Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament · Proverbs Kabanata 22

The group of proverbs beginning here terminates at Proverbs 22:7, where, like the preceding, it closes with a proverb of the rich and the poor.

3 The prudent seeth the evil, and hideth himself;

But the simple go forward, and suffer injury.

This proverb repeats itself with insignificant variations, Proverbs 27:12. The Kerı̂ ונסתּר makes it more conformable to the words there used. The Chethı̂b is not to be read ויסתּר , for this Kal is inusit., but ויסּתר , or much rather ויּסּתר , since it is intended to be said what immediate consequence on the part of a prudent man arises from his perceiving an evil standing before him; he sees, e.g., the approaching overthrow of a decaying house, or in a sudden storm the fearful flood, and betimes betakes himself to a place of safety; the simple, on the contrary, go blindly forward into the threatening danger, and must bear the punishment of their carelessness. The fut. consec. 3a denotes the hiding of oneself as that which immediately follows from the being observant; the two perf. 3b, on the other hand, with or without ו , denote the going forward and meeting with punishment as occurring contemporaneously (cf. Psalms 48:6, and regarding these diverse forms of construction, at Habakkuk 3:10). “The interchange of the sing. and plur. gives us to understand that several or many simple ones are found for one prudent man” (Hitzig). The Niph. of ענשׁ signifies properly to be punished by pecuniary fine (Exodus 21:22) (cf. the post-bibl. קנס , קנס , to threaten punishment, which appears to have arisen from censere, to estimate, to lay on taxes); here it has the general meaning of being punished, viz., of the self-punishment of want of foresight.

return to '

4 The reward of humility is the fear of Jahve,

Is riches, and honour, and life.

As ענוה־צדק , Psalms 45:5, is understood of the two virtues, meekness and righteousness, so here the three Göttingen divines (Ewald, Bertheau, and Elster), as also Dunasch, see in ' ענוה יראת ה an asyndeton; the poet would then have omitted vav, because instead of the copulative connection he preferred the appositional (Schultens: praemium mansuetudinis quae est reverentia Jehovae ) or the permutative (the reward of humility; more accurately expressed: the fear of God). It is in favour of this interpretation that the verse following (Proverbs 22:5) also shows an asyndeton. Luther otherwise: where one abides in the fear of the Lord; and Oetinger: the reward of humility, endurance, calmness in the fear of the Lord, is...; Fleischer also interprets ' יראת ה as Proverbs 21:4, חטאת ( lucerna impiroum vitiosa ), as the accus. of the nearer definition. But then is the nearest-lying construction: the reward of humility is the fear of God, as all old interpreters understand 4a ( e.g., Symmachus, ὕστερον πραΰ́τητος φόβος κυρίου ), a thought so incomprehensible, that one must adopt one or other of these expedients? On the one side, we may indeed say that the fear of God brings humility with it; but, on the other hand, it is just as conformable to experience that the fear of God is a consequence of humility; for actually to subordinate oneself to God, and to give honour to Him alone, one must have broken his self-will, and come to the knowledge of himself in his dependence, nothingness, and sin; and one consequence by which humility is rewarded, may be called the fear of God, because it is the root of all wisdom, or as is here said (cf. Proverbs 3:16; Proverbs 8:18), because riches, and honour, and life are in its train. Thus 4a is a concluded sentence, which in 4b is so continued, that from 4a the predicate is to be continued: the reward of humility is the fear of God; it is at the same time riches... Hitzig conjectures ' ראוּת ה , the beholding Jahve; but the visio Dei ( beatifica ) is not a dogmatic idea thus expressed in the O.T. עקב denotes what follows a thing, from עקב , to tread on the heels (Fleischer); for עקב (Arab. 'aḳib ) is the heels, as the incurvation of the foot; and עקב , the consequence (cf. Arab. 'aḳb , 'ukb , posteritas ), is mediated through the v. denom. עקב , to tread on the heels, to follow on the heels (cf. denominatives, such as Arab. batn , zahr , 'ân , עין , to strike the body, the back, the eye).

return to '

5 Thorns, snares, are on the way of the crooked;

He that guardeth his soul, let him keep far from them.

Rightly the Venet. ἄκανθαι παγίδες ἐν ὁδῷ στρεβλοῦ . The meaning of צנּים (plur. of צן , or צנּה , the same as צנינים ) and פּחים (from פּח , Arab. faḥ ), stands fast, though it be not etymologically verified; the placing together of these two words (the lxx obliterating the asyndeton: τρίβολος καὶ παγίδες ) follows the scheme שׁמשׁ ירח , Habakkuk 3:11. The עקּשׁ־לב (perverse of heart, crooked, Proverbs 17:20; Proverbs 11:20) drives his crooked winding way, corresponding to his habit of mind, which is the contrast and the perversion of that which is just, a way in which there are thorns which entangle and wound those who enter thereon, snares which unexpectedly bring them down and hold them fast as prisoners; the hedge of thorns, Proverbs 15:19, was a figure of the hindrances in the way of the wicked themselves. The thorn and snares here are a figure of the hindrances and dangers which go forth from the deceitful and the false in the way of others, of those who keep their souls, i.e., who outwardly and morally take heed to their life (Proverbs 16:17; Proverbs 13:3, pred. here subj.), who will keep, or are disposed to keep, themselves from these thorns, these snares into which the deceitful and perverse-hearted seek to entice them.

return to '

6 Give to the child instruction conformably to His way;

So he will not, when he becomes old, depart from it.

The first instruction is meant which, communicated to the child, should be על־פּי , after the measure (Genesis 43:7 = post-bibl. לפי and כּפי ) of his way, i.e., not: of his calling, which he must by and by enter upon (Bertheau, Zöckler), which דּרכּו of itself cannot mean; also not: of the way which he must keep in during life ( Kidduschin 30a); nor: of his individual nature (Elster); but: of the nature of the child as such, for דּרך נער is the child's way, as e.g., derek col - haarets , Genesis 19:31, the general custom of the land; derek Mitsrâyim , Isaiah 10:24, the way (the manner of acting) of the Egyptians. The instruction of youth, the education of youth, ought to be conformed to the nature of youth; the matter of instruction, the manner of instruction, ought to regulate itself according to the stage of life, and its peculiarities; the method ought to be arranged according to the degree of development which the mental and bodily life of the youth has arrived at. The verb חנך is a denominative like עקב , Proverbs 22:4; it signifies to affect the taste, חך (= חנך ), in the Arab. to put date syrup into the mouth of the suckling; so that we may compare with it the saying of Horace, Ep. i. 2, 69: Quo semel est imbuta recens servabit odorem Testa diu . In the post-bibl. Heb. חנּוּך denotes that which in the language of the Church is called catechizatio ; חנוך ( לנער ) ספר is the usual title of the catechisms. It is the fundamental and first requisite of all educational instruction which the proverb formulates, a suitable motto for the lesson-books of pedagogues and catechists. ממּנּה [from it] refers to that training of youth, in conformity with his nature, which becomes a second nature, that which is imprinted, inbred, becomes accustomed. Proverbs 22:6 is wanting in the lxx; where it exists in MSS of the lxx, it is supplied from Theodotion; the Complut. translates independently from the Heb. text.

return to '

7 A rich man will rule over the poor,

And the borrower is subject to the man who lends.

“This is the course of the world. As regards the sing. and plur. in 7a, there are many poor for one rich; and in the Orient the rule is generally in the hands of one” (Hitzig). The fut. denotes how it will and must happen, and the substantival clause 7b, which as such is an expression of continuance (Arab. thabât , i.e., of the remaining and continuing), denotes that contracting of debt brings naturally with it a slavish relation of dependence. לוה , properly he who binds himself to one se ei obligat , and מלוה , as Proverbs 19:17 ( vid., l.c.), qui alterum ( mutui datione ) obligat , from לוה , Arab. lwy , to wind, turn, twist round (cog. root laff ), whence with Fleischer is also to be derived the Aram. לות , “into connection;” so אל , properly “pushing against,” refers to the radically related אלה (= ולה ), contiguum esse . אישׁ מלוה is one who puts himself in the way of lending, although not directly in a professional manner. The pred. precedes its subject according to rule. Luther rightly translates: and he who borrows is the lender's servant, whence the pun on the proper names: “Borghart [= the borrower] is Lehnhart's [= lender's] servant.”

return to '

The group now following extends to the end of this first collection of Solomon's proverbs; it closes also with a proverb of the poor and the rich.

8 He that soweth iniquity shall reap calamity;

And the rod of his fury shall vanish away.

“Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap” (Galatians 6:7); he that soweth good reapeth good, Proverbs 11:18; he that soweth evil reapeth evil, Job 4:8; cf. Hosea 10:12. עולה is the direct contrast of צדקה or ישׁר ( e.g., Psalms 125:3; Psalms 107:42), proceeding from the idea that the good is right, i.e., straight, rectum ; the evil, that which departs from the straight line, and is crooked. Regarding און , which means both perversity of mind and conduct, as well as destiny, calamity, vid., Proverbs 12:21. That which the poet particularly means by עולה is shown in 8b, viz., unsympathizing tyranny, cruel misconduct toward a neighbour. שׁבט עברתו is the rod which he who soweth iniquity makes another to feel in his anger. The saying, that an end will be to this rod of his fury, agrees with that which is said of the despot's sceptre, Isaiah 14:5.; Psalms 125:3. Rightly Fleischer: baculus insolentiae ejus consumetur h. e. facultas qua pollet alios insolenter tractandi evanescet . Hitzig's objection, that a rod does not vanish away, but is broken, is answered by this, that the rod is thought of as brandished; besides, one uses כּלה of anything which has an end, e.g., Isaiah 16:4. Other interpreters understand “the rod of his fury” of the rod of God's anger, which will strike the עוּל and יכלה , as at Ezekiel 5:13; Daniel 12:7: “and the rod of His punishment will surely come” (Ewald, and similarly Schultens, Euchel, Umbreit). This though also hovers before the lxx: πληγὴν δὲ ἔργων αὐτοῦ ( עבדתו ) συντελέσει ( יכלּה ). But if the rod of punishment which is appointed for the unrighteous be meant, then we would have expected כּלהו . Taken in the future, the כּלות of the שׁבט is not its confectio in the sense of completion, but its termination or annihilation; and besides, it lies nearer after 8a to take the suffix of עברתו subjectively (Isaiah 14:6; Isaiah 16:6) than objectively. The lxx has, after Proverbs 22:8, a distich: -

ἄνδρα ἱλαρὸν καὶ δότην εὐλογεῖ ὁ θεὸς

ματαιότητα δὲ ἔργων αὐτοῦ συντελέσει .

The first line (2 Corinthians 9:7) is a variant translation of 9a (cf. Proverbs 21:17), the second ( ושׁוא עבדתו ) is a similar rendering of 8b.

return to '

9 He who is friendly is blessed;

Because he giveth of his bread to the poor.

The thought is the same as at Proverbs 11:25. טוב עין (thus to be written without Makkeph, with Munach of the first word, with correct Codd., also 1294 and Jaman), the contrast of רע עין , Proverbs 23:6; Proverbs 22:22, i.e., the envious, evil-eyed, ungracious (post-bibl. also צר עין ), is one who looks kindly, is good-hearted, and as ἱλαρὸς δότης , shows himself benevolent. Such gentleness and kindness is called in the Mishna עין טובה ( Aboth ii. 13), or עין יפה . Such a friend is blessed, for he has also himself scattered blessings (cf. גּם־הוּא , Proverbs 11:25; Proverbs 21:13); he has, as is said, looking back from the blessing that has happened to him, given of his bread (Luther, as the lxx, with partitive genitive: seines brots = of his bread) to the poor; cf. the unfolding of this blessing of self-denying love, Isa 8. The lxx has also here another distich:

Νίκην καὶ τιμὴν περιποιεῖται ὁ δῶρα δοὺς ,

Τὴν μέντοι ψυχὴν ἀφαιρεῖται τῶν κεκτημένων .

The first line appears a variant translation of Proverbs 19:6, and the second of Proverbs 1:19, according to which selfishness, in contrast to liberality, is the subject to be thought of. Ewald translates the second line: And he (who distributes gifts) conquers the soul of the recipients. But κεκτημένος = בּעל ( בּעלים ) signifies the possessor, not the recipient of anything as a gift, who cannot also be here meant because of the μέντοι .

return to '

10 Chase away the scorner, and contention goeth out,

And strife and reproach rest.

If in a company, a circle of friends, a society (lxx ἔκβαλε ἐκ συνεδρίου ), a wicked man is found who ( vid., the definition of לץ , Proverbs 21:24) treats religious questions without respect, moral questions in a frivolous way, serious things jestingly, and in his scornful spirit, his passion for witticism, his love of anecdote, places himself above the duty of showing reverence, veneration, and respect, there will arise ceaseless contentions and conflicts. Such a man one ought to chase away; then there will immediately go forth along with him dispeace ( מדון ), there will then be rest from strife and disgrace, viz., of the strife which such a one draws forth, and the disgrace which it brings on the society, and continually prepares for it. קלון is commonly understood of the injury, abuse, which others have to suffer from the scoffer, or also (thus Fleischer, Hitzig) of the opprobria of the contentious against one another. But קלון is not so used; it means always disgrace, as something that happens, an experience, vid., at Proverbs 18:3. The praise of one who is the direct contrast of a לץ is celebrated in the next verse.

return to '

11 He that loveth heart-purity,

Whose is grace of lips, the king is his friend.

Thus with Hitzig, it is to be translated not: he who loveth with a pure heart - we may interpret טהור־לב syntactically in the sense of puritate cordis or purus corde (Ralbag, Ewald, after Proverbs 20:7), for that which follows אהב and is its supplement has to stand where possible as the accus. of the object; thus not: qui amat puritatem cordis, gratiosa erunt labia ejus (de Dieu, Geier, Schultens, C. B. Michaelis, Fleischer), for between heart-purity and graciousness of speech there exists a moral relation, but yet no necessary connection of sequence; also not: he who loves purity of heart, and grace on his lips (Aben Ezra, Schelling, Bertheau), for “to love the grace of one's own lips” is an awkward expression, which sounds more like reprehensible self-complacency than a praiseworthy endeavour after gracious speech. Excellently Luther:

“He who has a true heart and amiable speech,

The king is his friend.”

טהור־לב is not adjectival, but substantival; טהר־ is thus not the constr. of the mas. טהור , as Job 17:10, but of the segolate טהר , or (since the ground-form of גּבהּ , 1 Samuel 16:7, may be גּבהּ as well as גּבהּ ) of the neut. טהור , like קדשׁ , Psalms 46:5; Psalms 65:5: that which is pure, the being pure = purity (Schultens). הן שׂפתיו (gracefulness of his lips) is the second subject with the force of a relative clause, although not exactly thus thought of, but: one loving heart-purity, gracefulness on his lips - the king is his friend. Ewald otherwise: “he will be the king's friend,” after the scheme Proverbs 13:4; but here unnecessarily refined. A counsellor and associate who is governed by a pure intention, and connects therewith a gentle and amiable manner of speech and conversation, attaches the king to himself; the king is the רעה ( רע ), the friend of such an one, and he also is “the friend of the king,” 1 Kings 4:5. It is a Solomonic proverb, the same in idea as Proverbs 16:13. The lxx, Syr., and Targ. introduce after אהב the name of God; but 11b does not syntactically admit of this addition. But it is worth while to take notice of an interpretation which is proposed by Jewish interpreters: the friend of such an one is a king, i.e., he can royally rejoice in him and boast of him. The thought is beautiful; but, as the comparison of other proverbs speaking of the king shows, is not intended.

return to '

12 The eyes of Jahve preserve knowledge;

So he frustrateth the words of the false.

The phrase “to preserve knowledge” is found at Proverbs 5:2; there, in the sense of to keep, retain; here, of protecting, guarding; for it cannot possibly be said that the eyes of God keep themselves by the rule of knowledge, and thus preserve knowledge; this predicate is not in accord with the eyes, and is, as used of God, even inappropriate. On the other hand, after “to preserve,” in the sense of watching, guarding a concrete object is to be expected, cf. Isaiah 26:3. We need not thus with Ewald supply יודע ; the ancients are right that דעת , knowledge, stands metonymically for אישׁ (Meîri), or אנשׁי (Aben Ezra), or יודעי דעת (Arama); Schultens rightly: Cognitio veritatis ac virtutis practica fertur ad homines eam colentes ac praestantes . Where knowledge of the true and the good exists, there does it stand under the protection of God. 12b shows how that is meant, for there the perf. is continued in the second consec. modus ( fut. consec.): there is thus protection against the assaults of enemies who oppose the knowledge which they hate, and seek to triumph over it, and to suppress it by their crooked policy. But God stands on the side of knowledge and protects it, and consequently makes vain the words (the outspoken resolutions) of the deceitful. Regarding סלף ( סלף ), vid., Proverbs 11:3 and Proverbs 19:3. The meaning of סלּף דּברי is here essentially different from that in Exodus 23:8; Deuteronomy 16:19: he perverteth their words, for he giveth them a bearing that is false, i.e., not leading to the end. Hitzig reads רעות [wickedness] for דעת , which Zöckler is inclined to favour: God keeps the evil which is done in His eyes, and hinders its success; but “to observe wickedness” is an ambiguous, untenable expression; the only passage that can be quoted in favour of this “to observe” is Job 7:20. The word דעת , handed down without variation, is much rather justified.

return to '

13 The sluggard saith, “A lion is without,

I shall be slain in the midst of the streets.”

Otherwise rendered, Proverbs 26:13. There, as here, the perf. אמר has the meaning of an abstract present, Gesen. §126. 3. The activity of the industrious has its nearest sphere at home; but here a work is supposed which requires him to go forth (Psalms 104:3) into the field (Proverbs 24:27). Therefore חוּץ stands first, a word of wide signification, which here denotes the open country outside the city, where the sluggard fears to meet a lion, as in the streets, i.e., the rows of houses forming them, to meet a רצח ( מרצּח ), i.e., a murder from motives of robbery of revenge. This strong word, properly to destroy, crush, Arab. raḍkh , is intentionally chosen: there is designed to be set forth the ridiculous hyperbolical pretence which the sluggard seeks for his slothfulness (Fleischer). Luther right well: “I might be murdered on the streets.” But there is intentionally the absence of אוּלי [perhaps] and of פּן [lest]. Meîri here quotes a passage of the moralists: ממופתי העצל הנבואה (prophesying) belongs to the evidences of the sluggard; and Euchel, the proverb העצלים מתנבאים (the sluggard's prophecy), i.e., the sluggard acts like a prophet, that he may palliate his slothfulness.

return to '

14 A deep pit is the mouth of a strange woman;

He that is cursed of God falleth therein.

The first line appears in a different form as a synonymous distich, Proverbs 23:27. The lxx translate στόμα παρανόμου without certainly indicating which word they here read, whether רע (Proverbs 4:14), or רשׁע (Proverbs 29:12), or נלוז (Proverbs 3:32). Proverbs 23:27 is adduced in support of זרות ( vid., Proverbs 2:16); זנות (harlots) are meant, and it is not necessary thus to read with Ewald. The mouth of this strange woman or depraved Israelitess is a deep ditch ( שׁוּחה עמקּה , otherwise עמקה , as Proverbs 23:27, where also occurs עמוּקה

(Note: The text to Immanuel's Comment. (Naples 1487) has in both instances עמוּקה .)

namely, a snare-pit into which he is enticed by her wanton words; the man who stands in fellowship with God is armed against this syren voice; but the ' זעוּם ה , i.e., he who is an object of the divine זעם ( Venet. κεχολωμένος τῷ ὀντωτῇ ), indignation, punishing evil with evil, falls into the pit, yielding to the seduction and the ruin. Schultens explains ' זעום ה by, is in quem despumat indignabundus ; but the meaning despumat is not substantiated; זעם , cf. Arab. zaghm , is probably a word which by its sound denoted anger as a hollow roaring, and like pealing thunder. The lxx has, after Proverbs 22:14, three tedious moralizing lines.

return to '

15 Folly is bound to the heart of a child;

The rod of correction driveth it forth.

Folly, i.e., pleasure in stupid tricks, silly sport, and foolish behaviour, is the portion of children as such; their heart is as yet childish, and folly is bound up in it. Education first driveth forth this childish, foolish nature (for, as Menander says:

Ὁ μὴ δαρεὶς ἄνθρωπος οὐ παιδεύεται ),

and if effects this when it is unindulgently severe: the שׁבט מוּסר ( vid., Proverbs 23:13) removeth אוּלת from the heart, for it imparts intelligence and makes wise (Proverbs 29:15). The lxx is right in rendering 16a: ἄνοια ἐξῆπται (from ἐξάπτειν ) καρδίας νέου ; but the Syr. has “here mangled the lxx, and in haste has read ἀνοίᾳ ἐξίπταται : folly makes the understanding of the child fly away” (Lagarde).

return to '

16 Whosoever oppresseth the lowly, it is gain to him;

Whosoever giveth to the rich, it is only loss.

It is before all clear that להרבּות and למחסור , as at Proverbs 21:5, למותר and למחסור , are contrasted words, and form the conclusions to the participles used, with the force of hypothetical antecedents. Jerome recognises this: qui calumniatur pauperem, ut augeat divitias suas, dabit ipse ditiori et egebit . So Rashi, who by עשׁיר thinks on heathen potentates. Proportionally better Euchel, referring עשׁק and נתן , not to one person, but to two classes of men: he who oppresses the poor to enrich himself, and is liberal toward the rich, falls under want. The antithetic distich thus becomes an integral one - the antithesis manifestly intended is not brought out. This may be said also against Bertheau, who too ingeniously explains: He who oppresses the poor to enrich himself gives to a rich man, i.e., to himself, the enriched, only to want, i.e., only to lose again that which he gained unrighteously. Ralbag is on the right track, for he suggests the explanation: he who oppresses the poor, does it to his gain, for he thereby impels him to a more energetic exercise of his strength; he who gives to the rich man does it to his own loss, because the rich man does not thank him for it, and still continues to look down on him. But if one refers לּו to the poor, then it lies nearer to interpret אך למחסור of the rich: he who gives presents to the rich only thereby promotes his sleepy indolence, and so much the more robs him of activity (Elster); for that which one gives to him is only swallowed up in the whirlpool of his extravagance (Zöckler). Thus Hitzig also explains, who remarks, under 17a: “Oppression produces reaction, awakens energy, and thus God on the whole overrules events” (Exodus 1:12). Similarly also Ewald, who thinks on a mercenary, unrighteous rich man: God finally lifts up the oppressed poor man; the rich man always becoming richer, on the contrary, is “punished for all his wickedness only more and more.” But with all these explanations there is too much read between the lines. Since אך למחדור (Proverbs 11:24; Proverbs 21:5) refers back to the subject: himself to mere loss, so also will it be here; and the lxx, Symmachus, Jerome (cf. also the Syr. auget malum suum ) are right when they also refer לו , not to the poor man, but to the oppressor of the poor. We explain: he who extorts from the poor enriches himself thereby; but he who gives to the rich has nothing, and less than nothing, thereby - he robs himself, has no thanks, only brings himself by many gifts lower and lower down. In the first case at least, 17a, the result corresponds to the intention; but in this latter case, 17b, one gains only bitter disappointment.

return to '

A fourth proverb - a distich - beginning with the warning אל :

28 Remove not the perpetual landmark

Which thy ancestors have set up.

28a = Proverbs 23:10. Regarding the inviolability of boundaries established by the law, vid., at Proverbs 15:25. גּבוּל עולם denotes “the boundary mark set up from ancient times, the removal of which were a double transgression, because it is rendered sacred by its antiquity” ( Orelli, p. 76). נסג = סוּג signifies to remove back, Hiph. to shove back, to move away. אשׁר has the meaning of ( ὅριον ) ὅ , τι , quippe quod . Instead of עולם , the Mishna reads, Pea v. 6, עולים , which in the Jerusalem Gemara one Rabbi understands of those brought up out of Egypt, another of the poor; for “to rise” (in the world) is a euphemism ( לשׁון כבוד ) for “to come down” (be reduced in circumstances).

(Note: As an analogical example, סגּי נהור , seeing clearly = blind.)

return to '