or Segol, in pausa) is neither elevated (soaring) (Ewald) nor diffuse (Jo. Ernst Jungius in Oetinger: lingua dicax ac sermonem ultra quam decorum verbis extendere solita), rather imperative (Bertheau), better presumptuous (Hitzig) words, properly words of superfluity, ἐ.6. of superabundant self-consciousness and high pretension (cf. the transitive bearing of the Arab. watr with ὑβρίζειν, from ὑπέρ, Aryan upar, Job, p. 363). Rightly Meiri, ms nay mtn. It produces a disagreeable impression, when a man of vulgar mind and of rude conduct, instead of keeping himself in retirement, makes himself of importance, and weighty in a shameless, impudent manner (cf. Ps. xii. 9, where mp, vilitas, in a moral sense); but yet more repulsive is the contrast, when a man in whom one is justified in expecting nobility of mind, in accordance with his life-position and calling, degrades himself by uttering deceitful words. Regarding the 3 48, concluding a minori ad majus, we have already spoken at xi. 31, xv. 11. KR. Ismael, in Bereschith Rabba, at xliv. 8, reckons ten such conclusions a minort ad majus in the Scriptures, but there are just as many quanto magis. The right accentuation (¢.g. in Cod.1294) is here ΣΡ. AN, transformed
Ver. 8 The gift of bribery appears a jewel to its receiver; Whitherso’er he turneth himself he acteth prudently.
How 80 is to be understood is shown by 1 Sam. xiv. 47, cf. Josh. i. 7; the quoque se vertit, prudenter rem agit, has accordingly in both sentences the person meant by veya as subject, not the gift (Hitzig), of which De”, “it maketh prosperous,” is not said, for 3 means, used only of persons, prudent, and therefore successful, fortunate conduct. Such is said of him who has to give (Luther): he presses through with it whithersoever he turns. But the making of ΜΞ the subj. does not accord with this: this means [gift] to one who has to give, appears to open doors and hearts, not merely as a golden key, it is truly such to him. ‘Thus yoy, as at iii. 27, will be meant of him to whom the present is brought, or to whom aclaim thereto is given. But 19¥ means here not the gift of seasonable liberality (Zickler), but, as always, the gift of bribery, i.e. a gift by which one seeks to purchase for himself (xvii. 23) preference on the part of a judge, or to mitigate the displeasure of a high lord (xxi. 14); here (for one does not let it depend merely on the faithfulness of another to his duty) it is that by which one seeks to secure an advantage to himself. The proverb expresses a fact of experience. The gift of bribery, to which, as to a well-known approved means, ἽΠΟΠ refers, appears to ti who receives and accepts it (Targ.) as a stone of pleasantness, a charming, precious stone, a jewel (Juwél from joie= gaudium); it determines and impels him to apply all his understanding, in order that he may reach the goal for which it shall be his reward. What he at first regarded as difficult, yea, impossible, that he now prudently carries out, and brings to a successful conclusion, wherever he turns himself, overcoming the seemingly insurmountable hindrances; for the enticement of the gift lifts him, as with a charm, above himself, for covetousness is a characteristic feature of human nature—pecunia obediunt omnia (Eccles. x. 19, Vulg.). Ver. 9 He covereth transgressions who seeketh after love, And he who always brings back a matter separateth friends.
The pred. stands first in the simple clause with the order of the words not inverted. That yw ΠΟΘ is also to be interpreted here as pred. (cf. 19a) is shown by x. 12, according to which love covereth all transgressions. We write Y¥BNBI2 with Dag. forte conjunctivum of 5 (as of 3 in Ezek. xviii. 6), and Gaja with the Sheva, according to the Meth.-Setzung, ὃ 37; the punctuation YWD ADI also occurs. What the expression “ to seek love” here means, is to be judged, with Hitzig, after Zeph. ii. 3,1 Cor. xiv. 1. Itis in no case equivalent to seek to gain the love of another, rather to seek to preserve the love of men towards one another, but it is to be understood not after 9d, but after x. 12: he seeks to prove love who does not strike on the great bell when his neighbour has sinned however grievously against him, does not in a scandal-loving manner make much ado about it, and takes care not thereby to widen the breach between men who stand near to one another, but endeavours by a reconciling, soothing, rectifying influence, to mitigate the evil, instead of making it worse. He, on the contrary, who repeats the matter (RY with 2 of the obj., to come back with something, as xxvi. 11), 7.e. turns always back again to the unpleasant occurrence (Theodotion, δευ- τερῶν ἐν λόγῳ; Symmachus, δευτερῶν λόγον, as Sir. vii. 14, xix. 7), divides friends (vid. xvi. 28), for he purposely fosters the strife, the disharmony, ill-will, and estrangement which the offence produced; while the noble man, who has love for his motive and his aim, by prudent silence contributes to bring the offence and the division which it occasioned into forgetfulness.
Ver. 10 One reproof maketh more impression on a wise man Than if one reckoned a hundred to the fool
One of the few proverbs which begin with a future, vid. xii. 26, Ρ. 265. It expresses what influence there is in one reproof with a wise man (35, vili. 9); 713 is the reproof expressed by the postbibl. ΠΕΡῚ), as the lowest grade of disciplinary punishment, admonitio, connected with warning. The verbal form nnn is the reading of the LXX. and Syr. (συντρίβει ἀπειλὴ καρδίαν φρο- viwov) for they read pan 20 ΠῚ") nnn, derived from NM, and thus onA (from Hiph. nn); thus Luther: reproof alarms more the intelligent, but nnn with 3 of the obj. is not Hebr.; on the contrary, the reading of the L.XX. is in accordance with the usage of the language, and, besides, is suitable. It is, however, first to be seen whether the traditional text stands in need of this correction. As fut. Niph. nnn, apart from the ult. accent. to be expected, gives no meaning. Also if one derives it from NM, to snatch away, to take away, it gives no appropriate thought; besides, mn is construed with the object. accus., and the fut. Apoc., in itself strange here, must be pointed either MOA or ANN (after 70‘) (Bottcher, Lehrb. ii. p. 413). Thus 17, as at Job xxi. 13, Jer. xxi. 13, will be fut. Kal of nmi=nny, Ps. xxxviii. 3 (Theodotion, Targ., Kimchi), With this derivation, also, NMA is to be expected; the reference in the Handwérterbuch to Gesen. Lehrgebdude, ὃ 51, 1, Anm. 1, where, in an extremely inadequate way, the retrogression of the tone ("NX 3D)) is spoken of, is altogether inappropriate to this place; and Bottcher’s explanation of the ult. tone from an intended expressiveness is ungrammatical; but why should not NNN, from nn3, with its first syllable originating from contraction, and thus having the tone, be Milel as well as Milra, especially here, where it stands at the head of the sentence? With 2 connected with it, nn) means: to descend into anything, to penetrate; Hitzig appropriately compares altius in pectus descendit of Sallust, Jug. 11. Jerome rightly, according to the sense: plus proficit, and the Venet. ἀνεῖ (read ὀνεῖ) ἀπειλὴ τῷ συνίοντι. In 106 73 (cf. Deut. xxv. 3; 2 Cor. xi. 24) is to be supplied to MND, not D’OYP (an hundred times, which may be denoted correctly by 82 as well as NSD, Eccles. viii. 12). With the wise (says a Talmudic proverb) a sign does as much as with the fool a stick does. Zehner, in his Adagia sacra (1601), cites Curtius (vii. 4): Nobilis eguus umbra quoque virge regitur, ignavus ne calcari quidem concitari potest.
Five proverbs of dangerous men against whom one has to be on his guard: Ver. 11 The rebellious seeketh only after evil, And a cruel messenger is sent out against him.
It is a question what is subj. and what obj. in lla. It lies nearest to look on) as subj., and this word (from i179, stringere, to make oneself exacting against any, to oppose, ἀντιτείνειν) is appropriate thereto; it occurs also at Ezek. ii. 7 as abstr. pro concreto. That it is truly subj. appears from this, that »»Ὲ Wp23, to seek after evil (cf. xxix. 10; 1 Kings xx. 7, etc.), is a connection of idea much more natural than "2 Wpa [to seek after rebellion |. Thus 38 will be logically connected with 39, and the reading ‘1 Bhs will be preferred to the reading ‘Y2"]8; 48 (corresponding to the Arab. dinnama) belongs to those particles which are placed before the clause, without referring to the immediately following part of the sentence, for they are much more regarded as affecting the whole sentence (vid. xiii. 10): the rebellious strives after nothing but only evil. Thus, as neut. obj. 9 is rendered by the Syr., Targ., Venet., and Luther; on the contrary, the older Greek translators and Jerome regard y5 as the personal subject. If now, in reference to rebellion, the discourse is of a 38 IND, we are not, with Hitzig, to think of the demon of wild passions unfettered in the person of the rebellious, for that is a style of thought and of expression that is modern, not biblical; but the old unpoetic yet simply true remark remains: Loquendi formula inde petita quod regis aut summit magistratus minister rebelli supplicium nunciat infligitque. qwon is n. offcii, not nature. Man as a messenger, and the spiritual being as messenger, are both called yxbo. Therefore one may not understand "3X qxdo, with the LXX., Jerome, and Luther, directly and exclusively of an angel of punishment. If one thinks of Jahve as the Person against whom the rebellion is made, then the idea of a heavenly messenger lies near, according to Ps. xxxv. 5f., Ixxviii. 49; but the proverb is so meant, that it is not the less true if an earthly king sends out against a rebellious multitude a messenger with an unlimited commission, or an officer against a single man dangerous to the state, with strict directions to arrest him at all hazards. ‘W28 we had already at xii. 10; the root wn wp means, to be dry, hard, without feeling. The fut. does not denote what may be done (Bertheau, Zéckler), which is contrary to the parallelism, the order of the words, and the style of the proverb, but what is done. And the relation of the clause is not, as Ewald interprets it, “scarcely does the sedition seek out evil when an inexorable messenger is sent.” Although this explanation is held by Ewald as “ unimprovable,” yet it is incorrect, because 8 in this sense demands, e.g. Gen. xxvii. 3, the perf. (strengthened by the infin. intensivus). The relation of the clause is, also, not such as Bottcher has interpreted it: a wicked man tries only scorn though a stern messenger is sent against him, but not because such a messenger is called?3x, against whom this “trying of scorn” helps nothing, so that it is not worth being spoken of; besides, now or npvin would have been used if this relation had been intended. We have in lla and 110, as also eg. at xxvi. 24, xxvill. 1, two clauses standing in internal reciprocal relation, but syntactically simply co-ordinated; the force lies in this, that a messenger who recognises no mitigating circumstances, and offers no pardon, is sent out against such an one.
The name of the bear, as that of the cow, Job xxi. 10, Ps. exliv. 14, preserves its masculine form, even when used in reference to sexual relationship (Ewald, ὃ 174); the ursa catulis orbata is proverbially a raging beast. How the abstract expression of the action W428 [to meet], here as e.g. Ps. xvii. 5, with the subj. following, must sound as finite (occurrat, may always meet), follows from DN} = vB ON (non autem occurrat). ΣΕ has on the last syllable Mehuppach, and Zinnorith on the preceding open syllable (according to the rule, Accentsystem, vi. ὃ δα). TRAIN, in the state of his folly, ¢.e. when he is in a paroxysm of his anger, corresponds with the conditional nounadjective maw, for folly morbidly heightened is madness (cf. Hos. xi. 7; Psychol. p. 291 f.). Ver. 13 He that returneth evil for good, From his house evil shall not depart.
If ingratitude appertains to the sinful manifestations of ignoble selfishness, how much more sinful still is black ingratitude, which recompenses evil for good! (2, as 1 Sam. xxv. 21, syn. 503, to requite, iii. 30, xxxi. 12; DY, to reimburse, xx. 22). Instead of vin, the Kert reads ¥39N; but that this verb, with a middle vowel, may be *’y as well as yy, Ps. lv. 2 shows.
1 In the Torath Emeth, p. 18, the word is irregularly represented as Milel— a closed syllable with Cholem can suffer no retrogression of the tone.
Ver. 14 As one letteth out water is the beginning of a strife; But cease thou from such strife ere it comes to showing teeth. The meaning of this verb 168 is certain: it means to break forth; and transitively, like Arab. fatr, to bring forth from a cleft, to make to break forth, to let go free (Theodotion, ἀπολύων; Jerome, dimittit; Venet. ἀφιείς). The LXX., since it translates by ἐξουσίαν δίδωσι, thinks on the juristic signification, which occurs in the Chronicles: to make free, or to declare so; but here ὯΝ “bib (wid. regarding the Metheg at xiv. 31, p. 311) is, as Luther translates, one who tears away the dam from the waters. And ἢ M's) is not accus. dependent on 1015, to be supplied (Hitzig: he unfetters water who the beginning of strife, viz. unfetters); but the part is used as at x. 17: one who unfetters the water is the beginning of strife, 1.6. he is thus related to it as when one... ‘This is an addition to the free use of the part. in the language of the Mishna, where one would expect the in/in., e.g. Yuta (= Y13), if one sows, 123 (= ἡ 13), of wantonness. It is thus unnecessary, with Ewald, to interpret ὙΘῚΒ as neut., which lets water go=a water-outbreak; 71D is meant personally; it represents one who breaks through a water-dam, withdraws the restraint of the water, opens a sluice, and then emblematically the proverb says: thus conditioned is the beginning of astrife. Then follows the warning to let go such strife (2°95, with the article used in the more elevated style, not without emphasis), to break from it, to separate it from oneself ere it reach a dangerous height. This is expressed by ybann "250, a verb occurring only here and at xviii. 1, xx. 3, always in the Hithpa. The Targum (misunderstood by Gesenius after Buxtorf; vid. to the contrary, Levy, under the word “ty II.) translates it at xvii. 1, xx. 3, as the Syr., by “to mock,” also Aquila, who has at xx. 3, ἐξυβρισθήσεται, and the LX X. at xviii. 1, ἐπονείδιστος ἔσται, and Jerome, who has this in allthe three passages, render the Hithpa. in this sense, passively. In this passage before us, the Targ., as Hitzig gives it, translates, “before it heats itself,” but that is an error occasioned by Buxtorf; vid. on the contrary, Levy, under the word 8P (κύριος): this translation, however, has a representative in Haja Gaon, who appeals for yd3, to glow, to Nidda viii. 2.1 Elsewhere the LXX., at xx. 3, συμπλέκεται (where Jerome, with the amalgamation of the two significations, miscentur contumeliis); Kimchi and others gloss it by t.ynn, and, according to this, the Venet. translates, πρὸ τοῦ
συνχυθῆναι (τὴν ἔριν); Luther, “before thou art mingled therein.” But all these explanations of the word: insultare, excandescere, and commisceri, are etymologically inadmissible. Bertheau’s and Zockler’s “roll itself forth” is connected at least with a meaning rightly belonging to the R. δ). But the Arab. shows, that not the meaning volvere, but that of retegere is to be adopted. Aruch! for Nidda viii. 2 refers to the Arab., where a wound is designated as OT Nyy yoanp nor, i.e. as breaking up, as it were, when the crust of that which is nearly healed is broken off (Maimuni glosses the word by 9>pnn?, were uncrusted), and blood again comes forth. The meaning retegere requires here, however, another distinction. The explanation mentioned there by Aruch: before the strife becomes public to thee, z.e. approaches thee, is not sufficient. The verbal stem y3 is the stronger power of 753, and means laying bare; but here, not as there, in the Mishna of a wound covered with a crust. ‘The Arab. ja? means to quarrel with another, properly to show him the teeth, the Poé! or the tendency-stem from jali’a, to have the mouth standing open, so that one shows his teeth; and the Syr. glas, with its offshoots and derivatives, has also this meaning of ringi, opening the mouth to show, 1.6. to make bare the teeth. Schultens has established this explanation of the words, and Gesenius further establishes it in the Thesaurus, according to which Fleischer also remarks, “ y:, of showing the teeth, the exposing of the teeth by the wide opening of the mouth, as happens in bitter quarrels.” But 2°73 does not agree with this. Hitzig’s translation, “before the strife shows its teeth,” is as modern as in ver. 11 is the passion of the unfettered demon, and Fleischer’s prius vero quam exacerbetur riva renders the Hithpa. in a sense unnecessarily generalized for xviii. 1 and xx. 3. The accentuation, which separates ybinnd from 23 by Febia Mugrash, is correct. One may translate, as Schultens, anteguam dentes stringantur, or, since the Hithpa. has sometimes a reciprocal signification, e.g. Gen. xlii. 1, Ps. xli. 8: ere one reciprocally shows his teeth. Hitzig unjustly takes exception to the inversion 2) 97. Why should not the object precede, as at Hos. xii. 15, the via, placed with emphasis at the end? The same inversion for a like reason occurs at Eccles. ν. 6.
Ver. 15 He that acquitteth the guilty and condemneth the righteous— An abomination to Jahve are they both.
The proverb is against the partisan judge who is open to bribery, like xxiv. 24, cf. Isa. v. 23, where, with reference to such, the announcement of punishment is emphatically made. YY and ΡΝ, in a forensic sense, are equivalent to sons (reus) and insons. 3 (cf. the Arab. jmy’na, altogether, but particularly the Pers. ham and the Turkish dkAy standing wholly thus in the numeral) is here, as at Gen. xxvii. 45, equivalent to IM, Jer. xlvi. 12 (in its unions =united). Whoever pronounces sentence of justification on the guilty, appears as if he must be judged more mildly than he who condemns the guiltless, but both the one and the other alike are an abhorrence to God.
We take vers. 16-21 together. This group begins with a proverb of the heartless, and ends with one of the perverse-hearted; and between these there are not wanting noticeable points of contact between the proverbs that follow one another.
Ver. 16 Why the ready money in the hand of the fool; To get wisdom when he has yet no heart? The question is made pointed by ΠῚ, thus not: why the ready money when...? Is it to obtain wisdom?—the whole is but one question, the reason of which is founded in [& 2) (thus to be accented with Mugrash going before).’ The fool, perhaps, even makes some endeavours, for he goes to the school of the wise, to follow out their admonitions, 127 ΠΡ (iv. 5, ete.), and it costs him something (iv. 7), but all to no purpose, for he has no heart. By this it is not meant that knowledge, for which he pays his honorarium, remains, it may be, in his head, but goes not to his heart, and thus becomes an unfruitful theory; but the heart is equivalent to the understanding (vid. p. 174), in the sense in which the heart appears as the previous condition to the attainment of wisdom (xviii. 15), and as something to be gained before all (xv. 32), viz. understanding, as the fitting intellectual and practical habitus to the reception, the
1 If we write “3 with Makkeph, then we have to accentuate noon map?
with Tarcha Munach, because the Silluk word in this writing has not two syllables before the:tone. This sequence of accents is found i in the Codd. Ven.
1521, 1615, Basel 1619, while most editions have ἜΣΣΩ npn mp, which is false. But according to Mss. we have 301 without Makkeph, and that is right according to the Makkeph rules of the metrical Accentuationssystem; vid. Torath Emeth, p. 40.
Brother is more than friend, he stands to one nearer than a friend does, Ps. xxxv. 14; but the relation of a friend may deepen itself into a spiritual, moral brotherhood, xviii. 24, and there is no name of friend that sounds dearer than ‘8, 2 Sam. i. 26. 17a and 170 are, according to this, related to each other climactically. The friend meant in 17a is a true friend. Of no other is it said that he loves Ny"?2a, 1.6. makes his love manifest; and also the article in ΜΠ not only here gives to the word more body, but stamps it as an ideal-word: the friend who corresponds to the idea of such an one.’ The inf. of the Hiph., in the sense “ to associate” (Ewald), cannot therefore be YI, because ¥7 is not derived from YY", but from 7139, Thus there exists no contrast between 17a and 178, so that the love of a friend is thought of, in contradistinction to that of a brother, as without permanency (FI.); but 170 means that the true friend shows himself in the time of need, and that thus the friendship becomes closer, like that between brothers. The statements do not refer to two kinds of friends; this is seen from the circumstance that M8 has not the article, as ΜΠ has. It is not the subj. but pred., as D178, Job xi. 12: sooner is a wild ass born or born again asa man. The meaning of at there, as at Ps. Ixxxvii. 5 f., borders on the notion of regenerari; here the idea is not essentially much less, for by the saying that the friend is born in the time of need, as a brother, is meant that he then for the first time shows himself as a friend, he receives the right status or baptism of such an one, and is, as it were, born into personal brotherly relationship to the sorely-tried friend. The translation comprobatur (Jerome) and erfunden [is found out] (Luther) obliterates the peculiar and
1 The Arab. grammarians say that the article in this case stands, Vast/rdgh khsdnas Gljnas, as an exhaustive expression of all essential properties of the genus, i.e. to express the full ideal realization of the idea in that which is named thus intentional expression, for 7212 is not at all a metaphor used for passing into the light—the two passages in Proverbs and in Job have not their parallel. my? is not equivalent to 7¥2 (cf. Ps. ix. 10, x. 1), for the interchange of the prep. in 17a and 176 would then be without any apparent reason. But Hitzig’s translation also: as a brother he is born of adversity, is impossible, for 2 after 751) and a> always designates that for which the birth is an advantage, not that from which it proceeds. Thus δ will be that of the purpose: for the purpose of the need,—not indeed to suffer (Job v. 7) on account of it, but to bear it in sympathy, and to help to bear it. Rightly Fleischer: frater autem ad e@rumnam (80. levandam et removendam) nascitur. The L.XX. gives this sense to the ὃ: ἀδελφοὶ δὲ ἐν ἀνάγκαις χρήσιμοι ἔστωσαν, τοῦτο γὰρ χάριν γεννῶνται. Ver. 18 A man void of understanding is he who striketh hands, Who becometh surety with his neighbour. Cf. vi. 1-5, where the warning against suretyship is given at large, and the reasons for it are adduced. It is incorrect to translate (Gesen., Hitzig, and others) Wy) DBP, with the LX X., Jerome, the Syr., Targ., and Luther, “for his neighbour;” to become surety for any one is? ΔΝ), vi. 1, or, with the object. accus., ΧΙ. 15, another suitable prep. is 192; but ‘p> never means pro (ὑπέρ), for at 1 Sam. i. 16 it means “to the person,” and 2 Sam. ui. 31, “before Abner’s corpse (bier).” ‘%Y) is thus here the person with whom the suretyship is entered into; he can be called the yi of him who gives bail, so much the more as the reception of the bail supposes that both are well known to each other. Here also Fleischer rightly translates: apud alterum (80. creditorem pro debitore). Ver. 19 He loveth sin who loveth strife; He who maketh high his doors seeketh destruction.
A synthetic distich (vid. p. 10). Bottcher finds the reason of the pairing of these two lines in the relationship between a mouth and a door (cf. Mic. vil. 5, V5 ΠΠΒ). Hitzig goes further, and supposes that 19) figuratively expresses what bvastfulness brings upon itself. Against Geier, Schultens, and others, who understand inns directly of the mouth, he rightly remarks that 12 327 is not heard of, and that 75 dT would be used instead. But the two lines harmonize, without this interchangeable reference of os and ostium. Zanksucht [quarrelsomeness] and Prunksucht [ostentation] are related as the symptoms of selfishness. But both bear their sentence in themselves. He who has pleasure in quarrelling has pleasure in evil, for he commits himself to the way of great sinning, and draws others along with him; and he who cannot have the door of his house high enough and splendid enough, prepares thereby for himself, against his will, the destruction of his house. An old Hebrew proverb says, j2p9n" 7322 pon 55, edi ficandi nimis studrosus ad mendicitatem redigitur. Both parts of this verse refer to one and the same individual, for the insanum edi- Jicandi studium goes only too often hand in hand with unjust and heartless litigation. Ver. 20 He that is of a false heart findeth no good; And he that goeth astray with his tongue falleth into evil.
Regarding ρον, vid. xi. 20. In the parallel member, ΣΝ 572 is he who twists or winds (vid. at ii. 12) with his tongue, going about concealing and falsifying the truth. The phrase 7273) (the connecting form before a word with a prep.) is syntactically possible, but the Masora designates the word, in contradistinction to JB72, pointed with Pathach, Lev. xiii. 16, with m> as wnicum, thus requires 273), as is also found in Codd. The contrast of ΠΡῚ is here 310, also neut., as xiii. 21, cf. xvi. 20, and Μη, xiii. 17.
The first three parts of the old Solomonic Book of Proverbs ( (1) x. 1—πῖῖ. 28; (2) xi. l-xv. 19; (3) xv. 20-xvil. 20) are now followed by the fourth part. We recognise it as striking the same keynote as x. 1. In xvii. 21 it resounds once more, here commencing a part; there, x. 1, beginning the second group of pros verbs. The first closes, as it begins, with a proverb of the fool.
Ver. 21 He that begetteth a fool, it is to his sorrow; And the father of a fool hath no joy. Tt is admissible to supply 12%, developing itself from 19, before Ἢ man? (vid. regarding this passive formation, at x. 1, cf. xiv. 13), niger) (thus to be written with Makkeph): it brings grief to him. According as one understands this as an expectation, or as a consequence, 1, as at xxiii. 24, is rendered either qui gignit or qui genuit. With 222, seldom occurring in the Book of Proverbs (only here and at ver. 7), DDD, occurring not unfrequently, is interchanged. Schultens rightly defines the latter etymologically:
marcidus h. 6. qui ad virtutem, pietatem, vigorem omnem vile spiritualis medullitus emarcuit; and the former: elumbis et mollitie segnitieve fractus, the intellecually heavy and sluggish (cf. Arab. kasal, laziness; kaslén, the lazy). Ver. 22 A joyful heart bringeth good recovery; And a broken spirit drieth the bones.
The heart is the centre of the individual life, and the condition and the tone of the heart communicates itself to this life, even to its outermost circumference; the spirit is the power of selfconsciousness which, according as it is lifted up or broken, also lifts up or breaks down the condition of the body (Psychol. p. 199), vid. the similar contrasted phrases Nov 2 and ANI] ΠῚ, xv. 13. The dz. rey. 173 (here and there in Codd. incorrectly written 3) has nothing to do with the Arab. jihat, which does not mean sight, but direction, and is formed from wjah (whence wajah, sight), like 712, congregation, from 731 (72%). The Syr, Targ. (perhaps also Symmachus: ἀγαθύνει ἡλικίαν; Jerome: etatem floridam facit; Luther: makes the life listig [cheerful]) translate it by body; but for this 73 (73) is used, and that is a word of an entirely different root from 173. To what verb this refers is shown by Hos. v. 13: ὙΠ 030 TANI, and healed not for you her ulcerous wound. “Nt is the compress, i.e. the bandage closing up the ulcer, then also the ulcer-wound itself; and 173 is the contrary of πον, e.g. Jer. vill. 22; it means the removing of the bandage and the healing of the wound. This is confirmed by the Syr. gho, which in like manner is construed with min, and means to be delivered from something (vid. Bernstein’s Lex. Syr. to Kirsch’s Chrestomathie). The Aethiop. quadriliteral gdéhgéh, to hinder, to cause to cease, corresponds to the causative Syr. agahish. Accordingly 2 means to be in the condition of abatement, mitigation, healing; and 73 (as synonym of 193, Neh. 11. 19, with which Parchon combines it), levamen, levatio, in the sense of bodily healing (LXX. εὐεκτεῖν ποιεῖ; Venet., after Kimchi, ἀγαθυνεῖ
1 Noldeke’s assertion (Art. Orion in Schenkel’s Bibel- Lexicon) that the Arab. kasal corresponds to the Hebr. Suis proceeds from the twofold supposition, that the meaning to be lazy underlies the meaning to totter (vid. also Dietrich in Gesenius’ Heb. Worterbuch), and that the Hebr. Ὁ must correspond with the Arab. U- The former supposition is untenable, the latter is far removed (cf. 6.σ. XDD and kursi, 75D and sifr, }2D0 and miskin). The verb bua, Aram. ΡΠ, is unknown in the Arab.
θεραπείαν); and 73 PO} (cf. xv. 2) denotes, to bring good improvement, to advance powerfully the recovery. Schultens compares the Arab. jahy, nitescere, disserenari, as Menahem has done 2), but this word is one of the few words which are explained exclusively from the Syriac (and &thiop.). 073 (here and at xxv. 15) is the word interchanging with DSY, xv. 30, xvi. 24. Ver. 23 Bribery from the bosom the godless receiveth, To pervert the ways of justice. Regarding IN, vid. xvii. 8. The idea of this word, as well as the clause containing the purpose, demand for the Y“ a high judicial or administrative post. The bosom, PM (PN), is, as xvi. 23, that of the clothing. From the bosom, Ph, where it was kept concealed, the gift is brought forth, and is given into the bosom, PM3, xxi. 14, of him whose favour is to be obtained—an event taking place under four eyes, which purposely withdraws itself from the observation of any third person. Since this is done to give to the course of justice a direction contrary to rectitude, the giver of the bribe has not right on his side; and, under the circumstances, the favourable decision which he purchases may be at once the unrighteous sentence of a py, accusing him, or accused by him, XVlll. 5. Ver. 24 The understanding has his attention toward wisdom; But the eyes of a fool are on the end of the earth. Many interpreters explain, as Euchel: ‘*‘ The understanding finds wisdom everywhere; The eyes οὗ the fool seek it at the end of the world.” Ewald refers to Deut. xxx. 11-14 as an unfolding of the same thought. But although it may be said of the fool (vid. on the contrary, xv. 14) that he seeks wisdom, only not at the right place, as at xiv. 6, of the mocker that he seeks wisdom but in vain, yet here the order of the words, as well as the expression, lead us to another thought: before the eyes of the understanding (‘JB°N®, as Gen. xxxiii. 18, 1 Sam. ii. 11,‘and frequently in the phrase AN) ‘TENN, e.g. 1 Sam. i. 22) wisdom lies as his aim, his object, the end after which he strives; on the contrary, the eyes of the fool, without keeping that one necessary thing in view, wander in alia omma, and roam about what is far off, without having any fixed object. The fool is everywhere with his thoughts, except where he ought to be. Leaving out of view that which lies nearest, he loses himself in aliena. The understanding has an ever present theme in wisdom, which arrests his attention, and on which he concentrates himself; but the fool flutters about fantastically from one thing to another, and that which is to him precisely of least importance interests him the most.
The series of proverbs, ver. 25-xviii. 2, begins and closes in the same way as the preceding, and only ver. 26 stands by itself without apparent connection.
A grief to his father is a foolish son,
And a bitter woe for her that bare him. The ἅπ. Ney. V2 is formed from 77) (to be bitter, properly harsh), as Ὁ from 0D3. The Syr.and Trg. change the subst. into participles; some codd. also have 12 (after the forms bn, 2DD, BD, y1>), but as may be expected in 25a, D'y'2. The dat. obj. instead of the accus. may be possible; the verse immediately following furnishes a sufficient example of this.
This, that one overthrows the noble on account of his rectitude.
Does the 03 [also] refer to a connection from which the proverb is separated? or is it tacitly supposed that there are many kinds of worthless men in the world, and that one from among them is brought forward? or is it meant, that to lay upon the righteous a pecuniary punishment is also not good? None of all these. The proverb must have a meaning complete in itself; and if pecuniary punishment and corporeal punishment were regarded as opposed to one another, 265 would then have begun with 3 48 (quanto magis percutere ingenuos). Here it is with Dj as at xx. 11, and as with J at lla, and ΡῚ at xiii. 10: according to the sense, it belongs not to the word next following, but to prayd; and δὴ (whence inf. wioy, as xxi. 11, with the @ in y, cf. also 758, xi. 10, for 738) means here not specially to inflict a pecuniary fine, but generally to punish, for, as in mulctare, the meaning is generalized, elsewhere with the accus., Deut. xxii. 19, here to give to any one to undergo punishment. The ruler is the servant of God, who has to preserve rectitude, εἰς ὀργὴν τῷ TO κακὸν πράσσοντι (Rom. ΧΙ. 14). It is not good when he makes his power to punish to be felt by the innocent as well as by the guilty.
In 26, instead of nid3, the proyerb is continued with ΓἾΞΠΟ; ain-x?, which is to be supplied, takes the inf. alone when it precedes, and the inf. with 5 when it follows, xviii. 5, xxvii. 21,
The first line here is a variation of x. 195. The phrase ΠΜῚ yt (here and at Dan. i. 4) means to possess knowledge (novisse); more frequently it is 12°2 YT, e.g. iv. 1, where yt has the inchoative sense of noscere. In 27) the Keri ism p>. Jerome translates it pretiosi spiritus, the Venet. τίμιος τὸ πνεῦμα. ashi glosses 9p here, as at 1 Sam. iii. 1, by 339 (thus to be read after codd.), retentus spiritu; most interpreters remark that the spirit here comes into view as expressing itself in words. It is scarcely correct to say that 025 7p. could designate one who is sparing in his words, but ΠΥ͂Ρ is, according to the fundamental conception of the verb 1’, gravis spiritu (Schultens), of a dignified, composed spirit; it is a quiet seriousness proceeding from high conscientiousness, and maintaining itself in self-control, which is designated by this word. But the Chethi) M77) presents almost the same description of character. ἽΡ from 77? (of the same root as 1p’) means to be firm, unmoveable, καρτερὸν εἶναι, hence to be congealed, frozen, cold (cf. frigus with rigere, rigor), figuratively to be coldblooded, passionless, quiet, composed (FI.); cf. post-bibl. 49 ΤΡ (Arab. kurrat ‘ain), cooling = refreshing, ἀνάψυξις (Acts iii. 20).* Whether we read ἽΡ" or ἽΡ, in any case we are not to translate rarus sptritu, which, apart from the impossibility of the expression, makes 276 almost a tautological repetition of the thought of 27a. The first line recommends bridling of the tongue, in contrast to inconsiderate and untimely talk; the second line recommends coldness, 7.6. equanimity of spirit, in contrast to passionate heat. Ver. 28 continues the same theme, the value of silence: Even a fool, when he keeps silence, is counted wise; When he shutteth his mouth, discreet.
The subj. as well as the pred. of the first line avail for the second. BEN, obturare, occludere, usually of closing the ear, is here transferred to the mouth. The Hiph. wenn means mutum agere (cf. Arab. khrs, mutum esse), from WN, which, like κωφός, passes from the meaning surdus to that of iia (Fl.). The words of Job xii. 5, and also those of Alexander: δὲ tacuisses sapiens mansisses, are applicable to fools. An Arab. proverb says, “silence is the covering of the stupid.” In the epigrammatical hexameter,
1 “ He has made my eye glowing” (askhn, cf. sn) is in Arab. equivalent to “he has deeply troubled me.” The eye of the benevolent is bd@rid, and in the Semitic manner of expression, with deep psychological significance, it is said that the tears of sorrow are hot, but those of joy cold.
rs tin, which oar eee Sine otha males 276 almost ἣν tantolor ρα Kep Sitjon of the ioe sh taal ‘The frat line repammendas hs ist! ing of i Longe, im eon ΜΕῚ inoonnidurate txt untimely talk; the eacond ding recomend a roam, Le. equanimity’ of apirit, in contrast to passionate hentia’ ope “otinues the same theme the valng ofsilendes | a a y he deens Mlecncet, oan ted Wises ty
ΠΑΡ. xvitt. 1. This series of proverbs now turns from Vele4| the fool to the separatist: The separatist seeketh after his own pleasure; Against all that is beneficial he showeth his teeth.
The reflexive 15) has here the same meaning as the Rabbinical “iA¥17}9 WB, to separate oneself from the congregation, A both ii. 5; 15) denotes a man who separates himself, for he follows his own counsel, Arab. mnfrd (mtfrrd) brayh, or jhys almhhl (seorsum ab aliis secedens). Instead of Mn, Hitzig, after Jerome, adopts the emendation mNhd, “after an occasion ” (a pretext), and by 75) thinks of one pushed aside, who, thrown into opposition, seeks to avenge himself. But his translation of 10, “against all that is fortunate he gnasheth his teeth,” shows how much the proverb is opposed to this interpretation. 75) denotes one who willingly (Judg. iv. 11), and, indeed, obstinately withdraws himself. The construction of Ὁ) with? (also Job x. 6) is explained by this, that the poet, giving prominence to the object, would set it forward: a pleasure (mxn, as Arab. hawan, unstable and causeless direction of the mind to something, pleasure, freak, caprice), and nothing else, he goes after who has separated himself (FI.); the effort of the separatist goes out after a pleasure, 1.6. the enjoyment and realization of such; instead of seeking to conform himself to the law and ordinance of the community, he seeks to carry out a separate view, and to accomplish some darling plan: libidinem sectatur sui cerebri homo. With this 1b accords.
mvAM (vid. at ii. 7) is concretely that which furthers and profits. Regarding pbann, vid. at xvii. 14, Thus putting his subjectivity in the room of the common weal, he shows his teeth, places himself in fanatical opposition against all that is useful and profitable in the principles and aims, the praxis of the community from which he separates himself. The figure is true to nature: the polemic of the schismatic and the sectary against the existing state of things, is for the most part measureless and hostile.
Ver. 2 The fool hath no delight in understanding; But only that his heart may reveal itself therein.
The verb 750 forms the fut. ΚΞ" as well as BM; first the latter from 75, with the primary meaning, to bow, to bend down; then both forms as intransitive, to bend oneself to something, to be inclined to something, Arab. ’tf. (FI.). 3M is here the intelligence which consists in the understanding of one’s own deficiency, and of that which is necessary to meet it. The inclination of the fool goes not out after such intelligence, but (ὍΝ °D; according to Ben-Naphtali, DN“*3) only that his heart, i.e. the understanding which he thinks that he already possesses, may reveal itself, show itself publicly. He thinks thereby to show himself in his true greatness, and to render a weighty service to the world. This loquacity of the fool, proceeding from self-satisfaction, without self-knowledge, has already, xii. 23, and often, been reprimanded.
The group beginning with ver. 3 terminates in two proverbs (vers. 6 and 7), related to the concluding verse of the foregoing:
Ver. 3 If a godless man cometh, then cometh also contempt; And together with disgrace, shame. J. D. Michaelis, and the most of modern critics, read YW; then, contempt etc., are to be thought of as the consequences that follow godlessness; for that jie? means (Hitzig) disgracefulness, i.e. disgraceful conduct, is destitute of proof; p>p always means disgrace as an experience. But not only does the Masoretic text punctuate YY, but also all the old translators, the Greek, Aramaic, and Latin, have done so. And is it on this account, because a coming naturally seems to be spoken of a person? The “pride cometh, then cometh shame,” xi. 2, was in their recollection not less firmly, perhaps, than in ours. They read Yt, because 13 does not fittingly designate the first of that which godlessness effects, but perhaps the first of that which proceeds from it. Therefore we adhere to the opinion, that the proverb names the fiends which appear in the company of the godless wherever he goes, viz. first 12, contempt (Ps. xxxi. 19), which places itself haughtily above all due subordination, and reverence, and forbearance; and then, with the disgrace [turpitudo], p>p, which attaches itself to those who meddle with him (Isa. xxii. 18), there is united the shame, nai (Ps. xxxix. 9), which he has to suffer from him who has only always expected something better from him. Fleischer understands all the three words in the passive sense, and remarks, ‘mean ndp-py, a more artificial expression for ΠΕῚΠῚ dp, in the Turkish quite common for the copula waw, eg. swylh thrak, earth and water, ’wrtylh dr, the man and the woman.”' But then the expression would be tautological; we understand na and npn of that which the godless does to others by his words, and >p of that which he does to them by his conduct. By this interpretation, by is more than the representative of the copula. Ver. 4 Deep waters are the words from a man’s mouth, A bubbling brook, a fountain of wisdom.
Earlier, we added to hominis the supplement sc. sapientis, but then an unnecessary word would be used, and that which is necessary omitted. Rather it might be said that US is meant in an ideal sense; but thus meant, wx, like 723, denotes the valiant man, but not man as he ought to be, or the man of honour; and besides, a man may be a man of honour without there being said of him what this proverb expresses. Ewald comes nearer the case when he translates, “‘ deep waters are the heart-words of many.” Heart-words—what an unbiblical expression! The LXX., which translates λόγος ἐν καρδίᾳ, has not read 30 "125, but 252 1959 (as xx. 5, “203 nyy). But that “ of many” is certainly not a right translation, yet right in so far as WN (as at xii. 14) is thought of as made prominent: the proverb expresses, in accordance with the form of narrative proverbs which present an example, what occurs in actual life, and is observed. Three different things are said of the words from a man’s mouth: they are deep waters, for their meaning does not lie on the surface, but can be perceived only by penetrating into the secret motives and aims of him who speaks; they are a bubbling brook, which freshly and powerfully gushes forth to him who feels this flow of words, for in this brook there never fails an always new gush of living water; it is a fountain or well of wisdom, from which wisdom flows forth, and whence wisdom is to be drawn. Hitzig supposes that the distich is antithetic; D'pSy OY, or rather DYpDyD ‘2, “waters of the deep,” are cistern pian’ on the contrary, “a Reeling brook is a fountain of wisdom.” But ΡῸΝ means deep, not deepened, and deep water is the contrast of shallow water; a cistern also may be deep (cf. xxii. 14), but deep water is such as is deep, whether it be in the ocean or in a ditch. 4b also does not suggest a cistern, for thereby it would be indicated that the description, WNTD 735, is not here continued; the “fountain of wisdom” does not form a proper parallel or an antithesis to this subject, since this much rather would require the placing in contrast of deep and shallow, of exhausted (drained out) and perennial. And: the fountain is a brook, the well a stream—who would thus express himself! We have thus neither an antithetic nor a synonymous (L.XX. after the phrase ἀναπηδῶν, Jerome, Venet., Luth.), but an integral distich (vid. vol. 1. p. 8) before us; and this leads us to consider what depths of thought, what riches of contents, what power of spiritual and moral advancement, may lie in the words of a man. Ver. 5 To favour the person of the godless is not good, And to oppress the righteous in judgment.
As ver. 4 has one subject, so ver. 5 has one predicate. The form is the same as xvii. 26. ‘3B NNY (cf. xxiv. 23), προσω- Tonia, acceptio persone, is this, that one accepts the *35, 2.e. the personal appearance of any one (πρόσωπον λαμβάνει), te. regards it as acceptable, respectable, agreeable, which is a thing in itself not wrong; but in a judge who ought to determine according to the facts of the case and the law, it becomes sinful partiality. nite, in a forensic sense, with the accus. of the person, may be regarded in a twofold way: either as a turning aside, 112, Isa. x. 2, from following and attaining unto the right, or as an oppressing, for the phrase Davi mot [to pervert justice] (cf.
xvii. 23) is transferred to the person who experiences the oppression = perversion of the law; and this idea perhaps always underlies the expression, wherever, as e.g. Mal. iii. 5, no addition brings with it the other. Under xvii. 15 is a fuller explanation of 3i0-ND. Ver. 6 The lips of the fool engage in strife, And his mouth calleth for stripes.
We may translate: the lips of the fool cause strife, for 2 ΝΞ, to come with anything, e.g. Ps. Ixvi. 13, is equivalent to bring it (to bring forward), as also: they engage in strife; as one says 0272 Nia: to be engaged in bloodshed, 1 Sam. xxv. 26. We prefer this intrant (ingerunt se), with Schultens and Fleischer. 382) for 1281N, a synallage generis, to which, by means of a “self-deception of the language” (Fl.), the apparent masculine ending of such duals may have contributed. The stripes which the fool calleth for (? NP, like ii. 3) are such as he himself carries off, for it comes ὦ verbis ad verbera. The LXX.: his bold mouth calleth for death (S7P) NY) ANT VB);
niaonn? has, in codd. and old editions, the Mem raphatum, as also at xix. 29; the sing. is thus pion, like AVI to Woy, for the Mem dagessatum is to be expected in the inflected 0979, by the passing over of the 6 into ἥ. _ Ver. 7 The mouth of the fool is to him destruction, And his lips are a snare to his soul. As ver. 6 corresponds to xvii. 27 of the foregoing group, so this ver. 7 corresponds to xvii. 28. Regarding ‘PTA, vid. xiii, 3. Instead of D2 ‘B, is to be written DIB, according to Torath Emeth, p. 40, Cod. 1294, and old editions. A pair of proverbs regarding the flatterer and the slothful: Ver. 8 The words of the flatterer are as dainty morsels, And they glide down into the innermost parts.
An “analogy, with an epexegesis in the second member ” (F'l.), which is repeated in xxvi. 22. Ewald, Bertheau, Hitzig, and others, are constrained to interpret D7) as introducing a contrast, and in this sense they give to pronenio all kinds of unwarrantable meanings. Ewald translates: as burning (on), cogn. 275), and offers next: as whispering (B79, cogn. Dy, Bnd); Ch. B. Michaelis, Bertheau, and others: as sporting (BN, cogn. nnd); Hitzig: like soft airs (nn, cogn. Arab. hillam, flaccus, lazus). All these interpretations are without support. The word Di? has none of all these significations; it means, as the Arab. lahima warrants, deglutire. But Bottcher’s explanation also: “as swallowed down, because spoken with reserve,” proceeds, like those others, from the supposed syntactically fine yet false supposition, that 8b is an antithetic “ dennoch” [tamen]. In that case the poet would have written O°%' on) (cf. nim, as the beginning of a conditional clause, iii. 29, xxiii. 8). But sim, om, with the finite following, introduces neither here nor at Deut. xxxiii. ὃ, Judg. xx. 34, Ps. χον. 10, cf. Gen. xliii. 23, a conditional clause. Thus 80 continues the clause 8a by one standing on the same line; and thus we do not need to invent a meaning for ppnbnna, which forms a contrast to the penetrating into the innermost parts. The relation of the parts of the proverb is rightly given by Luther: The words of the slanderer are stripes, And they go through the heart of one.
He interprets ond as transposed from ndn (Rashi and others); but stripes cannot be called nendno—they are called, 64, men, This interpretation of the word has always more support than that of Symmachus: ὡς ἀκέραιοι; Jerome: quasi simplicia; Aquila, xxvi. 22: yontvxot; which last, as also that of Capellus, Clericus, and Schultens: quasi numine quodam afflata, seems to support itself on the Arab. dhm iv. inspirare. But in reality dhm does not mean afflare; it means deglutire, and nothing else. The Jewish lexicographers offer nothing worth considering; Kimchi’s o'pon, according to which the Venet. translates μαλ- θακιζόμενοι, is fanciful; for the Talm. 025, striking = hitting, suitable, standing well, furnishes no transition to “smooth” and “soft.’ Immanuel compares éhm = νὰ; and Schultens, who is followed by Gesenius and others, has already, with perfect correctness, explained: tanguam que avidissime inglutiantur. Thus also Fleischer: things which offer themselves to be eagerly gulped down, or which let themselves be thus swallowed. But in this way can one be truly just to the Hithpa.? The Arab. dlthm (stronger form, dltkm, according to which van Dyk translates mthl ukam hlwt, like sweet morsels) means to swallow into oneself, which is not here appropriate. The Hithpa. will thus have here a passive signification: things which are greedily swallowed. Regarding 1373 from 13, vid. at xvi. 28. 07) refers to the words of the flatterer, and is emphatic, equivalent to que illa, etiam illa, or illa ipsa. 0 is here connected with the obj. accus. (cf. i. 12) instead of with DN, vil. 27. ‘YIN, penetralia, we had already at vii. 27; the root-word is (Arab.) khdr, to seclude, to conceal, different from hdr, demittere, and hkhr (cogn. In), to finish, cireumire. 02 is the inner part of the body with reference to the organs lying there, which mediate not only the life of the body, but also that of the mind,—in general, the internal part of the personality. The LXX. does not translate this proverb, but has in its stead xix. 15, in a different version, however, from that it gives there; the Syr. and the Targ. have thereby been drawn away from the Hebr. text. Ver. 9 He also who showeth himself slothful in his business, Is a brother to him who proceedeth to destroy.
The Mithpa. 152N7 signifies here, as at xxiv. 10, to show oneself slack, lazy, negligent. MIND is properly a commission for another, as a king has a messenger, ambassador, commissioner to execute it; here, any business, whether an undertaking in commission from another, or a matter one engages in for himself. He who shows himself slack therein, produces in his way, viz. by negligence, destruction, as truly as the ΤΠ bya, who does it directly by his conduct. Thus one is named, who is called, or who has his own delight in it, to destroy or overthrow. Jerome, incorrectly limiting: sua opera dissipantis. Hitzig well compares Matt. xii. 30. In the variation, xxviii. 24), the destroyer is called ΓΟ wx, the connection of the words being adject.; on the contrary, the connection of mnvin 5y2 is genit. (cf, xxii. 24, xxiii. 2, etc.), for n’nwn as frequently means that which destroys=destruction. Von Hofmann (Schrifthew. ii. 2, 403) understands "Ὁ wx of the street robber, "Ὁ >y2 of the captain of robbers; but the designation for the latter must be Ὁ WY, though at 1 Kings xi. 24 he is called by the name W 13, The form of the word in the proverb here is more original than at xxviii. 24. There 129 [companion] is used, here M8 [brother], a general Semitic name of him who, or of that which, is in any way related to another, cf. Job xxx. 29. Fleischer compares the Arab. proverb: dlshbhé akht alkhtydt, scepticism is the sister of sin.
Two proverbs, of the fortress of faith, and of the fortress of presumption:
Ver. 10 A strong tower is the name of Jahve: The righteous runneth into it, and is high. The name of Jahve is the Revelation of God, and the God of Revelation Himself, the creative and historical Revelation, and who is always continually revealing Himself; His name is His nature representing itself, and therefore capable of being | described and named, before all the Yetragramm, as the Anagramm of the overruling and inworking historical being of God, as the Chiffre of His free and all-powerful government in grace and truth, as the self-naming of God the Saviour. This name, which is afterwards interwoven in the name Jesus, is oN (Ps. Ixi. 4), a strong high tower bidding defiance to every hostile assault. Into this the righteous runneth, to hide himself behind its walls, and is thus lifted (perf. consec.) high above all danger (οἷς, ΡΣ XxIx UD), ON 77 means, Job xv. 26, to run against anything, Ὁ, seg. ace., to invest, Tie anything, 3 74, to hasten within; Hitzig’s conjecture, Ov’ [riseth up high], instead of 7, is a freak. 3 7 is speedily = 3 N)3, the idea the same ass. XXVM. 0), XXXd. 2 |. Ver. 11 The possession of the righteous is his strong fort, And is like a high wall in his imagination.
Line first = x.15a. n'a’) from 73%, Chald. 82D (whence after Megilla i 39", she w ho looks), R. 7, cogn. Ἵ, to pierce, to fix, means the image as a medal, and thus also intellectually: image (conception, and ΡΊΞΗ ΣᾺ the imagination) of the heart (Ps. Ixxiii. 7), here the fancy, conceit; Fleischer compares (Arab.) tswwr, to imagine something to oneself, French se figurer. Translators from the LX-X. to Luther incorrectly think on 13% (72D), to entertain; only the Venet. is correct in the rendering: ἐν φαντασίᾳ αὐτοῦ; better than Kimchi, who, after Eizra viii. 12, thinks on the chamber where the pee delighted in are ΚΘ and where he fancies himself in the sida of his treasures as εἶ surrounded by an inaccessible wall.
We place together vers. 12-19, in which the figure of a secure fortress returns:
Ver. 12. This proverb is connected with the preceding of the rich man who trusts in his mammon.
Before destruction the heart of man is haughty; And humility goeth before honour.
Line first is a variation of xvi. 18a, and line second is similar to xv. 990. Ver. 13 If one giveth an answer before he heareth, It is to him as folly and shame. The part. stands here differently from what it does at xiii. 18, where it is subj., and at xvii. 14, where it is pred. of a simple sentence; it is also here, along with what appertains to it in accordance with the Semitic idiom, subj. to 180 (one who answers... 1s one to whom this...); but, in accordance with our idiom, it becomes a hypothetical antecedent (cf. vol. i. p. 282). For “to answer” one also uses 2.) Π without addition; but the original full expression is 1323 Wn, reddere verbum, referre dictum (cf. 127 72¥, Jer. xliv. 20, absol. in the cogn., xv. 28a); 725 one may not understand of the word to which, aa of the word with which, the reply is made. 42 8 comprehends the meaning: it avails to him (ducitur ez), as well as it reaches to him (est et). In Agricola’s Fiinfhundert Spriichen this proverb is given thus: Wer aniwortet ehe er horet, der zaiget an sein torhait und wirdt ze schanden [he who answers before he hears shows his folly, and it is to him a shame]. But that would require the word to be 12", pude/iet; (δ NT) | m3?3 means that it becomes to him a ground of merited disgrace. a M323, properly wounding, 1.9, shame (like atteinte ἃ son Sitiatey from De2 (cogn. Den), to strike, hit, wound” (FI.). Sirach (xi. 8) warns against such rash talking, as well as against the rudeness of interrupting others. Ver. 14 The spirit of a man beareth his sickness; But a broken spirit, who can bear it?
The breath of the Creator imparting life to man is spoken of as spiritus spirans, my (O° MI), and as spiitus spiratus, wd) (70 WD); the spirit (animus) is the primary, and the soul (anima) the secondary principle of life; the double gender of nin is accounted for thus: when it is thought of as the primary, and thus in a certain degree (vid. Psychol. p. 103 ff.) the manly principle, it is mas, (Gen. vi. 3; Ps. li. 12, etc.). Here the change of gender is in the highest degree characteristic, and WS also is intentionally used (cf. 1 Sam. xxvi. 15) instead of 018, 16a: the courageous spirit of a man which sustains or endures ( 303, R. 5», comprehendere, prehendere; Luther, “ who knows how to contain himself in his sufferings;” cf. Ps. li. 12, “‘may the free Spirit hold me”) the sickness [ Scechthum] (we understand here (ἐς siech” in the old meaning = sick) with self-control, is generis masculini; while, on the contrary, the 782) ΠῚ (as xv. 13, xvii. 22), brought down from its manliness and superiority to disheartened passivity, is genere feminino (cf. Ps. li. 12 with ver. 19). ᾿ Fleischer compares the Arab. proverb, thbdt dlnfs balghdha thbdt alrwh balghnd, the soul has firmness by nourishment, the spirit by music.’ The question 738" "2 is like Mark ix. 50: if the salt becomes tasteless, wherewith shall one season it? There is no seasoning for the spice that has become insipid. And for the spirit which is destined to bear the life and fortune of the person, if it is cast down by sufferings, there is no one to lift it up and sustain it. But is not God the Most High the lifter up and the bearer of the human spirit that has been crushed and broken? The answer is, that the manly spirit, 14a, is represented as strong in God; the discouraged, 14d, as not drawing from God the strength and support he ought to do. But passages such as Isa. Ixvi. 2 do not bring it near that we think of the mx22 ΓΥῚ as alienated from God. The spirit is 8W3, the bearer of the personal and natural life with its functions, activities, and experiences. If the spirit is borne down to powerless and helpless passivity, then within the sphere of the human personality there is no other sustaining power that can supply its place. Ver. 15 The heart of a man of understanding gaineth knowledge, And the ear of the wise seeketh after knowledge.
32) may be also interpreted as an adj., but we translate it here as ‘at xiv. 33, because thus it corresponds with the parallelism; cf. py 29, xv. 28, and 02n n>, xvi. 23, where the adject. interpretation is excluded. The gaining of wisdom is, after xvi. 16, referred to the heart: a heart vigorous in embracing and receiving it is above all necessary, and just such an one possesses the p22, which knows how to value the worth and usefulness of such knowledge. The wise, who are already in possession of such knowledge, are yet at the same time constantly striving to increase this knowledge: their ear seeks knowledge, eagerly asking where it is to be found, and attentively listening when the opportunity is given of 8¥, obtaining it.
And bringeth him before the great. That {#2 may signify intellectual endowments, Hitzig supposes, but without any proof for such an opinion. Intellectual ability as the means of advancement is otherwise designated, xxii. 29. But Hitzig is right in this, that one mistakes the meaning of the proverb if he interprets jnd in the sense of NW (vid. at Xvil. 8): ἸΠ is an indifferent idea, and the proverb means that a man makes free space, a free path for himself, by a gift, ze. by this, that he shows himself to be agreeable, pleasing where it avails, not niggardly but liberal. As a proverb expresses it: Mit dem Hut in der Hand Kommt man durchs ganze Land [with hat in hand one goes through the whole land], so it is said here that such liberality brings before the great, 1.6. not: furnishes with introductions to them; but helps to a place of honour near the great, 1.6. those in a lofty position (cf. "2B9, xxii. 29; oy, Ps. cxili. 8). It is an important part of practical wisdom, that by right liberality, 1.96. by liberal giving where duty demands it, and prudence commends it, one does not lose but gains, does not descend but rises; it helps a man over the difficulties of limited, narrow circumstances, gains for him affection, and helps him up from step to step. The ἃ of {md is, in a singular way (cf. 73M, NIN), treated as unchangeable. Ver. 17 He that is first in his controversy is right;
But there cometh another and searcheth him thoroughly— an exhortation to be cautious in a lawsuit, and not to justify without more ado him who first brings forward his cause, and supports it by reasons, since, if the second party afterwards search into the reasons of the first, they show themselves untenable. i272 ἡ ΝΠ are to be taken together; the words are equivalent to TWNI2 122 NPWS: gui prior cum causa sua venit, 1.6. eam ad judicem defert (ΕἾ.). }wx1n may, however, also of itself alone be qui prior venit; and 122 will be taken with py: justus qui prior venit in causa sua (esse videtur). The accentuation rightly leaves the relation undecided. Instead of sa’ (Na) the Keri has δὲ), as it elsewhere, at one time, changes the fut. into the perf. with 1 (eg. xx. 4, Jer. vi. 21); and, at another time, the perf. with } into the fut. (6.9. Ps. x. 10, Isa. v. 29). But here, where the perf. consec. is not so admis-. sible, as vi. 11, xx. 4, the fut. ought to remain unchanged. ὙΠ is the other part, synon. with yan pt 5y2, Sanhedrin 7b, where the "M25 m7 (admonition for the court of justice) is derived from Deut. i. 16, to hear the accused at the same time with the accuser, that nothing of the latter may be adopted beforehand. This proverb is just such an audiatur et altera pars. The status controversie is only brought fairly into the light by the hearing of the altera pars: then comes the other and examines him (the first) to the very bottom. PH, elsewhere with the accus. of the thing, e.g. 2, thoroughly to search into a strife, Job xxix. 16, is here, as at xxviii. 11, connected with the accus. of the person: to examine or lay bare any one thoroughly; here, so that the misrepresentations of the state of the matter might come out to view along with the reasons assigned by the accuser. Ver. 18 The lot allayeth contentions, And separateth between the mighty, i.e. erects a partition wall between them—those contending (2 M57, as at 2 Kings 1]. 11, cf. Arab. jrk ὕψη); DY8Y are not opponents who maintain their cause with weighty arguments (ninsy, Isa. xli. 21), gue argumentis pollent (vid. Rashi), for then must the truth appear in the pro et contra; but mighty opponents, who, if the lot did not afford a seasonable means of reconciliation, would make good their demands by blows and by the sword (Fl.). Here it is the lot which, as the judgment of God, brings about peace, instead of the ultima ratio of physical force. The proverb refers to the lot what the Epistle to the Hebrews, vi. 16, refers to the oath, vid. at xv. 33. Regarding 0°12 and its altered forms, vid. vol. i. p. 145.
Ver. 19 A brother toward whom it has been acted perfidiously resists more than a strong tower; And contentions are like the bar of a palace.
Luther rightly regarded the word v2, according to which the LXX., Vulg., and Syr. translated frater qui adjuvatur a fratre, as an incorrect reading; one would rather expect yw ns, “a brother who stands by,” as Luther earlier translated; and besides, ywi2 does not properly mean adjuvari, but salvart. is translation—
Ejin verletzt Bruder helt herter denn eine feste Stad, Und Zanck helt herter, denn rigel am Palast
[a brother wounded resisteth more than a strong city, and strife resisteth more than bolts in the palace], is one of his most happy renderings. t¥"N > in itself only means ὑπὲρ πόλιν ὀχυράν (Venet.); the noun-adjective (cf. Isa. x. 10) to be supplied is to be understood to ty: 837 TY or 87 NWP (Kimchi). The Miph. yi occurs only here. If one reads yw, then it means one who is treated falsely = {3 Y2"53, like the frequently occurring ὭΡ, my rising up ones = "oy DYDD, those that rise up against me; but Codd. (also Baer’s Cod. jaman.) and old editions have Y¥53, which, as we have above translated, gives an impersonal attributive clause; the former: /rater perfidiose tractatus (ΕἾ.: mala fide offensus); the latter: perjide actum est, scil. {2 im eum=in quem perfide actum. MN is, after xvii. 17, a friend in the highest sense of the word; yw means to break off, to break free, with 3 or by of him on whom the action terminates. That the Yv’5 is to be thought of as ns of the yun) nx is obvious; the translation, “ brothers. who break with one another” (Gesen.), is incorrect: MX is not collective, and still less is pw) a reciprocum. The relation of ns is the same as that of })98, xvi. 28. The Targum (improving the Peshito) translates sing 2 NYNIT NA, which does not mean: a brother who renounces (Hitzig), fei who is treated wickedly on the part of, his brother. That is correct; on the contrary, Ewald’s “a ag eats resists more than...” proceeds from a meaning of yw which it has not; and Bertheau gives, with Schultens, an untenable’ reflexive meaning to the
1 Among the whole Heb. synon. for sinning, there exists no reflexive Niph.; and also the Arab. fsk has no ethical signification. 23D) only, in the sense of fool, is found. ἶ
Niph. (which as denom. might mean “ covered with crime,” Venet. πλημμεληθείς), and, moreover, one that is too weak, for he translates, ‘(a brother is more obstinate than...” Hitzig corrects }¥B th, to shut up sin =to hold it fettered; but that is not correct Heb. It ought to be ἍΝ, ¥23, or MIM. Τὴ 19a the force of the substantival clause lies in the [9 (more than, i.e. harder = more difficult to be gained), and in 196 in the 2; cf. Mic. vii. 4, where they are interchanged. The parallelism is synonymous: strifes and lawsuits between those who had been friends form as insurmountable a hindrance to their - reconciliation, are as difficult to be raised, as the great bars at the gate of a castle (ΕἾ.). The point of comparison is not only the weight of the cross-beam (from m3, crosswise, across, to go across the fteld), but also the shutting up of the access. Strife forms a partition wall between such as once stood near each other, and so much thicker the closer they once stood.
With ver. 19, the series of proverbs which began with that of the flatterer closes. The catchword nx, which occurred at its commencement, 9), is repeated at its close, and serves also as a landmark of the group following 20-24. The proverb of the breach of friendship and of contentions is followed by one of the reaction of the use of the tongue on the man himself. Ver. 20 Of the fruit which a man’s mouth bringeth is his heart satisfied;
By the revenue of his lips is he filled. He will taste in rich measure of the consequences not merely of the good (xii. 14, cf. xii. 2), but of whatever he has spoken. This is an oxymoron like Matt. xv. 11, that not that which goeth into the mouth, but that which cometh out of it, defileth a man. As at John iv. 34 the conduct of a man, so here his words are called his βρῶμα. Not merely the conduct (i. 31, Isa. iii. 10), but also the words are fruit-bringing; and not only do others taste of the fruit of the words as of the actions of a man, whether they be good or bad, but above all he himself does so, both in this life and in that which is to come. Ver. 21 Death and life are in the power of the tongue; And whoever loveth it shall eat its fruit.
The hand, 7’, is so common a metaphor for power, that as here a hand is attributed to the tongue, so e.g. Isa. xlvii. 14 to the flame, and Ps. xlix.16to Hades. Death and life is the great alternative which is placed, Deut. xxx. 15, before man. According as he uses his tongue, he falls under the power of death or attains to life. All interpreters attribute, 214, 208) to the tongue: gui eam (linguam) amant vescentur (O28), distrib. sing., as iii. 18, 35, etc.) fructu ejus. But “to love the tongue” is a strange and obscure expression. He loves the tongue, says Hitzig, who loves to babble. Euchel: he who guards it carefully, or: he who takes care of it, 1.6. who applies himself to right discourse. Combining both, Zéckler: who uses it much, as εὐλογῶν or κακολογῶν. The LXX. translates, οἱ δὲ κρατοῦντες αὐτῆς, 1.6. mIn&; but m8 means prehendere and tenere, not cohibere, and the tongue kept in restraint brings forth indeed no bad fruit, but it brings no fruit at all. Why thus? Does the suffix of mans, perhaps like viii. 17, Chethib, refer to wisdom, which, it is true, is not named, but which lies everywhere before the poet’s mind? At xiv. 3 we ventured to make 7n5n the subject of 3b. Then 216 would be as a miniature of viii. 17-21. Or is 71h) a mutilation of Min? 3n&: and he who loves Jahve (Ps. xcvii. 10) enjoys its (the tongue’s) fruit? Ver. 22 Whoso hath found a wife hath found a good thing, And hath obtained favour from Jahve.
As mani, 216, reminds us of viii. 17, so here not only 225, but also 22a harmonizes with viii. 35 (cf. xii. 2). A wife is such as she ought to be, as ver. 14, vx, a man is such as he ought to be; the LXX., Syr., Targ., and Vulgate supply bonam, but “ snomic brevity and force disdains such enervating adjectives, and cautious limitations of the idea” (Fl.). Besides, Haw Aw in old Hebr. would mean a well-favoured rather than a gooddispositioned wife, which later idea is otherwise expressed, xix. 14, xxxi. 10. The Venet. rightly has γυναῖκα, and Luther ein Ehefraw, for it is a married woman that is meant. The first X¥D is perf. hypotheticum, Gesen. ὃ 126, Anm. 1. On the other hand, Eccles. vii. 26, “I found, ‘8 8¥1D, more bitter than death the woman,” etc.; wherefore, when in Palestine one married a wife, the question was wont to be asked: δὰ xxi Ἰδὲ, has he married happily (after xyo of the book of Proverbs) or unhappily (after xxv of Ecclesiastes) (Jebamoth 63b)%"
The LXX. adds a distich to ver. 22, “ He that putteth away a good wife putteth away happiness; and he that keepeth an adulteress, is foolish and ungodly.” He who constructed this proverb [added by the LX X.] has been guided by xxv to δον (Ezra x. 3); elsewhere ἐκβάλλειν (γυναῖκα), Gal. iv. 30, Sir. xxviii. 15, is the translation of δ}. The Syr. has adopted the half of that distich, and Jerome the whole of it. On the other hand, vers. 23, 24, and xix. 1, 2, are wanting in the LXX. The translation which is found in some Codd. is that of Theodotion (wid. Lagarde). 7 Ver. 23 The poor uttereth suppliant entreaties; And the rich answereth rudenesses. The oriental proverbial poetry furnishes many parallels to this. It delights in the description of the contrast between a suppliant poor man and the proud and avaricious rich man; vid. e.g. Samachschari’s Goldene Halsbdnder, No. 58. O'DI04, according to its meaning, refers to the Hithpa. j3900, miser sonnei alicujus pro se imploravit; cf. the old vulgar “barmen,” i.e. to seek to move others to Er ‘barmen [compassion] (om). OY, dura, from Ὁ) (synon. ΠΕΡ), hard, fast, of bodies, and figuratively of an unbending, hard, haughty disposition, and thence of words of such a nature (F].). Both nouns are accus. of the object, as Job xl. 27, ὉΠ with the parallel 3, The proverb expresses a fact of experience as a consolation to the poor to whom, if a rich man insults him, nothing unusual occurs, and as a warning to the rich that he may not permit himself to be divested of humanity by mammon. A hard wedge to a hard clod; but whoever, as the Scripture saith, grindeth the poor by hard stubborn-hearted conduct, and grindeth his bashful face (Isa. iii, 15), challenges unmerciful judgment against himself; for the merciful, only they shall obtain mercy, αὐτοὶ ἐχεηθ: σονται (Matt. Wn (Oy Ver. 24 A man of many friends cometh off a loser; But there is a friend more faithful than a brother.
Jerome translates the commencing word by vir, but the Syr., Targ. by 8, which is adopted by ‘Hitzig σ᾽, Βδινοίιού, and others. Baty will a Gactunn poet use in one line “ zézt” [same as jetzt = now], and in the next “jetzt”? and could the Hebrew poet prefer to ™ its rarer, and here especially not altogether unambiguous form 8 (cf. to the contrary, Eccles. vii. 15)? We write &8, because the Masora comprehends this passage, with 2 Sam. xiv. 19, Mic. vi. 10, as the & ΣΡ ‘3, i.e. as the three, where one ought to expect wv, and is thus exposed to the danger of falling into error in writing and reading; but erroneously WS is found in all these three places in the Masora magna of the Venetian Bible of 1526; elsewhere the Masora has the defectiva scriptio with like meaning only in those two other passages. While ™XS=W, or properly ὃ), with equal possibility as UX,’ and it makes no material difference in the meaning of 24a whether we explain: there are friends who serve to bring one to loss: or a man of many friends comes to loss,—the inf. with ° is used in substantival clauses as the expression of the most manifold relations, Gesen. ὃ 132, Anm. 1 (cf. at Hab. i. 17), here in both cases it denotes the end, as e.g. Ps. xcii. 8, to which it hastens with many friends, or with the man of many friends. It is true that WX (like 505) is almost always connected only with genitives of things; but as one says DDN WN: aman belongs to God, so may one also say OY] WX: a man belongs to many friends; the common language of the people may thus have named a man, to whom, because he has no definite and decided character, the rule that one knows a man by his friends is not applicable, a so-called every-man’s-friend, or all-the-world’s-friend. Theodotion translates ἀνὴρ ἑταιριῶν Tov ἑταιρεύσασθαι; and thus also the Syr., Targ., and Jerome render (and among the moderns, Hitzig) YN as reflexive in the sense of to cherish social intercourse; but this reflexive is ΠΡ ΤΠ, xxii. 24. That yyinnn is either Hithpa. of ¥¥, to exult, Ps. Ix. 10, Ixv. 14, according to which the Venet. translates (contrary to Kimchi) ὥστε ἀλαλάξειν: such an one can exult, but which is not true, since, according to 248, a true friend outweighs the many; or it is Hithpa. of YI, to be wicked, sinful (ΕἸ.: οὐδὲ perniciem paraturus est); or, which we prefer, warranted by Isa. xxiv. 19, of ¥29, to become brittle (Béttcher and others)—which not only gives a good sense, but also a similar alliteration with D'Y), as iii. 29, xiii. 20. In contradistinction to 9, which is a general,
1 One sees from this interchange how softly the " was uttered; cf. Well- hausen’s Text der Bb. Samuel (1871) (Preface). Kimchi remarks that we say Sop for Sop, because we would otherwise confound it with Sipe.
and, according to the usage of the language (e.g. 176), a familiar idea, the true friend is called, in the antithetical parallel member, 278 (xxvii. 6); and after xvii. 17, N82 P24, one who remains true in misfortune. To have such an one is better than to have many of the so-called friends; and, as appears from the contrast, to him who is so fortunate as to have one such friend, there comes a blessing and safety. Immanuel has given the right explanation: “ A man who sets himself to gain many friends comes finally to be a loser (avin? 11D), for he squanders his means, and is impoverished in favour of others.” And Schultens: At - est amicus agglutinatus pre fratre. Rarum et carum esse genus insinuatur, ac proinde intimam illam amicitiam, que conglutinet compingatque corda, non per multos spargendam, sed circumspecte et ferme cum uno tantum ineundam. ‘Thus closes this group of proverbs with the praise of friendship deepened into spiritual brotherhood, as the preceding, ver. 19, with a warning against the destruction of such a relation by a breach of trust not to be made good again.
Chap. xix. The plur. D'V), xviii. 24, is emphatic and equivalent to0'22 OY, The group 1-4 closes with a proverb which contains this catchword. The first proverb of the group comes by ΒΦ into contact with xviii. 20, the first proverb of the preceding group.
Ver. 1 Better a poor man walking in his innocence, Than one with perverse lips, and so a fool. The contrast, xxviii. 6,is much clearer. But to correct this proverb in conformity with that, as Hitzig does, is unwarrantable. The Syr., indeed, translates here as there; but the Chald. assimilates this translation to the Heb. text, which Theodotion, and after him the Syro-Hexapl., renders by ὑπὲρ στρεβλόχειλον ἄφρονα. But does la form a contrast to 1b? Fleischer remarks: “ From the contrast it appears that he who is designated in 1 must be thought of as ἼΩΝ ἢ [rich]; and Ewald, “Thus early the ideas of a rich man and of a fool, or a despiser of God, are connected together.” Saadia understands D> [a fool], after Job xxxi. 24, of one who makes riches his 2D3 [confidence]. Kuchel accordingly translates: the false man, although he builds himself greatly up, viz. on his riches. But Sp3 designates the intellectually slothful, in whom the flesh overweighs the mind.
And the representation of the rich, which, for 15 certainly arises out of 1a, does not amalgamate with p>, but with rnp vpy. Arama is on the right track, for he translates: the rich who distorts his mouth (cf. vol. i. p. 143), for he gives to the poor suppliant a rude refusal. Better Zéckler: a proud man of perverse lips and haughty demeanour. If one with haughty, scornful lips is opposed to the poor, then it is manifestly one not poor who thinks to raise himself above the poor, and haughtily looks down on him. And if it is said that, in spite of this proud demeanour, he is a fool, then this presents the figure of one proud of his wealth, who, in spite of his emptiness and nequttia, imagines that he possesses a greatness of knowledge, culture, and worth corresponding to the greatness of his riches. How much better is a poor man than such an one who walketh (vid. on oh, vol. i. p. 79) in his innocence and simplicity, with his pure mind wholly devoted to God and to that which is good!—his poverty keeps him in humility which is capable of no malicious conduct; and this pious blameless life is of more worth than the pride of wisdom of the distinguished fool. ‘There is in contrast to MWY a simplicity, ἁπλότης, of high moral worth; but, on the other side, there is also a simplicity which is worthless. This is the connecting thought which introduces the next verse. Ver. 2 The not-knowing of the soul is also not good,
And he who hasteneth with the legs after it goeth astray. Fleischer renders ¥52 as the subj. and 2i0-ND as neut. pred.: in and of itself sensual desire is not good, but yet more so if it is without foresight and reflection. With this explanation the words must be otherwise accentuated. Hitzig, in conformity with the accentuation, before us: if desire is without reflection, it is also without success. But where wa) denotes desire or sensuality, it is always shown by the connection, as e.g. xxiii. 2; here NWI, referring to the soul as knowing (cf. Ps. exxxix. 14), excludes this meaning. But w5) is certainly gen. subjecti; Luzzatto’s “self-knowledge” is untenable, for this would require #5) nY7; Meiri rightly glosses wa) nyt by pa. After this Zockler puts Hitzig’s translation right in the following manner: where there is no consideration of the soul, there is no prosperity. But that also is incorrect, for it would require NOP; nox) is always pred., not a substantival clause.
Thus the proverb states that wD) nyt-ND2 is not good, and that is equivalent to w5) nyt-Nba ni (for the subject to nu-Nx? is frequently, as 6.0. xvii. 26, xviii. 5, an infinitive); or also: nyt-xba wb) is a virtual noun in the sense of the not-knowing of the soul; for to say nyI-N> was syntactically inadmissible, but the expression is nyw-N53, not Ny a (233), because this is used in the sense unintentionally or unexpectedly. The 03 which begins the proverb is difficult. If we lay the principal accent in the translation given above on “not good,” then the placing of b) first is a hyperbaton similar to that in xvii. 26, xx. 11; cf. 8, xvii. 11; P49, xiii. 10, as if the words were: if the soul is without knowledge, then also (60 ¢pso) it is destitute of anything good. But if we lay the principal accent on the “also,” then the meaning of the poet is, that ignorance of the soul is, like many other things, not good; or (which we prefer without on that account maintaining’ the original connection of ver. 1 and ver. 2), that as on the one side the pride of wisdom, so on the other ignorance is not good. In this case ὯΣ belongs more to the subject than to the predicate, but in reality to the whole sentence at the beginning of which it stands. To hasten with the legs (δ, as xxviii. 20) means now in this connection to set the body in violent agitation, without direction and guidance proceeding from the knowledge possessed by the soul. He who thus hastens after it without being intellectually or morally clear as to the goal and the way, makes a false step, goes astray, fails (vid. viii. 36, where ‘NDA is the contrast to *X¥b). Ver. 3 The foolishness of a man overturneth his way, And his heart is angry against Jahve.
Regarding 5p, vid. at xi. 3; also the Arab. signification “to go before” proceeds from the root conception pervertere, for first a letting precede, or preceding (e.g. of the paying before the delivery of that which is paid for: sala/, a pre-numbering, and then also: advanced money), consisting in the reversal of the
1 The old interpreters and also the best Jewish interpreters mar the understanding and interpretation of the text, on the one side, by distinguishing between a nearest and a deeper meaning of Scripture (ndaa qv and ND} JI); on the other by this, that they suppose an inward connection of all the proverbs, and expend useless ingenuity in searching after the connection. The former is the method especially adopted by Immanuel and Meiri, the latter has most of all been used by Arama.
natural order, is meant. The way is here the way of life, the walking: the folly of a man overturns, i.e. destroys, his life’scourse; but although he is himself the fabricator of his own ruin, yet the ill-humour (AX, wstuare, vid. at Ps. xi. 6) of his heart turns itself against God, and he blames (LX X. essentially correct: αἰτιᾶται) God instead of himself, viz. his own madness, whereby he has turned the grace of God into lasciviousness, cast to the winds the instruction which lay in His providences, and frustrated the will of God desiring his good. A beautiful paraphrase of this parable is found at Sir. xv. 11-20; cf. Lam. iii. 39.
The very same contrast, though otherwise expressed, we had at xiv.20. Regarding jin, vid. vol. i. p.63. δῚ 15 the tottering, or he who has fallen into a tottering condition, who has no resources, possesses no means. ‘The accentuation gives Mugrash to the word (according to which the Targ. translates), for it is not the subject of 15’: the reduced is separated (pass. Niph.) by his misfortunes, or must separate himself (reflex. Miph.) from his friend QOPI, as Eccles. iv. 4, pre socio suo); but subject of the virtual pred. 128) 7172: the reduced—his friend (ΠΡ, as ver. 7) separates himself, 1.6. (according to the nature of the Semitic substantival clause) he is such (of such a fate) that his friend sets himself free, whereby 335 may be omitted as selfobvious; 153 means one who separates himself, xviii. 1. If we make 21 the subject of the separatur, then the initiative of the separation from the friend is not expressed.
In vers. 5 and 9 we have the introductory proverb of two groups, the former of which, in its close as well as its beginning, cannot be mistaken.
times changing only because ψευδής goes before, and instead of ψευδῆ, the choice of a different rendering commended itself. Ver. 6 Many stroke the cheeks of the noble; And the mass of friends belongeth to him who gives.
The phrase "2B ‘2B Nidn signifies to stroke the face of any one, from the fundamental meaning of the verb non, to rub, to stroke, Arab. khala, with which the Heb., meaning to be sick, weak (viribus attritum esse), and the Arabic: to be sweet (properly levem et politum, glabrum esse, or palatum demulcere, leniter stringere, contrast asperum esse ad gustum), are connected — (ΕἾ.). The object of such insinuating, humble suing for favour is the 1°72 (from 273, nstigare), the noble, he who is easily incited to noble actions, particularly to noble-mindedness in bestowing gifts and in doing good, or who feels himself naturally impelled thereto, and spontaneously practises those things; cf. the Arab. krym, nobilis and liberalis (F1.), and at Job xxi. 28; parall. Ms jm, a man who gives willingly, as ΠῸΠ Ws, xv. 18, one who is easily kindled into anger. Many (Ὁ 5, as Job xi. 19) stroke the face of the liberal (Lat. caput mulcent or demulcent); and to him who gives willingly and richly belongs ¥77-03, the mass (the totality) of good friends, cf. xv. 17; there the art. of 74, according to the manner of expression of the Arab. grammarians, stood for “the exhaustion of the characteristic properties of the genus”: the friend who corresponds to the nature (the idea) of such an one; here it stands for “ the comprehension of the individuals of the genus;” all that is only always friend. It lies near with Ewald and Hitzig to read 37 >) (and every oneis friend...) ("$3 =‘bo, as Jer. viii. 10, etc.); but why could not yan-e3 be used as well as ὈἼΝΠ ΟΣ, perhaps with the sarcastic appearance which the above translation seeks to express? The LXX. also had yn 52) in view, which it incorrectly translates πᾶς δὲ ὁ κακός, whereby the Syr. and the Targ. are led into error; but }AD is not one and the same with In’, vid. xvii. 6. On the contrary, there certainly lies before us in ver. 7 a mutilated text. The tristich is, as we have shown, vol. i: p. 15, open to suspicion; and the violence which its interpretation needs in order to comprehend it, as a formal part of Ταῦ, places it beyond a doubt, and the LX X. confirms it that 7c is the remainder of a distich, the half of which is lost.
All the brethren of the poor hate him;
How much more do his friends withdraw themselves from him? Regarding ‘3 58, quanto magis, vid. at xi. 31, xv. 11, xvii. 7. In a similar connection xiv. 20 spake of hatred, i.e. the cooling of love, and the manifesting of this coldness. The brethren who thus show themselves here, unlike the friend who has become a brother, according to xvii. 17, are brothers-german, including kindred by blood relation. 22 has Mercha, and is thus without the Makkeph, as at Ps. xxxv. 10 (vid. the Masora in Baer’s Liber Psalmorum, 1861, p. 133). Kimchi (Michlol 205a), Norzi, and others think that cal (with am yp) is to be read as at Isa. x]. 12, where on) is a verb. But that is incorrect. The case is the same as with NW, iii. 12; Ps. xlvii. 5, Ix. 2. As here & with Mercha remains, so ὅ with Mercha in that twice occurring 22); that which is exceptional is this, that the accentuated 59 is written thus twice, not as the usual 55, but as 5 with the Makkeph. The ground of the exception lies, as with other peculiarities, in the special character of metrical accentuation; the Mercha represents the place of the Makkeph, and — thus remains in the unchanged force of a Kametz- Chatuph. The plur. 3PM does not stamp 37999 as the defectively written plur.; the suffix eu is always sing., and the sing. is thus, like 275, 60, meant collectively, or better: generally (in the sense of kind), which is the linguistic usage of these two words, 1 Sam. xxx. 26; Job xlii. 10. But it is worthy of notice that the Masoretic form here is not 7279, but ΠΡΟ, with Sheva. The Masora adds to it the remark n°, and accordingly the word is thus written with Sheva by Kimchi (Michlol 202a and Lez. under the word ny), in Codd., and older editions. The Venet., translating by ἀπὸ τοῦ φίλου αὐτοῦ, has not noticed that. But how? Does the punctuation 737 mean that the word is here to be derived from 1, maleficus? Thus understood, it does not harmonize with the line of thought. From this it is much more seen that the punctuation of the inflected 999, amicus, fluctuates. This word Y1) is a formation so difficult of comprehension, that one might almost, with Olshausen, ὃ 210; Bottcher, ὃ 794; and Lagarde, regard the Ὁ as the partitive jd, like the French
If now this line belongs to this proverb, then 4772 must be used of the poor, and MDATND, or ΠΙΡΠ ie (vid. regarding the 15 Keris, %- for 89, at Ps. c. 3), must be the attributively nearer designation of the Ὁ. The meaning of the Ker? would be: he (the poor man) hunts after mere words, which—but no actions corresponding to them—are for a portion tohim. This is doubtful, for the principal matter, that which is not a portion to him, remains unexpressed, and the mani [to him they belong] affords only the service of guarding one against understanding by the ON the proper words of the poor. ‘This service is not.in the same way afforded by 77 N? [they are not]; but this expression characterizes the words as vain, so that it is to be interpreted according to such parallels as Hos. xii. 2: words which are not, 1.6. which have nothing in reality corresponding to them, verba nihili, 1.6. the empty assurances and promises of his brethren and friends (Fl.). The old translators all? read x5, and the Syr. and Targ. translate not badly: Mw N? ibn; Symmachus, ῥήσεσιν ἀνυπάρκτοις. The expression is not to be rejected: ND nm’ sometimes means to come to N9, i.e. to nothing, Job vi. 21, Ezek. xxi. 32, cf. Isa. xv. 6; and si7 ND, he is not = has no reality, Jer. v. 12, nDOn-Ne O'8, may thus mean words which are nothing (vain). But how can it be said of the poor whom everything forsakes, that one dismisses him with words behind which there is nothing, and now also that he pursues such words? The former supposes always a sympathy, though it be a feigned one,
1 In vol. i. p. 266, we have acknowledged py, from yy, friend, only for xix. 7; but at xix. 4 we have also found amicus ejus more probable than ab amico suo (Ξε ΠΝ 12).
or, more closely, since this would be the translation of 31D SYD}, xvi. 20, xvii. 20: so it happens, or it comes to this, that he acquires good (= Ny? Mn); the nf. with ὁ is here, as at xviii. 24, the expression of a fut. periphrasticum, as in the Lat. consecuturus est. Regarding ap-nap, vid. xv. 82, and ANRIN WY, vol. i. p. 119, That the deportment of men is either care for the soul, or the contrary of that, is a thought which runs through the Book of Proverbs. The group of proverbs (vers. 9-16) now following begins and closes in the same way as the preceding.
And one who breathes out lies perisheth,
How much less a servant to rule over princes.
Thus also with M82 8) (3 p. Pil. non decet, cf. the adj. xxvi. 1) xvii. 7 begins. ‘3D ἢν rises here, as at ver. 7, a minori ad majus: how much more is it unbecoming = how much less is it seemly. The contrast in the last case is, however, more rugged, and the expression harsher. “ A fool cannot bear luxury: he becomes by it yet more foolish; one who was previously a humble slave, but who has attained by good fortune a place of prominence and power, from being something good, becomes at once something bad: an insolent sceleratus” (ΕἾ.). Agur, xxx. 22 f., describes such a homo novus as an unbearable calamity; and the author of the Book of Ecclesiastes, written in the time of the Persian domination, speaks, x. 7, of such. The LXX. translates, καὶ ἐὰν οἰκέτης ἄρξηται μεθ᾽ ὕβρεως δυναστεύειν, rendering the phrase O WD by μεθ᾽ ὕβρεως, but all other translators had ova before them. Ver. 11 The discretion of a man maketh him long-suffering, the like; in the proverbial style the fut. or the particip. is more common. In the synonymous parallel member, iF785N points to man as such: it is an honour to him to pass by a transgression (particularly that which affects himself), to let it go aside, ie. to forbear revenge or punishment (cf. Arab. tjdwz aly); thus also the divine πάρεσις (Rom. iii. 25) is designated by Mic. vii. 18; and in Amos vii. 8, viii. 2, 73¥ stands absol. for the divine remission or passing by, ¢.e. unavenging of sin. Ver. 12 A murmuring as of a lion is the wrath of the king, And as dew on plants is his favour. Line 1 is a variation of xx. 2a; line 2a of xvi. 15). ὮΝ) is not the being irritated against another, but generally ill-humour, fretfulness, bad humour; the murmuring or growling in which this state of mind expresses itself is compared to that of a lion which, growling, prepares and sets itself to fall upon its prey (vid. Isa. v. 29, cf. Amos 111. 4). Opposed to the ἢν) stands the beneficial effect of the 89, z.e. of the pleasure, the delight, the satisfaction, the disposition which shows kindness (Χ Χ. τὸ ἱλαρὸν αὐτοῦ). Inthe former case all are afraid; inthe latter, everything lives, as when the refreshing dew falls upon the herbs of the field. ‘The proverb presents a fact, but that the king may mirror himself in it. Ver. 13 A foolish son is destruction for his father, And a continual dropping are the contentions of a wife. Regarding Ni, vid. at xvii. 4, cf. x. 3. Line 2a is expanded, xxvii. 15, into a distich. The dropping is 1, properly striking (cf. Arab. tirad, from tarad 111., hostile assault) when it pours itself forth, stroke (drop) after stroke=constantly, or with unbroken continuity. Lightning-flashes are called (Jer Berachoth, p. 114, Shitomir’s ed.) pw, opp. ᾿Ξ, when they do not follow in intervals, but constantly flash; and ὁ. Bechoroth 44a; myn, weeping eyes, ms, dropping eyes, and ny™», eyes always flowing, are distinguished. An old interpreter (vid. R. Ascher in Pesachim 11. No. 21) explains 0 HoT by: “ which drops, and drops, and always drops.” An Arab proverb which I once heard from Wetzstein, says that there are three things which make our house intolerable: dltakk (= dldhalf), the trickling through of rain; dlnakk, the contention of the wife; and dlbakk, bugs.
Ver. 14 House and riches are a paternal inheritance, But from Jahve cometh a prudent wife. House and riches (opulentia), which in themselves do not make men happy, one may receive according to the law of inheritance; but a prudent wife is God’s gracious gift, xviii. 22. There is not a more suitable word than rosin (fem. of 22) to characterize a wife as a divine cift, making her husband happy. by (22) is the property which says: “I am named modesty, which wears the crown of all virtues.” ὦ Ver. 15 Slothfulness sinketh into deep sleep, And an idle soul must hunger. Regarding 7277 and its root-word D7), vid. at x. 5. DBM, to befall, to ce ‘to get, is to be te pa after Gen. iii. 21: the at pinn-y, viz. O8Y4, is naturally to be supplied. In 15d the fut. denotes that which will certainly happen, the inevitable. In both of its members the proverb is perfectly clear; Hitzig, however, corrects 15a, and brings out of it the meaning, “slothfulness gives tasteless herbs to eat.” The LXX. has two translations of this proverb, here and at xviii. 8. That it should translate ΠΟ by ἀνδρόγυνος was necessary, as Lagarde remarks, for the exposition of the “ works of a Hebrew Sotades.” But the Hebrew literature never sunk to such works, wallowing in the mire of sensuality, and ἀνδρόγυνος is not at all thus enigmatical; the Greek word was also used of an effeminate man, a man devoid of manliness, a weakling, and was, as the LX X. shows, more current in the Alexandrine Greek than elsewhere. Ver. 16 He that keepeth the commandment keepeth his soul; He that taketh no heed to his ways dies.
As at vi. 23, cf. Eccles. viii. 5, M8 is here the commandment of God, aa thus obligatory, which directs man in every case to do that which is right, and warns him against that which is wrong. And ¥377 12 (according to the Masora with Tsere, as in Codd. and old editions, not 2) is the antithesis of 1377 733, xvi. 17. To despise one’s own way is equivalent to, to regard it as worth no consideration, as no question of conscience whether one should enter upon this way or that. Hitzig’s reading, 88, “he that scattereth his ways,” lets himself be drawn by the manifold objects of sensuality sometimes in one direction and sometimes in another, is supported by Jer. iii. 13, according to which it must be 38; the conj. is not in the style of the Book of Proverbs, and besides is superfluous. The LXX., which is fond of a guid pro quo—it makes, 13d, a courtesan offering a sacrifice she had vowed of the wages of sin of the quarrelsome woman—has here, as the Heb. text: ὁ καταφρονῶν τῶν ἑαυτοῦ ὁδῶν ἀπολεῖται. Thus after the Keri n%, as also the Targ., Syro-Hexap., and Luther; on the contrary, the Syr., Jerome, the Venet. adopt the Chethib nov: he will become dead, z.e. dies no natural death. The Keri is more in the spirit and style of the Book of Proverbs (xv. 10, xxiii. 13, x. 21).
Vers. 17-21. These verses we take together. But we have no other reason for making a pause at ver. 21, than that ver. 22 is analogous to ver. 17, and thus presents itself to us as an initial verse.
Ver. 17 He lendeth to Jahve who is compassionate to the lowly, And his bounty He requites to him.
As at xiv. 31, 1)Π is part. Kal. The Masoretically exact form of the word is 1) Π (as οὐδ, xx. 14) with Mercha on the first syllable, on which the tone is thrown back, and the m7pyn on the second. The Roman legal phrase, mutut datione contrahitur obligatio, serves to explain the fundamental conception of mo, mutuo accipere, and mon, mutuum dare (vid. xxil. 7). The construction, Ex. xxii. 24, “ to make any one bound as a debtor, obligare,” lies at the foundation of the genitive connection 7 men (not men). With 176 cf. xii. 14, where the subject of 2% (Kert) remains in the background. mn) (not 1793) is here his work done in the sense of good exhibited. “ Love,” Hedinger once said, “is an imperishable capital, which always bears interest.” And the Archbishop Walther: nam Deo dat qui dat inopibus, ipse Deus est in pauperibus. Dr. Jonas, as Diichsel relates, once gave to a poor man, and said, “ Who knows when God restores it!” There Luther interposed: ‘“ As if God had not long ago given it beforehand!” This answer of Luther meets the abuse of this beautiful proverb by the covetous.
Ver. 18. This proverb brings to view once more the pedagogic character of this Older Book of Proverbs:
Correct thy son, for yet there is hope; But go not too far to kill him.
That 3 is meant relatively, as at xi. 15, is seen from Job xi. 18, xiv. 7; Jer. xxxi. 16 f.; Mpm wD is the usual expression for etenim spes est. ‘Though a son show obstinacy, and manifest a bad disposition, yet there is hope in the training of the youth of being able to break his self-will, and to wean him from his bad disposition; therefore his education should be carried forward with rigorous exactness, but in such a way that wisdom and love regulate the measure and limits of correction: ad eum interjicien- - dum animam ne tollas (animum ne inducas). “#52 is not the subject, for in that case the word would have been ΝΠ (2 Kings xiv. 10). It is the object: To raise the soul to something is equivalent to, to direct his desire to it, to take delight in it. The teacher should not seek correction as the object, but only as the means; he who has a desire after it, to put the child to death in the case of his guilt, changes correction into revenge, permits himself to be driven by passion from the proper end of correction, and to be pushed beyond its limits. The LXX. translates freely eis δὲ ὕβριν, for ὕβρις is unrestrained abuse, ‘128 1D19 as Immanuel glosses. Besides, all the ancients and also the Venet. translate inom as the inf. of 2A, But Oetinger (for he translates: lift not thy soul to his cry, for which Euchel: let not his complaining move thy compassion) follows the derivation from 27 suggested by Kimchi, Meiri, and Immanuel, and preferred by Ralbag, so that in’20 after the form N23 is equivalent to inten, But leaving out of view that ΠῸΠ means strepere, not lamentari, and that wb) XY) means attention, not desire, xxiii. 13 points out to us a better interpretation.