the second time from 5nn, to begin. If the LXX., with its imitators, deteriorates to such a degree proverbs so clear, beautiful, and inviolable, what may one expect from it in the case of those not easily understood! 100 signifies also, Isa. xviii. 2, to be widely extended (cf. Arab. meshak), here in the sense of time, as 723, to prolong, Isa. xiii. 22, and post-bib. 217 1, the course of time.
1 That the Targum of the Proverbs is a Jewish elaboration of the Peshito text, vid. Noldeke in Merx’ Archiv, Bd. ii. pp. 246-49.
Regarding nonin, vid. at x. 28, where as xi. 27 nipn, here MSN, as also Ps. lxxviii. 29 of the object of the wish, and with x12 in the sense of being fulfilled (cf. Josh. xxi. 43), as there with δ" 2Π in the sense of accomplishing or performing. Extended waiting makes the heart sick, causes heart-woe (nen, part. fem. Hiph. of non, to be slack, feeble, sick; R. $n, to loosen, to make loose); on the contrary, a wish that has been fulfilled is a tree of life (cf. p. 32), of a quickening and strengthening influence, like that tree of paradise which was destined to renew and extend the life of man. Ver. 13 Whoever despiseth the word is in bonds to it, And he that feareth the commandment is rewarded.
The word is thought of as ordering, and thus in the sense of the commandment, 6.4. 1 Sam. xvii. 19, Dan. ix. 23, 25. That which is here said is always true where the will of a man has subordinated itself to the authoritative will of a superior, but principally the proverb has in view the word of God, the ™¥2 κατ᾽ ἐξ. as the expression of the divine will, which (vi. 3) appears as the secondary, with the mn, the general record of the divine will. Regarding 5 ma of contemptuous, despiteful opposition, vid. at vi. 30, cf. xi. 12. Joél (vid. p. 136, note) records the prevailing tradition, for he translates: ‘ Whoever despises advice rushes into destruction; whoever holds the commandment in honour is perfect.” But that nova is to be understood neither of perfection nor of peace (L.XX. and Jerome), but means compensabitur (here not in the sense of punishment, but of reward), we know from xi. 31. The translation also of ἵρ 22m by “he rushes into destruction ” (LXX. καταφθαρήσεται, which the Syr.-Hexap. repeats; Luther, “he destroys himself;” the Venet. οἰχησεταί οἱ, periet sibr) fails, for one does not see what should have determined the poet to choose just this word, and, instead of the ambiguous dat. ethicus, not rather to say iW) Pan, So also this San is not with Gesenius to be connected with bin= Arab. khabl, corrumpere, but with 5an= Arab. habl, ligare, obligare. Whoever places himself contemptuously against a word which binds him to obedience will nevertheless not be free from that word, but is under pledge until he redeem the pledge by the performance of the obedience refused, or till that higher will enforce payment of the debt withheld by visiting with punishment. Jerome came near the right interpretation: ipse se in futurum obligat; Abulwalid refers to Ex. xxii. 25; and Parchon, Rashi, and others paraphrase: YY ΞΟΠ) jae, he is confiscated as by mortgage. Schultens has, with the correct reference of the 15 not to the contemner, but to the word, well estabshed and illustrated this explanation: he is pledged by the word, Arab. marhwan (rahyn), viz. pigneratus pane (Livius, xxix. 36). Ewald translates correctly: he is pledged to it; and Hitzig gives the right explanation: “A moan [a pledge, cf. xx. 16] is handed over to the offended law with the nan [the bad conduct] by the despiser himself, which lapses when he has exhausted the forbearance, so that the punishment is inflicted.” The LXX. has another proverb following ver. 13 regarding υἱὸς δόλιος and οἰκέτης σοφός; the Syr. has adopted it; Jerome has here the proverb of the anime. dolose (vid. at ver. 9). Ver. 14 The doctrine of the wise man is a fountain of life, To escape the snares of death.
An integral distich, vid. p. 8 of the Introduction. Essentially like 14a, x. 11 says, “a fountain of life is the mouth of the righteous.” The figure of the fountain of life with the teleological ‘11 “pd (the Ὁ of the end and consequence of the action) is repeated xiv. 27. The common non-biblical figure of the laquei mortis leads also to the idea of death as Wp’ [a fowler], Ps. xci. 3. If it is not here a mere formula for the dangers of death (Hitzig), then the proverb is designed to state that the life which springs from the doctrine of the wise man as from a fountain of health, for the disciple who will receive it, communicates to him knowledge and strength, to know where the snares of destruction lie, and to hasten with vigorous steps away when they threaten to entangle him.
Four proverbs follow, whose connection appears to have been occasioned by the sound of their words (53¥... 52, nyt2... ΝΣ, ΤΡ ee 7
Regarding 10 on (thus to be punctuated, without Makkeph with Munach, after Codd. and old editions), vid. p. 84; for the most part it corresponds with that which in a deep ethical sense we call fine culture. Regarding jh’, vid. at x. 10: it is not used here, as there, impersonally, but has a personai subject: he brings forth, causes. Fine culture, which shows men how to take the right side and in all circumstances to strike the right key, exercises a kindly heart-winning influence, not merely, as would be expressed by ἹΠ ΝΥΝ, to the benefit of its possessor, but, as is expressed by
}7 jm, such as removes generally a partition wall and brings men closer to one another. The | [ perennis], touching it both for the eye and the ear, forms the contrast to jn jn’. This word, an elative formation from jn’=..,j,, denotes that which stretches itself far, and that with reference to time: that which remains the same during the course of time. “ That which does not change in time, continuing the same, according to its nature, strong, firm, and thus im’s becomes the designation of the enduring and the solid, whose quality remains always the same.” Thus Orelli, Die hebr. Synonyme der Zeit u. Ewigkeit, 1871. But that in the passage before us it denotes the way of the ὩΣ 22 as “endlessly going forward,” the explanation of Orelli, after Bottcher (Collectanea, p. 135), is withdrawn by the latter in the new Aehrenlese (where he reads jn's 3%, “constant strife”). And jmx ὅπ) (Deut. xxi. 4) does not mean “Ca brook, the existence of which is not dependent on the weather and the season of the year,” at least not in accordance with the traditional meaning which is given Sota ix. 5 (cf. the Gemara), but a stony valley; for the Mishna says: ΠΡ Ipowind INN, 2.2. jN’N is here, according to its verbal meaning, equivalent to mvp (hard). We are of the opinion that here, in the midst of the discussion of the law of the many ΠΟ (the ritual for the atonement of a murder perpetrated by an unknown hand), the same meaning of the jn is certified which is to be adopted in the passage before us. Maimuni’ (in Sota and Hilchoth Rozeach ix. 2) indeed, with the Mishna and Gemara, thinks the meaning of a “strong rushing wady” to be compatible; but mvp is a word which more naturally denotes the property of the ground than of a river, and the description, Deut. xxi. 4: in a jms ὅΠ), in which there is no tillage and sowing, demands for ὉΠ) here the idea of the valley, and not primarily that of the valley-brook. According to this tradition, the Targum places a ΘΠ in the Peshito translation of 15d, and the Venet. translates, after Kimchi, ὁδὸς δὲ ἀνταρτῶν (of ἀνταρτής from ἀνταίρειν) ἰσχυρά. The fundamental idea of remaining like itself, continuing, passes over into the idea of the firm, the hard, so that i's is a word that interchanges with yp, Num. xxiv. 21, and serves as a figurative designation of the rocky mountains, Jer. xlix. 19, and the rocky framework of the earth, Mic. vi. 2. Thus the meaning of hardness (πετρῶδες, Matt. xiii. 5) connects itself with
1 [=R. Moses ὃ. Maimun=Rambam, so called by the Jews from the initial letters of his name = Maimonides, ἃ. 1204. ]
the word, and at the same time, according to Deut. xxi. 4, of the uncultivable and the uncultivated. The way of the 0°33, the treacherous (vid. p. 84), ὁ.6. the manner in which they transact with men, is stiff, as hard as stone, and repulsive; they follow selfish views, never placing themselves in sympathy with the condition of their neighbour; they are without the tenderness which is connected with fine culture; they remain destitute of feeling in things which, as we say, would soften a stone. It is unnecessary to give a catalogue of the different meanings of this jmx, such as vorago (Jerome), a standing bog (Umbreit), an ever trodden way (Bertheau), etc.; Schultens offers, as frequently, the relatively best: at via perfidorum pertinacissime tensum; but jn’ does not mean to strain, but to extend. The LXX. has between 15a and 15d the interpolation: τὸ δὲ γνῶναι νόμον διανοίας ἐστὶν ἀγαθῆς. Ver. 16 Every prudent man acteth with understanding; But a fool spreadeth abroad folly. Hitzig reads, with the Syr. (but not the Targ.) and Jerome, 55 (omnia agit), but contrary to the Hebr. syntax. The “59 is not feeble and useless, but means that he always acts NY13, mit Bedacht [with judgment] (opp. ny 033, inconsulto, Deut. iv. 42, xix. 4), while on the contrary the foo’ displays folly. xii. 23 and xv. 2 serve to explain both members of the verse. Beddchtigkeit [judgment] is just knowledge directed to a definite practical end, a clear thought concentrated on a definite point. 7}, he calls out, and 1"), he sputters out, are parallels to #5’. Fleischer: #18, expandit (opp. Arab. tawy, intra animum cohiluit), as a cloth or paper folded or rolled together, cf. Schiller’s'—
“ He spreads out brightly and splendidly The enveloped life.”
There lies in the word something derisive: as the merchant unrolls and spreads out his wares in order to commend them, so the fool does with his foolery, which he had enveloped, z.e. had the greatest interest to keep concealed within himself—he is puffed up therewith. Ver. 17 A godless messenger falls into trouble; But a faithful messenger is a cordial. The traditional text, which the translations also give (except Jerome, nuntius impii, and leaving out of view the LXX., which
1[“* Er breitet es heiter und gldnzend aus, Das zusammengewickelte Leben.’
makes of ver. 17 a history of a foolhardy king and a wise messenger), has not NOD, but NOD; the Masora places the word along with sybnn, Gen. xlviii. 16. And $5» is likewise testified to by all translators; they all read it as Kal, as the traditional text punctuates it; Luther alone departs from this and translates the Hiph.: “a godless messenger bringeth misfortune.” Indeed, this conj. presses itself forward; and even though one read OB. the sense intended by virtue of the parallelism could be no other than that a godless messenger, because no blessing rests on his godlessness, stumbles into disaster, and draws him who gave the commission along with him. The connection yw Nn is like yuh ON, xi. 7 (cf. the fem. of this adj., Ezek. iii. 18). Instead of ¥72 is 47a, xvil. 20, xxvill. 14, parallels (cf. also xi. 5) which the punctuators may have had in view in giving the preference to Kal. With sxbp, from JN2, R. 1, to make to go=to send, is interchanged ὝΥ, from ἫΝ, to turn, whence to journey (cf. πον oF to become, to be as the νὰ εἰ τὰ to be to seine νῷ to journey” is used). The like xiv. 15, D218 TY 5 the etl: means fethet aliveds, in ithe full extent of the idea. Regarding X57, the means of healing, here of strength, refreshment, vid. iv. 22, xu. 18. Ver. 18 Poverty and shame (to him) who rejecteth correction; But he who regardeth reproof is honoured.
We are neither to supply &* before Hep) wv (or more correctly, abstr. pro coner., as 27, xii. 27), nor ὃ before yb, as Gesenius (Lehrgeb. ὃ 227a) does; nor has the part. YNB the value of a hypothetical clause like xviii. 13, Job xli. 18, although it may certainly be changed into such without destroying the meaning (Ewald, Hitzig); but “poverty and shame is he who is without correction,” is equivalent to, poverty and shame is the conclusion or lot of him who is without correction; it is left to the hearer tu find out the reference of the predicate to the subject in the sense of the quality, the consequence, or the lot (cf. e.g. x. 17, xiii. 1, xiv. 85). Regarding jp, vid. p. 73. The Latin expression corresponding is: qui detrectat disciplinam. He who rejects the admonition and correction of his parents, his pastor, or his friend, and refuses every counsel to duty as a burdensome moralizing, such an one must at last gather wisdom by means of injury if he is at
1 Vid. regarding the strong demand which the Hebr. style makes on hearer and reader, my Gesch. der jiidischen Poesie (1863), p. 189.
all wise: he grows poorer in consequence of missing the right rule of life, and has in addition thereto to be subject to disgrace through his own fault. On the contrary, to him who has the disgrace to deserve reproof, but who willingly receives it, and gives it effect, the disgrace becomes an honour, for not to reject reproof shows self-knowledge, humility, and good-will; and these properties in the judgment of others bring men to honour, and have the effect of raising them in their position in life and in their calling.
Two pairs of proverbs regarding fools and wise men, ranged together by catchwords.
Ver. 19 Quickened desire is sweet to the soul, And it is an abomination to fools to avoid evil.
A synthetic distich (vid. p. 8), the first line of which, viewed by itself, is only a feebler expression of that which is said in 120, for 77) Msn is essentially of the same meaning as 782 MND, not the desire that has just arisen and is not yet appeased (Umbreit, Hitzig, Zockler), which when expressed by a part. of the same verb would be ΠὶΠ (=n We), but the desire that is appeased (Jerome, Luther, also Venet. ἔφεσις γενομένη, t.e. after Kimchi: in the fulfilling of past desire; on the contrary, the Syr., Targ. render the phrase 78) of becoming desire). The Mph. 77) denotes not the passing into a state of being, but the being carried out into historical reality, e.g. KEizek. xxi. 12, xxxix. 8, where it is connected with x2; it is always. the expression of the completed fact to which there is a looking back, e.g. Judg. xx. 3; and this sense of the Niph. stands so fast, that it even means to be done, finished (brought to an end), to be out, to be done with anything, e.g. Dan. ii. 1." The sentence, that fulfilled desire does good to the soul, appears commonplace (Hitzig); but it is comprehensive enough on the ground of Heb. xi. to cheer even a dying person, and conceals the ethically significant truth that the blessedness of vision is measured by the degree of the longing of faith. But the application of the clause in its
1 We have said, p. 215, that a Niph. in which the peculiar causative meaning of the Hiph. would be rendered passively is without example; we must here with πὸ add, that the Niph. of intransitive verbs denotes the entrance into the condition expressed by the Kal, and may certainly be regarded, accord- ing to our way of thinking, as passive of the Hiphil (Gesen. ὃ 51, 2). But the old language shows no mini to which ΠΡ) (Arab. dinhaway, in Mutenebbi) stood as passive; in the Arab. also the seventh form, rightly regarded, is always pairing with 19d acquires another aspect. On this account, because the desire of the soul is pleasant in its fulfilment, fools abhor the renouncing of evil, for their desire is directed to that which is morally worthless and blameworthy, and the endeavour, which they closely and constantly adhere to, is to reach the attainment of this desire. This subordinate proposition of the conclusion is unexpressed. The pairing of the two lines of the proverb may have been occasioned by the resemblance in sound of nayin and MSA, “AD is n. actionis, like xvi. 17, cf. 6. Besides, it is to be observed that the proverb speaks of fools and not of the godless. Folly is that which causes that men do not break free from evil, for it is the deceit of sinful lust which binds them fast thereto. Ver. 20 Whoever goes with wise men, becomes wise; And whoever has intercourse with fools, becomes base. Regarding the significance of this proverb in the history of the religion and worship of Israel, vid. p. 39. We have translated 20a after the Ker?; the translation according to the Chethib is: “go with wise men and become wise” (cf. viii. 33), not qion, for the connection of the (meant imperatively) enfin. absol. with an imper. (meant conclusively) is not tenable; but Fon is an imper. form established by 1207, Jer. li. 50 (cf. Tio = N39, Num. xxii. 14), and appears to have been used with such shades of conception as here of intercourse and companionship for ΠΝ Regarding in", vid. at xi. 15; there it meant malo afficietur, here it means malus (peor) fiet. The Venet. (contrary to Kimchi, who explains by frangetur) rightly has κακωθήσεται. There is here a play upon words; AY means to tend (a flock), also in general to be considerate about anything (xv. 14, Isa. xliv. 20), to take care of anything with the accusative of the person (xxviii. 7, xxix. 3), to hold intercourse with any one: he who by preference seeks the society of fools, himself becomes such (Jerome, similis efficietur), or rather, as yy" expresses, he comes always morally lower down. “A wicked companion leads his associate into hell.” Ver. 21 Evil pursueth sinners, And the righteous is repaid with good.
To 9727 of the punishment which follows after sinners at their heels, cf. Nah. i. 8. Greek art gives wings to Nemesis in this sense. To translate 210, with Lowenstein, ‘ The pious, the good rewards them,” is untenable, for 31, the good (e.g. xi. 27), never appears personified, only 210, goodness, Ps. xxiii. 6, according to
As acommencing word, 210 signifies in the Afishle for the most part bonum (pre); but here, as at xii. 2, cf. xxii. 9, xiv. 4, it signifies bonus. As the expression that God is 31» (Ps. xxv. 8, etc.) of the Ο. T. is equivalent to the N. T. that He is ἀγάπη, so that man who in his relation to others is determined by unselfish love is 21 for the good man [der Giitige], ἰ.6. the man who is willing to communicate all good is truly good, because the essence of ΠΡῚΝ, righteousness of life, is love. Such an one suffers no loss by his liberality, but, according to the law, xi. 25, by which a dispenser of blessings is at the same time also a recipient of blessings, he has only gain, so that he makes his children’s children to inherit, ὁ.6. leaves behind him an inheritance extending even to his grandchildren (vid. regarding ΠΌΤ, Ρ. 182; here trans. as containing its object in itself, as at Deut. xxxii. 8: to make to inherit, to place in possession of an inheritance). The sinner, on the contrary (ΝΠ sing. to D'NDN, ἁμαρτωλοί), loses his wealth, it is already destined to pass over to the righteous who is worthy of it, and makes use (cf. Job xxvii. 17) of that which he possesses in accordance with the will and appointment of God—a revelation of justice appertaining to time, the exceptions to which the old limited doctrine of requital takes no notice of. ΡΠ, strength, then like our “ Vermdgen” (cf. opes, facultates), that by means of which one is placed in circumstances to accomplish much (F.); cf. regarding the fundamental idea contorquere, compingere, p. 226, also regarding ΒΝ, properly condensare, then condere, p. 61.
Connected with ver. 22 there now follow two proverbs regarding sustenance, with one intervening regarding education. Ver. 23 The poor man’s fresh land gives food in abundance, And many are destroyed by iniquity.
The Targ. and Theodotion (μέγας) translate 4, but the Masora has “19 with short Kameiz, as xx. 6, Eccles. i. 8 (cf. Kimchi under a). The rendering: multitudo cibi est ager pauperum, makes the produce the property “of the field (= frugum fertilis). V2 is the new field (novale or novalis, viz. ager), from 3, to make arable, fruitful; properly to raise up, viz. by grubbing and freeing of stones (RD). But why, asks Hitzig, just the new field? As if no answer could be given to this question, he changes 1° into 3°3, and finds in 23a the description of a rentier, ‘a great man who consumes the income of his capital.’ But how much more intelligible is the new field of the poor man than these capitals (Ὁ δ) with their per cents (32)! A new field represents to us severe labour, and as belonging to a poor man, a moderate field, of which it is here said, that notwithstanding its freshly broken up fallow, it yet yields a rich produce, viz. by virtue of the divine blessing, for the proverb supposes the ora et labora. Regarding OWR1=D'W, vid. at x. 4. Jerome’s translation, patrum (properly, heads), follows a false Jewish tradition. In the antithesis, 236, one is tempted to interpret & in the sense of viii. 21 [substance, wealth], as Schultens, opulentia ipsa raditur guum non est moderamen, and Kuchel: that which is essentially good, badly managed, goes to ruin. But ™ and wv at the beginning of a proverb, or of a line of a proverb, in every case means est gui. That a wealthy person is meant, the contrast shows. ΠΕΡ), which denotes anything taken away or gathered up, has the same meaning here as at 1 Sam. xxvii. 1: est qui (ΕἸ. quod, but the parallel does not demand this) abripiatur, 1.6. quasi turbine auferatur et perdatur; the word reminds us of 51D, whirlwind, but in itself it means only something smooth and altogether carried off. The 3 is here as at Gen. xix. 15; elsewhere DBD N>2 means with injustice (properly, not-right), xvi. 8, Jer. xxii. 13, Ezek. xxii. 29; here it is not the 3 of the means, but of the ΝΑ cause. While the (industrious and God-fearing) poor man is richly nourished from the piece of ground which he cultivates, many a one who has incomparably more than he comes by his unrighteousness down to a state of beggary, or even lower: he is not only in poverty, but along with this his honour, his freedom, and the very life of his person perish,
Ver. 24 He that spareth his rod hateth his son, And he who loveth him visits him early with correction. The pedagogic rule of God, iii. 12, avails also for men, xxiii. 13 f,, xxix. 15. The rod represents here the means of punishment, the patria potestas. He who spareth or avoideth this, and who does this even from love, has yet no true right love for his son; he who loveth him correcteth him early. With ἐπιμελῶς παιδεύει of the LXX. (cf. Sir. xxx. 1, ἐνδελεχήσει μάστιγας) the thought is in general indicated, but the expression is not explained. Many erroneously regard the suffix of NY as referring to the object immediately following (de Dieu, Ewald, Bertheau, Zockler); Hitzig, on the contrary, rightly remarks, that j in this case we should expect the words to be, after v. 22 (cf. Ex. 11. 6), 1I-nN. He himself, without any necessity, takes NY in the sense of the Arab. skhar, compescere. Hofmann (Schriftbew. ii. 2. 402) is right in saying that “NW is connected with a double accusative as elsewhere 57? occurs; and the meaning is, that one ought much more to anticipate correction than restrain it where it is necessary.” “NY means to go out early to anything (vid. p. 73), according to which a Greek rendering is ὀρθρίζει (Venet. ὀρθριεῖ) αὐτῷ παιδείαν: maturat et castigationem = mature eum castigat (F].). “NW does not denote the early morning of the day (as Rashi, nip), but the morning of life (as Euchel, yor inva). “The earlier the fruit, the better the training.” A father who truly wishes well to his son keeps him betimes under strict discipline, to give him while he is yet capable of being influenced the right direction, and to allow no errors to root themselves in him; but he who is indulgent toward his child when he ought to be strict, acts as if he really wished his ruin. Ver. 25 The righteous has to eat to the satisfying of his soul; But the body of the godless must suffer want.
Jerome translates 1pnn freely by insaturabilis (he has want =has never enough), but in that case we would have expected Th “DAN; also in 25a YIv-7Y would have been used. We have thus “ΕΝ us no commendation of temperance and moderation in contrast to gluttony, but a statement regarding the diversity of fortune of the righteous and the godless—another way of clothing the idea of x. 3. Yaw’ is a segolate form, thus an infin. formation, formally different from the similar Y2¥, iii. 10. Regarding }83, vid. Psychol. Ρ. 265f.; it is a nobler word than “ Bauch” [belly], for it denotes not the external arch, but, like κοιλία (R. D3, concavus), the inner body, here like xviii. 20, as that which receives the nourishment and changes it in succum et sanguinem. That God richly nourishes the righteous, and on the contrary brings the godless to want and misery, is indeed a rule with many exceptions, but understood in the light of the N. T., it has deep inward everlasting truth.
Chap. xiv. The division of chapters here corresponds to a new commencement made in ver. 1. This proverb reminds us of the allegorical conclusion of the Introduction, and appears, since it is older, to have suggested it (vid. p. 34). The three proverbs 1-3 form a beautiful trifolium: wise mangement, God-fearing conduct, and wise silence, with their threefold contraries.
Ver. 1 The wisdom of the woman buildeth her house, And folly teareth it down with its own hands. Were it ΟΣ nio2n, after. Jude. v. 29, cf. Isa. xix. 11, then the meaning would be: the wise among women, each of them buildeth her house. But why then not just 1030 ΠΟ, as 2 Sam. xiv. 2, ef. Ex. xxxv. 25? The Syr., Targum, and Jerome write sapiens mulier. And if the whole class must be spoken of, why again immediately the individualizing inna? The LXX. obliterates that by its ὠκοδόμησαν. And does not nin [folly] in the contrasted proverb (10) lead us to conclude on a similar abstract in la? The translators conceal this, for they translate nh personally. Thus also the Venet. and Luther; nix is, says Kimchi, an adj. like NY, ceca. But the linguistic usage does not point δὴ with Ὅης to any Say, It is true that a fem. of 548 does not occur; there is, however, also no place in which ΠΡῚΝ may certainly present itself as such. Thus also ΓῚΘΣΠ must be an abstr.; we have shown at i. 20 how Nin3n, as neut. plur., might have an abstr. meaning. But since it is not to be perceived why the poet should express himself so singularly, the punctuation ND3N is to be understood as proceeding from a false supposition, and is to be read nian, as at ix. 1 (especially since this passage rests on the one before us). Fleischer says: “to build the house is figuratively
equivalent to, to regulate well the affairs of a house, and to keep them in a good condition; the contrary, to tear down the house, is the same contrast as the Arab. ’amdrat dlbyt and kharab albyt. Thus e.g. in Burckhardt’s Spriichw. 217, harrt sabrt bythé ’amérat, a good woman (ein braves Weib) has patience (with her husband), and thereby she builds up her house (at the same time an example of the use of the preterite in like general sentences for individualizing); also No. 430 of the same work: ’amdrat dlbyt wla khardbt, it is becoming to build the house, not to destroy it; cf. in the Thousand and One Nights, where a woman who had compelled her husband to separate from her says: dna dlty ’amalt hadhé barwhy wakhrnt byty bnfsy. Burckhardt there makes the remark: ’amérat dlbyt denotes the family placed in good circumstances—father, mother, and children all living together happily and peacefully.”
This conditional relation of the wife to the house expresses itself in her being named as house-wife (cf. Hausehre [= honour of a house] used by Luther, Ps. Ixviii. 13), to which the Talmudic ‘25 (= uxor mea) answers; the wife is noted for this, and hence is called man apy, the root and foundation of the house; vid. Buxtorf’s Lez. col. 301. In truth, the oneness of the house is more dependent on the mother than on the father. A wise mother can, if her husband be dead or neglectful of his duty, always keep the house together; but if the house-wife has neither understanding nor good-will for her calling, then the best will of the house-father cannot hinder the dissolution of the house, prudence and patience only conceal and mitigate the process of dissolution—folly, viz. of the housewife, always becomes more and more, according to the degree in which this is a caricature of her calling, the ruin of the house.
Ver. 2 He walketh in his uprightness who feareth Jahve, And perverse in his ways is he that despiseth Him.
That which syntactically lies nearest is also that which is intended; the ideas standing in the first place are the predicates. Wherein it shows itself, and whereby it is recognised, that a man fears God, or stands in a relation to Him of indifference instead of one of fear and reverence, shall be declared: the former walketh in his uprightness, i.e, so far as the consciousness of duty which animates him prescribes; the latter in his conduct follows no higher rule than his own lust, which drives him sometimes hither and sometimes thither. v2 qpin (cf. qpin 1v*, Mic. ii. 7) is of kindred meaning with tena Ta, xxviii. 6 (DINa WA, x. 9), and ind) 77, Isa. lvii. 2. The connection of yo 115) follows the scheme of 2 Kings xviii. 37, and not 2 Sam. xv. 32, Ewald, ὃ 288c. If the second word, which particularizes the idea of the first, has the reflexive suff. as here, then the accusative connection, or, as ii. 15, the prepositional, is more usual than the genitive. Regarding nd, flectere, inclinare (a word common to the author of i.-ix.), vid. at ii, 15. With wa, cf. 1 Sam. ii. 30; the suffix without doubt refers to God, for 13 is the word that stands in parallel contrast to ‘1 Ny. Ver. 3 In the mouth of the fool is a switch of pride; But the lips of the wise preserve them.
The noun 207 (Aram. 87030, Arab. khitr), which besides here occurs only at Isa. xi. 1, meaning properly a brandishing (from son = Arab. khatr, to brandish, to move up and down or hither and thither, whence dlkhttdér, the brandisher, poet. the spear), concretely, the young elastic twig, the switch, z.e. the slender flexible shoot. Luther translates, “fools speak tyrannically,” which is the briefer rendering of his earlier translation, “in the mouth of the fool is the sceptre of pride;” but although the Targum uses NHIN of the king’s sceptre and also of the prince’s staff, yet here for this the usual Hebr. 02% were to be expected. In view of Isa. xi. 1, the nearest idea is, that pride which has its roots in the heart of the fool, grows up to his mouth. But yet it is not thus explained why the representation of this proceeding from within stops with 10M (cf. xi. 30). The βακτηρία ὕβρεως (LXX., and similarly the other Greek versions) is either meant as the rod of correction of his own pride (as eg. Abulwalid, and, among the moderns, Bertheau and Zoéckler) or as chastisement for others (Syr., Targum: the staff of reviling). Hitzig is in favour of the former idea, and thinks himself warranted in translating: a rod for his back; but while 73 is found for 783, we do not (cf. under Job xli. 7: a pride are the, etc.) find ΠΝ for m3, the body, or δ, the back. But in general it is to be assumed, that if the poet had meant 10n as the means of correction, he would have written iN)s3. Rightly Fleischer: “The tongue is often compared to a staff, a sword, etc., in so far as their effects are ascribed to it; we have here the figure which in Rev. i. 16 passes over into plastic reality.” Self-exaltation (R. δ, to strive to be above) to the delusion of greatness is characteristic of the fool, the ON [godless], not the D3 [stupid, dull ]—Hitzig altogether confounds these two conceptions. With such self-exaltation, in which the mind, morally if not pathologically diseased, says, like Nineveh and Babylon in the prophets, I am alone, and there is no one with me, there is always united the scourge of pride and of disgrace; and the meaning of 3b may now be that the lips of the wise protect those who are exposed to this injury (Ewald), or that they protect the wise themselves against such assaults (thus most interpreters).
But this reference of the eos to others lies much more remote than at xii. 6; and that the protection of the wise against.injury inflicted on them by words is due to their own lips is unsatisfactory, as in this case, instead of Bewahrung [custodia], we would rather expect Vertheidigung [defensio|, Dimpfung [damping, extinguishing], Miederduckung [stooping down, accommodating oneself to circumstances]. But also it cannot be meant that the lips of the wise preserve them from the pride of fools, for the thought that the mouth preserves the wise from the sins of the mouth is without meaning and truth (cf. the contrary, xiii. 3). Therefore Arama interprets the verb as jussive: the lips = words of the wise mayest thou keep, ze. take to heart. And the Venet. translates: χείλη δὲ σοφῶν φυλάξεις αὐτά, which perhaps means: the lips of the wise mayest thou consider, and that not as a prayer, which is foreign to the gnome, but as an address to the hearer, which e.g. xx. 19 shows to be admissible. But although in a certain degree of similar contents, yet 3a and 3) clash. Therefore it appears to us more /probable that the subject of 3b is the ΠΏΣ contained in O'3N; in vi. 22 wisdom is also the subject to poy wavn without its being named. Thus: while hurtful pride grows up to the throat of the fool, that, viz. wisdom, keeps the lips of the wise, so that no word of self-reflection, especially none that can wound a neighbour, escapes from ie: The form 0%9WM is much more peculiar than wie, Ex. xviii. 26, and ΣΙ, Ruth ii. 8, for the latter are obsitive forms of ἸΏΒ") and syn, while on eft contrary the former arises from Owen) Tf, geeonies to the usual interpretation, we make ‘nay the ΠῚ then tife construction follows the rule, Gesen. ὃ 146, 2. The LXX. transfers it into Greek: χείλη δὲ σοφῶν φυλάσσει αὐτούς. The probable conjecture, that ὉΠ is an error in transcription for DNDN = ὉΠ ΠΥ Γι (this is found also in Luzzatto’s Gramm. § 776; and Hitzig adduces as other examples of such transpositions of the } Jer. ii. 25, xvii. 23, Job xxvi. 12, and Josh ii. 4, ὩΞΥΠῚ for paym), we do ποῖ atkifowledye: because it makes the lips the subject with an exclusiveness the justification of which is doubtful to us.
1 Vid. regarding these forms with 5 instead of the simple Sheva, Kimchi, Michlol 20ab. He also remarks that these three forms with @ are all Mira; this is the case also in a remarkable manner with ἡ ΟΊ ᾽ν, vid. Michlol 21b; Livjath Chen ii. 9; and particularly Heidenheim, in his edition of the Pentateuch entitled Meér Enajim, under Ex. xviii. 26.
Ver. 4. The switch and the preserving, ver. 3, may have given occasion to the collector, amid the store of proverbs before him, now to present the agricultural figure:
Without oxen the crib is empty;
But rich increase is by the strength of the plough-ox. This is a commendation of the breeding of cattle, but standing here certainly not merely as useful knowledge, but as an admonition to the treatment in a careful, gentle manner, and with thankful recompense of the ox (xii. 10), which God has subjected to man to help him in his labour, and more generally, in so far as one seeks to gain an object, to the considerate adoption of the right means for gaining it. D DON (from ΝΣ to cling to) are the cattle giving themselves willingly to the service of men (poet. equivalent to O32). iw (rin, Arab. thwr), Ved. sthiras, is the Aryan-Semitic name of the plough-ox. The noun Di38 (=Di38 like POS, PON) denotes the fodder-trough, from DIX, to feed, and thus perhaps as to its root-meaning related to φάτνη (πάτνη), and may thus also designate the receptacle for grain where the corn for the provender or feeding of the cattle is preserved—Di2N», Jer. 1. 26, at least has this wider signification of the granary; but there exists no reason to depart here from the nearest signification of the word: if a husbandman is not thoughtful about the care and support of the cattle by which he is assisted in his labour, then the crib is empty—he has nothing to heap up; he needs not only fodder, but has also nothing. 12 (in pause 73), clean (synon. ‘72, cf. at xi. 26), corresponds with our daar [bare] = bloss [nudus]. Its derivation is obscure. The 3, 46, is that of the mediating cause: by the strength of the piough-ox there is a fulness of grain gathered into the barn (nian, from xiz, to gather in, anything gathered in). “Δ is the inverted 12, Striking if also accidental is the frequency of the x and 2in ver. 4. This is continued in ver. 5, where the collector gives two proverbs, the first of which commences with a word beginning with x, and the second with one beginning with 3:
But a lying witness breathes out falsehoods.
The right vocalization and sequence of the accents is 71230 fs wpa (Ρ with Tsere and the servile Mahpach, 1123N with Munach, because the following Athnach-word has not two syllables before the tone). As in 5a DON IY, so in 5b WY W is the subject. Different is the relation of subject and predicate in the second line of the parallel proverbs, ver. 25, xix. 5. With 5a cf. DON WY, xiii, 17; and regarding ™5* (one who breathes out), vid. at vi. 19, xii. 17. Ver. 6 In vain the scorner seeketh wisdom; But to the man of understanding knowledge is easy. The general sentence is concrete, composed in the common historical form. Regarding "δ, necquidquam, vid. at xiii.4. The participle 2p is here neut. for 7223, something which makes itself easy or light. The frivolous man, to whom truth is not a matter of conscience, and who recognises no authority, not even the Supreme, never reaches to truth notwithstanding all his searching, it remains veiled to him and far remote; but to the man of understanding, who knows that the fear of God and not estrangement from God leads to truth, knowledge is an easy matter—he enters on the right way to this end, he brings the right receptivity, brings to bear on it the clear eye, and there is fulfilled to him the saying, “To him that hath it is given.” Three proverbs regarding fools: Ver. 7 Go from the presence of a foolish man, And surely thou hast not known lips of knowledge;
t.e. surely hast not brought into experience that he possesses lips which express experimental knowledge, or: surely thou must confess on reflection that no prudent word has come forth from his mouth. If 7b were intended to assign a motive, then the expression would be ὙΠΟ 3 or YIANDN (Isa. xliv. 9), according to which Aquila and Theodotion translate, cat ov μὴ γνῷς. 133 is the sphere of vision, and 733 denotes either away from the sphere of vision, as e.g. Isa. i. 16, or, inasmuch as [2 is used as in by, NOMAD, and the like: at a certain distance from the sphere of vision, but so that one keeps the object in sight, Gen. xxi. 16. 2 732 denotes, as the inverted expression Deut. xxvili. 66 shows, over against any one, so that he has the object visibly before him, and ° 130, Judg. xx. 34, from the neighbourhood of a place where one has it in view. So also here: go away from the vis-d-vis (vis = vistis) of the foolish man, if thou hast to do with such an one; whence, 70, follows what he who has gone away must on looking back say to himself. 53 (with the pret. as 6.9. Isa. xxxili. 23) expresses a negative with emphasis. Nolde and others, also Fleischer, interpret 70 relatively: et in quo non cognoveris labia scientia. If yr-on were the expression used, then it would be explained after ix. 13, for the idea of the foolish man is extended: and of such an one as absolutely knows not how to speak anything prudent. But in ΑΝ the relative clause intended must be indicated by the added ja: and of such an one in whom... Besides, in this case Nr (vid. Ps. xxxv. 15) would have been nearer than 93. The LXX. has modified this proverb, and yet has brought out nothing that is correct; not only the Syr., but also Hitzig follows it, when he translates, “‘ The foolish man hath everything before Ligh but lips of ΠΛΘΡΊΘΠΩΕ are a receptacle of knowledge” (ΠῚ 034), It racks one’s brains to find out the meaning of the first part here, and, as Bottcher rightly says, who can be satisfied with the “lips of knowledge” as the “receptacle of knowledge”? Ver. 8 The wisdom of the prudent is to observe his way, And the folly of fools is deceit. The nearest idea is that of self-deceit, according to which the LXX., Syr., and Jerome render the word error (“ Jrrsal”). But M212 is nowhere else used of self- deception, and moreover is not the suitable word for such an idea, since the conception of the dolus malus is constantly associated with it. Thus the contrast will be this: the wisdom of the prudent shows itself in this, that he considers his conduct (3 as vii. 7, cf. Ps. v. 2), 1.6. regulates it carefully, examining and considering (xiii. 16) it according to right and duty; and that on the contrary the folly of fools shows itself in this, that they aim at the malevolent deception of their neighbour, and try all kinds of secret ways for the gaining of thisend. The former is wisdom, because from the good only good comes; the latter is folly or madness, because deception, however long it may sneak in darkness, yet at last comes to light, and recoils in its destructive effects upon lim from whom it proceeds. Ver. 9 The sacrificial offering of fools mocketh; But between upright men there is good understanding.
We may not give to the Hiph. yon any meaning which it nowhere has, as, to excuse (IXimchi), or to come to an agreement by mediation (Schultens). So we may not make DON the subject (Targ., Symmachus, Jerome, Luther, “fools make sport with sin”), for one is persuaded that pox is equivalent to puna jo tnx 55 (Immanuel, Meiri, and others), which would be more admissible if we had pon (vid. iii. 35), or if yd did not immediately follow (ved. xxvili. 1). Aquila and Theodotion rightly interpret the relation of the component parts of the sentence: ἄφρονας χλευάζει πλημμέλεια; and this translation of DW also is correct if we take πλημμέλεια in the sense of a θυσία περὶ πλημμελείας (Sir. vii. 31), in which the Judzeo-Hellenic actually uses it (vid. Schleusner’s Lew.). The idea of sacrificial offering is that of expiation: it is a penitential work, it falls under the prevailing point of view of an ecclesiastical punishment, a satesfactio in a church-disciplinary sense; the forgiveness of sins is conditioned by this, (1) that the sinner either abundantly makes good by restitution the injury inflicted on another, or in some other way bears temporal punishment for it, and (2) that he willingly presents the sacrifices of rams or of sheep, the value of which the priest has to determine in its relation to the offence (by a tax-scale from 2 shekels upwards). The Jord gives accurately the offences which are thus to be atoned for. Here, with reference to 96, there particularly comes into view the offence against property (Lev. v. 20 ff.) and against female hononr (Lev. xix. 20-22). Fools fall from one offence into another, which they have to atone for by the presentation of sacrificial offerings; the sacrificial offering mocketh them ($n with accus.-object, as xix. 28, Ps. cxix. 51), for it equally derides them on account of the self-inflicted loss, and on account of the efforts with which they must make good the effects of their frivolity and madness; while on the contrary, among men of upright character, ἤν, a relation of mutual favour, prevails, which does not permit that the one give to the other an indemnity, and apply the Asham- [OW =trespass-offering| Jord. Symmachus rightly: καὶ ἀνάμεσον εὐθέων εὐδοκία. But the LXX. confuses this proverb also. Hitzig, with the Syr., follows it and translates: The tents of the foolish are in punishment overthrown [ver/allt]; The house of the upright is well-pleasing [wolge/dllt].
Is not this extravagant [ungereimt = not rhymed] in spite of the rhyme? These ‘nx [tents] extracted from pons, and this m3 [house] formed out of }2, are nothing but an aimless and tasteless flourish.
Four proverbs of joy and sorrow in the present and the future:
Ver. 10 The heart knoweth the trouble of its soul, And no stranger can intermeddle with its joy.
The acceniuation 7" 2 seems to point out yt as an adjective (Lowenstein: a feeling heart), after 1 Kings iii. 9, or genit. (of a feeling heart); but Cod. 1294 and the Jemen Cod., and others, as well as the editions of Jablonsky and Michaelis, have 2? with Rebia, so that this is by itself to be taken as the subject (cf. the accentuation xv. δα and under at 16a). M72 has the 1 with Dagesh, and consequently the short Kametz (Michlol 636), like 77¥ iii. 8, ef, N13, Judg. vi. 28, and on the contrary M3, Ezek. xvi. 4; it is the fem. of mdr = morr, from 17, adstringere, amarum esse. Regarding 2, in contradistinction to WB2, vid. Psychol. p: 20k. 1 that is meant by the Hellenic and Hellenistic νοῦς, λόγος, συνεί- δησις, θυμός, is comprehended in καρδία, and all by which the wa and wip) are affected comes in 39 into the light of consciousness.” The first half of the proverb is clear: the heart, and only it, 1.6. the man in the centre of his individuality, knows what brings bitterness to his soul, 7.e. what troubles him in the sphere of his natural life and of the nearest life-circle surrounding him. It thus treats of life experiences which are of too complex a nature to be capable of being fully represented to others, and, as we are wont to say, of so delicate a nature that we shrink from uncovering them and making them known to others, and which on this account must be kept shut up in our own hearts, because no man is so near to us, or has so fully gained our confidence, that we have the desire and the courage to pour out our hearts to him from their very depths. Yet the saying, “ Every one knows where the shoe pinches him” (1 Kings viii. 38), stands nearer to this proverb; here this expression receives a psychological, yet a sharper and a deeper expression, for the knowledge of that which grieves the soul is attributed to the heart, in which, as the innermost of the soul-corforeal life, it reflects itself and becomes the matter-of-fact of the reflex consciousness in which it must shut itself up, but also for the most part without external expression. If we now interpret ΒΑΕ ΣΝ, as prohibitive, then this would stand (with this exception, that in this case δὲ instead of x9 is to be expected) in opposition, certainly not intended, to the exhortation, Rom. xii. 15, “ Rejoice with them that do rejoice,” and to the saying, “ Distributed joy is doubled joy, distributed sorrow is half sorrow;” and an admonition to leave man alone with his joy, instead of urging him to distribute it, does not run parallel with 10a. Therefore we interpret the fut. as potentiulis. As there is a soul-sorrow of the man whose experience is merely a matter of the heart, so there is also a soul-joy with which no other (vid. regarding Ἢ, p. 1385, and cf. here particularly Job xix. 27) intermeddleth (2 yn like Ps. evi. 35), in which no other can intermeddle, because his experience, as e.g. of blessed spiritual affection or of benevolent feeling, is purely of a personal nature, and admits of no participation (cf. on ἔκρυψε, Matt. xiii. 44), and thus of no communication to others. Elster well observes: ‘“ By
this thought, that the innermost feelings of a man are never fully imparted to another man, never perfectly cover themselves with the feelings of another, yea, cannot at all be fully understood by another, the worth and the significance of each separate human personality is made conspicuous, not one of which is the example of a species, but each has its own peculiarity, which no one of countless individuals possesses. At the same time the proverb has the significance, that it shows the impossibility of a perfect fellowship among men, because one never wholly understands another. Thereby it is indicated that no human fellowship can give true salvation, but only the fellowship with God, whose love and wisdom are capable of shining through the most secret sanctuary of human
personality.” Thus also Diichsel (but he interprets 105 admonitorily): ‘‘ Hach man is a little world in himself, which God only fully sees through and understands. His sorrow appertaining to his innermost life, and his joy, another is never able fully to transfer to himself. Yea, the most sorrowful of all experiences, the most inward of all joys, we possess altogether alone, without any to participate with us.” Ver. 11 The house of the wicked is overthrown; But the tent of the upright flourishes. In the cogn. proverb, xii. 7, line 2 begins with 1, but here the apparently firmly-founded house is assigned to the godless, and on the contrary the tent, easily destroyed, and not set up under the delusion of lasting for ever, is assigned to the righteous. While the former is swept away without leaving a trace behind (Isa. xiv. 23), the latter has blossoms and shoots (957 as inwardly transitive, like Job xiv. 9, Ps. xcii. 14); the houselold of such remains not only preserved in the same state, but in a prosperous, happy manner it goes forward and upward. Ver. 12 There is a way that seemeth right to one, But the end thereof are the ways of death.
This is literally repeated in xvi. 25. The rightness is present only as a phantom, for it arises wholly from a terrible self-deception; the man judges falsely and goes astray when, without regard to God and His word, he follows only his own opinions. It is the way of estrangement from God, of fleshiy security; the way of vice, in which the blinded thinks to spend his life, to set himself to fulfil his purposes; but the end thereof (A) 08 with neut.
fem.: the end of this intention, that in which it issues) are the ways of death. He who thus deceives himself regarding his course of life, sees himself at last arrived at a point from which every way which now further remains to him leads only down to death. The self-delusion of one ends in death by the sentence of the judge, that of another in self-murder; of one in loathsome disease, of another in a slow decay under the agony of conscience, or in sorrow over a henceforth dishonoured and distracted life. Ver. 13 Even in the midst of laughter the heart experiences sadness; And to it, joy, the end is sorrow. Every human heart carries the feeling of disquiet and of separation from its true home, and of the nothingness, the transitoriness of all that is earthly; and in addition to this, there is many a secret sorrow in every one which grows out of his own corporeal and spiritual life, and from his relation to other men; and this sorrow, which is from infancy onward the lot of the human heart, and which more and more deepens and diversifies itself in the course of life, makes itself perceptible even in the midst of laughter, in spite of the mirth and merriment, without being able to be suppressed or expelled from the soul, returning always the more intensely, the more violently we may have for a time kept it under and sunk it in unconsciousness. Euchel cites here the words of the poet, according to which 13a is literally true: “ΝΟ, man is not made for joy; Why weep his eyes when in heart he laughs?”!
From the fact that sorrow is the fundamental condition of humanity, and forms the background of laughter, it follows, 130, that in general it is not good for man to give himself up to joy, viz. sensual (worldly), for to it, joy, the end (the issue) is sorrow. That is true also of the final end, which according to that saying, μακά- plot οἱ κλαίοντες νῦν ὅτι γελάσετε, changes laughter into weeping, and weeping into laughter. The correction ANDO N Ns (Hitzig presses upon the Mishle style an article in such cases rejected, and removes a form of expression of the Hebr. syntaais ornata, which here, as at Isa. xvii. 6, is easily obviated, but which is warranted by a multitude of other examples, vid. at xiii. 4 (also v. 22), and cf. Philippi’s Status Const. p. 14 f., who regards the second word, as here nnn, after the Arab., as accus. But in cases like "οἷ i ‘*Nein, der Mensch ist zur Freude nicht gemacht, Darum weint sein Aug’ wenn er herzlich lacht.”
PY, although not in cases such as Ezra ii. 62, the accus. rendering is tenable, and the Arab. does not at all demand it. In the old Hebr. this solutio of the st. constr. belongs to the elegances of the language; it is the precursor of the vulgar post-bibl. AN INS anne oe, That the Hebr. may also retain a gen. where more or fewer parts of a sentence intervene between it and its governing word, is shown by such examples:as Isa. xlviii. 9, xlix. 7, Ixi. 7.? There follows a series of proverbs which treat of the wicked and the good, and of the relation between the foolish and the wise:
Ver. 14 He that is of a perverse heart is satisfied with his own ways; And a good man from himself.
We first deterntine the subject conception. 2) AD (one turning aside τῆς καρδίας or τὴν καρδίαν) is one whose heart is perverted, 31D), turned away, viz. from God, Ps. xliv. 19. The Book of Proverbs contains besides of this verb only the name of dross (recedanea) derived from it; 3D, separated, drawn away, is such a half passive as "3D, Isa. xlix. 21, aw, Mic. ii. 8, etc. (Olsh. ὃ 245a). Regarding 31D WX, vid. at xii. 2, cf. xiii. 22: a man is so called whose manner of thought and of action has as its impulse and motive self-sacrificing love. When it is said of the former that he is satisfied with his own ways, viz. those which with heart turned away from God he enters upon, the meaning is not that they give him peace or bring satisfaction to him (Lowenstein), but we see from i. 31, xvili. 20, that this is meant recompensatively: he gets, enjoys the reward of his wandering in estrangement from God. It is now without doubt seen that 146 expresses that wherein the benevolent man finds his reward. We will there-
1 Regarding the supplying (ibdal) of a foregoing genitive or accus. pronoun of the third person by a definite or indefinite following, in the same case as the substantive, Samachschari speaks in the MJufassal, p. 94 ss., where, as examples, are found: raeituhu Zeidan, I have seen him, the Zeid; marartu bihi Zeidin, 1 have gone over with him, the Zeid; saraftu wugéhah@ awwalihd, in the flight I smote the heads of the same, their front rank. Vid. regarding this anticipation of the definite idea by an indefinite, with explanations of it, Fleischer’s Makkari, Additions et Corrections, p. x1. col. 2, and Dieterici’s Mutanabbi, p. 341, 1. 13. 1
2 These examples moreover do not exceed that which is possible in the Arab., vid. regarding this omission of the mud@/, where this is supplied from the preceding before a genitive, Samachschari’s Mu/fassal, p. 34, 1. 8-13. Perhaps Tone, Obad. ver. 7, of thy bread = the (men) of thy bread, is an example of fore not explain (after iv. 15, cf. Num. xvi. 26, 2 Sam. xix. 10): the good man turns himself away from him, or the good man stands over him (as Jerome, Venet., after Eccles. v. 7);—this rendering gives no contrast, or at least a halting one. The jp of YOvD must be parallel with that of Y272. From the LXX., ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν διανοημάτων αὐτοῦ, the Syr. rightly: from the fruit (religiousness) of his soul; the Targ.: from his fruit. Buxtorf, against Cappellus, has already perceived that here no other phrase but the explanation of Yyn by ex eo quod penes se est lies at the foundation. We could, after vii. 14, also explain: from that which he perceives as his obligation (duty); yet that other explanation lies proportionally nearer, but yet not so that we refer the suffix to the blackslider of 14a: in it (his fate) the good man is satisfied, for this contrast also halts, the thought is not in the spirit of the Book of Proverbs (for xxix. 165 does not justify it); and in how totally different a connection of thought νυ is used in the Book of Proverbs, is shown by xxiv. 17); but generally the Scripture does not use yaw of such satisfaction, it has, as in 14a, also in 148, the recompensative sense, according to the fundamental principle, ὃ ἐὰν σπείρῃ ἄνθρωπος τοῦτο Kai θερίσει (Gal. vi. 7). The suffix refers back to the subject, as we say: oy ny}, ὧν WE) (Psychol. p. 152). But considerations of an opposite kind also suggest themselves. Everywhere else 5yp refers not to that which a man has within himself, but that which he carries without; and also that yeyn can be used in the sense of voyeND, no evidence can be adduced: it must be admitted to be possible, since the writer of the Chronicles (2 Chron. i. 4) ventures to use 33, Is ον thus used substantively: by his leaves (Aben Ezra and others)? If one compares xi. 28 with Ps. i. 3, this explanation is not absurd; but why then did not the poet rather use 159? We come finally to the result, that yoyn, although it admits a connected interpretation, is an error of transcription. But the correction is not YP (Elster) nor 22D? (Cappellus), for ody and Drby, deeds, are words which do not exist; nor is it pOyEIN (Bertheau) nor YOR (Ewald), but OID? (which Cappellus regarded, but erroneously, as the LXX. phrase); for (1) throughout almost the whole O. T., from Judg. 1i. 19 to Zech. i. 18, p77 and o>Syp are interchangeable words, and indeed almost an inseparable pair, cf. particularly Jer. xvii. 10; and (2) when Isaiah (111. 10) says, γδ5 DM ytD ἼΒ DOD PIS WK, this almost sounds like a prophetical paraphrase of the second line of the proverb, which besides by this emendation gains a more rhythmical sound and a more suitable compass.’
But the prudent takes heed to his step.
We do not translate, ‘every thing,” for “word” and faith are correlates, Ps. ον]. 24, and ‘NB is the non-self-dependent who lets himself Ἔ; easily persuaded by the talk of another (vid. p- 56): he believes every word without proving it, whether it is well-meant, whether it is true, whether it is νη δα and useful, so that he is thus, without having any firm principle, and without any judgment of his own, driven about hither and thither; the prudent, on the other hand, considers and marks his step, that he may not take a false step or go ata, he proves his way (8a), he takes no step without thought and consideration (3 or [33 with 5, to consider or reflect upon anything, Ps. xxiii. 17, cf. xxxiii. 15)—he makes sure steps with his feet (Heb. xii. 13), sill permitting himself to waver and sway by every wind of doctrine (Eph. iv. 14).
Ver. 16 The wise feareth and departeth from evil; But the fool loseth his wits and is regardless.
Our editions have 8% with Munach, as if 87! 02N were a substantive with its adjective; but Cod. 1294 has pon with Rebia, and thus it must be: 05n is the subject, and what follows is its complex predicate. Most interpreters translate 16: the fool is over-confident (Zockler), or the fool rushes on (Hitzig), as also Luther: but a fool rushes wildly through, i.e. in a daring, presumptuous manner. But ayn denotes everywhere nothing else than to fall into extreme anger, to become heated beyond measure, xxvi. 17 (cf. xx. 2), Deut. iii. 26, etc. Thus 16a and 160 are fully contrasted. What is said of the wise will be judged after Job i. 1, cf. Ps. xxxiv. 15, xxxvii.27: the wise man has fear, viz. fear of God, or rather, since n'nbyn is not directly to be supplied, that careful, thoughtful, selfmistrusting reserve which flows from the reverential awe of God; the fool, on the contrary, can neither rule nor bridle his affections, and without any just occasion falls into passionate excitement. But on the other side he is self-confident, regardless, secure; while the wise man avoids the evil, 1.6. carefully goes out of its way, and in N. T. phraseology “ works out his own salvation with fear and trembling.”
Ver. 17. This verse, as if explanatory of “ayn, connects itself with this interpretation of the contrasts, corresponding to the general usus loquendi, and particularly to the Mishle style.
One who is quick to anger worketh folly,
And a man of intrigues is hated. Ewald finds here no right contrast. He understands 713!) W'S in a good sense, and accordingly corrects the text, substituting for 3b”, miv® (Sit), for he translates: but the man of consideration bears (properly smooths, viz. his soul). On the other hand it is also to be remarked, that no wx, when it occurs, is not to be understood necessarily in a good sense, since ΠΟΙ is used just like nwo, at one time in a good and at another in a bad sense, and that we willingly miss the ‘most complete sense” thus arising, since the proverb, as it stands in the Masoretic text, is good Hebrew, and needs only to be rightly understood to let nothing be missed in completeness. The contrast, as Ewald seeks here to represent it (also Hitzig, who proposes jNU*: the man of consideration remains quiet; Syr. ramys, circumspect), we have in ver. 29, where the μακρόθυμος stands over against the ὀξύθυμος (AS or Θ' ἘΝ of the breathing of anger through the nose, cf. Theocritus, i. 18: καὶ ot del δριμεῖα χολὰ ποτὶ pik κάθηται). Here the contrast is different: to the man who is quick to anger, who suddenly gives expression to his anger and displeasure, stands opposed the man of intrigues, who contrives secret vengeance against those with whom he is angry. Such a deceitful man, who contrives evil with calculating forethought and executes it in cold blood (cf. Ps. xxxvii. 7), is hated; while on the contrary the noisy lets himself rush forward to inconsiderate, mad actions, but is not hated on that account; but if in his folly he injures or disgraces himself, or is derided, or if he even does injury to the body and the life of another, and afterwards with terror sees the evil done in its true light, then he is an object of compassion. Theodotion rightly: (ἀνὴρ δὲ) διαβουλιῶν μισηθήσεται, and Jerome: vir versutus odiosus est (not the Venet. ἀνὴρ βδελυγμῶν, for this signification has only ΠΕ, and that in the sing.); on the contrary, the LX X., Syr., Targum, and Symmachus incorrectly understand nytd WN in bonum pariem.
But the prudent put on knowledge as a crown. As a parallel word to 2m, nD! (after the Masora defective), also in the sense of Arab. dkthar, multiplicare, abundare (from Arab.
kathura, to be much, perhaps’ properly comprehensive, encompassing), would be appropriate, but it is a word properly Arabic. On the other hand, inappropriate is the meaning of the Heb.-Aram. AD, to wait (properly waiting to surround, to go round any one, cf. manere aliquem or aliquod), according to which Aquila, ἀναμενοῦσιν, and Jerome, expectabunt. Also M33, to encompass in the sense of to embrace (L.XX. κρατήσουσιν), does not suffice, since in the relation to 19m) one expects an idea surpassing this. Certainly there is a heightening of the idea in tls, that the Hiph. in contradistinction to ὉΠ) would denote an object of desire spontaneously sought for. But far stronger and more pointed is the heightening of the idea when we take n>" as the denom. of ἽΠ3 (Gr. κίταρις, κίδαρις, Babyl. 173, cudur, cf. 172, a rounding, sphera). Thus Theodotion, στεφθήσονται. The Venet. better actively, ἐστέψαντο (after Kimchi: pws Sy ans3 nytn wb), the Targ., Jerome, Luther (but not the Syr., which translates tn) by “to inherit,” but nn> by μεριοῦνται, which the LXX. has for 1m). The bibl. language has also (Ps. cxlii. 8) 35 in the denom. signification of to place a crown, and that on oneself; the non-bibl. has "ns (like the bibl. Dy2) in the sense of distributor of crowns,” and is fond of the metaphor nytn ind, crown of knowledge. With those not selfdependent (vid. regarding the plur. form of ‘M8, p. 56), who are swayed by the first influence, the issue is, without their willing it, that they become habitual fools: folly is their possession, 2.¢. their property. The prudent, on the contrary, as ver. 15 designates them, have thoughtfully to ponder their step to gain knowledge as a crown (cf. YWYF, to gain riches, M57, 110, to gain flowers, Gesen. § 53,2). Knowledge is to them not merely an inheritance, but a possession won, and as such remains with them a high and as it were a kingly ornament. Ver. 19 The wicked must bow before the good, And the godless stand at the doors of the righteous.
The good, viz. that which is truly good, which has love as its principle, always at last holds the supremacy. The good men who manifest love to men which flows from love to God, come finally forward, so that the wicked, who for a long time played the part of lords,
1 According to rule the Hebr. w becomes in Arab. 8.5, as in Aram. ἢ; but kthar might be from ktar, an old verb rarely found, which derivata with the idea of encircling (wall) and of rounding (bunch) point to.
bow themselves willingly or unwillingly before them, and often enough it comes about that godless men fall down from their prosperity and their places of honour so low, that they post themselves at the entrance of the stately dwelling of the righteous (xill, 22), waiting for his going out and in, or seeking an occasion of presenting to him a supplication, or also as expecting gifts to be bestowed (Ps. xxxvii. 25). The poor man Lazarus πρὸς τὸν πυλῶνα of the rich man, Luke xvi. 20, shows, indeed, that this is not always the case on this side of the grave. an’ Ἣν according to the Masora (cf. Kimchi’s Wéorterbuch under nnw), the ultima accented; the accentuation of the form 33D wavers between the ult. and ike penult. Olsh. p. 482 f., cf. Gesen. 68, Anm. 10. The substantival clause 19d is easily changed into a verbal clause: they come (Syr.), appear, stand (incorrectly the Targ.: they are judged in the gates of the righteous). Three proverbs on the hatred of men: Ver. 20 The poor is hated even by his neighbour;
But of those who love the rich there are many. This is the old history daily repeating itself. Among all people is the saying and the complaint:
Donec eris felix multos numerabis amicos,
Tempora si fuerint nubilia solus eris. The Book of Proverbs also speaks of this lamentable phenomenon. It is a part of the dark side of human nature, and one should take notice of it, so that when it goes well with him, he may not regard his many friends as all genuine, and when he becomes poor, he may not be surprised by the dissolution of earlier friendship, but may value so much the higher exceptions to the rule. The connection of the passive with? of the subject (cf. xiii. 18), as in the Greek with the dative, is pure Semitic; sometimes it stands with 12, but in the sense of ἀπό, Cant. iii. 10, before the influence of the West led to its being used in the sense of ὑπό (Ges. ὃ 143, 2); NB", is hated (Cod. 1294: x2"), connects with the hatred αὐ εν is dimiaed against the poor also the indifference which makes him without sympathy, for one feels himself troubled by him and ashamed.
Ver. 21 Whoever despiseth his neighbour committeth sin; But whoever hath compassion on the suffering—blessings on him! One should regard every human being, especially such as God has 1 Ovid, Trist. i. 8.
placed near to him, as a being having the same origin, as created in the image of God, and of the same lofty destination, and should consider himself as under obligation to love him. He who despiseth his neighbour (write ΓΞ with Metheg, and vid. regarding the constr. with dat. object. vi. 30, cf. xi. 12, xiii. 13) sins in this respect, that he raises himself proudly and unwarrantably above him; that the honour and love he shows to him he measures not by the rule of duty and of necessity, but according to that which is pleasing to himself; and in that he refuses to him that which according to the ordinance of God he owes him. In ver. 218 the Chethib D3 and the Kert ONY (vid. at Ps. ix. 13) interchange in an inexplicable way; ‘22 is the bowed down (cf. Arab. ma’nuww, particularly of the prisoner, from ’ana, fut. ya’nw, to bow, bend), 2 (Arab. ’anin, with the art. @[nzy, from the intrans. ’antya, to be bowed down) the patient bearer who in the school of suffering has learned humility and meekness. One does not see why the Keri here exchanges that passive idea for this ethical one, especially since, in proving himself to be {iN (compassionate) (for which elsewhere the part. Kal }2\n, xiv. 31, xix. 17, xxviii. 8), one must be determined only by the needy condition of his neighbour, and not by his (the neighbour’s) moral worthiness, the want of which ought to make him twofold more an object of our compassion. All the old translators, from the LX X. to the Venet. and Luther, on this account adopt the Chethib.
Ver. 22. The proverb terminating (ver. 21) with WS (cf. xvi. 20) is now followed by one not less singularly formed, commencing with Non (cf. viii. 1).
Will they not go astray who devise evil,
And are not mercy and truth to those who devise good? The part. Wh signifies both the plougher and the artisan; but on this account to read with Hitzig both times WN, i.c. machinatores, is nothing less than advisable, since there is connected with this metaphorical YN, as we have shown at iii. 29, not only the idea of fabricating, but also that of ploughing. Just so little is there any reason for changing with Hitzig, against all old translators, Y7. into v7’: will it not go ill with them...; the fut. yn’ (cf. Isa. Ixiii. 17) is not to be touched; the perf. 1yn (e.g. Ps. lvili. 4) would denote that those who contrive evil are in the way of error, the fut. on the contrary that they will fall into error (cf. xii. 26 with Job xii. 24). But if wn xdn is the expression of the result which shall certainly come to such, then 226 stands as a contrast adapted thereto: and are not, on the contrary, mercy and truth those who contrive that which is good, ze. (for that which befalls them, as xiii. 18a, ef. xiv. 35), is made their attribute) are they not an object of mercy and truth, viz. on the part of God and of men, for the effort which proceeds from love and is directed to the showing forth of good is rewarded by this, that God and men are merciful to such and maintain truth to them, stand in truth to them; for NOS) IDM is to be understood here, as at ii. 3, neither of God nor of men exclusively, but of both together: the wicked who contrive evil lose themselves on the way to destruction, but grace and truth are the lot of those who aim at what is good, guarded and guided by which, they reach by a blessed way a glorious end.
There now follows a considerable series of proverbs (vers. 23-31) which, with a single exception (ver. 24), have all this in common, that one or two key-words in them begin with ».
Ver. 23 In all labour there is gain, But idle talk leadeth only to loss. Here the key-words are 119 and ΟΠ (parallel xxi. 5, cf. with xi. 24), which begin with Ὁ. A¥P is labour, and that earnest and unwearied, as at x. 22. If one toils on honestly, then there always re from it something which stands forth above’ the endeavour as its result and product, wid. at Job xxx. 11, where it is shown how 1M‘, from the primary meaning to be stretched out long, acquires the meaning of that which hangs over, shoots over, copiousness, and gain. By the word of thie lips, on the contrary, ὦ.6. purposeless and inoperative talk (O°‘NS¥ 725 as Isa. xxxvi. 5, cf. Job xi. 2), nothing is gained, but on the contrary there is only loss, for by it one only robs both himself and others of time, and wastes strength, which might have been turned to better purpose, to say nothing of the injury that is thereby done to his soul; perhaps also he morally injures, or at least discomposes and wearies others. Ver. 24 It is a crown to the wise when they are rich; But the folly of fools remains folly.
From xii. 4, 31, xvii. 6, we see that O29 NY is the predicate. Thus it is {4 Aa of Ἂν wise of which it is said that they are a crown or an ornament to them. More than this is said, if with Hitzig we read, after the LXX,, py, their prudence, Seanad of pwy. For oe the meaning would oe that the wise need no other crown than that which they have in their prudence. But yet far more appropriately “riches” are called the crown of a wise man when they come to his wisdom; for it is truly thus that riches, when they are possessed along with wisdom, contribute not a little to heighten its influence and power, and not merely because they adorn in their appearance like a crown, or, as we say, surround as with a golden frame, but because they afford a variety of means and occasions for self-manifestation which are denied to the poor. By this interpretation of 24a, 240 comes out also into the light, without our requiring to correct the first nay, or to render it in an unusual sense. The LXX. and Syr. translate the first nw by διατριβή (by a circumlocution), the Targ. by gloria, fame—we know not how they reach this. Schultens in his Com. renders: crassa opulentia elumbium crassities, but in his Animadversiones he combines the first nw with the Arab. awwale, precedence, which Gesen. approves of. But although the meaning to be thick (properly coalescere) appertains to the verbal stem Y δὴν as well as the meaning to be before (Arab. dl, dwila, wal), yet the Hebr. naw always sed everywhere means only folly,’ from the fundamental idea crassities (thickness). Hitzig’s naw (which denotes the consequence with which the fool invests himself) we do not accept, because this word is Hitzig’s own invention. Rather nm? i is to be expected: the crown with Be fools adorn themselves is folly. But the sentence: the folly of fools is (and remains) folly (Symmachus, Jerome, Venet., Luther), needs the emendation as little as xvi. 226, for, interpr eted in connection with 24a, it denotes that while wisdom is adorned and raised up by riches, folly on the other hand remains, even when connected with riches, always the same, without being either thereby veiled or removed,—on the contrary, the fool, when he is rich, exhibits his follies always more and more. C. B. Michaelis compares Lucian’s simia est simia etiamsi aurea gestet insignia.
Ver. 25 A witness of truth delivereth souls; But he who breathes out lies is nothing but deception.
When men, in consequence of false suspicions or of false accusations, fall into danger of their lives (mw) °2"s is the designation in the later language of the law of a criminal process), then a tongue
1 Ewald’s derivation of Sy from ΠΝ Ξε PN; null, vain, is not much better which, pressed by conscientiousness and not deterred by cowardice, will utter the truth, saves them. But a false tongue, which as such (vid. 5b) is a Ὁ 33 M5: (after the Masora at this place nd" defective), t.e. is one who breathes out lies (vid. regarding mp’ at vi. 19), is mere deception (LXX., without reading 7579 [as Hitzig does]: δόλιος). In xii. 17 71299 is to be interpreted as the object. accus. of 13° carried forward, "but here to carry forward rare) (Arama, Lowenstein) is ‘idepieadetstlecatlie to deliver deceit = the deceiver is not expressed in the Hebr.—nnnn is, as possibly also xii. 16 (LXX. δόλιος), without YS or TY being supplied, the pred. of the substantival clause: such an one is deception (in bad Latin, dolositas), for he who utters forth lies against better knowledge must have a malevolent, deceitful purpose. Ver. 26 In the fear of Jahve lies a strong ground of confidence, And the children of such an one have a refuge.
The so-called 3 essentie stands here, as at Ps. Ixviii. 5, lv. 19, Isa. xxvi. 4, before the subject idea; the clause: in the fear of God exists, 1.6. 1 is and proves itself, as a strong ground of confidence, does not mean that the fear of God is something in which one can rely (Hitzig), but that it has (xxii. 19, Jer. xvil. 7, and here) an inheritance which is enduring, unwavering, and not disappointing in God, who is the object of fear; for it is not faith, nor anything else subjective, which is the rock that bears us, but this Rock is the object which faith lays hold of (cf. Isa. xxviii. 16). Is now the 220% to be referred, with Ewald and Zockler, to 'n? It is possible, as we have discussed at Gen. vi. 1 f.; but in view of parallels such as xx. 7, it is not probable. He who fears God entails in the Abrahamic way (Gen. xviii. 19) the fear of God on his children, and in this precious paternal inheritance they have a ODM (not ndMd, and therefore to be written with Masoretic exactness TBM), a pete or place of protection, a refuge in every time of need (cf. Ps. Ixxi. 5-7). Accordingly aaah refers back to the ‘7 8%, to be understood from ‘n ΠΡ (LXX., Luther, and all the J ewish interpreters), which we find not so doubtful as to regard on this account the explanation after Ps. Ixxiii. 15, cf. Deut. xiv. 1, as necessary, although we grant that such an introduction of the N. T. generalization and deepening of the idea of sonship is to be expected from the Chokma.
There springs up a life which makes him who carries jn himself (cf. John iv. 14, ἐν αὐτῷν this welling life, penetrating and strong of will to escape the snares (write after the Masora wiping defective) which death lays, and which bring to an end in death—a repetition of ΧΙ]. 4 with changed subject.
And when the population diminishes, it is the downfall of his glory. The honour or the ornament (vid. regarding 71, tumere, ampliari, the root-word of 177 and 1779 at Isa. Ixiii. 1) of a king consists in this, that he rules over a great people, and that they increase and prosper; on the other hand, it is the ruin of princely greatness when the people decline in number and in wealth. Regarding MMM, vid. at x. 14. DENA signifies prepositionally “ without” (properly, by non-existence), 6.9. xxvi. 20, or adverbially “ groundless” (properly, for nothing), Isa. lii. 4; here it is to be understood after its contrast “373: in the non-existence, but which is here equivalent to in the ruin (cf. DAN, the form of which in conjunction is DDN, Gen. xlvii. 15), lies the misfortune, decay, ruin of the princedom. The LXX. ἐν δὲ ἐκλείψει λαοῦ συντριβὴ δυνάστου. Certainly i) (from 7, Arab. razuna, to be powerful) is to be interpreted personally, whether it be after the form a with a fixed, or after the form ip with a changeable Kametz; but it may also be an abstract like Οἷον (ΞΞ Arab. seldm), and this we prefer, because in the personal sivnification jf), viii. 15, xxxi. 4, is used. We have not here to think of jim (from nm), consumption (the Venet. against Kimchi, πενίας); the choice of the word also is not determined by an intended amphibology (Hitzig), for this would be meaningless.
herein as “ great in understanding” (cf. 2 Sam. xxiii. 20), or as a “man of great understanding” (Lat. multus prudentid); the contrary is he who suffers himself to be impelled by his affections into hasty, inconsiderate action, which is here expressed more actively by nai am. Does this mean that he bears folly to the view (Luther, Umbreit, Bertheau, Elster, and others)? But for that idea the Mishle style has other expressions, xii. 23, xiii. 16, xv. 2, cf. xiv. 17. Or does it mean that he makes folly high, ze. shows himself highly foolish (LX X., Syr., Targum, Fleischer, and others)? But that would be expressed rather by mT or M30}, | Or is it he heightens folly (Lowenstein, Hitzig)? But the remark that the angry ebullition is itself a gradual heightening of the foolish nature of such an one is not suitable, for the choleric man, who lets the evenness of his disposition be interrupted by a breaking forth of anger, is by no means also in himself a fool. Rashi is right when he says, 1pond nwan, ie. (to which also Fleischer gives the preference) aufert pro portione sua stultitiam. The only appropriate parallel according to which it is to be explained, is 11]. 35. But not as Ewald: he lifts up folly, which lies as it were before his feet on his life’s path; but: he takes off folly, in the sense of Lev. vi. 8, i.e. he carries off folly, receives a portion of folly; for as to others, so also to himself, when he returns to calm blood, that which he did in his rage must appear as folly and madness. Ver. 30 A quiet heart is the life of the body, But covetousness is rottenness in the bones.
Heart, soul, flesh, is the O. T. trichotomy, Ps. Ixxxiv. 3, xvi. 9; the heart is the innermost region of the life, where all the rays of the bodily and the soul-life concentrate, and whence they again unfold themselves. The state of the heart, ze. of the central, spiritual, soul-inwardness of the man, exerts therefore on all sides a constraining influence on the bodily life, in the relation to the heart the surrounding life. Regarding S219 2, vid. at xii. 18, p. 262. Thus is styled the quiet heart, which in its symmetrical harmony is like a calm and clear water-mirror, neither interrupted by the affections, nor broken through or secretly stirred by passion. By the close connection in which the corporeal life of man stands to the moral-religious determination of his intellectual and mediately his soul-life—this threefold life is as that of one personality, essentially one—the body has in such quiet of spirit the best means of preserving the life which furthers the well-being, and co-operates to the calming of all its disquietude; on the contrary, passion, whether it rage or move itself in stillness, is like the disease in the bones (xii. 4), which works onward till it breaks asunder the framework of the body, and with it the life of the body. The plur. bwva occurs only here; Bottcher, ὃ 695, says that it denotes the whole body; but 13 also does not denote the half, a wa is the surrogate of an abstr.: the body, i.e. the bodily life in the totality of its functions, and in the entire manifoldness of its relations. Ewald translates bodies, but "wa signifies not the body, but’ its material, the animated matter; rather cf. the Arab. dbshdr, “ corporeal, human nature,” but which (leaving out of view that this plur. belongs to a later period of the language) has the parallelism against it. Regarding 782? (jealousy, zeal, envy, anger) Schultens is right: affectus inflammans estuque indignationis fervidus, from §2?, Arab. kand, to be high red. Ver. 31 He who apiece the poor reproacheth his Maker; And whosoever is merciful to the poor, it is an honour to him.
Line first is repeated in xvii. 5a somewhat varied, and the relation of the idea in 316 is as xix. 17a, according to which 11231 is the predicate and ἢ" 3ὶὲ pin the subject (Symmachus, Targ., Jerome, Venet., Luther), not the reverse (Syr.); 1257 is thus not the 3 per. Po. (LXX.), but the part. Kal (for which 216 has the part. Po. }2\2). The predicates Wy 47M (vid. regarding the perf. Gesen. ὃ 126, 3) and 1712201 follow one another after the scheme of the Chiasmus. ΡΝ has Munach on the first syllable, on which the tone is thrown back, and on the second the mIpyn sign (vid. Torath Emeth, p. 21), as 6.4. 1OiB, xvii. 14, and INN, xvii. 19. The showing of forbearance and kindness to the poor arising from a common relation to one Creator, and from respect towards a personality bearing the image of God, is a conception quite in the spirit of the Chokma, which, as in the Jahve religion it becomes the universal religion, so in the national law it becomes the human (vid. p. 41). Thus also Job xxxi. 15, cf. iii. 9 of the Epistle of James, which in many respects has its roots in the Book of Proverbs. Matt. xxv. 40 is a New Testament side-piece to 310.
Ver. 32. This verse also contains a key-word beginning with », but pairs acrostically with the proverb following:
When misfortune befalls him, the godless is overthrown; But the righteous remains hopeful in his death.
When the subject is 3 connected with Κι (the godless), then it may be understood of evil thought and action (Eccles. vii. 15) as well as of the experience of evil (6.9. xiii. 21). The L.XX. (and also the Syr., Targ., Jerome, and Venet.) prefers the former, but for the sake of producing an exact parallelism changes ini22 [in his death] into i19n2 [in his uprightness], reversing also the relation of the subject and the predicate: ὁ δὲ πεποιθὼς τῇ ἑαυτοῦ ὁσιότητι (the Syr.: in this, that he has no sin; Targ.: when he dies) δίκαιος, But no Scripture word commends in so contradictory a manner self-righteousness, for the verb nDn never denotes self-confidence, and with ἢ the exception of two passages (Judg. ix. 15, Isa. xxx. 2), where it is connected with ON, is everywhere the exclusive (vid. Ps. exviii. 8 f.) designation of confidence resting itself in God, even without the ‘na, as here and at Ps. xvii. 7. The parallelism leads us to translate inyi2, not on account of his wickedness, but with Luther, in conformity with 1nv2, in his misfortune, 1.6. if it befall him. Thus Jeremiah (xxiii. 12) says of the sins of his people: 377° MOBNS, in the deep darkness they are driven on (MpA. of nnt=nm), and xxiv. 16 contains an exactly parallel thought: the godless stumble mya, into calamity. Ewald incorrectly: in his calamity the wicked is overthrown—for what purpose then the pronoun? The verb ΠΠῚ frequently means, without any addition, “ to stumble over heaps,” e.g. Ps. xxxv. 5, xxxvi. 18. The godless in his calamity is overthrown, or he fears in the evils which befall him the intimations of the final ruin; on the contrary, the righteous in his death, even in the midst of extremity, is comforted, viz. in God in whom he confides. Thus understood, Hitzig thinks that the proverb is not suitable for a time in which, as yet, men had not faith in immortality and in the resurrection. Yet though there was no such revelation then, still the pious in death put their confidence in Jahve, the God of life and of salvation—for in Jahve’ there was for ancient Israel the beginning, middle, and end of the work of salvation—and believing that they were going home to Him, committing their spirit into His hands (Ps. xxxi. 6), they fell asleep, though without any explicit knowledge, yet not without the hope of eternal life. Job also knew that (xxvii. 8 ff.) between‘the death of those estranged from God and of those who feared God there was not only an external, but a deep essential distinction; and now the Chokma opens up a glimpse into the eternity heavenwards, xv. 24, and has formed, xii. 28, the expressive and distinctive al nyo" be for snimnettality, which breaks like a ray from the morning sun dinmah the night of the Sheol. Ver. 33 Wisdom rests in the heart of the man of understanding; But in the heart of fools it maketh itself known. Most interpreters know not what to make of the second line here. The LXX. (and after it the Syr.), and as it appears, also Aquila and Theodotion, insert ov; the Targ. improves the Peshito, for it inserts ΠΡῚΝ (so that xii. 23, xiil. 16, and xv. 2 are related). ea Abulwalid explains: in the heart of fools it is lost; Euchel: i reels about; but these are imaginary interpretations resting on a misunderstanding of the passages, in which yt’ means to come to feel, and yin to give to feel (to punish, correct). Kimchi rightly adheres to the one ascertained meaning of the words, according to which the Venet. μέσον δὲ ἀφρόνων γνωσθήσεται. So also the translation of Jerome: δέ indoctos quosque (quoque) erudiet, is formed, for he understands the “and is manifest among fools” (Luther) not merely, as C. B. Michaelis, after the saying: opposita juata se posita magis elucescunt, but of a becoming manifest, which is salutary to these. Béttainly 2)?2 can mean among =in he circle of, xv. 31; but if, as here and e.g. Jer. xxxi. 31, 37P3 is interchanged with 505, and if apa ANN is the subject saben of, as 1 Keir ν 11, 28, shes 2773 does not mean among (in the midst of), but in thd heart is the fool. According to this, the Talmud rightly, by comparison with the current proverb (Mezia 85b): NP wp wp aba ΝΎΠΟΝ, a stater in a flaggon cries Kish, Kish, i.e. makes much clatter. In the heart of the understanding wisdom rests, 1.6. remains silent and still, for the understanding feels himself personally happy in its possession, endeavours always the more to deepen it, and lets it operate within; on the contrary, wisdom in the heart of the fools makes itself manifest: they are not able to keep to themselves the wisdom which they imagine they possess, or the portion of wisdom which is in reality theirs; but they think, as it is said in Persius: Scire tuum nihil est nist scire hoc te sciat alter. They discredit and waste their little portion of wisdom (instead of thinking on its increase) by obtrusive ostentatious babbling. Two proverbs follow regarding the state and its ruler: