Bible Commentaries

The proverb Proverbs 12:28 is so sublime, so weighty, that it manifestly forms a period and conclusion. This is confirmed from the following proverb, which begins like Proverbs 10:1 (cf. 5), and anew stamps the collection as intended for youth:

1 A wise son is his father's correction;

But a scorner listens not to rebuke.

The lxx, which the Syr. follows, translate Ψἱὸς πανουργὸς ὑπήκοος πατρί , whence it is not to be concluded with Lagarde that they read נוסר in the sense of a Ni. tolerativum ; they correctly understood the text according to the Jewish rule of interpretation, “that which is wanting is to be supplied from the context.” The Targ. had already supplied שׁמע from 1b, and is herein followed by Hitzig, as also by Glassius in the Philologia sacra. But such an ellipse is in the Hebr. style without an example, and would be comprehensible only in passionate, hasty discourse, but in a language in which the representation filius sapiens disciplinam patris audit numbers among the anomalies is not in general possible, and has not even its parallel in Tacitus, Ann. xiii. 56: deesse nobis terra, in qua vivamus - in qua moriemur, non potest , because here the primary idea, which the one expression confirms, the other denies, and besides no particle, such as the ו of this passage before us, stands between them. Böttcher therefore maintains the falling out of the verb, and writes יבּין before בּן ; but one says not בין מוסר , but שׁמע מוסר , Proverbs 1:8; Proverbs 4:1; Proverbs 19:27. Should not the clause, as it thus stands, give a sense complete in itself? But מוּסר can hardly, with Schultens and Ewald, be taken as part. Hoph. of יסר : one brought up by his father, for the usage of the language knows מוסר only as part. Hoph. of סוּר . Thus, as Jerome and the Venet. translate: a wise son is the correction of his father, i.e., the product of the same, as also Fleischer explains, “Attribution of the cause, the ground, as elsewhere of the effect.” But we call that which one has trained (vegetable or animal) his Zucht (= παιδεία in the sense of παίδευμα ). To the wise son (Proverbs 10:1) who is indebted to the מוסר אב (Proverbs 4:1), stands opposed the לץ ( vid., Proverbs 1:22), the mocker at religion and virtue, who has no ear for גּערה , strong and stern words which awaken in him a wholesome fear (cf. Proverbs 17:10, Jude 1:23: ἐν φόβῳ ).

return to '

2 From the fruit of the mouth of a man he himself enjoys good;

But the delight of the godless is violence.

2a = Proverbs 12:14, where ישׂבּע for יאכל . A man with a fruit-bringing mouth, himself enjoys also the blessing of his fruit-producing speech; his food (cf. βρῶμα , John 4:34) is the good action in words, which in themselves are deeds, and are followed by deeds; this good action affords enjoyment not merely to others, but also to himself. Ewald and Bertheau attract יאכל to 2b; so also does Fleischer: “the violence which the בּגדים wish to do to others turns back upon themselves; they must eat it also, i.e., bear its evil consequences.” The thought would then be like Proverbs 10:6: os improborum obteget violentia , and “to eat violence” is parallel to “to drink (Proverbs 26:6) violence (injury).” But wherefore then the naming of the soul, of which elsewhere it is said that it hungers or satiates itself, but never simply (but cf. Luke 12:19) that it eats? On the contrary, נפשׁ means also appetitus , Proverbs 23:2, and particularly wicked desire, Psalms 27:12; here, as Psalms 35:25, the object of this desire ( Psychol. p. 202). Regarding בגדים , vid., above, p. 85. There are such as do injury in a cunning deceitful manner to their neighbour to their own advantage. While the former (the righteous) distributes to his neighbour from the inner impulse without having such a result in view, yet according to God's direction he derives enjoyment himself therefrom: the desire of the latter goes to חמס , ἀδικία , and thus to the enjoyment of good unrighteously and violently seized.

return to '

3 He that guardeth his mouth keepeth his soul;

He that openeth his lips, to him it is destruction.

3a is extended in Proverbs 21:23 to a distich. Mouth and soul stand in closest interchangeable relation, for speech is the most immediate and continuous expression of the soul; thus whoever guards his mouth keeps his soul (the Venet., with excellent rendering of the synonym, ὁ τηρῶν τὸ στόμα ἑαυτοῦ φυλάσσει τὴν ψυχὴν ἑαυτοῦ ), for he watches that no sinful vain thoughts rise up in his soul and come forth in words, and because he thus keeps his soul, i.e., himself, safe from the destructive consequences of the sins of the tongue. On the contrary, he who opens wide his lips, i.e., cannot hold his mouth (lxx ὁ δὲ προπετὴς χείλεσιν ), but expresses unexamined and unconsidered whatever comes into his mind and gives delight, he is destruction to himself (supply הוּא ), or to him it is destruction (supply זאת ); both interpretations are possible, the parallelism brings nearer the former, and the parallel Proverbs 18:7 brings nearer the latter. פּשׂק means to spread (Schultens diducere cum ruptura vel ad rupturam usque ), here the lips, Pih. Ezekiel 16:25, the legs, Arab. fashkh , farshkh ; vid., regarding the R. פש , to extend, to spread out, Fleischer in the supplements to the A. L. Z. 1843, col. 116. Regarding the Mishle word מחתּה , vid., under Proverbs 10:14.

return to '

The three proverbs (Proverbs 13:1-3) which refer to hearing and speaking are now following by a fourth which, like Proverbs 13:2 and Proverbs 13:3, speaks of the נפשׁ .

The soul of the sluggard desires, yet has not;

But the soul of the industrious is richly satisfied.

The view that the o in נפשׁו עצל is the cholem compaginis, Böttcher, §835, meets with the right answer that this would be the only example of a vocal casus in the whole of gnomic poetry; but when on his own part ( Neue Aehrenlese, §1305) he regards נפשׁו as the accus. of the nearer definition (= בּנפשׁו ), he proceeds inadvertently on the view that the first word of the proverb is מתאוּה , while we read מתאוּה , and נפשׁו is thus the nom. of the subject. נפשׁו עצל means “his (the sluggard's) soul” (for עצל occurs as explanatory permutative briefly for נפשׁ עצל ), as סעיפיה פּריּה means “its branches ( i.e., of the fruitful tree),” Isaiah 17:6. One might, it is true, add ה to the following word here, as at Proverbs 14:13; but the similar expression appertaining to the syntax ornata occurs also 2 Samuel 22:33; Psalms 71:7, and elsewhere, where this is impracticable. Meîri appropriately compares the scheme Exodus 2:6, she saw him, viz., the boy. With reference to the ואין here violently (cf. Proverbs 28:1) introduced, Böttcher rightly remarks, that it is an adverb altogether like necquidquam , Proverbs 14:6; Proverbs 20:4, Psalms 68:21, etc., thus: appetit necquidquam anima ejus, scilicet pigri . 4b shows the meaning of the desire that has not, for there תדשּׁן occurs, a favourite strong Mishle word (Proverbs 11:25; Proverbs 28:25, etc.) for abundant satisfaction (the lxx here, as at 28:25, ἐν ἐπιμελείᾳ , sc. ἔσονται , instead of which, Montfaucon supposed πιμελείᾳ , which is, however, a word not authenticated). The slothful wishes and dreams of prosperity and abundance (cf. Proverbs 21:25., a parallel which the Syr. has here in view), but his desire remains unsatisfied, since the object is not gained but only lost by doing nothing; the industrious gain, and that richly, what the slothful wishes for, but in vain.

return to '

Two proverbs of the character of the righteous and of the effect of righteousness:

A deceitful thing the righteous hateth;

But the godless disgraceth and putteth to shame.

With דּבּר in the sphere of an intelligible generality (as here of falsehood, or Psalms 41:9 of worthlessness) a concrete event is in view, as with דּברי in the following plur. a general fact is separated into its individual instances and circumstances ( vid., at Psalms 65:4); for דבר means not only the word in which the soul reveals itself, but also any fact in which an inner principle or a general fact or a whole comes forth to view. The righteous hateth all that bears in it the character of a falsehood (punctuate דּבר־שׁקר with Gaja, cf. Proverbs 12:19), but the godless ... Should we now, with Bertheau, Hitzig, and others, translate “acteth basely and shamefully”? It is true that both Hiphs. may be regarded as transitive, but this expression gives not right contrast to 5a, and is pointless. We have seen at Proverbs 10:5 that הבישׁ , like השׂכּיל , has also a causative signification: to put to shame, i.e., bring shame upon others, and that Proverbs 19:26, where מבישׁ וּמחפּיר are connected, this causative signification lies nearer than the intrinsically transitive. Thus it will also here be meant, that while the righteous hateth all that is false or that is tainted by falsehood, the godless on the contrary loves to disgrace and to put to shame. But it is a question whether יבאישׁ is to be derived from בּאשׁ = בּושׁ , and thus is of the same meaning as יבישׁ ; הבאישׁ , Isaiah 30:5, which there signifies pudefactum esse , is pointed הבאישׁ , and is thus derived from a יבשׁ = בּושׁ , vid., 2 Samuel 19:6. But הבאישׁ occurs also as Hiph. of בּאשׁ , and means transitively to make of an evil savour, Genesis 34:30, cf. Exodus 5:21, as well as intransitively to come into evil savour, 1 Samuel 27:12. In this sense of putidum faciens , bringing into evil savour, יבאישׁ occurs here as at Proverbs 19:26, suitably along with יחפיר ; Proverbs 19:26 is the putidum facere by evil report (slander), into which the foolish son brings his parents, here by his own evil report, thus to be thought of as brought about by means of slander. The old translators here fall into error; Luther renders both Hiphils reflexively; only the Venet. (after Kimchi) is right: ὀζώσει (from an ὀζοῦν as trans. to ὀζεῖν ) καὶ ἀτιμώσει , he makes to be of ill odour and dishonours.

return to '

6 Righteousness protecteth an upright walk,

And godlessness bringeth sinners to destruction.

The double thought is closely like that of Proverbs 11:5, but is peculiarly and almost enigmatically expressed. As there, צדקה and רשׁעה are meant of a twofold inner relation to God, which consists of a ruling influence over man's conduct and a determination of his walk. But instead of naming the persons of the תּמימי דּרך and חטּאים as the objects of this influence, the proverb uses the abstract expression, but with personal reference, תּם־דּרך and חטּאת dna תּם , and designates in two words the connection of this twofold character with the principles of their conduct. What is meant by תּצּר and תּסלּף proceeds from the contrasted relationship of the two (cf. Proverbs 22:12). נצר signifies observare , which is not suitable here, but also tueri ( τηρεῖν ), to which סלּף ( vid., at Proverbs 11:3, and in Gesen. Thesaurus), not so much in the sense of “to turn upside down,” pervertere (as Proverbs 11:3; Proverbs 23:8), as in the sense of “to overthrow,” evertere (as e.g., Proverbs 21:12), forms a fitting contrast. He who walks forth with an unfeigned and untroubled pure mind stands under the shield and the protection of righteousness (cf. with this prosopopoeia Psalms 25:21), from which such a walk proceeds, and at the same time under the protection of God, to whom righteousness appertains, is well-pleasing. but he who in his conduct permits himself to be determined by sin, godlessness (cf. Zechariah 5:8) from which such a love for sin springs forth, brings to destruction; in other words: God, from whom the רשע , those of a perverse disposition, tear themselves away, makes the sin their snare by virtue of the inner connection established by Him between the רשׁעה and the destruction (Isaiah 9:17). In the lxx this 6th verse was originally wanting; the translation in the version of Aquila, in the Complut. and elsewhere, which the Syr. follows, falsely makes חטאת the subj.: τοὺς δὲ ἀσεβεῖς φαύλους ποιεῖ ἁμαρτία .

return to '

Two proverbs of riches and poverty: -

There is one who maketh himself rich and hath nothing;

There is another who representeth himself poor amid great riches.

A sentence which includes in itself the judgment which Proverbs 12:9 expresses. To the Hithpa. התכּבּד (to make oneself of importance) there are associated here two others, in the meaning to make oneself something, without anything after it, thus to place oneself so or so, Ewald, §124a. To the clauses with ו there is supplied a self-intelligible לּו .

return to '

8 A ransom for a man's life are his riches;

But the poor heareth no threatening.

Bertheau falls into error when he understands גּערה of warning; the contrast points to threatening with the loss of life. The wealth of the rich before the judgment is not here to be thought of; for apart from this, that the Torâ only in a single case permits, or rather ordains (Exodus 21:29.), ransom from the punishment of death, and declares it in all other cases inadmissible, Numbers 35:31. (one might indeed think of an administration of justice not strictly in accordance with the Mosaic law, or altogether accessible to bribery), 8b does not accord therewith, since the poor in such cases would fare ill, because one would lay hold on his person. But one may think e.g., on waylayers as those introduced as speaking Proverbs 1:11-14. The poor has no room to fear that such will threateningly point their swords against his breast, for there is nothing to be got from him: he has nothing, one sees it in him and he is known as such. But the rich is a valuable prize for them, and he has to congratulate himself if he is permitted to escape with his life. Also in the times of war and commotion it may be seen that riches endanger the life of their possessor, and that in fortunate cases they are given as a ransom for his life, while his poverty places the poor man in safety. To לא שׁמע Hitzig fittingly compares Job 3:18; Job 39:7: he does not hear, he has no need to hear. Michaelis, Umbreit, Löwenstein (who calls to remembrance the state of things under despotic governments, especially in the East) also explain 8b correctly; and Fleischer remarks: pauper minas hostiles non audit , i.e., non minatur ei hostis . Ewald's syntactic refinement: “Yet he became poor who never heard an accusation,” presents a thought not in harmony with 8a.

return to '