{"commentary":{"id":"keil-delitzsch","name":"Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch Old Testament Commentary","website":"https://worthy.bible/commentaries/keil-delitzsch-commentary","licenseUrl":"https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/","licenseNotes":null,"licenseNotice":null,"englishName":"Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch Old Testament Commentary","language":"eng","textDirection":"rtl","sha256":"bb5cc0f9cfe0a93b3c903bb6972c6bc8c4e9f2bd3be6c2a6d276737cf9c5edce","availableFormats":["json"],"listOfBooksApiLink":"/api/c/keil-delitzsch/books.json","listOfProfilesApiLink":"/api/c/keil-delitzsch/profiles.json","numberOfBooks":39,"totalNumberOfChapters":909,"totalNumberOfVerses":6516,"totalNumberOfProfiles":0,"languageName":"English","languageEnglishName":"English"},"book":{"id":"PRO","commentaryId":"keil-delitzsch","name":"Proverbs","commonName":"Proverbs","introduction":"The Book of Proverbs\n\nIntroduction\n\nThe Book of Proverbs bears the external title ספר משׁלי, which it derives from the words with which it commences. It is one of the three books which are distinguished from the other twenty-one by a peculiar system of accentuation, the best exposition of which that has yet been given is that by S. Baer,\n\n(Note: Cf. Outlines of Hebrew Accentuation, Prose and Poetical, by Rev. A. B. Davidson, D.D., Professor of Hebrew, Free Church College, Edinburgh, 1861, based on Baer's Torath Emeth, Rdelheim 1872.)\n\nas set forth in my larger Psalmen-commentar\n\n(Note: Vol. ii., ed. of 1860, pp. 477-511).\n\nThe memorial word for these three books, viz., Job, Mishle (Proverbs), and Tehillim (Psalms), is אמת, formed from the first letter of the first word of each book, or, following the Talmudic and Masoretic arrangement of the books, תאם.\n\nHaving in view the superscription משׁלי שׁלמת, with which the book commences, the ancients regarded it as wholly the composition of Solomon. The circumstance that it contains only 800 verses, while according to Kg1 5:12 (Kg1 4:32) Solomon spake 3000 proverbs, R. Samuel bar-Nachmani explains by remarking that each separate verse may be divided into two or three allegories or apothegms (e.g., Pro 25:12), not to mention other more arbitrary modes of reconciling the discrepancy.\n\n(Note: Pesikta, ed. Buber (1868), 34b, 35a. Instead of 800, the Masora reckons 915 verses in the Book of Proverbs.)\n\nThe opinion also of R. Jonathan, that Solomon first composed the Canticles, then the Proverbs, and last of all Ecclesiastes, inasmuch as the first corresponds\n\n(Note: Schir-ha-Schirim Rabba, c. i.f. 4a.)\n\nwith the spring-time of youth, the second with the wisdom of manhood, and the third with the disappointment of old age, is founded on the supposition of the unity of the book and of its Solomonic authorship.\n\nAt the present day also there are some, such as Stier, who regard the Book of Proverbs from first to last as the work of Solomon, just as Klauss (1832) and Randegger (1841) have ventured to affirm that all the Psalms without exception were composed by David. But since historical criticism has been applied to Biblical subjects, that blind submission to mistaken tradition appears as scarcely worthy of being mentioned. The Book of Proverbs presents itself as composed of various parts, different from each other in character and in the period to which they belong. Under the hands of the critical analysis it resolves itself into a mixed market of the most manifold intellectual productions of proverbial poetry, belonging to at least three different epochs.\n\n1. The External Plan of the Book of Proverbs, and Its Own Testimony as to Its Origin\n\nThe internal superscription of the book, which recommends it, after the manner of later Oriental books, on account of its importance and the general utility of its contents, extends from Pro 1:1 to Pro 1:6. Among the moderns this has been acknowledged by Lwenstein and Maurer; for Pro 1:7, which Ewald, Bertheau, and Keil have added to it, forms a new commencement to the beginning of the book itself. The book is described as \"The Proverbs of Solomon,\" and then there is annexed the statement of its object. That object, as summarily set forth in Pro 1:2, is practical, and that in a twofold way: partly moral, and partly intellectual. The former is described in Pro 1:3-5. It presents moral edification, moral sentiments for acceptance, not merely to help the unwise to attain to wisdom, but also to assist the wise. The latter object is set forth in Pro 1:6. It seeks by its contents to strengthen and discipline the mind to the understanding of thoughtful discourses generally. In other words, it seeks to gain the moral ends which proverbial poetry aims at, and at the same time to make familiar with it, so that the reader, in these proverbs of Solomon, or by means of them as of a key, learns to understand such like apothegms in general. Thus interpreted, the title of the book does not say that the book contains proverbs of other wise men besides those of Solomon; if it did so, it would contradict itself. It is possible that the book contains proverbs other than those of Solomon, possible that the author of the title of the book added such to it himself, but the title presents to view only the Proverbs of Solomon. If Pro 1:7 begins the book, then after reading the title we cannot think otherwise than that here begin the Solomonic proverbs. If we read farther, the contents and the form of the discourses which follow do not contradict this opinion; for both are worthy of Solomon. So much the more astonished are we, therefore, when at Pro 10:1 we meet with a new superscription, משׁלי שׁלמה, from which point on to Pro 22:16 there is a long succession of proverbs of quite a different tone and form - short maxims, Mashals proper - while in the preceding section of the book we find fewer proverbs than monitory discourses. What now must be our opinion when we look back from this second superscription to the part 1:7-9:18, which immediately follows the title of the book? Are 1:7-9:18, in the sense of the book, not the \"Proverbs of Solomon\"? From the title of the book, which declares them to be so, we must judge that they are. Or are they \"Proverbs of Solomon\"? In this case the new superscription (Pro 10:1), \"The Proverbs of Solomon,\" appears altogether incomprehensible. And yet only one of these two things is possible: on the one side, therefore, there must be a false appearance of contradiction, which on a closer investigation disappears. But on which side is it? If it is supposed that the tenor of the title, Pro 1:1-6, does not accord with that of the section 10:1-22:6, but that it accords well with that of 1:7-9:18 (with the breadth of expression in 1:7-9:18, it has also several favourite words not elsewhere occurring in the Book of Proverbs; among these, ערמה, subtilty, and מזמּה, discretion, Pro 1:4), then Ewald's view is probable, that chap. 1-9 is an original whole written at once, and that the author had no other intention than to give it as an introduction to the larger Solomonic Book of Proverbs beginning at Pro 10:1. But it is also possible that the author of the title has adopted the style of the section Prov 1:7-9:18. Bertheau, who has propounded this view, and at the same time has rejected, in opposition to Ewald, the idea of the unity of the section, adopts this conclusion, that in 1:8-9:18 there lies before us a collection of the admonitions of different authors of proverbial poetry, partly original introductions to larger collections of proverbs, which the author of the title gathers together in order that he may give a comprehensive introduction to the larger collection contained in 10:1-22:16. But such an origin of the section as Bertheau thus imagines is by no means natural; it is more probable that the author, whose object is, according to the title of the book, to give the proverbs of Solomon, introduces these by a long introduction of his own, than that, instead of beginning with Solomon's proverbs, he first presents long extracts of a different kind from collections of proverbs. If the author, as Bertheau thinks, expresses indeed, in the words of the title, the intention of presenting, along with the \"Proverbs of Solomon,\" also the \"words of the wise,\" then he could not have set about his work more incorrectly and self-contradictorily than if he had begun the whole, which bears the superscription \"Proverbs of Solomon\" (which must be regarded as presenting the proverbs of Solomon as a key to the words of the wise generally), with the \"words of the wise.\" But besides the opinion of Ewald, which in itself, apart from internal grounds, is more natural and probable than that of Bertheau, there is yet the possibility of another. Keil, following H. A. Hahn, is of opinion, that in the sense of the author of the title, the section 1-9 is Solomonic as well as 10-22, but that he has repeated the superscription \"Proverbs of Solomon\" before the latter section, because from that point onward proverbs follow which bear in a special measure the characters of the Mashal (Hvernick's Einl. iii. 428). The same phenomenon appears in the book of Isaiah, where, after the general title, there follows an introductory address, and then in Isa 2:1 the general title is repeated in a shorter form. That this analogy, however, is here inapplicable, the further discussion of the subject will show.\n\nThe introductory section Prov 1:7-9:18, and the larger section 10:1-22:16, which contains uniform brief Solomonic apothegms, are followed by a third section, 22:17-24:22. Hitzig, indeed, reckons 10:1-24:22 as the second section, but with Pro 22:17 there commences an altogether different style, and a much freer manner in the form of the proverb; and the introduction to this new collection of proverbs, which reminds us of the general title, places it beyond a doubt that the collector does not at all intend to set forth these proverbs as Solomonic. It may indeed be possible that, as Keil (iii. 410) maintains, the collector, inasmuch as he begins with the words, \"Incline thine ear and hear words of the wise,\" names his own proverbs generally as \"words of the wise,\" especially since he adds, \"and apply thine heart to my knowledge;\" but this supposition is contradicted by the superscription of a fourth section, Pro 24:23., which follows. This short section, an appendix to the third, bears the superscription, \"These things also are לחכמים.\" If Keil thinks here also to set aside the idea that the following proverbs, in the sense of this superscription, have as their authors \"the wise,\" he does unnecessary violence to himself. The ל is here that of authorship and if the following proverbs are composed by the חכמים, \"the wise,\" then they are not the production of the one חכם, \"wise man,\" Solomon, but they are \"the words of the wise\" in contradistinction to \"the Proverbs of Solomon.\"\n\nThe Proverbs of Solomon begin again at Pro 25:1; and this second large section (corresponding to the first, 10:1-22:16) extends to chap. 29. This fifth portion of the book has a superscription, which, like that of the preceding appendix, commences thus: \"Also (גּם) these are proverbs of Solomon which the men of Hezekiah king of Judah collected.\" The meaning of the word העתּיקוּ is not doubtful. It signifies, like the Arameo-Arabic נסח, to remove from their place, and denote that the men of Hezekiah removed from the place where they found them the following proverbs, and placed them together in a separate collection. The words have thus been understood by the Greek translator. From the supplementary words αἱ ἀδιάκριτοι (such as exclude all διάκρισις) it is seen that the translator had a feeling of the important literary historical significance of that superscription, which reminds us of the labours of the poetical grammarians appointed by Pisitratus to edit older works, such as those of Hesiod. The Jewish interpreters, simply following the Talmud, suppose that the \"also\" (גּם) belongs to the whole superscription, inclusive of the relative sentence, and that it thus bears witness to the editing of the foregoing proverbs also by Hezekiah and his companions;\n\n(Note: Vid., B. Bathra, 15a. From the fact that Isaiah outlived Hezekiah it is there concluded that the Hezekiah-collegium also continued after Hezekiah's death. Cf. Frst on the Canon of the O.T. 1868, p. 78f.)\n\nwhich is altogether improbable, for then, if such were the meaning of the words, \"which the men of Hezekiah,\" etc., they ought to have stood after Pro 1:1. The superscription Pro 25:1 thus much rather distinguishes the following collection from that going before, as having been made under Hezekiah. As two appendices followed the \"Proverbs of Solomon,\" 10:1-22:16, so also two appendices the Hezekiah-gleanings of Solomonic proverbs. The former two appendices, however, originate in general from the \"wise,\" the latter more definitely name the authors: the first, chap. 30, is by \"Agur the son of Jakeh;\" the second, Pro 31:1-9, by a \"King Lemuel.\" In so far the superscriptions are clear. The name of the authors, elsewhere unknown, point to a foreign country; and to this corresponds the peculiar complexion of these two series of proverbs. As a third appendix to the Hezekiah-collection, Pro 31:10. follows, a complete alphabetical proverbial poem which describes the praiseworthy qualities of a virtuous woman.\n\nWe are thus led to the conclusion that the Book of Proverbs divides itself into the following parts: - (1) The title of the book, Pro 1:1-6, by which the question is raised, how far the book extends to which it originally belongs; (2) the hortatory discourses, 1:7-9:18, in which it is a question whether the Solomonic proverbs must be regarded as beginning with these, or whether they are only the introduction thereto, composed by a different author, perhaps the author of the title of the book; (3) the first great collection of Solomonic proverbs, 10:1-22:16; (4) the first appendix to this first collection, \"The words of the wise,\" 22:17-24:22; (5) the second appendix, supplement of the words of some wise men, Pro 24:23.; (6) the second great collection of Solomonic proverbs, which the \"men of Hezekiah\" collected, chap. 25-29; (7) the first appendix to this second collection, the words of Agur the son of Makeh, chap. 30; (8) the second appendix, the words of King Lemuel, Pro 31:1-9; (9) third appendix, the acrostic ode, Pro 31:10. These nine parts are comprehended under three groups: the introductory hortatory discourses with the general title at their head, and the two great collections of Solomonic proverbs with their two appendices. In prosecuting our further investigations, we shall consider the several parts of the book first from the point of view of the manifold forms of their proverbs, then of their style, and thirdly of their type of doctrine. From each of these three subjects of investigation we may expect elucidations regarding the origin of these proverbs and of their collections.\n\n2. The Several Parts of the Book of Proverbs with Respect to the Manifold Forms of the Proverbs\n\nIf the Book of Proverbs were a collection of popular sayings, we should find in it a multitude of proverbs of one line each, as e.g., \"Wickedness proceedeth from the wicked\" (Sa1 24:13); but we seek for such in vain. At the first glance, Pro 24:23 appears to be a proverb of one line; but the line \"To have respect of persons in judgment is not good,\" is only the introductory line of a proverb which consists of several lines, Pro 24:24. Ewald is right in regarding as inadmissible a comparison of the collections of Arabic proverbs by Abu-Obeida, Meidani, and others, who gathered together and expounded the current popular proverbs, with the Book of Proverbs. Ali's Hundred Proverbs are, however, more worthy of being compared with it. Like these, Solomon's proverbs are, as a whole, the production of his own spirit, and only mediately of the popular spirit. To make the largeness of the number of these proverbs a matter of doubt were inconsiderate. Eichhorn maintained that even a godlike genius scarcely attains to so great a number of pointed proverbs and ingenious thoughts. But if we distribute Solomon's proverbs over his forty years' reign, then we have scarcely twenty for each year; and one must agree with the conclusion, that the composition of so many proverbs even of the highest ingenuity is no impossible problem for a \"godlike genius.\" When, accordingly, it is related that Solomon wrote 3000 proverbs, Ewald, in his History of Israel, does not find the number too great, and Bertheau does not regard it as impossible that the collection of the \"Proverbs of Solomon\" has the one man Solomon as their author. The number of the proverbs thus cannot determine us to regard them as having for the most part originated among the people, and the form in which they appear leads to an opposite conclusion. It is, indeed, probable that popular proverbs are partly wrought into these proverbs,\n\n(Note: Isaac Euchel (1804), in his Commentary on the Proverbs, regards Pro 14:4 and Pro 17:19 as such popular proverbs.)\n\nand many of their forms of expression are moulded after the popular proverbs; but as they thus lie before us, they are, as a whole, the production of the technical Mashal poetry.\n\nThe simplest form is, according to the fundamental peculiarity of the Hebrew verse, the distich. The relation of the two lines to each other is very manifold. The second line may repeat the thought of the first, only in a somewhat altered form, in order to express this thought as clearly and exhaustively as possible. We call such proverbs synonymous distichs; as e.g., Pro 11:25 :\n\nA soul of blessing is made fat,\n\nAnd he that watereth others is himself watered.\n\nOr the second line contains the other side of the contrast to the statement of the first; the truth spoken in the first is explained in the second by means of the presentation of its contrary. We call such proverbs antithetic distichs; as e.g., Pro 10:1 :\n\nA wise son maketh his father glad,\n\nAnd a foolish son is his mother's grief.\n\nSimilar forms, Pro 10:16; Pro 12:5. Elsewhere, as Pro 18:14; Pro 20:24, the antithesis clothes itself in the form of a question. sometimes it is two different truths that are expressed in the two lines; and the authorization of their union lies only in a certain relationship, and the ground of this union in the circumstance that two lines are the minimum of the technical proverb - synthetic distichs; e.g., Pro 10:18 :\n\nA cloak of hatred are lying lips,\n\nAnd he that spreadeth slander is a fool.\n\nNot at all infrequently one line does not suffice to bring out the thought intended, the begun expression of which is only completed in the second. These we call integral (eingedankige) distichs; as e.g., Pro 11:31 (cf. Pe1 4:18):\n\nThe righteous shall be recompensed on the earth -\n\nHow much more the ungodly and the sinner!\n\nTo these distichs also belong all those in which the thought stated in the first receives in the second, by a sentence presenting a reason, or proof, or purpose, or consequence, a definition completing or perfecting it; e.g., Pro 13:14; Pro 16:10; Pro 19:20; Pro 22:28.\n\n(Note: Such integral distichs are also Pro 15:3; Pro 16:7, Pro 16:10; Pro 17:13, Pro 17:15; Pro 18:9, Pro 18:13; Pro 19:26-27; Pro 20:7-8, Pro 20:10-11, Pro 20:20-21; Pro 21:4, Pro 21:13, Pro 21:16, Pro 21:21, Pro 21:23-24, Pro 21:30; Pro 22:4, Pro 22:11; Pro 24:8, Pro 24:26; Pro 26:16; Pro 27:14; Pro 28:8-9, Pro 28:17, Pro 28:24; Pro 29:1, Pro 29:5, Pro 29:12, Pro 29:14. In Pro 14:27; Pro 15:24; Pro 17:23; Pro 19:27, the second line consists of one sentence with ל and the infin.; in Pro 16:12, Pro 16:26; Pro 21:25; Pro 22:9; Pro 27:1; Pro 29:19, of one sentence with כּי; with כּי אם, Pro 18:2; Pro 23:17. The two lines, as Pro 11:31; Pro 15:11; Pro 17:7; Pro 19:7, Pro 19:10, Pro 20:27, form a conclusion a minori ad majus, or the reverse. The former or the latter clauses stand in grammatical relation in Pro 23:1-2, Pro 23:15., Pro 27:22; Pro 29:21 (cf. Pro 22:29; Pro 24:10; Pro 26:12; Pro 29:20, with hypoth. perf., and Pro 26:26 with hypoth. fut.); in the logical relation of reason and consequence, Pro 17:14; Pro 20:2, Pro 20:4; in comparative relation, Pro 12:9, etc. These examples show that the two lines, not merely in the more recent, but also in the old Solomonic Mashal, do not always consist of two parallel members.)\n\nBut there is also a fifth form, which corresponds most to the original character of the Mashal: the proverb explaining its ethical object by a resemblance from the region of the natural and every-day life, the παραβολή proper. The form of this parabolic proverb is very manifold, according as the poet himself expressly compares the two subjects, or only places them near each other in order that the hearer or reader may complete the comparison. The proverb is least poetic when the likeness between the two subjects is expressed by a verb; as Pro 27:15 (to which, however, Pro 27:16 belongs):\n\nA continual dropping in a rainy day\n\nAnd a contentious woman are alike.\n\nThe usual form of expression, neither unpoetic nor properly poetic, is the introduction of the comparison by כּ [as], and of the similitude in the second clause by כּן [so]; as Pro 10:26 :\n\nAs vinegar to the teeth, and as smoke to the eyes,\n\nSo is the sluggard to them who give him a commission.\n\nThis complete verbal statement of the relation of likeness may also be abbreviated by the omission of the כּן; as Pro 25:13; Pro 26:11 :\n\nAs a dog returning to his vomit -\n\nA fool returning to his folly.\n\nWe call the parabolic proverbs of these three forms comparisons. The last, the abbreviated form of the comparative proverb, which we will call, in contradistinction to the comparative, the emblematic, in which the contrast and its emblem are loosely placed together without any nearer expression of the similitude; as e.g., Pro 26:20; Pro 27:17-18, Pro 27:20. This takes place either by means of the couplative Vav, ו, as Pro 25:25 -\n\nCold water to a thirsty soul,\n\nAnd good news from a far country.\n\n(Note: This so-called Vav adaequationis, which appears here for the first time in the Proverbs as the connection between the figure and the thing itself without a verbal predicate (cf. on the other hand, Job 5:7; Job 12:11; Job 14:11.), is, like the Vav, ו, of comparison, only a species of that Vav of association which is called in Arab. Waw alajam'a, or Waw alam'ayat, or Waw al'asatsahab (vid., at Isa 42:5); and since usage attributes to it the verbal power of secum habere, it is construed with the accus. Vid., examples in Freytag's Arabum Proverbia, among the recent proverbs beginning with the Arabic letter k.)\n\nOr without the Vav; in which case the second line is as the subscription under the figure or double figure painted in the first; e.g., Pro 25:11., Pro 11:22 :\n\nA gold ring in a swine's snout -\n\nA fair woman without understanding.\n\nThese ground-forms of two lines, can, however, expand into forms of several lines. Since the distich is the peculiar and most appropriate form of the technical proverb, so, when two lines are not sufficient for expressing the thought intended, the multiplication to four, six, or eight lines is most natural. In the tetrastich the relation of the last two to the first two is as manifold as is the relation of the second line to the first in the distich. There is, however, no suitable example of four-lined stanzas in antithetic relation. But we meet with synonymous tetrastichs, e.g., Pro 23:15., Pro 24:3., 28f.; synthetic, Pro 30:5.; integral, Pro 30:17., especially of the form in which the last two lines constitute a proof passage beginning with כּי, Pro 22:22., or פּן, Pro 22:24., or without exponents, Pro 22:26.; comparative without expressing the comparison, Pro 25:16. (cf. on the other hand, Pro 26:18., where the number of lines is questionable), and also the emblematical, Pro 25:4.:\n\nTake away the dross from the silver,\n\nAnd there shall come forth a vessel for the goldsmith;\n\nTake away the wicked from before the king,\n\nAnd this throne shall be established in righteousness.\n\nProportionally the most frequently occurring are tetrastichs, the second half of which forms a proof clause commencing with כּי or פּן. Among the less frequent are the six-lined, presenting (Pro 23:1-3; Pro 24:11.) one and the same thought in manifold aspects, with proofs interspersed. Among all the rest which are found in the collection, Pro 23:12-14, Pro 23:19-21, Pro 23:26-28; Pro 30:15., Pro 30:29-31, the first two lines form a prologue introductory to the substance of the proverb; as e.g., Pro 23:12-14 :\n\nO let instruction enter into thine heart,\n\nAnd apply thine ears to the words of knowledge.\n\nWithhold not correction from the child;\n\nFor if thou beatest him with the rod - he dies not.\n\nThou shalt beat him with the rod,\n\nAnd deliver his soul from hell.\n\nSimilarly formed, yet more expanded, is the eight-lined stanza, Pro 23:22-28 :\n\nHearken unto thy father that begat thee,\n\nAnd despise not thy mother when she is old.\n\nBuy the truth and sell it not:\n\nWisdom, and virtue, and understanding.\n\nThe father of a righteous man greatly rejoices,\n\nAnd he that begetteth a wise child hath joy of him.\n\nThy father and thy mother shall be glad,\n\nAnd she that bare thee shall rejoice.\n\nThe Mashal proverb here inclines to the Mashal ode; for this octastich may be regarded as a short Mashal song, - like the alphabetical Mashal Psalm 37, which consists of almost pure tetrastichs.\n\nWe have now seen how the distich form multiplies itself into forms consisting of four, six, and eight lines; but it also unfolds itself, as if in one-sided multiplication, into forms of three, five, and seven lines. Tristichs arise when the thought of the first line is repeated (Pro 27:22) in the second according to the synonymous scheme, or when the thought of the second line is expressed by contrast in the third (Pro 22:29; Pro 28:10) according to the antithetic scheme, or when to the thought expressed in one or two lines (Pro 25:8; Pro 27:10) there is added its proof. The parabolic scheme is here represented when the object described is unfolded in two lines, as in the comparison Pro 25:13, or when its nature is portrayed by two figures in two lines, as in the emblematic proverb Pro 25:20 :\n\nTo take off clothing in cold weather,\n\nVinegar upon nitre,\n\nAnd he that singeth songs to a heavy heart.\n\nIn the few instances of pentastichs which are found, the last three lines usually unfold the reason of the thought of the first two: Pro 23:4., Pro 25:6., Pro 30:32.; to this Pro 24:13 forms an exception, where the כּן before the last three lines introduces the expansion of the figure in the first two. As an instance we quote Pro 25:6.:\n\nSeek not to display thyself in the presence of the king,\n\nAnd stand not in the place of the great.\n\nFor better that it be said unto thee, \"Come up hither,\"\n\nThan that they humble thee in the presence of the prince,\n\nWhile thine eyes have raised themselves.\n\nOf heptastichs I know of only one example in the collection, viz., Pro 23:6-8 :\n\nEat not the bread of the jealous,\n\nAnd lust not after his dainties;\n\nFor he is like one who calculates with himself: -\n\n\"Eat and drink,\" saith he to thee,\n\nAnd his heart is not with thee.\n\nThy morsel which thou hast eaten must thou vomit up,\n\nAnd thou hast wasted thy pleasant words.\n\nFrom this heptastich, which one will scarcely take for a brief Mashal ode according to the compound strophe-scheme, we see that the proverb of two lines can expand itself to the dimensions of seven and eight lines. Beyond these limits the whole proverb ceases to be משׁל in the proper sense; and after the manner of Ps 25; 34, and especially chap. 37, it becomes a Mashal ode. Of this class of Mashal odes are, besides the prologue, Pro 22:17-21, that of the drunkard, Pro 23:29-35; that of the slothful man, Pro 24:30-34; the exhortation to industry, Pro 27:23-27; the prayer for a moderate portion between poverty and riches, Pro 30:7-9; the mirror for princes, Pro 31:2-9; and the praise of the excellent wife, Pro 31:10. It is singular that this ode furnishes the only example of the alphabetical acrostic in the whole collection. Even a single trace of original alphabetical sequence afterwards broken up cannot be found. There cannot also be discovered, in the Mashal songs referred to, anything like a completed strophe-scheme; even in Pro 31:10. the distichs are broken by tristichs intermingled with them.\n\nIn the whole of the first part, Prov 1:7-9:18, the prevailing form is that of the extended flow of the Mashal song; but one in vain seeks for strophes. There is not here so firm a grouping of the lines; on the supposition of its belonging to the Solomonic era, this is indeed to be expected. The rhetorical form here outweighs the purely poetical. This first part of the Proverbs consists of the following fifteen Mashal strains: (1) Pro 1:7-19, (2) Pro 1:20., (3) chap. 2, (4) 3:1-18, (5) Pro 3:19-26, (6) Pro 3:27., (7) 4:1-5:6, (8) Pro 4:7., (9) Pro 6:1-5, (10) Pro 6:6-11, (11) Pro 6:12-19, (12) Pro 6:20., (13) chap. 7, (14) chap. 8, (15) chap. 9. In chap. 3 and chap. 9 there are found a few Mashal odes of two lines and of four lines which may be regarded as independent Mashals, and may adapt themselves to the schemes employed; other brief complete parts are only waves in the flow of the larger discourses, or are altogether formless, or more than octastichs. The octastich Pro 6:16-19 makes the proportionally greatest impression of an independent inwoven Mashal. It is the only proverb in which symbolical numbers are used which occurs in the collection from 1 to 29:\n\nThere are six things which Jahve hateth,\n\nAnd seven are an abhorrence to His soul:\n\nHaughty eyes, a lying tongue,\n\nAnd hands that shed innocent blood;\n\nAn heart that deviseth the thoughts of evil,\n\nFeet that hastily run to wickedness,\n\nOne that uttereth lies as a false witness,\n\nAnd he who soweth strife between brethren.\n\nSuch numerical proverbs to which the name מדּה has been given by later Jewish writers (see my Gesch. der Jd. Poesie, pp. 199, 202) are found in chap. 30. With the exception of Pro 30:7-9, Pro 30:24-28 (cf. Sir. 25:1, 2), the numerical proverb has this peculiarity, found also in most of the numerical proverbs of Sirach (Sir. 23:16; 25:7; 26:5, 28), that the number named in the first parallel line is in the second (cf. Job 5:9) increased by one. On the other hand, the form of the Priamel\n\n(Note: From praeambulum, designating a peculiar kind of epigram found in the German poetry of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.)\n\nis used neither in the Book of Proverbs nor in that of Sirach. Proverbs such as Pro 20:10 (\"Diverse weights, diverse measures - an abomination to Jahve are they both\") and Pro 20:12 (\"The hearing ear, the seeing eye - Jahve hath created them both\"), to be distinguished from Pro 17:3; Pro 27:21, and the like, where the necessary unity, and from Pro 27:3, where the necessary resemblance, of the predicate is wanting, are only a weak approach to the Priamel - a stronger, Pro 25:3, where the three subjects form the preamble (\"The heaven for height, and the earth for depth, and the heart of kings - are unsearchable\"). Perhaps Pro 30:11-14 is a greater mutilated Priamel. Here four subjects form the preamble, but there is wanting the conclusion containing the common predicate. This, we believe, exhausts the forms of the Mashal in the collection. It now only remains to make mention of the Mashal chain, i.e., the ranging together in a series of proverbs of a similar character, such as the chain of proverbs regarding the fool, Pro 26:1-12, the sluggard, Pro 26:13-16, the tale-bearer, Pro 26:20-22, the malicious, Pro 26:23-28 - but this form belongs more to the technics of the Mashal collection than to that of the Mashal poetry.\n\nWe now turn to the separate parts of the book, to examine more closely the forms of their proverbs, and gather materials for a critical judgment regarding the origin of the proverbs which they contain. Not to anticipate, we take up in order the separate parts of the arrangement of the collection. Since, then, it cannot be denied that in the introductory paedagogic part, Pro 1:7-9, notwithstanding its rich and deep contents, there is exceedingly little of the technical form of the Mashal, as well as generally of technical form at all. This part, as already shown, consist not of proper Mashals, but of fifteen Mashal odes, or rather, perhaps, Mashal discourses, didactic poems of the Mashal kind. In the flow of these discourses separate Mashals intermingle, which may either be regarded as independent, or, as Pro 1:32; Pro 4:18., can easily be so understood. In the Mashal chains of chap. 4 and chap. 9 we meet with proverbs that are synonymous (Pro 9:7, Pro 9:10), antithetic (Pro 3:35; Pro 9:8), integral, or of one thought (Pro 3:29-30), and synthetic (Pro 1:7; Pro 3:5, Pro 3:7), of two lines and of four lines variously disposed (Pro 3:9., 11f., 31f., 33f.); but the parabolic scheme is not at all met with, separate proverbs such as Pro 3:27. are altogether without form, and keeping out of view the octastich numerical proverb, Pro 6:16-19, the thoughts which form the unity of separate groups are so widely expanded that the measure of the Mashal proper is far exceeded. The character of this whole part is not concentrating, but unfolding. Even the intermingling proverbs of two lines possess the same character. They are for the most part more like dissolved drops than gold coins with sharp outline an","order":20,"numberOfChapters":31,"sha256":"20e0bd64619dae6740a04b7a7d7b33f0f6666efc36cef9c3e29bae3b6bcbce14","firstChapterNumber":1,"firstChapterApiLink":"/api/c/keil-delitzsch/PRO/1.json","firstChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"keil-delitzsch","book":"PRO","chapter":1},"lastChapterNumber":31,"lastChapterApiLink":"/api/c/keil-delitzsch/PRO/31.json","lastChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"keil-delitzsch","book":"PRO","chapter":31},"totalNumberOfVerses":633},"chapter":{"number":21,"content":[{"type":"verse","number":1,"content":["The group, like the preceding one, now closes with a proverb of the king.\nA king's heart in Jahve's hand is like brooks of water;\nHe turneth it whithersoever He will.\nBrook and canal (the Quinta: ὑδραγωγοί) are both called פּלג, or פּלג, Job 20:17, Arab. falaj (from פּלג, to divide, according to which Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, διαρέσεις; Venet. διανομαί; Jerome, divisiones); Jkt has the explanation of the word: \"falaj is the name given to flowing water, particularly the brook from a spring, and every canal which is led from a spring out over flat ground.\" Such brooks of water are the heart of a king, i.e., it is compared to such, in Jahve's hand. The second line contains the point of comparison: He inclines it, gives to it the direction (הטּה, causat. of נטה, Num 21:15) toward whatever He will (חפץ denotes willing, as a bending and inclining, viz., of the will; vid., at Pro 18:2). Rightly Hitzig finds it not accidental that just the expression \"brooks of water\" is chosen as the figure for tractableness and subjection to government. In Isa 32:2, the princes of Judah are compared to \"rivers of water in a dry place\" with reference to the exhaustion of the land during the oppression of the Assyrian invasion; the proverb has specially in view evidences of kindness proceeding from the heart, as at Pro 16:15 the favour of the king is compared to clouds of latter rain emptying themselves in beneficent showers, and at Pro 19:12 to the dew refreshing the plants. But the speciality of the comparison here is, that the heart of the king, however highly exalted above his subjects, and so removed from their knowledge he may be, has yet One above it by whom it is moved by hidden influences, e.g., the prayer of the oppressed; for man is indeed free, yet he acts under the influence of divinely-directed circumstances and divine operations; and though he reject the guidance of God, yet from his conduct nothing results which the Omniscient, who is surprised by nothing, does not make subservient to His will in the world-plan of redemption. Rightly the Midrash: God gives to the world good or bad kings, according as He seeks to bless it or to visit it with punishment; all decisions that go forth from the king's mouth come לכתחלה, i.e., in their first commencement and their last reason they come from the Holy One. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":2,"content":["The next group extends from Pro 21:2 to Pro 21:8, where it closes as it began.\n2 Every way of a man is right in his own eyes;\nBut a weigher of hearts is Jahve.\nA proverb similar to Pro 16:2 (where דּרכי, for דּרך, זך for ישׁר, רוּחות for לבּות). God is also, Pro 17:3, called a trier, בּחן, of hearts, as He is here called a weigher, תּכן. The proverb indirectly admonishes us of the duty of constant self-examination, according to the objective norm of the revealed will of God, and warns us against the self-complacency of the fool, of whom Pro 12:15 says (as Trimberg in \"Renner\"): \"all fools live in the pleasant feeling that their life is the best,\" and against the self-deception which walks in the way of death and dreams of walking in the way of life, Pro 14:12 (Pro 16:25). \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":3,"content":["3 To practice justice and right\nHath with Jahve the pre-eminence above sacrifice.\nWe have already (vol. i. p. 42) shown how greatly this depreciation of the works of the ceremonial cultus, as compared with the duties of moral obedience, is in the spirit of the Chokma; cf. also at Pro 15:8. Prophecy also gives its testimony, e.g., Hos 6:7, according to which also here (cf. Pro 20:8 with Isa 9:8) the practising of צדקה וּמשׁפּט (sequence of words as at Gen 18:19; Psa 33:5, elsewhere צדק ומשׁפט, and yet more commonly משׁפט וצדקה) does not denote legal rigour, but the practising of the justum et aequum, or much rather the aequum et bonum, thus in its foundation conduct proceeding from the principle of love. The inf. עשׂה (like קנה, Pro 16:16) occurs three times (here and at Gen 50:20; Psa 101:3); once עשׂו is written (Gen 31:18), as also in the infin. absol. the form עשׂה mro and עשׂו interchange (vid., Norzi at Jer 22:4); once עשׂהוּ for עשׂותו (Exo 18:18) occurs in the status conjunctus. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":4,"content":["4 Loftiness of eyes and swelling of heart - \nThe husbandry of the godless is sin.\nIf נר, in the sense of light, gives a satisfactory meaning, then one might appeal to Kg1 11:36 (cf. Sa2 21:17), where ניר appears to signify lamp, in which meaning it is once (Sa2 22:29) written ניר (like חיק); or since ניר = נר (ground-form, nawir, lightening) is as yet certainly established neither in the Heb. nor Syr., one might punctuate נר instead of נר, according to which the Greeks, Aram., and Luther, with Jerome, translate. But of the lamp of the godless we read at Pro 13:9 and elsewhere, that it goeth out. We must here understand by נר the brilliant prosperity (Bertheau and others) of the wicked, or their \"proud spirit flaming and flaring like a bright light\" (Zckler), which is contrary to the use of the metaphor as found elsewhere, which does not extend to a prosperous condition. We must then try another meaning for נר; but not that of yoke, for this is not Heb., but Aram.-Arab., and the interpretation thence derived by Lagarde: \"Haughtiness and pride; but the godless for all that bear their yoke, viz., sin,\" seeks in vain to hide behind the \"for all that\" the breaking asunder of the two lines of the verse. In Heb. נר means that which lightens (burning) = lamp, נוּר, the shining (that which burns) = fire, and ניר, Pro 13:23, from ניר, to plough up (Targ. Sa1 8:12, למנר = לחרשׁ) the fresh land, i.e., the breaking up of the fallow land; according to which the Venet. as Kimchi: νέωμα ἀσεβῶν ἁμαρτία, which as Ewald and Elster explain: \"where a disposition of wicked haughtiness, of unbridled pride, prevails, there will also sin be the first-fruit on the field of action; נר, novale, the field turned up for the first time, denotes here the first-fruits of sin.\" But why just the first-fruits, and not the fruit in general? We are better to abide by the field itself, which is here styled נר, not שׂדה (or as once in Jer 39:10, יגב); because with this word, more even than with שׂדה, is connected the idea of agricultural work, of arable land gained by the digging up or the breaking up of one or more years' fallow ground (cf. Pea ii. 1, ניר, Arab. siḳâḳ, opp. בור, Arab. bûr, Menachoth 85a, שׂדות מניּרות, a fresh broken-up field, Erachin 29b, נר ,, opp. הביר, to let lie fallow), so that נר רשׁעים may mean the cultivation of the fields, and generally the husbandry, i.e., the whole conduct and life of the godless. נר is here ethically metaph., but not like Hos 10:12; Jer 4:3, where it means a new moral commencement of life; but like חרשׁ, arare, Job 4:8; Hos 10:13; cf. Pro 3:29. רחב is not adj. like Pro 28:25, Psa 101:5, but infin. like חסר, Pro 10:21; and accordingly also רוּם is not adj. like חוּם, or past like סוּג, but infin. like Isa 10:12. And חטּאת is the pred. of the complex subject, which consists of רוּם עינים, a haughty looking down with the eyes, רחב־לב, breadth of heart, i.e., excess of self-consciousness, and נר רשׁעים taken as an asyndeton summativum: pride of look, and making oneself large of heart, in short, the whole husbandry of the godless, or the whole of the field cultivated by them, with all that grows thereon, is sin. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":5,"content":["5 The striving of the diligent is only to advantage.\nAnd hastening all [excessive haste] only to loss;\nor in other words, and agreeably to the Heb. construction:\nThe thoughts of the industrious are (reach) only to gain,\nAnd every one who hastens - it (this his hastening) is only to loss.\nVid., at Pro 17:21. At Pro 10:4, Luther translates \"the hand of the diligent,\" here \"the plans of an expert [endelichen],\" i.e., of one actively striving (Pro 22:29, endelich = מהיר) to the end. The אץ, hastening overmuch, is contrasted with the diligent: Luther well: but he who is altogether too precipitant. Everywhere else in the Proverbs אץ has a closer definition with it, wherefore Hitzig reads אצר, which must mean: he who collects together; but אץ along with חרוץ is perfectly distinct. The thought is the same as our \"eile mit Weile\" [= festina lente], and Goethe's\nWie das Gestirn ohne Hast,\nAber ohne Rast\nDrehe sich jeder\nUm die eigne Last.\n\"Like the stars, without haste but without rest, let every one carry about his own burden,\" viz., of his calling that lies upon him. The fundamental meaning of אוץ is to throng, to urge (Exo 5:13), here of impatient and inconsiderate rashness. While on the side of the diligent there is nothing but gain, such haste brings only loss; over-exertion does injury, and the work will want care, circumspection, and thoroughness. In the Book of Proverbs, the contrasts \"gain\" and \"loss\" frequently occur, Pro 11:24; Pro 14:23; Pro 22:16 : profit (the increase of capital by interest), opp. loss (of capital, or of part thereof), as commercial terms. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":6,"content":["6 The gaining of treasures by a lying tongue\nIs a fleeting breath of such as seek death.\nOne may, at any rate, after the free manner of gnomic resemblances and comparisons, regard \"fleeting breath\" and \"such as seek death\" as two separated predicates: such gain is fleeting breath, so those who gain are seeking death (Caspari's Beitrge zu Jes. p. 53). But it is also syntactically admissible to interpret the words rendered \"seekers of death\" as gen.; for such interruptions of the st. constr., as here by נדּף [fleeting], frequently occur, e.g., Isa 28:1; Isa 32:13; Ch1 9:13; and that an idea, in spite of such interruption, may be thought of as gen., is seen from the Arab.\n(Note: Vid., Friedr. Philippi's Status constructus, p. 17, Anm. 3; and cf. therewith such constructions as (Arab.) mân'u faḍlah âlmanhtâji, i.e., a refuser of the needy, his beneficence = one who denies to the needy his beneficence.)\nBut the text is unsettled. Symmachus, Syr., Targ., the Venet., and Luther render the phrase מבקשׁי [seekers]; but the lxx and Jerome read מוקשׁי [snares] (cf. Ti1 6:9); this word Rashi also had before him (vid., Norzi), and Kennicott found it in several Codd. Bertheau prefers it, for he translates: ...is fleeting breath, snares of death; Ewald and Hitzig go further, for, after the lxx, they change the whole proverb into: מות (בּמוקשׁי) הבל רדף אל־מוקשׁי, with פּעל in the first line. But διώκει of the lxx is an incorrect rendering of נדף, which the smuggling in of the ἐπὶ (παγίδας θανάτου) drew after it, without our concluding therefrom that אל־מוקשׁי, or למוקשׁי (Lagarde), lay before the translators; on the contrary, the word which (Cappellus) lay before them, מוקשׁי, certainly deserves to be preferred to מבקשׁי: the possession is first, in view of him who has gotten it, compared to a fleeting (נדּף, as Isa 42:2) breath (cf. e.g., smoke, Psa 68:3), and then, in view of the inheritance itself and its consequences, is compared to the snares of death (Pro 13:14; Pro 14:27); for in פּעל (here equivalent to עשׂות, acquisitio, Gen 31:1; Deu 8:17) lie together the ideas of him who procures and of the thing that is procured or effected (vid., at Pro 20:11). \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":7,"content":["7 The violence of the godless teareth them away,\nFor they have refused to do what is right.\nThe destruction which they prepare for others teareth or draggeth them away to destruction, by which wicked conduct brings punishment on itself; their own conduct is its own executioner (cf. Pro 1:19); for refusing to practise what is right, they have pronounced judgment against themselves, and fallen under condemnation. Rightly Jerome, detrahent, with Aquila, κατασπάσει = j'gurrem (as Hab 1:15), from גּרר; on the contrary, the lxx incorrectly, ἐπιξενωθήσεται, from גוּר, to dwell, to live as a guest; and the Venet., as Luther, in opposition to the usus loq.: δεδίξεται (fut. of δεδίσσεσθαι, to terrify), from גוּר, to dread, fear, which also remains intrans., with the accus. following, Deu 32:27. The Syr. and the Targ. freely: robbery (Targ. רבּוּנא, perhaps in the sense of usury) will seize them, viz., in the way of punishment. In Arab. jarr (jariyratn) means directly to commit a crime; not, as Schultens explains, admittere crimen paenam trahens, but attrahere (arripere), like (Arab.) jany (jinâytn), contrahere crimen; for there the crime is thought of as violent usurpation, here as wicked accumulation. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":8,"content":["8 Winding is the way of a man laden with guilt;\nBut the pure - his conduct is right.\nRightly the accentuation places together \"the way of a man\" as subject, and \"winding\" as predicate: if the poet had wished to say (Schultens, Bertheau) \"one crooked in his way\" (quoad viam), he would have contented himself with the phrase נחפּך דּרך. But, on the other hand, the accentuation is scarcely correct (the second Munach is a transformed Mugrash), for it interprets וזר as a second pred.; but וזר is adj. to אישׁ. As הפכפּך (synon. פּתלתּל, עקלקל) is a hapax leg., so also vazar, which is equivalent to (Arab.) mawzwr, crimine onustus, from wazria, crimen committere, properly to charge oneself with a crime. The ancient interpreters have, indeed, no apprehension of this meaning before them; the lxx obtain from the proverb a thought reminding us of Psa 18:27, in which vazar does not at all appear; the Syr. and Targ. translate as if the vav of vazar introduces the conclusion: he is a barbarian (nuchrojo); Luther: he is crooked; Jerome also sets aside the syntax: perversa via viri aliena est; but, syntactically admissible, the Venet. and Kimchi, as the Jewish interpreters generally, διαστροφωτάτη ὁδὸς ἀνδρὸς καὶ ἀλλόκοτος. Fleischer here even renounces the help of the Arab., for he translates: Tortuosa est via viri criminibus onusti, qui autem sancte vivit, is recte facit; but he adds thereto the remark that \"vazar thus explained, with Cappellus, Schultens, and Gesenius, would, it is true, corresponding to the Arab. wazar, have first the abstract meaning of a verbal noun from wazira;\n(Note: The n. act formed from wazara is wazr, wizr, wizat. These three forms would correspond to the Heb. vězěr, vēzěr, and zěrěth (z'rāh, cf. rěděth, r'dah, Gen 46:3).)\nthe old explanation is therefore perhaps better: tortuosa est via viri et deflectens (scil. a recta linea, thus devia est), when the 'viri' is to be taken in the general sense of 'many, this and that one;' the closer definition is reflected from the זך of the second clause.\" But (1) זר as an adj. signifies peregrinus; one ought thus rather to expect סר, degenerated, corrupt, although that also does not rightly accord; (2) the verbal noun also, e.g., 'all, passes over into a subst. and adj. signification (the latter without distinction of number and gender); (3) וזר, after its adj. signification, is related to (Arab.) wazyr, as חכם is to ḥakym, רזב to rahyb; it is of the same form as ענו, with which it has in common its derivation from a root of similar meaning, and its ethical signification. In 8b, וזך is rightly accented as subj. of the complex pred. זך is the pure in heart and of a good conscience. The laden with guilt (guilty) strikes out all kinds of crooked ways; but the pure needs not stealthy ways, he does not stand under the pressure of the bondage of sin, the ban of the guilt of sin; his conduct is straightforward, directed by the will of God, and not by cunning policy. Schultens: Integer vitae scelerisque purus non habet cur vacillet, cur titubet, cur sese contorqueat. The choice of the designation וזך [and the pure] may be occasioned by וזר (Hitzig); the expression 8b reminds us of Pro 20:11. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":9,"content":["The group now following extends to Pro 21:18, where a new one begins with a variation of its initial verse.\n9 Better to sit on the pinnacle of a house-roof,\nThan a contentious wife and a house in common.\nWe have neither to supplement the second line: than with a contentious wife... (Symmachus, Theodotion, Jerome, Luther), nor: than that one have a contentious...; but the meaning is, that sitting on the roof-top better befits one, does better than a quarrelsome wife and a common house (rightly the Targ. and Venet.), i.e., in a common house; for the connecting together of the wife and the house by vav is a Semitic hendiadys, a juxtaposition of two ideas which our language would place in a relation of subordination (Fleischer). This hendiadys would, indeed, be scarcely possible if the idea of the married wife were attached to אושׁת; for that such an one has with her husband a \"house of companionship, i.e., a common house,\" is self-evident. But may it not with equal right be understood of the imperious positive mother-in-law of a widower, a splenetic shrewish aunt, a sickly female neighbour disputing with all the world, and the like? A man must live together with his wife in so far as he does not divorce her; he must then escape from her; but a man may also be constrained by circumstances to live in a house with a quarrelsome mother-in-law, and such an one may, even during the life of his wife, and in spite of her affection, make his life so bitter that he would rather, in order that he might have rest, sit on the pinnacle or ridge of a house-roof. פּנּהּ is the battlement (Zep 1:16) of the roof, the edge of the roof, or its summit; he who sits there does so not without danger, and is exposed to the storm, but that in contrast with the alternative is even to be preferred; he sits alone. Regarding the Chethı̂b מדינים, Kerı̂ מדינים, vid., at Pro 6:14; and cf. the figures of the \"continual dropping\" for the continual scolding of such a wife, embittering the life of her husband, Pro 19:13. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":10,"content":["10 The soul of the godless hath its desire after evil;\nHis neighbour findeth no mercy in his eyes.\nThe interchange of perf. and fut. cannot be without intention. Lwenstein renders the former as perf. hypotheticum: if the soul of the wicked desires anything evil...; but the רשׁע wishes evil not merely now and then, but that is in general his nature and tendency. The perf. expresses that which is actually the case: the soul of the wicked has its desire directed (write אוּתה with Munach, after Codd. and old Ed., not with Makkeph) toward evil, and the fut. expresses that which proceeds from this: he who stands near him is not spared. יחן is, as at Isa 26:10, Hoph. of חנן, to incline, viz., oneself, compassionately toward any one, or to bend to him. But in what sense is בּעיניו added? It does not mean, as frequently, e.g., Pro 21:2, according to his judgment, nor, as at Pro 20:8; Pro 6:13 : with his eyes, but is to be understood after the phrase מצא חן בּעיני: his neighbour finds no mercy in his eyes, so that in these words the sympathy ruling within him expresses itself: \"his eyes will not spare his friends,\" vid., Isa 13:18. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":11,"content":["11 When the scorner is punished, the simple is made wise;\nAnd when insight is imparted to a wise man, he receives knowledge.\nThe thought is the same as at Pro 19:25. The mocker at religion and virtue is incorrigible, punishment avails him nothing, but yet it is not lost; for as a warning example it teaches the simple, who might otherwise be easily drawn into the same frivolity. On the other hand, the wise man needs no punishment, but only strengthening and furtherance: if \"instruction\" is imparted to him, he embraces it, makes it his own דּעת; for, being accessible to better insight, he gains more and more knowledge. De Dieu, Bertheau, and Zckler make \"the simple\" the subject also in 11b: and if a wise man prospers, he (the simple) gains knowledge. But השׂכּיל ל, used thus impersonally, is unheard of; wherefore Hitzig erases the ל before חכם erofeb ל eh: if a wise man has prosperity. But השׂכיל does not properly mean to have prosperity, but only mediately: to act with insight, and on that account with success. The thought that the simple, on the one side, by the merited punishment of the mocker; on the other, by the intelligent prosperous conduct of the wise, comes to reflection, to reason, may indeed be entertained, but the traditional form of the proverb does not need any correction. השׂכּיל may be used not only transitively: to gain insight, Gen 3:6; Psa 2:10, and elsewhere, but also causatively: to make intelligent, with the accus. following, Pro 16:23; Psa 32:8, or: to offer, present insight, as here with the dat.-obj. following (cf. Pro 17:26). Instead of בּענשׁ־, the Kametz of which is false, Codd. and good Edd. have, rightly, בּענשׁ־. Hitzig, making \"the wise\" the subject to בהשׂכיל (and accordingly \"the scorner\" would be the subject in 11a), as a correct consequence reads בּענשׁ = בּהענשׁ. For us, with that first correction, this second one also fails. \"Both infinitivi constr.,\" Fleischer remarks, \"are to be taken passively; for the Semitic infin., even of transitive form, as it has no designation of gender, time, and person, is an indeterminate modus, even in regard to the generis verbi (Act. and Pass.).\"\n(Note: The Arab. National Grammarians, it is true, view the matter otherwise. When ḳatlu zydn, the putting to death of Zeid, is used in the sense of Zeid's becoming dead, according to their view the fâ'l (the gen. subjecti) is omitted; the full expression would be ḳatlu 'amrn zaydnâ. Since now 'amrn is omitted, zaydn has in the gen. form taken the place of the fâ'l, but this gen. is the representative of the acc. objecti. Without thus going round about, we say: it is the gen. objecti.)\nTo this proverb with u-behaskil there is connected the one that follows, beginning with maskil. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":12,"content":["12 A righteous One marketh the house of the godless;\nHe hurleth the godless to destruction.\nIf we understand by the word צדּיק a righteous man, then 12a would introduce the warning which he gives, and the unexpressed subject of 12b must be God (Umbreit). But after such an introitus, יהוה ought not to be wanting. If in 12a \"the righteous man\" is the subject, then it presents itself as such also for the second parallel part. But the thought that the righteous, when he takes notice of the house of the godless, shows attention which of itself hurls the godless into destruction (Lwenstein), would require the sing. רשׁע in the conclusion; also, instead of מסלּף the fut. יסלּף would have been found; and besides, the judicial סלּף (vid., regarding this word at Pro 11:3; Pro 19:3) would not be a suitable word for this confirmation in evil. Thus by צדיק the proverb means God, and מסלף has, as at Pro 22:12, Job 12:19, this word as its subject. \"A righteous One\" refers to the All-righteous, who is called, Job 34:17, \"the All-just One,\" and by Rashi, under the passage before us, צדּיקו שׁל־עולם. Only do not translate with Bertheau and Zckler: the Righteous One (All-righteous), for (1) this would require הצּדּיק, and (2) הצדיק is never by itself used as an attributive designation of God. Rightly, Fleischer and Ewald: a Righteous One, viz., God. It is the indetermination which seeks to present the idea of the great and dreadful: a Righteous One, and such a Righteous One!\n(Note: The Arabs call this indetermination âlnkrt lalt'ẓym wallthwyl. Vid., under Psa 2:12.)\nהשׂכיל with על, Pro 16:20, or אל, Psa 41:2; Neh 8:13, here with ל, signifies to give attention to anything, to look attentively on it. The two participles stand in the same line: animum advertit ... evertit. Hitzig changes לבּית רשׁע into לבּיתו, and makes רשׁע the subject of 12b; but the proverb as it lies before us is far more intelligible. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":13,"content":["13 He that stoppeth his ear at the cry of the poor\nhe also calls and is not heard.\nOnly the merciful find mercy, Mat 5:7; the unmerciful rich man, who has no ear for the cry of the דל, i.e., of him who is without support and means of subsistence, thus of one who is needing support, will also remain unheard when he himself, in the time of need, calls upon God for help. Cf. the parable of the unmerciful servant of the merciful king, Mat 18:23. מן in מזּעקת, as Isa 23:15; Gen 4:13; Gen 27:1; no preposition of our [German] language [nor English] expresses, as Fleischer here remarks, such a fulness of meaning as this מן does, to which, after a verb of shutting up such as אטם (cf. Pro 17:28), the Arab. 'n would correspond, e.g., â'my 'n âltryḳ: blind, so that he does not see the way. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":14,"content":["14 A gift in secret turneth away anger;\nAnd a bribe into the bosom violent wrath.\nHitzig reads with Symmachus, the Targ., and Jerome, יכבּה, and translates: \"extinguishes anger;\" but it does not follow that they did read יכבה; for the Talm. Heb. כּפה signifies to cover by turning over, e.g., of a vessel, Sanhedrin 77a, which, when it is done to a candle or a fire, may mean its extinction. But כפה of the post-bibl. Heb. also means to bend, and thence to force out (Aram. כּפא, כּפי), according to which Kimchi hesitates whether to explain: overturns = smothers, or: bends = forces down anger. The Venet. follows the latter signification: κάμψει (for Villoison's καλύψει rests on a false reading of the MS). But there is yet possible another derivation from the primary signification, curvare, flectere, vertere, according to which the lxx translates ἀνατρέπει, for which ἀποτρέπει would be yet better: כפה, to bend away, to turn off, ἀρκεῖν, arcere, altogether like the Arab. (compared by Schultens) kfâ, and kfy, ἀρκεῖν, to prevent, whence, e.g., ikfı̂ni hada: hold that away from me, or: spare me that (Fleischer); with the words hafı̂ka sharran (Lat. defendaris semper a malo) princes were anciently saluted; kfy signifies \"to suffice,\" because enough is there, where there is a keeping off of want. Accordingly we translate: Donum clam acceptum avertit iram, which also the Syr. meant by mephadka (מפרק). This verb is naturally to be supplied to 14b, which the lxx has recognised (it translates: but he who spares gifts, excites violent anger). Regarding שׂחד, vid., at Pro 17:8; and regarding בּחק, at Pro 17:23. Also here חק (חיק = חיק), like Arab. jayb, 'ubb, חב, denotes the bosom of the garment; on the contrary (Arab.) hijr, hiḍn, חצן, is more used of that of the body, or that formed by the drawing together of the body (e.g., of the arm in carrying a child). A present is meant which one brings with him concealed in his bosom; perhaps 13b called to mind the judge that took gifts, Exo 23:8 (Hitzig). \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":15,"content":["15 It is a joy to the just to do justice,\nAnd a terror for them that work iniquity.\nTo act according to the law of rectitude is to these as unto death; injustice has become to them a second nature, so that their heart strives against rectitude of conduct; it also enters to little into their plan of life, and their economy, that they are afraid of ruining themselves thereby. So we believe, with Hitzig, Elster, Zckler, and Luther, this must be explained in accordance with our interpretation of Pro 10:29. Fleischer and others supplement the second parallel member from the first: וּפעל און מחתּה לפעלי אין; others render 15b as an independent sentence: ruin falls on those who act wickedly. But that ellipsis is hard and scarcely possible; but in general מחתה, as contrasted correlate to שׂמחה, can scarcely have the pure objective sense of ruin or destruction. It must mean a revolution in the heart. Right-doing is to the righteous a pleasure (cf. Pro 10:23); and for those who have און, and are devoid of moral worth, and thus simply immoral as to the aim and sphere of their conduct, right-doing is something which alarms them: when they act in conformity with what is right, they do so after an external impulse only against their will, as if it were death to them. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":16,"content":["16 A man who wanders from the way of understanding,\nShall dwell in the assembly of the dead.\nRegarding השׂכּל, vid., Pro 1:3; and regarding רפאים, Pro 2:18. The verb נוּח means to repose, to take rest, Job 3:13, and to dwell anywhere, Pro 14:33; but originally like (Arab.) nâkh and hadd, to lay oneself down anywhere, and there to come to rest; and that is the idea which is here connected with ינוּח, for the figurative description of יאבד or ימוּת is formed after the designation of the subject, 16a: he who, forsaking the way of understanding, walks in the way of error, at length comes to the assembly of the dead; for every motion has an end, and every journey a goal, whether it be one that is self-appointed or which is appointed for him. Here also it is intimated that the way of the soul which loves wisdom and follows her goes in another direction than earthwards down into hades; hades and death, its background appear here as punishments, and it is true that as such one may escape them. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":17,"content":["17 He who loveth pleasure becometh a man of want;\nHe who loveth wine and oil doth not become rich.\nIn Arab. samh denotes the joyful action of the \"cheerful giver,\" Co2 9:7; in Heb. the joyful affection; here, like farah, pleasure, delight, festival of joy. Jerome: qui diligit epulas. For feasting is specially thought of, where wine was drunk, and oil and other fragrant essences were poured (cf. Pro 27:9; Amo 6:6) on the head and the clothes. He who loves such festivals, and is commonly found there, becomes a man of want, or suffers want (cf. Jdg 12:2, אישׁ ריב, a man of strife); such an one does not become rich (העשׁיר, like Pro 10:4, = עשׂה עשׁר, Jer 17:11); he does not advance, and thus goes backwards. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":18,"content":["18 The godless becometh a ransom for the righteous;\nAnd the faithless cometh into the place of the upright.\nThe thought is the same as at Pro 11:8. An example of this is, that the same world-commotion which brought the nations round Babylon for its destruction, put an end to Israel's exile: Cyrus, the instrument in God's hands for inflicting punishment on many heathen nations, was Israel's liberator, Isa 43:3. Another example is in the exchange of places by Haman and Mordecai, to which Rashi refers. כּפר is equivalent to λύτρον, ransom; but it properly signifies price of atonement, and generally, means of reconciliation, which covers or atones for the guilt of any one; the poll-tax and \"oblations\" also, Exo 30:15., Num 31:50, are placed under this point of view, as blotting out guilt: if the righteousness of God obtains satisfaction, it makes its demand against the godless, and lets the righteous go free; or, as the substantival clause 18b expresses, the faithless steps into the place of the upright, for the wrath passes by the latter and falls upon the former. Regarding בּוגד, vid., Pro 2:22. Thus, in contrast to the ישׁר, he is designated, who keeps faith neither with God nor man, and with evil intention enters on deceitful ways - the faithless, the malicious, the assassin. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":19,"content":["With this verse, a doublet to Pro 21:9 (Pro 25:24), the collector makes a new addition; in Pro 21:29 he reaches a proverb which resembles the closing proverb of the preceding group, in its placing in contrast the רשׁע and ישׁר; - \nIt is better to dwell in a waste land,\nThan a contentious wife and vexation.\nThe corner of the roof, Hitzig remarks, has been made use of, and the author must look further out for a lonely seat. But this is as piquant as it is devoid of thought; for have both proverbs the same author, and if so, were they coined at the same time? Here also it is unnecessary to regard מאשׁת as an abbreviation for משּׁבת עם אשׁת. Hitzig supplies שׁכן, by which אשׁת, as the accus.-obj., is governed; but it is not to be supplied, for the proverb places as opposite to one another dwelling in a waste land (read שׁבת בּארץ־מדבּר, with Codd. and correct Ed.) and a contentious wife (Chethı̂b, מדונים, Kerı̂, מדינים) and vexation, and says the former is better than the latter. For וכעס [and vexation] is not, as translated by the ancients, and generally received, a second governed genitive to אשׁת, but dependent on מן, follows \"contentious woman\" (cf. 9b): better that than a quarrelsome wife, and at the same time vexation. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":20,"content":["20 Precious treasure and oil are in the dwelling of the wise;\nAnd a fool of a man squanders it.\nThe wise spares, the fool squanders; and if the latter enters on the inheritance which the former with trouble and care collected, it is soon devoured. The combination אוצר נחמד ושׁמן [desirable treasure and oil] has something inconcinnate, wherefore the accentuation places אוצר by itself by Mehuppach Legarmeh; but it is not to be translated \"a treasure of that which is precious, and oil,\" since it is punctuated אוצר, and not אוצר; and besides, in that case מחמדּים would have been used instead of נחמד. Thus by אוצר נחמד, a desirable and splendid capital in gold and things of value (Isa 23:18; Psa 19:11); and by שׁמן, mentioned by way of example, stores in kitchen and cellar are to be thought of, which serve him who lives luxuriously, and afford noble hospitality, - a fool of a man (כּסיל אדם, as at Pro 15:20), who finds this, devours it, i.e., quickly goes through it, makes, in short, a tabula rasa of it; cf. בּלע, Isa 28:4, with בּלּע, Sa2 20:26, and Pro 19:28. The suffix of יבלּענּוּ refers back to אוצר as the main idea, or distributively also both to the treasure and the oil. The lxx (θησαυρὸς ἐπιθυμητὸς) ἀναπαύσεται ἐπὶ στόματος σοφοῦ, i.e., ישׁכן בפה חכם, according to which Hitzig corrects; but the fool, he who swallows down \"the precious treasure with a wise mouth,\" is a being we can scarcely conceive of. His taste is not at all bad; why then a fool? Is it perhaps because he takes more in than he can at one time digest? The reading of the lxx is corrected by 20b. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":21,"content":["21 He that followeth after righteousness and kindness\nWill obtain life, righteousness, and honour.\nHow we are to render צדקה וחסד is seen from the connection of Pro 21:3 and Hos 6:7 : tsedakah is conduct proceeding from the principle of self-denying and compassionate love, which is the essence of the law, Mic 6:8; and hesed is conduct proceeding from sympathy, which, placing itself in the room of another, perceives what will benefit him, and sets about doing it (cf. e.g., Job 6:14 : to him who is inwardly melted disheartened חסד is due from his neighbour). The reward which one who strives thus to act obtains, is designated 21b by חיּים and כּבוד. Honour and life stand together, Pro 22:4, when עשׁר precedes, and here צדקה stands between, which, Pro 8:18, Psa 24:5, is thought of as that which is distributed as a gift of heaven, Isa 45:8, which has glory in its train, Isa 58:8; as Paul also says, \"Whom He justified, them He also glorified.\" The lxx has omitted tsedakah, because it can easily appear as erroneously repeated from 21a. But in reality there are three good things which are promised to those who are zealous in the works of love: a prosperous life, enduring righteousness, true honour. Life as it proceeds from God, the Living One, righteousness as it avails the righteous and those doing righteously before God, honour or glory (Psa 29:3) as it is given (Psa 84:12) by the God of glory. Cf. with חיים צדקה, Pro 10:2, and with צדקה, especially Jam 2:13, κατακαυχᾶται ἔλεος κρίσεως. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":22,"content":["22 A wise man scaleth a city of the mighty;\nAnd casteth down the fortress in which they trusted.\nEcc 9:14. is a side-piece to this, according to which a single wise man, although poor, may become the deliverer of a city besieged by a great army, and destitute of the means of defence. עלה, seq. acc., means to climb up, Joe 2:7; here, of the scaling of a fortified town, viz., its fortress. עז is that which makes it עיר עז, Isa 26:1 : its armour of protection, which is designated by the genit. מבטחה, as the object and ground of their confidence. The vocalization מבטחה, for mibtachcha (cf. Jer 48:13 with Job 18:14), follows the rule Gesen. 27, Anm. 2b. The suff., as in לאתננּה, Isa 23:17, is lightened, because if its mappik, Michlol 30b; vid., regarding the various grounds of these formae raphatae pro mappicatis, Bttcher, 418. If a city is defended by ever so many valiant men, the wise man knows the point where it may be overcome, and knows how to organize the assault so as to destroy the proud fortress. With ויּרד, he brings to ruin, cf. עד רדתּהּ, Deu 20:20. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":23,"content":["23 He that guardeth his mouth and his tongue,\nKeepeth his soul from troubles.\nPro 13:3 resembles this. He guardeth his mouth who does not speak when he does better to be silent; and he guardeth his tongue who says no more than is right and fitting. The troubles comprehend both external and internal evils, hurtful incidents and (נפשׁ) צרות לבב, Psa 25:17; Psa 31:8, i.e., distress of conscience, self-accusation, sorrow on account of the irreparable evil which one occasions. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":24,"content":["24 A proud and arrogant man is called mocker (free-spirit);\nOne who acteth in superfluity of haughtiness.\nWe have thus translated (vol. i. p. 39): the proverb defines almost in a formal way an idea current from the time of Solomon: לץ (properly, the distorter, vid., Pro 1:7) is an old word; but as with us in the west since the last century, the names of free-thinkers and esprits forts (cf. Isa 46:12) have become current for such as subject the faith of the Church to destructive criticism, so then they were called לצים, who mockingly, as men of full age, set themselves above revealed religion and prophecy (Isa 28:9); and the above proverb gives the meaning of this name, for it describes in his moral character such a man. Thus we call one זד, haughty, and זד יהיר dna ,, i.e., destroying himself, and thus thoughtlessly haughty, who בּעברת זדון acts in superfluity or arrogance (vid., at Pro 11:23) of haughtiness; for not only does he inwardly raise himself above all that is worthy of recognition as true, of faith as certain, of respect as holy; but acting as well as judging frivolously, he shows reverence for nothing, scornfully passing sentence against everything. Abulwald (vid., Gesen. Thes.) takes יהיר in the sense of obstinate; for he compares the Arab. jahr (jahar), which is equivalent to lijâj, constancy, stubbornness. But in the Targ. and Talm. (vid., at Hab 2:5, Levy's Chald. Wrterb. under יהיר) יהר in all its offshoots and derivations has the sense of pride; we have then rather to compare the Arab. istaihara, to be insane (= dhahb 'aḳlh, mens ejus alienata est), perhaps also to hajjir, mutahawwir, being overthrown, praeceps, so that יהיר denotes one who by his ὑπερφρονεῖν is carried beyond all σωφρονεῖν (vid., Rom 12:3), one who is altogether mad from pride. The Syr. madocho (Targ. מריחא), by which יהיר (Targ. יהיר) is rendered here and at Hab 2:5, is its synonym; this word also combines in itself the ideas foolhardy, and of one acting in a presumptuous, mad way; in a word, of one who is arrogant. Schultens is in the right way; but when he translates by tumidus mole cava ruens, he puts, as it is his custom to do, too much into the word; tumidus, puffed up, presents an idea which, etymologically at least, does not lie in it. The Venet.: ἀκρατὴς θρασὺς βωμολόχος τοὔνομά οἱ, which may be translated: an untractable reckless person we call a fool [homo ineptus], is not bad. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":25,"content":["25 The desire of the slothful killeth him;\nFor his hands refuse to be active.\nThe desire of the עצל, Hitzig remarks, goes out first after meat and drink; and when it takes this direction, as hunger, it kills him indeed. But in this case it is not the desire that kills him, but the impossibility of satisfying it. The meaning is simply: the inordinate desire after rest and pleasure kills the slothful; for this always seeking only enjoyment and idleness brings him at last to ruin. תּאוה means here, as in Kibroth ha-tava, Num 11:34, inordinate longing after enjoyments. The proverb is connected by almost all interpreters (also Ewald, Bertheau, Hitzig, Elster, Zckler) as a tetrastich with Pro 21:25 : he (the slothful) always eagerly desires, but the righteous giveth and spareth not. But (1) although צדּיק, since it designates one who is faithful to duty, might be used particularly of the industrious (cf. Pro 15:19), yet would there be wanting in 26a ואין, Pro 13:4, cf. Pro 20:4, necessary for the formation of the contrast; (2) this older Book of Proverbs consists of pure distichs; the only tristich, Pro 19:7, appears as the consequence of a mutilation from the lxx. Thus the pretended tetrastich before us is only apparently such. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":26,"content":["26 One always desireth eagerly;\nBut the righteous giveth and holdeth not back.\nOtherwise Fleischer: per totum diem avet avidus, i.e., avarus; but that in התאוּה תּאוה the verb is connected with its inner obj. is manifest from Num 11:4; it is the mode of expression which is called in the Greek syntax schema etymologicum, and which is also possible without an adj. joined to the obj., as in the ὕβριν θ ̓ ὑβρίζεις (Eurip. Herc. fur. 706), the Arab. mârâhu miryatn: he had a strife with him. Euchel impossibly: necessities will continually be appeased, which would have required תּתאוּה or מתאוּה. The explanation also cannot be: each day presents its special demand, for כּל־היּום does not mean each day, but the whole day, i.e., continually. Thus we render התאוה with the most general subject (in which case the national grammarians supply המּתאוּה): continually one longs longing, i.e., there are demands, solicitations, wishes, importunate petitions; but still the righteous is not embarrassed in his generosity, he gives as unceasingly (cf. Isa 14:6; Isa 58:1) as one asks. Thus the perf. is explained, which is related hypothetically to the fut. following: though one, etc. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":27,"content":["27 The sacrifice of the godless is an abomination;\nHow much more if it is brought for evil!\nLine first = Pro 15:8. Regarding the syllogistic אף כּי, vid., 12:31; Pro 15:11; regarding זמּה, crime, particularly the sin of lewdness (from זמם, to press together, to collect the thoughts upon something, to contrive, cf. raffinement de la volupt), at Pro 10:23. בּזמּה is too vaguely rendered in the lxx by παρονόμως, falsely by Jerome, ex scelere (cf. ἐξ ἀδίκου, Sir. 31:18, with Mal 1:13). The ב is not meant, as at Eze 22:11, of the way and manner; for that the condition of life of the רשׁע is not a pure one, is not to be supposed. It is as Hitzig, rightly, that of price: for a transgression, i.e., to atone for it; one is hereby reminded, that he who had intercourse with a betrothed bondmaid had to present an ascham [trespass-offering], Lev 19:20-22. But frequently enough would it occur that rich sensualists brought trespass-offerings, and other offerings, in order thereby to recompense for their transgressions, and to purchase for themselves the connivance of God for their dissolute life. Such offerings of the godless, the proverb means, are to God a twofold and a threefold abomination; for in this case not only does the godless fail in respect of repentance and a desire after salvation, which are the conditions of all sacrifices acceptable to God, but he makes God directly a minister of sin. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":28,"content":["28 A false witness shall perish;\nBut he who heareth shall always speak truth.\nThe lxx translate 28b by ἀνὴρ δὲ φυλασσόμενος λαλήσει. Cappellus supposes that they read לנצר for לנצה, which, however, cannot mean \"taking care.\" Hitzig further imagines שׂמח for שׁמע, and brings out the meaning: \"the man that rejoiceth to deliver shall speak.\" But where in all the world does נצר mean \"to deliver\"? It means, \"to guard, preserve;\" and to reach the meaning of \"to deliver,\" a clause must be added with מן, as מרע. When one who speaks lies (עד כּזבים), and a man who hears (אישׁ שּׁומע, plene, and with the orthophonic Dagesh), are contrasted, the former is one who fancifully or malevolently falsifies the fact, and the latter is one who before he speaks hears in order that he may say nothing that he has not surely heard. As לב שׁמע, Kg1 3:9, means an obedient heart, so here אישׁ שּׁומע means a man who attentively hears, carefully proves. Such an one will speak לנצח, i.e., not: according to the truth, and not: for victory (Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, εἰς νῖκος), i.e., so that accomplishes it (Oetinger); for the Heb. נצח has neither that Arab. nor this Aram. signification; but, with the transference of the root meaning of radiating or streaming over, to time, continuous existence (vid., Orelli, Synonyma der Zeit und Ewigkeit, pp. 96-97), thus: he will speak for continuance, i.e., either: without ever requiring to be silent, or, which we prefer: so that what he says stands; on the contrary, he who testifies mere fictions, i.e., avers that they are truth, is destroyed (28a = Pro 19:9, cf. 5): he himself comes to nothing, since his testimonies are referred to their groundlessness and falsity; for שׁקר אין לו רגלים, the lie has no feet on which it can stand, it comes to nothing sooner or later. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":29,"content":["Another proverb with אישׁ: - \nA godless man showeth boldness in his mien;\nBut one that is upright-he proveth his way.\nThe Chethı̂b has יכין; but that the upright directeth, dirigit, his way, i.e., gives to it the right direction (cf. Ch2 27:6), is not a good contrast to the boldness of the godless; the Kerı̂, הבין דּרכּו, deserves the preference. Aquila, Symmachus, the Syr., Targ., and Venet. adhere to the Chethı̂b, which would be suitable if it could be translated, with Jerome, by corrigit; Luther also reads the verb with כ, but as if it were יכּון (whoever is pious, his way will stand) - only the lxx render the Kerı̂ (συνιεῖ); as for the rest, the ancients waver between the Chethı̂b דּרכיו and the Kerı̂ דּרכּו: the former refers to manner of life in general; the latter (as at Pro 3:31 and elsewhere) to the conduct in separate cases; thus the one is just as appropriate as the other. In the circumstantial designation אישׁ רשׁע (cf. Pro 11:7) we have the stamp of the distinction of different classes of men peculiar to the Book of Proverbs. העז (to make firm, defiant) had, Pro 7:13, פנים as accus.; the בּ here is not that used in metaphoristic expressions instead of the accus. obj., which we have spoken of at Pro 15:4; Pro 20:30, but that of the means; for the face is thought of, not as the object of the action, but, after Gesen. 138, 1, as the means of its accomplishment: the godless makes (shows) firmness, i.e., defiance, accessibility to no admonition, which is countenance; but the upright considers, i.e., proves (Pro 14:8), his way. בּין (הבין) means a perceiving of the object in its specific peculiarity, an understanding of its constituent parts and essential marks; it denotes knowing an event analytically, as השׂכּיל, as well as synthetically (cf. Arab. shakl), and is thus used as the expression of a perception, which apprehends the object not merely immediately, but closely examines into its circumstances. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":30,"content":["If we further seek for the boundaries, the proverbs regarding the rich and the poor, Pro 22:2, Pro 22:7, Pro 22:16, present themselves as such, and this the more surely as Pro 22:16 is without contradiction the terminus. Thus we take first together 21:30-22:2.\nPro 21:30\n30 No wisdom and no understanding,\nAnd no counsel is there against Jahve.\nThe expression might also be 'לפני ה; but the predominating sense would then be, that no wisdom appears to God as such, that He values none as such. With לנגד the proverb is more objective: there is no wisdom which, compared with His, can be regarded as such (cf. Co1 3:19), none which can boast itself against Him, or can at all avail against Him (לנגד, as Dan 10:12; Neh. 3:37); whence it follows (as Job 28:28) that the wisdom of man consists in the fear of God the Alone-wise, or, which is the same thing, the All-wise. Immanuel interprets חכמה of theology, תּבוּנה of worldly science, עצה of politics; but חכמה is used of the knowledge of truth, i.e., of that which truly is and continues; תבונה of criticism, and עצה of system and method; vid., at Pro 1:2; Pro 8:14, from which latter passage the lxx has substituted here גבורה instead of תבונה. Instead of 'לנגד ה it translates πρὸς τὸν ἀσεβῆ, i.e., for that which is 'נגד ה against Jahve.\nPro 21:31\n31 The horse is harnessed for the day of battle;\nBut with Jahve is the victory,\ni.e., it remains with Him to give the victory or not, for the horse is a vain means of victory, Isa 33:17; the battle is the Lord's, Sa1 17:47, i.e., it depends on Him how the battle shall issue; and king and people who have taken up arms in defence of their rights have thus to trust nothing in the multitude of their war-horses (סוּס, horses, including their riders), and generally in their preparations for the battle, but in the Lord (cf. Psa 20:8, and, on the contrary, Isa 31:1). The lxx translates התּשׁוּעה by ἡ βοήθεια, as if the Arab. name of victory, naṣr, proceeding from this fundamental meaning, stood in the text; תשׁועה (from ישׁע, Arab. ws', to be wide, to have free space for motion) signifies properly prosperity, as the contrast of distress, oppression, slavery, and victory (cf. e.g., Psa 144:10, and ישׁוּעה, Sa1 14:45). The post-bibl. Heb. uses נצח (נצּחון) for victory; but the O.T. Heb. has no word more fully covering this idea than תשׁועה (ישׁועה).\n(Note: In the old High German, the word for war is urlag (urlac), fate, because the issue is the divine determination, and nt (as in \"der Nibelunge Not\"), as binding, confining, restraint; this nt is the correlate to תשׁועה, victory; מלחמה corresponds most to the French guerre, which is not of Romanic, but of German origin: the Werre, i.e., the Gewirre [complication, confusion], for נלחם signifies to press against one another, to be engaged in close conflict; cf. the Homeric κλόνος of the turmoil of battle.) \n"]}]},"thisChapterLink":"/api/c/keil-delitzsch/PRO/21.json","thisChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"keil-delitzsch","book":"PRO","chapter":21},"nextChapterApiLink":"/api/c/keil-delitzsch/PRO/22.json","nextChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"keil-delitzsch","book":"PRO","chapter":22},"previousChapterApiLink":"/api/c/keil-delitzsch/PRO/20.json","previousChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"keil-delitzsch","book":"PRO","chapter":20},"numberOfVerses":30}