Wisdom of Ben Sira : Studies on Tradition, Redaction, and Theology / Edited by Angelo Passaro and Giuseppe Bellia

The Wisdom of Ben Sira: Studies on Tradition, Redaction, and Theology

Edited by Angelo Passaro Giuseppe Bellia

Walter de Gruyter The Wisdom of Ben Sira

≥ Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Studies

Edited by Friedrich V. Reiterer, Beate Ego, Tobias Nicklas

Volume 1

Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York The Wisdom of Ben Sira

Studies on Tradition, Redaction, and Theology

Edited by Angelo Passaro and Giuseppe Bellia

Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York Țȍ Printed on acid-free paper which falls within the guidelines of the ANSI to ensure permanence and durability.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

The wisdom of Ben Sira : studies on tradition, redaction, and theology / edited by Angelo Passaro and Giuseppe Bellia. v. cm. Ϫ (Deuterocanonical and cognate literature studies) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-3-11-019499-9 (alk. paper) 1. Bible. O.T. Apocrypha. Ecclesiasticus Ϫ Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Passaro, Angelo. II. Bellia, Giuseppe. BS1765.52.W57 2008 2291.406Ϫdc22 2008007365

ISBN 978-3-11-019499-9 ISSN 1865-1666

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de.

Ą Copyright 2008 by Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, D-10785 Berlin All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed in Germany Cover Design: Christopher Schneider, Berlin Preface

By contrast with the good reputation of its gentle and prudent author, the Book of Sirach shows itself to be laden with not a few concerns and pervaded with many enquiries as a result of the great number of questions which it continues to raise: philological, exegetical, literary, historical, theological and even confessional – from the moment when its reception among those texts which ‘defile the hands’ not only divided, as it continues to divide, the Christian tradition from the Rabbinic, but also, within those very confessions, has separated the judgement of synagogues and churches. It has been the cause of division even from the remotest times, if it is true that the book, which was not received into the Hebrew canon, was nonetheless already read at Qumran, two centuries before the so-called turning point of Jamnia. In the Christian tradition, the text is already present in the ancient Vetus Lati- na but, some centuries later, it would not be accepted by the fiery Dalmatian (St. Jerome) who refused to include it among the other inspired books. In the more recent history of interpretation, there is no doubt that the encumbrance of Luther’s belittling estimation (Est sicut talmud ex variis libris collectus) has weighed down on our book. His words have been transmitted to the present day as if as a platitude, consistently on the part of commentators, even if in more recent years help has come with a slow reversal of the tendency, something which has made the book the object of rigorous and specialist studies which have brought to light aspects and themes of great interest. The question of canonicity, however, could be one of the keys to reading the many problems which the text poses, starting from the fact that it is precisely our book which is among the most certain and authoritative witnesses for the tripartite architecture of the sacred books of the incipient Hebrew canon (Law, Prophets and other Writings). This witness is transmitted not only on the part of the grandson-translator, as we read in his Prologue (1, 8 and 23), but of the complex structure of the work as intended by his sage-ancestor (38:31–39:1) which seems to represent the ideal order of the library of the Greek-speaking diaspora of Alexandra. Already, at that time, the Jews of that city were employed in intense literary activity translating the prophetic books with the aim of helping those members of the community who were no longer familiar with the Hebrew language and so had need of reliable and authoritative versions in order to get to know their own tradition and to live according to the customs of the Fathers. More than for other books, an exegesis for Ben Sira is necessary which takes account of the canonical tradition but does not allow itself to be ensnared by the romantic ideal of the original document, being able to read trans- versely and objectively the different textual traditions so as to avoid falling VI Preface into those conjectural reconstructions which, after all, are supported only by extra-textual presuppositions In the judgement of many, however, the principal means of access for the understanding of this book remains the critical awareness of the methodological and hermeneutical problems that are bound to the text. To understand what function the organising structure performs in a book like ours, which manifests complex and elegant compositional strategies, it would help to have a clearer perception of the cultural and theological context in which that cultural and theological process that goes under the name of the “sapientialisation” of Scripture begins. It is a current of thought running through the entire sapiential Pentateuch, which proclaims the indisputable self-identification of the Book of the Torah with Wisdom. This is a problematic and disputed identification which requires a demanding leap of degree at the theological level, imposing a bold rethinking of the concept of the Law, rather than a revisiting, and the attribution and predication to Wis- dom of new characteristics, unheard-of as far as the existing sapiential tradition was concerned. A truly complex book, then, and one wholly discounted, situated on the edges of the canon, as we have said, one which puts more than one question, not only concerning the complicated state of affairs connected with its troubled textual transmission, but also precisely because of the multiplicity of texts recognised as “inspired”. A scribal work, composed of several compositional strata and several theological aims, which, in the end, challenges us with the radical and explosive question of the canonicity of the sacred books and, therefore, of the fundamental question of inspiration. However, the difficult theological questions, with their seriousness and contemporary relevance, cannot make us forget the questions, which are still open and involving, posed by the book because of its more exact sys- tematisation within the whole of the sapiential literature. The tradition of the wise scribes of Israel had, for a long time, gained a connotation of judi- cious and practical enquiry, concerned with grasping the thread of the presence of God hidden beneath the transitory nature of the every-day, without neglecting to engage with the high questions of speculative theology. For this reason, more than one question vital for the faith of Israel had remained open and unsolved within its heritage. In the face of these theological problems, which touch the heart of the religious identity of a people, the work of Ben Sira has been interpreted and judged in quite diverse ways: it has been read as a book of synthesis which attempts to make up for the replies that had never been given to the realistic challenge of Job and the corrosive criticism of Qoheleth, trying to renew the threads of traditional wisdom around the leading theme of the fear of the Lord; or it has been seen as the careful interpretation of an enlightened conservative who, in a time of change, still not marked by the traumas of Preface VII the Maccabean crisis, is seeking without too much trouble to draw the heritage of his own tradition towards the new one emerging from the Jewish diaspora in the Hellenistic world. Many claim that we are faced with a text of an apologetic nature because it displays the characteristics of a book written in the office, a sort of “curial”, and, therefore, predictably conservative, product, preoccupied with the religious behaviour of the younger generation. Is it, in the end, a work which, in the grooves of the Jerusalem and Temple tradition, pursues the aim of restoring the truth of the faith against the autonomous enquiry of human wisdom, or is it just an honest and clever attempt at dialogue between the legitimate reasonings of the world and the wisdom given in the Law of Israel? And again: what are the true motives for its incomprehensible exclusion by the Rabbinic tradition, seeing that the hebraica veritas has been shown to be a specious and inconsistent justification. On the other hand, what are the more convincing reasons for its different reception into the Christian canon on the part of the great churches? To better understand the sense and the significance of these questions and, rather than conclusive answers, to offer an attempt at shared reflection which makes it possible to guarantee some firm points concerning the results shared by criticism and so to advance the work of research, there have been collected in this volume contributions aimed at specialists in the material with evident skills, organised according to a now acclaimed multidisciplinary viewpoint which develops around composition, tradition and theology. In connection with the making of this book, there are the advice, the help and the collaboration of those who deserve our gratitude. Without their discreet availability and their generous and disinterested support, this labour could not have seen the light. Particular thanks are due to Dr. Michael Tait for his sensitive work of translation; to Dr. Salvatore Tirrito for his expert support with IT; to Giusy Zarbo and Francesco Bonanno for their generous assistance; and to the understanding colleagues and students of the Depart- ment of Biblical Studies of the Theological Faculty of Sicily at Palermo. Grateful thanks are also due to Dr. Donato Falmi, the Editor-in-Chief of Città Nuova Editrice, Rome, who has given permission for the publication of this edition in English; to Prof. Dr. Vincenz Reiterer who suggested this book for the inauguration of this new series (DCL.St); and to Dr. Albrecht Döhnert and the publishing house of de Gruyter for accepting it.

Palermo, April 2008 Angelo Passaro and Giuseppe Bellia

Contents

Preface...... V Abbreviations ...... XI

MAURICE GILBERT Methodological and hermeneutical trends in modern exegesis on the Book of Ben Sira ...... 1

JEREMY CORLEY Searching for structure and redaction in Ben Sira. An investigation of beginnings and endings ...... 21

GIUSEPPE BELLIA An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira ...... 49

ÉMILE PUECH Ben Sira and Qumran ...... 79

NURIA CALDUCH-BENAGES The hymn to the creation (Sir 42:15–43:33): a polemic text? ...... 119

PANCRATIUS C. BEENTJES “Full Wisdom is from the Lord“. Sir 1:1-10 and its place in Israel’s Wisdom literature ...... 139

ANGELO PASSARO The secrets of God. Investigation into Sir 3:21-24 ...... 155

SILVANA MANFREDI The true sage or the Servant of the Lord (Sir 51:13-30 Gr) ...... 173

JAN LIESEN A common background of Ben Sira and the Psalter. The concept of hr"AT in Sir 32:14–33:3 and the Torah Psalms ...... 197 X Contents

FRIEDRICH VINCENZ REITERER The interpretation of the Wisdom tradition of the Torah within Ben Sira ...... 209

ALEXANDER A. DI LELLA Ben Sira’s doctrine on the discipline of the tongue. An intertextual and synchronic analysis...... 233

ANTONINO MINISSALE The metaphor of “falling”: hermeneutic key to the Book of Sirach ...... 253

GIOVANNI RIZZI Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach ...... 277

ROSARIO PISTONE Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew ...... 309

ANGELO PASSARO –GIUSEPPE BELLIA Sirach, or the metamorphosis of the sage ...... 355

Authors ...... 375 Index of Modern Authors ...... 377 Index of References ...... 383 Index of Subjects...... 409 Abbreviations

AnBib Analecta Biblica AncB Anchor Bible ATA Alttestamentliche Abhandlungen ATD Das Alte Testament Deutsch BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research BBB Bonner biblische Beiträge BEAT Beiträge zur Erforschung des Alten Testaments und des antiken Judentums BeO Bibbia e Oriente BET Beiträge zur biblischen Exegese und Theologie BEThL Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium BFChTh Beiträge zur Förderung christlicher Theologie Bib Biblica BiKi Bibel und Kirche BibOr Biblica et Orientalia Bijdr. Bijdragen BJSt Brown Judaic Studies BK Biblischer Kommentar BN Biblische Notizen BUL Biblioteca Universale Laterza BZ Biblische Zeitschrift BZAW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft BZfr Biblische Zeitfragen BZNW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft CBC Cambridge biblical commentary CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly CBQ.MS Catholic Biblical Quarterly. Monograph series CRB Cahiers de la Revue Biblique CSB Studi Biblici (Bologna) CStP Collectània Sant Pacià DB Dictionnaire de la Bible DBS Dictionnaire de la Bible. Supplément DCLY Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook DJD Discoveries in the Judean Desert DSD Dead Sea Discoveries EHAT Exegetisches Handbuch zum Alten Testament EJ Encyclopaedia Judaica ErIs Eretz Israel EstB Estudios biblicos EtB Études bibliques EThL Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses FNT Filologia Neotestamentaria FRLANT Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Tes- taments XII Abbreviations

FzB Forschung zur Bibel HALAT Baumgartner, W. (ed.), Hebräiches und Aramäiches Lexicon zum Alten Testament, Leiden 1967-1990 HBS Herder Biblische Studien Hen Henoch HThR Harvard Theological Review HUCA Hebrew Union College annual ITS Indian theological studies JBL Journal of Biblical Literature JJS Journal of Jewish Studies JNWSL Journal of Northwest Semitic languages JQR Jewish Quarterly Review JSHRZ Jüdische Schriften aus hellenistisch-römischer Zeit JSJ Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman period JSJ.S Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman period. Supplement Series JSOT.S Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. Supplement Series JSP Journal for the Study of Pseudepigrapha JSPE.S Journal for the Study of Pseudepigrapha. Supplement Series JSSt Journal of Semitic studies JTSt Judaistische Texte und Studien KuI Kirche und Israel LCL Loeb Classical Library LeDiv Lectio Divina LHVT Zorell, F., Lexicon Hebraicum Veteris Testamenti, Romae 1984 LoB Leggere oggi la Bibbia MoBi Monde de la Bible NCBC The new century Bible commentary NCCHS Newsletter. Congregational Christian Historical Society NEB Neue Echter Bibel NTA.NF Neutestamentliche Abhandlungen. Neue Folge OBO Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis OrChr Oriens Christianus OrSuec Orientalia Suecana OTL The Old Testament Library PIBA Proceedings of the Irish Biblical Association PSV Parola Spirito e Vita PWCJS Proceedings of the World Congress of Jewish Studies QD Quaestiones disputatae RAC Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum RB Revue Biblique RBén Revue bénédictine de critique, d’histoire et de littérature religieuses RdQ Revue de Qumran RHPhR Revue d’histoire et de philosophie religieuses RivBib Rivista Biblica Abbreviations XIII

RStB Ricerche Storico Bibliche RTL Revue théologique de Louvain Sal. Salesianum SBF.CMa Studium Biblicum Franciscanum. Collectio maior SBFLA Studii Biblici Franciscani liber annuus SBL Society of Biblical Literature SBL.DS Society of Biblical Literature. Dissertation series SBL.EJL Society of Biblical Literature. Early Judaism and its Literature SBL.MS Society of Biblical Literature. Monograph series SBL.SCS Society of Biblical Literature. Septuagint and Cognate Studies SCSt Septuagint and Cognate studies Sem. Semitica SSS Semitic study series StBi Studi Biblici (Brescia) STDJ Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah StPB Studia Post-biblica StTh Studia theologica. Scandinavian Journal of Theology SubBi Subsidia biblica TDNT Kittel, G. – Friedrich, G. (eds.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament ThWAT Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Alten Testament TSAJ Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism TU Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur VT Vetus Testamentum VT.S Vetus Testamentum. Supplements VuF Vorträge und Forschungen WMANT Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament WUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament ZAW Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft ZKTh Zeitschrift für katolische Theologie ZThK Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche

Methodological and hermeneutical trends in modern exegesis on the Book of Ben Sira

MAURICE GILBERT

1. One text or, better, several texts

1.1 In Hebrew

May 13, 1896 marks the starting point of modern exegesis of the book traditionally called in the West “Ecclesiasticus”. On that day, in Cambridge, Solomon Schechter identified the Hebrew text of Sir 39:15b–40:8 on a sheet of ancient paper, shown to him in that morning by Agnes Smith Levis and her twin sister Margaret Dunlop Gibson. They had bought it shortly before in the Middle East and later il would be known that this text had come from the geniza(deposit) of the Qaraite synagogue in Cairo. At that time, in Hebrew, only the rabbinic quotations of Ben Sira were known. This discovery made in Cambridge prompted others in Oxford, in London, in Paris; then in 1901, all the Hebrew texts of Ben Sira until then discovered were published in facsimiles.1 The era of the first scientific works on the Hebrew book of Ben Sira had already begun and continued until the first World War, with commentaries and critical editions by I. Lévi (1898-1901),2 N. Peters (1902, 1905, 1913),3 and R. Smend (1906),4 to mention only the most valuable. These were convinced of the authenticity of the rediscovered Hebrew texts, but the definitive confirmation was still lacking. That came when the excavations at Qumran and Masada brought to light, in 1962-1964, some ancient Hebrew fragments of Ben Sira’s book:5 these new texts were similar enough to those discovered more than half a century before to convince everybody that truly, after so many centuries, the original text of the book of Ben Sira had been recovered. But this book was not complete in Hebrew. Already with the fragments of the four medieval manuscripts coming from the Cairo geniza, identified at the end of the 19th century, almost two third

1 Facsimiles of the Fragments Hitherto Recovered of the Book of Ecclesiasticus in Hebrew, Oxford-Cambridge 1901. 2 L’Ecclésiastique; The Hebrew Text. 3 Der jüngst Wieder aufgefundene hebräische Text des Buches Ecclesiasticus; Liber Iesu Filii Sirach; Das Buch Jesus Sirach. 4 Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach. 5BAILLET –MILIK – DE VAUX, Textes des grottes de Qumran, 75-77; SANDERS, The Psalms Scroll, 79-85; YADIN, The Ben Sira Scroll from Masada. 2 Maurice Gilbert of the book were published, and the later discoveries will not change the case: in 1931, a fragment of a new manuscript (Ms E) came to light,6 as in 1982 another from a sixth one (Ms F),7 and in 1958-1959, two fragments of Ms B were also recovered.8 In fact the discovery of the Masada text launched a renewal of studies on Ben Sira. Here are mentioned works of new pioneers: Y. Yadin (1965),9 A. A. Di Lella (1966),10 J. Haspecker (1967),11 J. Hadot (1970),12 H. P. Rüger (1970),13 J. Marböck (1971),14 O. Rickenbacher (1973),15 G. L. Prato (1975).16 To these names we may today add others, among whom some who still pursuing research are present in this congress. This short historical survey should not mislead us about the reliability of the Hebrew texts of Ben Sira now available. The first problem concerns the edition of these rediscovered texts. In addition to the critical editions made at the beginning of last century, there are today two others, one published in 1973 by the Academy in Jerusalem17 and the other edited in 1997 in Leiden by P. C. Beentjes.18 Asimple comparison between these two reveals many different readings of the manuscripts. Moreover, if a present-day scholar has at his disposal the Facsimiles edited in 1901, or those of manuscripts discovered later, he will often feel that he lacks confidence in the material offered. Today, at least a common agreement on the readings of these manuscripts is surely desirable, and I whould wish to see one day soon new facsimiles, the most accurate possible. A second problem arises when, for a specific text, we have two or three witnesses in different manuscripts. These often give divergent texts. How to choose the original reading? Two scholars tried to answer this question. H. P. Rüger (1970)19 tried to show that, in these manuscripts, it is possible to suppose the confluence of two successive editions of the text, the first one (Hb I) being the only one assigned to Ben Sira. A. Minissale (1995)20 proposed a reconstruction of ten Hebrew passages of Ben Sira for which

6MARCUS, A Fifth Ms of Ben Sira, 223-240. 7DI LELLA, The Newly Discovered, 226-238; BEENTJES, A Closer Look, 171-186. 8DI LELLA, The Recently, 153-167. 9 Cf. note 5. 10 The Hebrew Text of Sirach. 11 Gottesfurcht bei Jesus Sirach. 12 Penchant mauvais. 13 Text und Textform. 14 Weisheit im Wandel. 15 Weisheitsperikopen bei Ben Sira. 16 Il problema della teodicea. 17 The Book of Ben Sira. 18 The Book of Ben Sira in Hebrew; ID., Errata et corrigenda, 375-377. 19 Cf. note 13. 20 La versione greca. Methodological and hermeneutical trends in modern exegesis 3 we have at least two manuscripts, but clear and solid principles do not appear for choosing this reading instead of that. Here we can perceive the perplexity of scholars, who are often tempted to turn towards the ancient versions in Greek or in Syriac in order to resolve textual problems of the Hebrew text of Ben Sira. The critical choices made by P. W. Skehan (AncB, 1987)21 or by G. Sauer (ATD, 2000),22 not always similar, unfortunately prove the genuine complexity of the problem. However it seems to me that three theses can be accepted, over and above the global authenticity of the rediscovered texts: 1. These texts are not totally reliable. Often they propose doublets, which give two or even more different readings of the same passage. A critical analysis is therefore necessary in these cases, but not only in these. 2. The hypothesis of A. A. Di Lella (1966),23 according to which there are Hebrew retroversions from the Syriac version, should not underestimated. For the Hebrew text of Sir 51:13-30 in Ms B, this fact is evident. 3. The thesis of a second edition of the Hebrew text (Hb II), thesis assumed by many scholars, is also secure. The proof appears, for instance, in Ms A for Sir 11:15-16 and 16:15-16, which are additions known by some Greek manusripts as also by the Latin and Syriac versions. In conclusion, a hope may be expressed in form of a question: Shall we have one day a Hebrew text of Ben Sira (Hb I), on which a majority of scholars can agree?

1.2 In Greek

There are two forms of the Greek version. The first one is transmitted by the great manuscripts written with uncial or capital letters, principally the Vaticanus, the Sinaiticus and the Alexandrinus. Their text gives the so called short text (Gr I). But there are other Greek manuscripts which transcribed a revised Greek version, extended with about 135 lines (Gr II): mainly the codex Venetus, written with uncial letters, and some manuscripts where the letters are no longer uncial, but minuscule, that is to say cursive. In 1909, J. H. A. Hart had published with a commentary the Gr II text of Ms 248.24 It is worth mentioning another very useful edition made by O. Wahl in 1974, in which he collected, verse by verse, the witnesses of the Greek text of the Sacra Parallela;25 this is again a Gr II text, but with some-

21 With SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira. 22 Jesus Sirach/Ben Sira. 23 Cf. note 10. 24 Ecclesiasticus. 25 Der Sirach-Text der Sacra Parallela. 4 Maurice Gilbert thing new: it contains in Greek ten additional verses known previously only in Latin. Today, for the Greek version, the critical edition prepared by J. Ziegler (1965)26 is without doubt the best. For its correct use, some characteristics of it must be borne in mind. First of all, the very rich critical apparatus must be carefully consulted. For instance, one can see in it that sometimes Ziegler proposes conjectures which have no basis in the Greek manuscripts, but are an attempt to improve the Greek text by using readings of the Hebrew. In addition, Ziegler inserts in their place with smaller letters 135 lines taken from the Gr II manuscripts; but, from this Gr II text, he does not retain, except in his critical apparatus, all the other minor changes. Lastly, Ziegler restores the original order of the chapters: in all the Greek manuscripts, Sir 33:16b – 36:13a was put before Sir 30:25 – 33:16a; this mistake was made after the translation of the Greek text, a Gr II text, into Latin, and this Latin version, in agreement with the Hebrew manuscripts and the Syriac Peshit- ta version, kept the original order of these chapters. In his study of the Greek version, Gr I, A. Minissale27 showed that this version is not literal, but is analogous to the manner of translating Hebrew in the midrashim and targumim. Therefore, one cannot use this Greek version without discernment to reconstruct or to correct the original text in Hebrew. It is enough to compare the Hebrew text of Sir 51:1-12 with the Greek version to observe that the latter, addressing God throughout in the second person singular, disrupts the originality of the Hebrew text; for this one, in its first half, addresses God directly, and speaks about him in the second half. The same procedure appears in Sir 4:11-19, where the Greek version changes the direct speech of Wisdom, according to the Hebrew text and the Syriac version, into a description of Wisdom’s action. About Gr II, the long version, my opinion is that it mainly depends on a Hebrew enlarged text. For instance, it happens that a verse of Gr II is only understandable if translated into Hebrew. This is the case for the Greek text of Sir 1:10cd; Minissale translates this Greek addition as follows:28 “Loving the Lord is wisdom giving glory; he imparts her to those to whom he reveals himself so that they see him”; but the second line is obscure. Therefore, I proposed in the Bible de Jérusalem (1998) that this Greek version embodies a confusion between the two Hebrew verbs to see and to fear, both in the infinitive qal with suffix, and my translation is: “to those who fear him, he imparts her”.29 The same problem arises for other traditional translations of additions in Gr II, but not only there, where mistakes are unceasingly

26 Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach. 27 Cf. note 20. 28 Siracide (Ecclesiastico), ad loc. 29 Voir ou craindre le Seigneur?, 247-252. Methodological and hermeneutical trends in modern exegesis 5 repeated without realizing the misunderstanding. The famous Greek addition in Sir 24:18cd is commonly translated: “I spread myself in all my sons, elected by him from eternity”, but I explained that a correct translation must be: “I give myself with all my fruits, always at his commands”.30 Again a last note: an addition of Gr II is sometimes considered as the translation of an authentic text of Ben Sira; this happens for Sir 1:21, but recently I tried to show the weakness of such an assumption.31

1.3 In Latin

The ancient Latin version, called Vetus latina, of Ecclesiasticus was made before the 3rd century AD from a Greek extended text (Gr II). Today this Latin version, which was studied in 1899 by H. Herkenne (he already saw in Sir 1:21 an authentic text of Ben Sira),32 do not interest scholars very much, except those who propose critical editions. These are two. The first was established by the Benedictine monks of Saint Jerome Abbey in Rome (1964)33 and gives the text as it was at the time of its insertion in the Vul- gate. The second gives the Vetus latina text and is published at Beuron, Ger- many; W. Thiele, who was the editor for Sir 1–24, began in 1987 and concluded his part in 2005;34 for Sir 25–51, another editor is awaited. For research, it is useful to consult the edition of the Latin version prepared by J. Gribomont and G. D. Sixdenier for the multi-language edition of Ben Sira (badly) published by F. Vattioni in 1968:35 these two editors have marked with special signs the parts of the version which they considered not original but as later revisions of this Vetus latina version, in order to make it conform more closely to the Greek text. Such an hypothesis, which comes from D. De Bruyne (1928),36 has been disputed by Thiele,37 who thinks that most of the Vetus latina doublets were already in the Greek text used by the Latin translator. There remains another problem not yet studied: several times the Vetus latina of Ecclesiasticus does not correspond to the Greek texts at our disposal, but rather to the Hebrew manuscripts. J. Ziegler, in his critical apparatus of the Greek version, mentioned a good number of cases. How can

30 Les additions grecques et latines à Siracide 24, 196-199. 31 L’addition de Siracide 1,21, 317-325. 32 De veteris latinae Ecclesiastici capitibus I-XLIII. 33 Sapientia Salomonis. Liber Hiesu filii Sirach. 34 Sirach Ecclesiasticus. 35 Ecclesiastico, LIII-LIV. 36 Étude sur le texte latin. 37 Sirach Ecclesiasticus, 103-122. 6 Maurice Gilbert we explain them? Were they in the Greek text used by the Latin translator? Lastly, it must be remembered that the Vetus latina of Ecclesiasticus preserves some additions unknown in Greek, like Sir 24:31VL, at the end of the Wisdom’s speech: Qui elucidant me vitam eternam habebunt.

1.4 In Syriac

Unfortunately a critical edition of the Syriac Peshitta version of the book of Ben Sira, promised for decades, is still lacking, as well as any full analysis of that version. Meanwhile, one can use the edition of the codex Ambrosianus recently published with both English and Spanish translations by N. Cal- duch-Benages, J. Ferrer and J. Liesen (2003).38 Concerning this Syriac version, there are different opinions. According to H. P. Rüger, the translator used the enlarged Hebrew text (1970),39 but for M. D. Nelson (1988), who studied only Sir 39:27–44:18, the translator used the original text of Ben Sira (Hb I), while consulting the enlarged Hebrew text (Hb II) and also the two Greek versions (Gr I and Gr II).40 A complete study of the Peshitta version, compared with Hebrew and Greek texts, is still desirable. Meanwile, let us mention some characteristics of this Peshitta. As with the Greek version, the Peshitta does not translate literally, but after the manner of the targumim (N. Calduch-Benages e.a.),41 with omissions and also additions. One addition, only known by the Peshit- ta, appears instead of Sir 1:22-27 (N. Calduch-Benages, 1997,42 and T. Legrand, 1998) 43 but this Syriac addition seems to many scholars44 to translate a Hebrew text (Hb II), except that N. Calduch-Benages and her collab- orators45 think that it was written by the Syriac translator himself. More- over, the Syriac translator sometimes alters the Hebrew text he has to translate: a good example is the prayer of Sir 51:1-12, where he omits all references to calumny, which is in fact in Hebrew the main reason which provoked the prayer; doing so, the Syriac translator composed a prayer which can now be used for any kind of thanksgiving when the Lord has saved anybody from some unspecified mortal danger.

38 La sabiduría del escriba. 39 Cf. note 13. 40 The Syriac Version of the Wisdom of Ben Sira. 41 La sabiduría del escriba, 24-27 and 48-51. 42 Traducir-Interpretar. 43 Siracide (syriaque) 1,20c-z. 44 Cf. KEARNS, The Expanded Text, 191. 45 La sabiduría del escriba, 26-27 and 50-51. Methodological and hermeneutical trends in modern exegesis 7

1.5 Conclusion

The book of Ben Sira is not the only one in the Bible for which there is a plurality of texts. For our book, the basic fact is that they were two editions. The first one in Hebrew was translated into Greek (Hb I – Gr I), and the second, originally also in Hebrew (Hb II), is found in some Greek manuscripts (Gr II) and in the old Latin version. The Syriac Peshitta version seems to reflect both the first and the second Hebrew editions.

2. One author or, better, several authors

The problem to be faced here is that of the variety of hands which touched the book of Ben Sira from the time of his writing till the transmission of the book during Antiquity.

2.1 The main author, Ben Sira

Is it possible to hear the voice of Ben Sira, to read his message directly from his text; to read it, of course, on a copy – or on a copy of copy – of his own text? Today, after the discovery of his Hebrew texts, the answer is without any doubt positive, though with serious reservations. The name of this wise man is Ben Sira. This is sure, but, in Hebrew, Ms B gives a more developed name which does not correspond with that of the Greek manuscripts. Those specify that the author was from Jerusalem, a detail which, in Hebrew, Ms B does not give (Sir 50:27). About the date of his book, a majority of scholars acknowledges today that it must be fixed during the first quarter of the 2nd century BC; that means between years 200 and 175 BC, therefore before the Maccabean crisis under Antiochus IV. Ben Sira was a wisdom master. He taught young disciples: this is evident after reading in Hebrew some undisputed texts like the following ones. Before explaining that God takes care of all, Ben Sira writes:

Hear me and receive my mind, to my words apply the heart. I will spread with measure my spirit and with modesty I will indicate what I know (Sir 16:24-25, Ms A).

When he advises eating temperately, he says: 8 Maurice Gilbert

Hear, my son, do not despise me: at last you will understand my words (Sir 31:22, Ms B).

Calling the disciple to praise the Lord for all his works, even the most mysterious, “with songs of lyre and zither and so with great voice” (Sir 39:15cd, Ms B), the master concludes:

Now, with all heart, rejoice and bless the name of the Holy one (Sir 39:35, Ms B).

Or before giving his teaching on true and false shame:

Hear the instruction on shame, sons, and be ashamed according to my mind (Sir 41:14a.16a, Mas and Ms B).

Two other autobiographical texts in Hebrew concern the composition of his book:

Therefore, from the beginning, I was convinced and I reflected and I put in writing: All the works of God are good, for every need, in proper time, he supplies (Sir 39:32-33, Ms B).

And this one, which perhaps marks the end of a stage of the book’s redaction:

Even myself, the last, I stayed awake and, like a gleaner after [vintagers], with the Lord’s blessing, even myself I arrive first and, like a vintager, I filled up the wine-press! Look! I am not tired only for myself, but for all those who search [for instruction] (Sir 33:16-18, Ms E).

These autobiographical quotations come from four different Hebrew manuscripts and they are more or less similar in the Greek version, as well as in the Syriac one, except Sir 41:14a.16a (the Peshitta omits almost the whole chapter). There are two other autobiographical texts of Ben Sira, but each presents difficulties. Two of them are in Sir 51, the last chapter of the book, which, in spite of the first colophon of Sir 50:27-29, is more and more considered authentic, except for the Hebrew addition in Ms B between Sir 51:12 and 51:13. Now, this chapter 51 comprises in its first twelve verses a thanksgiving prayer, and in Sir 51:13-30, a final text on the search for wisdom. The prayer, well preserved in the Hebrew Ms B, was seriously mod- Methodological and hermeneutical trends in modern exegesis 9 ified in Greek and in Syriac.46 The final text on Wisdom is incomplete in the Qumran Hebrew manuscript but, with the help of the Greek and Syr- iac versions and of the Hebrew retroversion of Ms B, it is possible to recom- bine it, in a necessarily hypothetical way.47 What shall we do then with Sir 24:30-34, where Ben Sira describes his function as master in relation to Wis- dom? This passage has not yet been discovered in Hebrew. Can we trust the Greek version or the Syriac one? It is true, these versions are very similar, but they are not identical: Sir 24:34 is lacking in Syriac, without mentioning here other discrepancies between the two versions. Saying that, I want to make clear the difficulty exegetes of Ben Sira must resolve when they try to understand the autobiographical texts of Ben Sira. J. Liesen48 did much work on these characteristic texts of our wise man, who can present himself as a master precisely because he is full of Wisdom, or better: because Wisdom coming from God fills him to overflowing; to his disciples, he is able to pass on this Wisdom overflowing from himself to them. He is only a mediator of Wisdom. Never in Israel had a wisdom master spoken of himself like that. Now, the main themes of his teaching are the following. It is beyond doubt that he endeavoured to offer a synthesis of the heritage of his people. If he insists more than his predecessors on the fear of the Lord as the basic behaviour of a man who intends to be open to Wisdom offered by God, Ben Sira was also the first to show the coherence of the whole action of God. According to our wise man, Wisdom, continuously offered by God, has her best expression in the Torah and the one who truly fears God puts into practice the precepts of the Torah. Along the same lines, one can perceive why Ben Sira is interested in the biblical history recounted in the Pen- tateuch and in the prophets, even if he does not see, for his time, any hope for the future but in the faithfulness of the official priesthood. And this hope does not mean that Ben Sira was a priest, as H. Stadelmann (1980) claimed.49 More serene than Qohelet, Ben Sira puts his trust in the tradition of his people. He discerns the danger, not yet dramatic, of the invading Hellenism; he has doubts about the first pretentions of the incipient apocalyptic. Aspir- itual man, he trusts God and prayer, for him, is part of the observances of a truly wise person. Better still, Ben Sira thinks that only a wise man, contrary to a sinner, can praise the Lord (Sir 15:9-10), realizing therefore the primary vocation of the living man (Sir 17:9-10.27-28); the last ten chapters of his book (Sir 42:15–51:30) are first of all a hymn to the Lord, an invitation

46 On the Hebrew text, cf. GILBERT, L’action de grâce de Ben Sira. 47 Cf. GILBERT, Venez à mon école, 283-290. 48 Strategical Self-References, 63-74. ID., Full of Praise, especially 95-187. 49 Ben Sira als Schriftgelehrter. Cf. review of G. L. Prato: Greg 63 (1982), 560-565. 10 Maurice Gilbert to praise him for his work in the world and in history, in which Ben Sira himself is conscious of being an example for his disciples.50

2.2 The Ben Sira’s grandson, his translator into Greek

The are two documents which help to understand the part of the first translator of the book of Ben Sira: the prologue of this version and the translation itself, the short one (Gr I) transmitted in the main uncial manuscripts. The prologue, which is transmitted by these manuscripts,51 is the only text in which the translator speaks of himself – Ben Sira was his grandfather – and of his task of translator. With the majority of scholars, I take this prologue as authentic. The grandson of Ben Sira arrived in Egypt in 132 BC and during his stay there he discovered his grandfather’s book. This book seemed to him so useful for those who, outside the land of Israel, wish to be instructed, to reform their ways and to live according to the Torah, that he decided to translate it from Hebrew into Greek. Such an undertaking was not carried quickly, not only on account of the length of the book, but also because it is never easy to render into Greek what is expressed in Hebrew: the grandson insists on this challenge, which should excuse him. Moreover, putting his work in the frame of the Torah, of the prophets, and of the other Jewish books, in Hebrew as well as in the Greek Septuagint version, he probably hoped, perhaps following his grandfather himself (cf. Sir 24:32-34), that his translation would one day be officially accepted among the books which were gradually forming the future canon of the Scriptures.52 About the translation itself, B. G. Wright (1989)53 is right when he says that, when comparison with the Hebrew text is possible, it is certainly not mechanical, but that the grandson wanted first of all to deliver the message of his grandfather, its content rather than its literal words. A. Minissale (1995)54 specified that the targumic method was already applied by the grandson. It can be added that the Hebrew copy of Ben Sira’s book used by the grandson was not excellent and also that he had sometimes difficulty in understanding what his grandfather had written. We realize therefore why he tried to apologize for the quality of his translation, which altogether is not so bad.

50 Cf. GILBERT, Prayer in the Book of Ben Sira, 117-135. 51 On this prologue, cf. PRATO, Scrittura divina, 75-97; MARBÖCK, Text und Übersetzung, 99-116. 52 Cf. RÜGER, Le Siracide, especially 67-69. 53 No Small Difference. 54 Cf. note 20. Methodological and hermeneutical trends in modern exegesis 11

Lastly, in Sir 50:23-24, the grandson modified the text of his grandfather: it was no longer possible to speak of the lineage of the priest Simon and of Aaron, when political interests had put an end, decades before, to the heredity of the main priestly office in Jerusalem.

2.3 The authors of the second edition

One may think that a second edition became necessary for two reasons, the success of the book and theological progress after the grandson’s time. However it is still very difficult to give precise indications based on textual proofs. The main reason is that we do not have this complete second edition. I mean that changes and additions in it appear in Hebrew and Greek manuscripts in a rather chaotic way: one manuscript conveys some modifications and another, others. This signifies, it seems, that there was no “second edition” as we would understand it, but a slow and progressive evolution of the text of Ben Sira, due to many hands, each scribe choosing such or such modification. These modifications, which mainly bring the book’s eschatology up to date, seem to have been done between years 80 B.C. and 80 A.D. Some of them already appear in Hebrew, others more numerous in Greek manuscripts, where copyists were free to make their choice. Who were the authors of these changes, retouchings and additions? It seems that some distinctions have to be made. Modifications developing new eschatological perspectives, even without ever using the words “resurrection” and “immortality”, come from people who followed the path of Dan 12:1-3 and of 2 Macc 7. At the beginning of the last century, Hart (1909) thought they were Pharisees;55 but he had only compared some Greek additions with authors writing in Greek, Philo, Paul and Josephus. In 1951, C. Kearns, in his thesis presented to the Pontifical Biblical Commission, unpublished up to now, gave a new direction to the research, especially towards the apocalyptic literature ascribes to the Essenes.56 But – and this remark is important – Kearns was unable to compare the additions of the book of Ben Sira with the Qumran texts which were published after his thesis. It is true that, from 1951 till today, many scholars have studied several points of Ben Sira’s book vis-à-vis the Qumran writings. It is also true that a few scholars have compared the additions of the book of Ben Sira with the Qumran literature (Philonenko, 1986; Legrand, 1996; Rossetti, 2002-2003).57 But an

55 Ecclesiasticus, especially 272-320. 56 The Expanded Text. 57 PHILONENKO, Sur une interpolation, 317-321; LEGRAND, Le Siracide: problèmes textuels et théologiques de la recension longue; ROSSETTI, Le aggiunte ebraiche e greche, 607-648. 12 Maurice Gilbert exhaustive comparison between both is still lacking. In any case, an Essen- ian origin of the multiform second edition of the book of Ben Sira, or at least of a part of it, should not astonish us, when one remembers that Qumran provided fragments of the book; as also if we accept the hypothesis of Di Lella,58 according to whom the Hebrew manuscripts found in Cairo originate from Qumran. However Qumran does not explain all the additions. G. L. Prato59 showed that the three lines of Sir 17:5 probably depend on the school of Aristobulus, who was under Stoic influence. A plurality of origin of the second edition is therefore corroborated.

2.4 Latin and syriac translators

There is no reason, it seems, to doubt that the Vetus latina of Ecclesiasticus was made by a Christian. Probably he was a member of a community in Roman Africa. His translation was done before the middle of the 3rd century A.D., for Cyprian of Carthage quoted several passages of it. This is all that can be said. About the author of the Syriac Peshitta version, recently there have been contrasting opinions. In 1977, M. M. Winter60 tried to prove that he was an Ebionite Christian living during the 3rd century or at the beginning of the 4th; among other things, he was opposed, said Winter, to sacrifices and priesthood; his translation would have been revised at the end of the 4th century by an orthodox Christian who inserted allusions to Jesus and to John the Baptist. In 1989, R. J. Owens61 rejected the hypothesis of an Ebionite and proposed for the date of the Peshitta of Ben Sira, with its Christian allusions, about the year 300, because already in 337 Aphrahat quoted it from memory. Lastly, in 1999, in his posthumous introduction to the Peshitta version of the Old Testament, M. P. Weitzman,62 finding in the Chronicles translation the same characteristics assigned by Winter to an Ebionite, considered that the translation of Ben Sira must have been made by a Jew of the 3rd century, a supporter of rabbinism and opposed to cultic matter, a Jew who, later, became a Christian.

58 Qumran and the Geniza Fragments of Sirach, 245-267. 59 La lumière interprète de la sagesse, 317-346. 60 The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac, 237-253 and 494-507. 61 The Early Syriac Text, 39-75. 62 The Syriac Version, especially 216-226. Methodological and hermeneutical trends in modern exegesis 13

2.5 Conclusion

So many hands have touched the book of Ben Sira. For centuries it remained open to modifications, not always casual, but very often intentional, generally made by unknown authors. Already the grandson of Ben Sira adapted his grandfather’s text for his time; moreover he translated it into Greek as targumists did in Aramaic for the Hebrew Torah. After him came those who felt compelled to bring the text up to date, according to theological progress of their time, and those who inserted some philosophical explanations, which were still Jewish, but coming more from Hellenistic thought than from the Bible. The first probably were Essenes and the others, people of the Aristobulus school. Later, in the Latin church, the Vetus latina version preserves texts which are found nowhere else. And the Peshitta version, based again on the already extended Hebrew text of Ben Sira, comprises, as far as we see, some typically Christian echoes. Facing such a plurality of texts, it is by all means reasonable to search with the help of criticism the words and the thought of Ben Sira himself. But then, what will we do with the witnesses that came later? Will they have only scientific interest for scholars or will they have a purely historical and cultural value?

3. Human words or also Word of God

From the hermeneutical point of view, it is impossible to avoid the fact that the book of Ecclesiasticus was acknowledged as inspired and canonical by the Catholic church, which definitively confirmed its statement in 1546 during the council of Trent. On the other hand, Protestant and Anglican Reform considers this book as one of the “Apocrypha”, and the Orthodox church does not take a common and clear position. Reason and origin of these discrepancies go back to the establishment of the scriptural canon, you might say, of the Hebrew Bible by Jewish rabbis: they never put the book of Ben Sira among the sacred books. As a result, during the patristic age,63 mainly in the 4th century and at the beginning of the 5th, most of the Church Fathers in the East, perhaps more conscious of the Jewish position, showed hesitation about the canonical value of the books which are not in the Hebrew Bible but are included in the Septuagint; among these is the book of Ben Sira. The main exception was John Chrysos- tom who, without any reluctance, quoted many times the Greek version of

63 Cf. GILBERT, Jesus Sirach, 878-906. 14 Maurice Gilbert

Ben Sira. The stance taken by Jerome in Bethlehem was the most radical: his explicit refusal of the canonicity of Ben Sira’s book had an impact for centuries. However, usually, the Greek Fathers and also Jerome in Latin (after 404) often quoted the book of Ben Sira as Scripture.64 In the West, there was no discussion on the matter, so that at the end of the 4th century, under Augustine’s influence, the councils of Hippo (393) and of Carthage (397) put the book of Ecclesiasticus into their canonical lists, and in 405 Innocent I did the same in the name of the church of Rome. Now, apart from this question about the canonicity of Ben Sira’s book, there is another more complicated question. Is there an official position in the Catholic church about the variety of the texts assigned to Ben Sira? As it was explained above, we find a variety of languages: texts in Hebrew, in Greek, in Latin, in Syriac, and a variety of texts forms: either short or long, i.e. either without or with additions. For twenty years I uphold the thesis that the Catholic church never adopted a position regarding this matter.65 Neither did it declare in which language a book is said to be canonical, or according to which edition. The only statement in this matter is still that made by the council of Trent, which declared canonical the books listed in the canon, as taken as an whole and with all their parts, as they are traditionally read in the Catholic church and found in the Vulgate. Now, it does not appear that the council wanted to show a preference for the long text of Ecclesiasticus in the Vulgate. Of course, excluding it is impossible, but, as the same council had requested from the pope a correct edition of the Septuagint, the Vaticanus manuscript was chosen for this purpose, and this manuscript gives the short Greek version of Ben Sira. Such freedom in the Catholic church is not new and still exists until today. During Christian antiquity, Greek churches read either the short version done by Ben Sira’s grandson, as also Jerome when he quoted Ecclesi- asticus in Latin, or the extended one, as frequently did Chrysostom and the Sacra Parallela. Latin churches read the long version of the Vetus latina –as did Ambrose and Augustine – and Syriac churches also used their enlarged version. For each of them, the text they used to read was for them sacred and canonical. Such freedom is the practice of the Holy See today. John Paul II authorized the publication of two Bibles: in 1979, the New Vulgate which for Ecclesiasticus resumes, with a few corrections, the version of the Vetus latina, i.e. the long text; in 2000, the Bible called after Blaj, a roumanian version made in 1795 by Samuil Micu who, for the book of Ben Sira, usually translated the short Greek version, with only very few additions.66

64 Cf. GILBERT, Jérôme et l’oeuvre de Ben Sira, 109-120. 65 Cf. GILBERT, L’Ecclésiastique. Quel texte? Quelle autorité?, 233-250. 66 Biblia de la Blaj. 1795. For instance, Sir 1:5 (Ziegler) is translated, but not Sir 1:7.10cd; Methodological and hermeneutical trends in modern exegesis 15

However the Hebrew text of Ben Sira and its second enlarged edition were never used by Christians, at least as far as we know. Never that is, until the discoveries done from 1896. These Hebrew texts were only read in Judaism, at Qumran and in the medieval sect of the Quaraites. With what status? As a sacred book? Doubts may be raised. In fact Greek and Syriac churches never read the Old Testament in Hebrew. The Latin church, until the Renaissance, had indirect access to it through the translation of Jerome, but not for Ben Sira’s book, because the hermit of Bethlehem refused to translate it into Latin. On the other hand, instead of the Greek version, from the time of the discoveries of the Hebrew fragments of Ben Sira’s book, some renowned Catholic biblical scholars did not hesitate to translate them as they are: these are, for instance, A.Vaccari in 1925, L. Alonso Schökel in 1968, P. W. Skehan and A. A. Di Lella in 1987.67 From these facts, I infer some hermeneutical consequences: 1. The research of the original Hebrew text of Ben Sira (Hb I) is comparable with the principle of the hebraica veritas which prompted Jerome to translate the Hebrew Bible into Latin.68 For a Catholic, desire of hearing the authentic word of Ben Sira leads to an acknowledgement of his inspiration and of the canonical value, even if not exclusively of course, of his book in Hebrew. When at the end of the Second Vatican council, Paul VI decided to have the Vulgate corrected in the light of the original texts, he in fact renewed the principle of Jerome; I think this principle is also valid for the book of Ben Sira. Of all those who took this book in hand, he is the first whom we should call an inspired author. 2. The Septuagint has been for twenty centuries the Bible of the Greek churches and some Fathers held that this version was inspired. For the book of Ben Sira, in any case, even after the Hebrew fragments’ discoveries, the short Greek version of the great uncial manuscripts remains the complete text which allows a secure enough access to Ben Sira’s thought. It is therefore not astonishing to find this version in modern Western translations in the principal Bibles. However there are two remarks to keep in mind: - Modern Bibles in different languages often correct the grandson’s version which the great uncial manuscripts give, not so much to restore what he really should have written but to give understanding to the words of his grandfather himself, according to the Hebrew fragments. Compared with the grandfather, the grandson is less interesting.

11:15-16; 16:15-16; 24:18.24. On the contrary Sir 26:19-27 (Ziegler) was added to this edition, but was not in the great majority of the copies of the 1795 edition: cf. critical note p. 2419. 67 VACCARI,Ilibri poetici della Bibbia, 331-408; ALONSO SCHÖKEL,Eclesiástico,141-332; SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira. 68 Among the recent scientific works going in this direction, cf. CORLEY, Ben Sira’s Teaching. 16 Maurice Gilbert

- On the other hand, present-day scholars working on the Septuagint tend to respect this version in itself. One concludes then that both Hb I of Ben Sira and Gr II of his grandson deserve respect, without detriment to either. 3. The second edition, with changes and additions, especially in the matter of eschatology, comes from Judaism and was a great success among Christians. Witnesses of this are some Greek manuscripts and various Greek patristic texts; then the Vetus latina version, usually read in Western churches before the New Vulgate, and also the Peshitta version read over centuries in Christian communities speaking Syriac, give the same witness. For all of those who, in every part of the church, used and still use one of the enlarged version of Ecclesiasticus, it is evident that they have or have had a sacred book in hand. Therefore, some consequences follow: - This second edition, in all its different forms, keeps its theological value, i.e. each of these forms can be said, in my opinion, inspired and canonical. - Therefore, theologically, the texts peculiar to this second edition cannot be relegated to footnotes as having only an informative value. - Lastly, as much as possible, the principle of coherence of each version of this second edition of Ben Sira’s book deserves to be applied, in the same way as scholars today insist they must do for the Septuagint. In fact, what I intend to lay stress on is a necessarily wider concept of canonicity and therefore of inspiration. The authors of the second edition, multi-form though it may be, play a part in the charism of inspiration; I say that for similar reasons I used to affirm the inspiration of the original author, Ben Sira. These authors, through their translators, were received as inspired by the church. These translators, in so far as they deliver to us the second edition, are very often the only ones who give us access to it. Their translations therefore must be respected, not only from the scientific, historical and cultural point of view, but also for theological reasons: they too transmit the word of God.

4. Conclusion

More than a century has passed after the discoveries of the Hebrew fragments of Ben Sira’s book, and modern research on textual criticism, history of the texts and theology has not simplified the manner of presenting the problems, many of which have not yet received adequate answers. Ecclesiasticus remains one of the most difficult books of the Bible in its interpretation and if one day we succeed in recovering the Hebrew parts of the book which are now missing, the situation would only be partly clar- Methodological and hermeneutical trends in modern exegesis 17 ified. The real problem will still be the relation between Hebrew texts and ancient versions. Meanwhile, with the means at our disposal, research carries on and must proceed. If it is true that all the problems raised about this book cannot be resolved in one go, then let us proceed step by step, conscious that only a part of this mysterious book will become better known to us. More precisely, trying to reconstruct the Hebrew text written by Ben Sira is a necessity which appears today as a priority and which is related to Jerome’s principle of the hebraica veritas; other problems identified today will remain, but they must not be underestimated in the search for a correct understanding of Ecclesiasticus. Numerous researchers are therefore welcome. There is room for more. 18 Maurice Gilbert

Bibliography

ALONSO SCHÖKEL, L., Eclesiástico (Los libros sagrados 8,1), Madrid 1968. BAILLET, M. – MILIK, J. T. – DE VAUX, R., Textes des grottes de Qumran (DJD 3), Oxford 1962. BEENTJES, P. C., A Closer Look at the Newly Discovered Sixth Hebrew Manuscript (MS F) of Ben Sira: EstB 51 (1993), 171-186. BEENTJES, P. C., The Book of Ben Sira in Hebrew. A Text Edition of all Extant Hebrew Manuscripts & A Synopsis of all Parallel Hebrew Ben Sira Texts (VT.S 68), Lei- den 1997. BEENTJES, P. C., Errata et corrigenda, in: EGGER-WENZEL, R. (ed.), Ben Sira’s God (BZAW 321), Berlin – New York 2002, 375-377. Biblia de la Blaj. 1795. Editie jubiliara, Roma 2000. CALDUCH-BENAGES, N. – FERRER, J. – LIESEN, J., La sabiduría del escriba. Wisdom of the Scribe (Biblioteca Midrasíca 26), Estella (Navarra) 2003. CALDUCH-BENAGES, N., Traducir-Interpretar: la versión siríaca de Sirácida 1: EstB 55 (1997), 313-340. CORLEY, J., Ben Sira’s Teaching on Frienship (BJSt 316), Providence 2002. DE BRUYNE, D., Étude sur le texte latin de l’Ecclésiastique: RBén 40 (1928), 5-48. DI LELLA, A. A., The Newly Discovered Sixth Manuscript of Ben Sira from the Cairo Geniza: Bib 69 (1988), 226-238. DI LELLA, A. A., Qumran and the Geniza Fragments of Sirach: CBQ 24 (1962), 245- 267. DI LELLA, A. A., The Recently Identified Leaves of Sirach in Hebrew: Bib 45 (1964), 153-167. Facsimiles of the Fragments Hitherto Recovered of the Book of Ecclesiasticus in Hebrew, Oxford – Cambridge 1901. GILBERT, M., Voir ou craindre le Seigneur? Sir 1,10d, in: CAGNI, L. (ed.), Biblica et semitica. Studi in memoria di Francesco Vattioni (Istituto Universitario Orien- tale, Dipartimento di Studi Asiatici, Series Minor 59), Napoli 1999, 247-252. GILBERT, M., Les additions grecques et latines à Siracide 24, in: AUWERS, J.-M. – WÉNIN, A. (eds.), Lectures et relectures de la Bible. Festschrift P.-M. Bogaert (BEThL 144), Leuven 1999, 196-199. GILBERT, M., L’addition de Siracide 1,21. Une énigme, in: COLLADO BERTOMEU, V.(ed.), Palabra, Prodigio, Poesía. In Memoriam P. Luis Alonso Schökel, S.J. (AnBib 151), Roma 2003, 317-325. GILBERT,M., L’action de grâce de Ben Sira (Si 51,1-12), in: KUNTZMANN, R. (ed.), Ce Dieu qui vient. Mélanges offerts à Bernard Renaud (LeDiv 159), Paris 1995, 231- 242. GILBERT, M., Venez à mon école (Si 51,13-30), in: FISCHER, I. – RAPP, U. – SCHILLER,J. (eds.), Aus den Spuren der schriftgelehrten Weisen. Festschrift für Johannes Marböck anlässlich seiner Emeritierung (BZAW 331), Berlin – New York 2003, 283-290. GILBERT, M., Prayer in the Book of Ben Sira. Function and Relevance, in: EGGER-WEN- ZEL, R. – CORLEY, J. (eds.), Prayer from Tobit to Qumran (DCLY 2004), Berlin – New York 2004, 117-135. GILBERT, M., Jesus Sirach: RAC 18 (1996), 878-906. Methodological and hermeneutical trends in modern exegesis 19

GILBERT, M., Jérôme et l’oeuvre de Ben Sira: Muséon 100 (1987),109-120. GILBERT, M., L’Ecclésiastique. Quel texte? Quelle autorité?: RB 94 (1987), 233-250. HADOT, J., Penchant mauvais et volonté libre dans la sagesse de Ben Sira (L’Ecclési- astique), Bruxelles 1970. HART, J. H. A., Ecclesiasticus. The Greek Text of Codex 248. Edited with a Textual Commentary and Prolegomena, Cambridge 1909. HASPECKER, J., Gottesfurcht bei Jesus Sirach (AnBib 30), Rom 1967. HERKENNE, H., De veteris latinae Ecclesiastici capitibus I-XLIII, Leipzig 1899. KEARNS, C., The Expanded Text of Ecclesiasticus. Its Teaching on the Future Life as a Clue to its Origin, Diss. Pontifical Biblical Commission, Rome 1951. LEGRAND,TH., Siracide (syriaque) 1,20c-z. Une addition syriaque et ses résonances esséniennes, in: AMPHOUX,CH.-B. – FREY,A. – SCHATTNER-RIESER, U. (eds.), Études sémitiques et samaritaines offertes à Jean Margain (Histoire du texte biblique 4), Lausanne 1998, 123-134. LEGRAND,TH., Le Siracide: problèmes textuels et théologiques de la recension longue. Unpublished thesis of the Protestant Faculty of Theology of Strasbourg, Stras- bourg 1996. LÉVI, I., L’Ecclésiastique ou la Sagesse de Jésus, fils de Sira. Texte original hébreu édité, traduit et commenté (BEHE.R 10,1-2), 2 vol., Paris 1898-1901. LÉVI, I.,The Hebrew Text of Ecclesiasticus (SSS 3), Leiden 1904, 19512. LIESEN, J., Strategical Self-References in Ben Sira, in: CALDUCH-BENAGES, N. – VER- MEYLEN, J. (eds.), Treasures of Wisdom. Studies in Ben Sira and the Book of Wis- dom. Festschrift M. Gilbert (BEThL 143), Leuven 1999, 63-74. LIESEN, J., Full of Praise. An Exegetical Study of Sir 39,12-35 (JSJ.S 64), Leiden 2000. MARBÖCK, J., Weisheit im Wandel. Untersuchungen zur Weisheitstheologie bei Ben Sira (BBB 37), Bonn 1971; (BZAW 272), Berlin – New York 19992. MARBÖCK, J., Text und Übersetzung – Horizonte einer Auslegung im Prolog zum Griechischen Sirach, in: VONACH, A. – FISCHER, G. (eds.), Horizonte biblischer Texte. Festschrift für Josef M. Oesch (OBO 196), Freiburg/Schweiz – Göttingen 2003, 99-116. MARCUS, J., A Fifth Ms of Ben Sira: JQR 21 (1931), 223-240. MINISSALE, A., La versione greca del Siracide. Confronto con il testo ebraico alla luce dell’attività midrascica e del metodo targumico (AnBib 133), Roma 1995. MINISSALE, A., Siracide (Ecclesiastico) (Nuovissima versione della Bibbia 23), Roma 1980. NELSON, M.D., The Syriac Version of the Wisdom of Ben Sira Compared to the Greek and Hebrew Materials (SBL.DS 107), Atlanta 1988. OWENS, R.J., The Early Syriac Text of Ben Sira in the Demonstrations of Aphrahat: JSSt 34 (1989), 39-75. PETERS, N., Der jüngst Wiederaufgefundene hebräische Text des Buches Ecclesiasti- cus unter sucht, herausgegeben, übersetzt und mit kritischen Noten versehen, Freiburg im Breisgau 1902. PETERS, N., Liber Iesu Filii Sirach sive Ecclesiasticus Hebraice, Friburgi Brisgoviae 1905. PETERS, N., Das Buch Jesus Sirach oder Ecclesiasticus (EHAT 25), Münster 1913. PHILONENKO, M., Sur une interpolation essénisante dans le Siracide (16,15-16), in OrSuec 33-35 (1984-1986), 317-321. PRATO, G. L., Il problema della teodicea in Ben Sira. Composizione dei contrari e richiamo alle origini (AnBib 65), Roma 1975. 20 Maurice Gilbert

PRATO, G. L., Scrittura divina e scrittura umana in Ben Sira: dal fenomeno grafico al testo sacro: RStB 12 (2000), 75-97. PRATO, G. L., La lumière interprète de la sagesse dans la tradition textuelle de Ben Sira, in: GILBERT, M. (ed.), La Sagesse de l’Ancien Testament (BEThL 51), Leu- ven 19902, 317-346. RICKENBACHER, O., Weisheitsperikopen bei Ben Sira (OBO 1), Freiburg/Schweiz – Göttingen 1973. ROSSETTI, M., Le aggiunte ebraiche e greche a Sir 16,1-16: Sal 64 (2002), 607-648. RÜGER, H. P., Text und Textform im hebräischen Sirach (BZAW 112), Berlin 1970. RÜGER, H. P., Le Siracide: un livre à la frontière du canon, in: KAESTLI, J.-D. – WER- MELINGER, O. (eds.), Le canon de l’Ancien Testament. Sa formation et son histoire (MoBi), Genève 1984, 47-69. Sapientia Salomonis. Liber Hiesu filii Sirach (Biblia sacra iuxta latinam Vulgatam versionem ad codicum fidei XII), Città del Vaticano, 1963. SANDERS, J. A., The Psalms Scroll of Qumran Cave 11 (11QPsa) (DJD 4), Oxford 1965. SAUER, G., Jesus Sirach/Ben Sira übersetzt und erklärt (ATD.A 1), Göttingen 2000. SKEHAN, P. W. – DI LELLA, A. A., The Wisdom of Ben Sira. A New Translation with Notes, Introduction, and Commentary (AncB 39), New York 1987. SMEND, R., Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach erklärt, Berlin 1906. STADELMANN, H., Ben Sira als Schriftgelehrter (WUNT 2,6), Tübingen 1980. The Book of Ben Sira. Text, Concordance and an Analysis of the Vocabulary, Pub- lished by The Academy of the Hebrew Language and the Shrine of the Book, Jerusalem 1973. THIELE, W. (ed.), Sirach Ecclesiasticus (Vetus Latina 11/2), Freiburg 1987-2005. VACCARI, A., I libri poetici della Bibbia, Roma 1925. VATTIONI, F., Ecclesiastico. Testo ebraico con apparato critico e versioni greca, latina e siriaca, Napoli 1966. WAHL, O., Der Sirach-Text der Sacra Parallela (FzB 16), Würzburg 1974. WEITZMAN, M. P., The Syriac Version of the Old Testament. An Introduction (Uni- versity of Cambridge Oriental Publications 56), Cambridge 1999. WINTER, M. M., The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac: VT 27 (1977), 237-253 and 494-507. WRIGHT, B. G., No Small Difference. Sirach’s Relationship to its Hebrew Parent Text (SBL.SCS 26), Atlanta 1989. YADIN, Y., The Ben Sira Scroll from Masada, Jerusalem 1965. YADIN, Y., The Hebrew Text of Sirach. A Text-Critical and Historical Study (Studies in Classical Literature 1), London – Paris – Den Haag 1966. ZIEGLER, J., Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach (Septuaginta. Vetus Testamentum Graecum XII/2), Göttingen 1965. Searching for structure and redaction in Ben Sira. An investigation of beginnings and endings

JEREMY CORLEY

Introduction

One of the problems awaiting full resolution in Ben Sira studies is the question of the book’s structure. The problem has been touched on in the major commentaries, including those by Rudolf Smend (1906), Norbert Peters (1913), and Moshe Segal (third edition 1972), as well as in the combined work of Patrick Skehan and Alexander Di Lella (1987).1 In addition, there have been several important shorter studies, particularly in recent years.2 Already in 1980 Wolfgang Roth proposed a plausible redactional history for the book. More than a decade later, in his article of 1993, John Harvey sought to move “Toward a Degree of Order in Ben Sira’s Book”. Then, in a lecture published in 1997, Johannes Marböck considered “Structure and Redaction History of the Book of Ben Sira: Review and Prospects”. In the same year, Hans-Winfried Jüngling published an essay on the structure of the Book of Sirach. In 1999 Georg Sauer published his thoughts on the thematic construction of Ben Sira’s book. Furthermore, the topic has received treatment in the course of several monographs, including Josef Haspecker’s pioneering study (1967) and recent works by Lutz Schrader (1994), Jeremy Corley (2002), and Otto Mulder (2003).3 Afew scholars believe that the book lacks a deliberate structure planned by the author. For instance, Schrader sees little organized structure in Ben Sira’s composition and cites “the complete lack of connection between the individual segments, the absence of linking passages, the tensions existing within the contents, as well as the many repetitions”.4 Accordingly, Schrader believes that a student put the collection together from the author’s notes

1 See SMEND, Die Weisheit, xxx-xli; PETERS, Das Buch Jesus Sirach, xxxix-xlii; SEGAL,Se¯per ben-Sîra¯’hasˇsˇa¯le¯m, introduction, 13-16; SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, xiii- xvi, 21-30, 40-45, 73-74. 2 See ROTH, On the Gnomic-Discursive Wisdom; HARVEY, Toward a Degree of Order; MAR- BÖCK, Structure and Redaction History; JÜNGLING, Der Bauplan des Buches Jesus Sirach; SAUER, Gedanken. 3 See HASPECKER, Gottesfurcht, 119-25; SCHRADER, Leiden und Gerechtigkeit, 62-68; CORLEY, Ben Sira’s Teaching on Friendship, 22-26; MULDER, Simon the High Priest, 25-59. 4SCHRADER, Leiden und Gerechtigkeit, 67 (translation mine). Schrader (p. 68) sees similar cases of contradictions in the poetry of Theognis. However, contradictions do not necessarily negate the possibility of one author or editor: see Prov 26:4-5. 22 Jeremy Corley after his death.5 However, Marböck makes a pertinent observation: “Ques- tions to be put to Schrader are why the extensive arrangement of the book could not be attributed to the Siracid himself, and whether the literary and thematic shape of separate sections, or rather their connections, is not even more intensive than expected (as in 1:11–2:18)”.6 As I discuss some of these points, it will become apparent that my analysis differs from Schrader’s. The existence of many studies indicates that the question of the book’s structure is of interest, yet not fully resolved. Hence perhaps the present treatment may shed further light on the topic. One particular contribution of this article is an examination of the significance of beginnings and endings within Ben Sira’s work, both in the book as a whole and in the individual sections. In the first part of this discussion I will consider possible structural models provided by sapiential works within or outside the Bible (including the Book of Proverbs), with special reference to the openings and closings of these writings. I will then consider Ben Sira passages of special structural significance, particularly the book’s beginning and ending. Thereafter I will outline an eightfold division of the book, according to a widely accepted pattern. Next I will treat stylistic features that indicate delimitation of longer and shorter units within Ben Sira’s book, whereby the openings and closings of sections are marked. Finally,I will conclude with a brief discussion of possible redactional stages.

1. Structural models provided by other sapiential books

Previous investigations into the structure of Ben Sira’s book have generally given little attention to structural models for the work, apart from the Book of Proverbs. Thematic links between Ben Sira and sapiential works from Egypt and Greece have often been suggested, without much consideration of structural features.7 This section will consider some links, both structural and thematic, that exist between Ben Sira and five works: Proverbs, Job, the prototype of Papyrus Insinger, the poetry of Theognis, and the pre- Maccabean sections of 1 Enoch.8

5 Ibid., 303. Schrader acknowledges, however, that the compiler of Ben Sira’s teaching notes acted according to a plan, based on the Book of Proverbs (p. 68). 6MARBÖCK, Structure and Redaction History, 79. 7 See MIDDENDORP, Die Stellung; SANDERS, Ben Sira and Demotic Wisdom . 8 A comparison could also be made with 4Q Instruction (a Qumran text from the second or first century BC), where similar themes are treated: care of parents (Sir 3:1-16; 4Q416 2.iii.15-19); wariness in social dealings (Sir 11:29–12:6; 4Q417 1.i.7-10); an encouragement to seek wisdom (Sir 6:18-37; 14:20–15:10; 4Q417 2.i.6-13); an admonition to respect one’s wife (Sir 26:1-4.13-18; 4Q416 2.iii.19-iv.13); caution in regard to loans and guarantees (Sir 29:1-20; 4Q416 2.ii.4-7; 4Q417 1.ii.21-23). Searching for structure and redaction in Ben Sira 23

1.1 The Book of Proverbs

Some clear similarities between Proverbs and Ben Sira occur in features of structure and form.9 The first significant aspect to observe is a general resemblance in the theological poems opening the two books. While Proverbs begins with a six-line introduction (Prov 1:1-6), Ben Sira opens with an eight- line preamble (Sir 1:1-10). Thereafter, the statement of Prov 1:7 (“The fear of Yhwh is the beginning of knowledge”) is adapted, under the influence of Prov 9:10, to become the topic sentence of Sir 1:11-30: “The beginning of wisdom is to fear the Lord” (Sir 1:14 Gr).10 For this poem on the fear of the Lord in Sir 1:11-30, Ben Sira copies the twenty-two-line pattern of Prov 2:1- 22, which also refers to the fear of God (Prov 2:5). A second clear resemblance may be noted: Sir 24:1-34 has many similarities with Prov 8:1-36.11 Thus, Lady Wisdom’s first-person speech in Sir 24:3-22 is reminiscent of her first-person speech in Prov 8:4-36, with the introductory use of yna (“I”) in Prov 8:12.17 being echoed in the occurrence of evgw, (“I”) in Sir 24:3.16. Wisdom’s presence at the origin of creation is stated in Prov 8:22-31 and Sir 24:3-6. The saying in Prov 8:22 (“Yhwh created me at the beginning of his way”) finds an echo in Sir 24:9 Gr: “Before eternity, from the beginning he created me”. So too, the declaration in Prov 8:27 (“When he established the heavens I was there, when he marked a circle on the surface of the abyss”) is echoed in Sir 24:5 Gr: “The vault of heaven I circled alone, and in the depth of the abysses I walked”. Moreover, a warning against missing the opportunity of gaining wisdom appears in both passages, in each case at the end of wisdom’s speech. While Prov 8:36 declares: “One who misses me injures himself”, Sir 24:22 Gr asserts: “Those working with me will not miss the mark”. These examples show that Sir- ach 24 is heavily modeled on Prov 8. The most distinctive resemblance, however, is the use of an alphabetic acrostic at the end of both books (Prov 31:10-31; Sir 51:13-30), where significant verbal links enhance the structural similarity.12 The saying in Prov

9SEGAL,Se¯per ben-Sîra¯’ hasˇsˇa¯le¯m, introduction, 16; MIDDENDORP, Die Stellung, 78-84; SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 43-45, 576; SCHRADER, Leiden und Gerechtigkeit, 68; SANDERS, Ben Sira and Demotic Wisdom, 3-12. 10 The biblical translations are mine unless otherwise indicated. Note the abbreviations: Hb = Hebrew; Gr = Greek; S = Syriac; L = Latin. The Hebrew manuscripts: Mas = Masada Ms (Mas 1h); HQ = Qumran Cave 11 MS (11Q5 = 11Q Psa); Ms A, Ms B = geniza Mss A and B. 11 Cf. GILBERT, L’Éloge de la Sagesse; SKEHAN, Structures in Poems on Wisdom; SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 331-338. 12 PETERS, Das Buch Jesus Sirach, xl and 437; SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 576. The vocabulary shared between the two acrostic poems includes four words at the start of bicola: ~mz (“consider”: Prov 31:16; Sir 51:18 HQ); dy (“hand”: Prov 31:19; Sir 51:19 24 Jeremy Corley

31:26 (“She opens her mouth with wisdom”) is expanded in Sir 51:25 Ms B: “I opened my mouth and spoke of her: ‘Acquire for yourselves wisdom without price’”. Most important perhaps is the reversed use of two keywords (“give” and “deeds”) in the last line of each poem. While Prov 31:31 concludes: “Give her some of the fruit of her hands, and let her deeds praise her at the gates”, Sir 51:30 Ms B ends: “Do your deeds with righteousness, and he will give you your reward in its time”. Thus, in a learned allusion to Prov 31, Ben Sira concludes his book by presenting Lady Wisdom as the truly “capable wife” whom his young male students should seek.13

1.2 The Book of Job

The Wisdom of Ben Sira exhibits several structural resemblances to the Book of Job, especially at the beginning and the end. Both works open with two chapters about a God-fearing person who has to face trials.14 While Job 1:1 depicts the hero as “fearing God” (cf. Job 1:8-9), Sir 1:11-30 offers a discourse on the fear of the Lord. The immediate arrival of trials upon Job (Job 1:6–2:10) is matched by the way Sir 2:1-18 quickly warns of the testing that can afflict anyone wishing to serve God. The deliverance from trials narrated at the end of the older book (Job 42:7-14) is matched by Ben Sira’s hymn of thanksgiving for deliverance from distress (Sir 51:1-12). Moreover, God’s two lengthy speeches, proclaiming his unfathomable glory revealed in creation (Job 38:2–39:30; 40:7–41:26), correspond broadly with Ben Sira’s long poem on the divine glory in creation (Sir 42:15–43:26), while Job’s humble admis- sion of his lack of understanding of God’s “wonders” (Job 42:2-6) matches Ben Sira’s similar confession of the limits of human powers in the face of

HQ); @k (“palm”: Prov 31:20; Sir 51:20 HQ); hp (“mouth”: Prov 31:26; Sir 51:25 Ms B). On the text of Sir 51:30 see the discussion below. 13 The authenticity of Sir 51:13-30 has been questioned on paleographical, textual, and thematic grounds (see, for instance, MIDDENDORP, Die Stellung, 118-25; SCHRADER, Lei- den und Gerechtigkeit, 75-82). Paleographical doubt on its authenticity has been cast because it occurs in the Cave 11 Qumran Psalms Scroll, though this may have been a liturgical collection of biblical psalms together with hymns of diverse origin. The textual reason is that later texts (geniza Hebrew, Greek, Syriac) alter the wording from the earliest text form in the Qumran Psalms Scroll; but there are many cases of textual corruption in the book, and the use of romantic language could account for many of the sapientializing changes. The thematic ground concerns the perceived use of the language of romantic love in the poem; yet such language in connection with wisdom appears elsewhere (Sir 15:2-3). 14 I owe this insight to Renate Egger-Wenzel. On the connections between Sirach and Job see MIDDENDORP, Die Stellung, 75-78; SANDERS, Ben Sira and Demotic Wisdom, 47-48 and 79-80. Note that both Sirach and Job are Hebrew wisdom books, and Sir 49:9 Ms B mentions Job briefly. Searching for structure and redaction in Ben Sira 25 the Lord’s “wonders” (Sir 43:27-33). One other significant resemblance lies in the positioning of an important poem on wisdom at the heart of both books. Job 28 is a sapiential poem that (like Sir 19:20) equates wisdom with the fear of the Lord (Job 28:28), whereas Sirach 24 is a sapiential poem that identifies wisdom with the Law of Moses (Sir 24:23). Although these similarities are not absolutely decisive, they do suggest that the Book of Job may have had some influence on the general structure of Ben Sira’s work.

1.3 The Prototype of Papyrus Insinger

Although the actual copy of the demotic Egyptian wisdom writing known as Papyrus Insinger seems to date from the first century AD, its prototype from the Ptolemaic era may have served as one of the structural models for Ben Sira’s book. Jack Sanders observes four general similarities: the grouping of sayings on a particular topic into a thematic unit; the placing of warn- ings and exhortations into a series; the collecting of observations that begin with “there is” (or “there are”); and the use of refrains to indicate the end of a passage.15 Unfortunately the demotic text begins halfway through the sixth instruction (out of twenty-five), so we do not know how it began. Nev- ertheless, attention has been drawn to a similarity in order for two important passages. Early in Papyrus Insinger there is a section on respect and care for parents, particularly in their old age (1.19–2.20), a passage that strongly resembles part of Sir 3:1-16. Moreover, toward the end of Papyrus Insinger there is a lengthy celebration of the wonders of nature (30.18–33.6), which has a general structural resemblance to Ben Sira’s poem on creation in 42:15–43:33. In fact, building on the resemblances observed by Sanders for the whole of Ben Sira, we could produce a list of eight comparable passages in the same order (noting clusters of the most similar sayings):

Sir 3:4-12 // P. Insinger 1.19–2.7 (care of parents); Sir 9:2-9 // P. Insinger 8.2-14 (controlling desire for women); Sir 13:9-13 // P. Insinger 10.12–11.3 (caution before a noble); Sir 33:20-30 // P. Insinger 14.3-11 (disciplining slaves); Sir 35:2-13 // P. Insinger 16.3-13 (generosity to the poor); Sir 38:18-21 // P. Insinger 19.19–20.7 (accepting bereavement); Sir 42:15-18 // P. Insinger 30.18–31.1 (praising God for his works); Sir 43:6-33 // P. Insinger 32.2-18 (marvels of God’s creation).

15 The connections noted here develop the observations of SANDERS, Ben Sira and Demotic Wisdom, 69-103, esp. 88-91. 26 Jeremy Corley

Although this list is impressive, it ignores other similar passages that do not fit the sequence (e.g., Sir 14:3-19 // P. Insinger 17.4-10 against miserli- ness; Sir 30:1-13 // P. Insinger 8.21–9.20 on disciplining sons; Sir 27:22–28:7 // P. Insinger 33.7-13 on forgiveness). Thus, at best the resemblance in order is incomplete. A curious similarity exists between Sir 51:30 and the end of P. Insinger (35.11). The penultimate didactic saying in the Egyptian text concerns a divinely given reward for the sage: “The heart of the wise man, its reward is the eye of the god”.16 This saying has a similar theme to Sir 51:30 (where the versions offer a different wording). According to the geniza Hebrew text, Sir 51:30b promises a repayment given by God to the persevering seeker of wisdom: “He will give you your reward in its time”.

1.4 The poetry of Theognis

The elegiac poetry of Theognis may have served as a model for some passages in Ben Sira’s book.17 The theological poems opening Ben Sira’s book (Sir 1:1–2:18) have a role faintly similar to the prayers (addressing Apollo, Artemis, and the Muses) opening the sayings of Theognis (lines 1-18). How- ever, the most significant parallels with Theognis concern a few themes: caution in friendship (Sir 6:5-17; Theognis 61-82 and 115-28); discrimination in social relations (Sir 12:1-18; Theognis 93-114); the divine determination of fortune (Sir 11:10-19; Theognis 165-72); and proper behavior at banquets and sensible wine drinking (Sir 31:12–32:13; Theognis 467-510).

1.5 The pre-maccabean sections of the Book of Enoch

Unlike the sapiential books of Proverbs, Job, Papyrus Insinger, and Theog- nis, 1 Enoch is usually placed in the category of apocalyptic literature. Nev- ertheless, 1 Enoch 92:1 (here 4Q212 ii.23) calls Enoch avwna ~yk[x] (“[wis]est of men”), and a related text from the Book of Giants (4Q203 8.4) dubs the patriarch avrp rps (“distinguished scribe”).18 Hence, because of the importance of the theme of wisdom in the Enochic writings (cf. 1 Enoch 32:3, 6; 82:2-3; 99:10), and because Ben Sira may be reacting against some of the pre- Maccabean Enochic texts, a brief discussion is included here.19

16 Translation from LICHTHEIM, Ancient Egyptian Literature, 213. 17 MIDDENDORP, Die Stellung, 13-24; SANDERS, Ben Sira and Demotic Wisdom, 29-38. 18 GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ –TIGCHELAAR, The Dead Sea Scrolls, I, 442-443 and I, 410-411. 19 Many connections between both works are explored by ARGALL, 1 Enoch and Sirach. Searching for structure and redaction in Ben Sira 27

While the Enochic corpus was surely incomplete in Ben Sira’s day, pre- Maccabean sections probably include most of the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36) and the Astronomical Book (1 Enoch 72-82), plus parts of the Epistle of Enoch (1 Enoch 92-105). While Randal Argall has made thematic comparisons between Ben Sira and 1 Enoch, it is also possible to detect some general structural similarities.20 In the first place, the opening poem of Ben Sira’s book has a faint echo of the start of the Book of the Watchers. While Ben Sira begins his work with the statement: “All wisdom is from the Lord” (Sir 1:1), 1 Enoch 1:2 reports Enoch’s declaration: “‘[The vision of the Holy One of heaven was revealed to me, and I heard] it all from the words of [the Watchers] and the Holy Ones [and because I heard it from them, I knew and understood everything]”.21 Then Enoch’s call to observe heaven and earth and the rain (1 Enoch 2:1-3) has a general similarity to Ben Sira’s questioning whether any human being can fathom heaven or earth or the number of raindrops (Sir 1:2-3).22 Similarities to Enochic literature also occur in the closing sections of Ben Sira’s book. Thus, the poem glorifying God for astronomical and meteoro- logical wonders (Sir 42:15–43:33) deals with similar phenomena to the Astro- nomical Book (1 Enoch 72-82), although in a different style. Moreover, the Enochic Apocalypse of Weeks employs a pattern of ten weeks for Israel’s history from Enoch to the final age (1 Enoch 93:1-10; 91:11-17), while Sir 44:17–45:26 has a pattern of seven covenants from Noah to Phinehas.23 Final- ly, the close of the Epistle of Enoch is slightly similar to the last verse of Ben Sira’s book, where the geniza manuscript ends the final sapiential poem with the words: “Do your deeds with righteousness, and he will give you your reward in its time” (Sir 51:30 Ms B). The Ethiopic text of 1 Enoch 105:1 also speaks of a reward associated with wisdom: “Reveal it [= truth] to them with your wisdom, for you are their guides; and (you are) [or: there will be] a reward upon the whole earth”.24

20 For instance, ARGALL observes a resemblance between Sir 42:15-17 and 1 Enoch 14:20-23 (1 Enoch and Sirach, 161-62), as well as between Sir 24:13-22 and 1 Enoch 32:3-4 (ibid., 93). 21 GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ –TIGCHELAAR, The Dead Sea Scrolls, 1.399. The reading of 4Q201 i.2-3 has been completed with reference to the Ethiopic text. A Qumran manuscript of 1 Enoch 93:2 (4Q 212 iii.22) puts a comparable declaration on the lips of Enoch: “I have come to know everything” (ibid., 1.443); cf. 1 Enoch 19:3; 81:2. 22 Moreover, Sir 1:1-10 resembles 1 Enoch 93:11-14 in affirming human ignorance of the mysteries of the world; cf. CORLEY, Wisdom versus Apocalyptic, 275-280. 23 There may be a polemical note here in Ben Sira’s writing. If we discount the mention of Enoch in Sir 44:16 as a later gloss, the beginning of the Praise of the Ancestors with Noah may be Ben Sira’s response to the Book of the Watchers and the Apocalypse of Weeks, with Ben Sira stressing the Noachic covenant rather than Enochic revelation. 24 Translation by ISAAC, 1 (Ethiopic Apocalypse of) Enoch, 86 (compare the fragmentary text in 4Q204 frag. 5, col. i). 28 Jeremy Corley

As expected, our consideration of structural models for Ben Sira’s work has found the closest parallels in the Book of Proverbs. However, we have noted that Ben Sira’s book also exhibits some structural similarities with other writings, such as the Book of Job, the prototype of Papyrus Insinger, the poetry of Theognis, and even some pre-Maccabean parts of 1 Enoch.

2. Passages of special structural significance

2.1 The opening Wisdom poem (Sir 1:1-10)

The sapiential poem that begins Ben Sira’s work (Sir 1:1-10) sets the tone for the whole book. Special structural significance belongs to the opening phrase (“all wisdom”), which is played upon later in the book, and which may echo a phrase from the Book of Kings and even the Epic of Gilgamesh. Admittedly, the exact phrase “all wisdom” (Sir 1:1; cf. 19:20) occurs only once in the MT in Dan 1:4 (Daniel and his three companions were skilled “in all wisdom”), but that text was probably written a few years after Ben Sira’s death. More significantly, 1 Kgs 10:4 speaks of the Queen of Sheba observing “all the wisdom of Solomon”, granted to him by God in response to his prayer at Gibeon (1 Kgs 3:9). Since the Book of Proverbs claims to contain Solomon’s wisdom (Prov 1:1), Ben Sira may be presenting his work as a new Book of Proverbs. In addition, the later author may be wishing to suggest that his book contains “all the wisdom of Ben Sira”, given to him by God in answer to his prayer (Sir 39:5-6; 51:13-14).25 The opening phrase (“all wisdom”) seems to have a structural function in the book. The second main section (4:11–6:17) begins with a bicolon that mentions both “wisdom” (4:11a Ms A has the rare form twmkx) and “all” (4:11b Ms Ahas lk).26 Moreover, while in most Greek Mss the opening poem of section VI ends with the phrase “all those seeking instruction (paidei,an)” (33:18 G), a few Mss read “all those seeking wisdom (sofi,an)”, which would be a play on the phrase “all wisdom” in 1:1. Furthermore, when seen as a whole, 1:1–43:33 exhibits an inclusio, whereby Sir 1:1 begins with the phrase “all wisdom” (pa/sa sofi,a), while 43:33 divides the phrase to give “everything” … “wisdom” (pa,nta ... sofi,an). In addition, Sir 19:20–20:31 (a sub-

25 Possibly Ben Sira may have wished his work to be known as the book of “All Wisdom,” just as the first word of each of the five books of the Torah serves as the Hebrew title. Similarly, the ancient title of the Epic of Gilgamesh was taken from its opening words; cf. PRITCHARD, Ancient Near Eastern Texts, 72. 26 For the eight main sections of Ben Sira’s work see the discussion of “Major Divisions of Ben Sira’s Book” below. Searching for structure and redaction in Ben Sira 29 unit in section IV) begins with the declaration that employs the significant phrase twice: “The fear of the Lord is all wisdom, and the practice of the law is in all wisdom” (19:20 Gr). Finally, the author’s signature in 50:27-29 Gr concludes with mention of one who “will become wise” (50:28b: sofisqh,setai) in connection with “everything” (50:29a: pa,nta). It is curious that the opening of Ben Sira, which develops biblical teaching on wisdom’s origin from Israel’s one God (Prov 2:6), exhibits some resemblances to the start of the ancient Mesopotamian Epic of Gilgamesh. Indeed, the opening phrase of the book (“all wisdom,” Sir 1:1) echoes the phrase “complete wisdom” (I.i.4) near the beginning of the Gilgamesh Epic.27 The epic opens by presenting Gilgamesh (I.i.1-6):

[Of him who] found out all things, I [shall te]ll the land, [Of him who] experienced everything, [I shall tea]ch the whole. He searched (?) lands (?) everywhere. He who experienced the whole gained complete wisdom. He found out what was secret and uncovered what was hidden, He brought back a tale of times before the Flood.28

Ben Sira opens his book with a distant echo of the start of the Babylonian text. Whereas the epic opens by speaking of Gilgamesh as one who had “found out all things” and “experienced everything” and “gained complete wisdom”, Ben Sira speaks of “one [who] is wise”, the one who “created [wisdom] and saw and enumerated her” (Sir 1:8-9). Moreover, whereas the epic says that Gilgamesh “found out what was secret and uncovered what was hidden” from before the Flood, Ben Sira inquires to whom the root of wisdom has been revealed (Sir 1:6).29

2.2 Self-References (Sir 24:30-34; 33:16-18; 39:12)

The sage’s three major references to his own activity occur at the start of sections V and VI and VII of the work, as indicated below in the discussion of “Major Divisions of Ben Sira’s Book”. These passages not only provide

27 This Mesopotamian text may not be so remote from Judaism around 200 BC, since links have been observed between the epic and the Enochic literature; cf. VANDERKAM, Enoch, 137 and 175. In fact, the name Gilgamesh occurs in the Qumran Book of Giants (4Q 530 ii.2; 4Q 531 17.12), while Qoh 9:7-9 (possibly written in Jerusalem in the century before Ben Sira) quotes Gilgamesh (X.iii.6-14 [Meissner Tablet]). 28 Epic quoted from DALLEY, Myths from Mesopotamia, 50. On the opening lines of the Epic of Gilgamesh see TOURNAY, “Début de l’épopée de Gilgamesh”, 5-7. 29 Nevertheless, later in his book Ben Sira will acknowledge that he traveled in order to discover wisdom (Sir 34:10-12; cf. 39:4), just as Gilgamesh gained wisdom through his experiences of searching lands (I.i.2-4). 30 Jeremy Corley markers of the book’s structure, but also offer glimpses into the author’s intentions.30 The most plausible theory to explain these three self-references has been proposed by Wolfgang Roth: “After Sirach had composed his first book of wisdom (1:1–23:27 and 51:1-30), he found himself compelled three times to add a section to his original book (24:1–32:13; 32:14–38:23; 38:24–50:29)”.31 Each supplementary section is prefaced by a sapiential poem: “24:1-29 precedes the first additional section as prologue, 32:14–33:15 is the prologue to the second addition, and 38:24–39:11 introduces the third”. Roth also declares that in each of these additional sections, “an autobiographical note intervenes between prologue and body of the section”– a reference to 24:30-34, 33:16-18, and 39:12. Here I will consider these three passages. The longest authorial self-reference occurs in 24:30-34, at the end of the wisdom poem introducing Part V of the book. Since the Hebrew text is unfortunately lost, the following translation will be based mainly on the Greek.

I also issued forth like a channel from a river, and like a water trench into a garden. I said: I will irrigate my plantation, and I will saturate my garden plot. And behold, the channel became for me a river, and my river became a lake. Again I will make instruction shine out like the dawn, and I will show it forth even to a distance. Again I will pour out teaching like prophecy, and I will bequeath it to everlasting generations. See that not only for myself have I toiled, but for all those seeking it.

Although in this autobiographical passage Ben Sira attributes to himself a prophetic role (24:33), elsewhere he indicates that he views himself not as one of the earlier “canonical” prophets, but rather as a gleaner who gathers the fruits left behind by previous harvesters (33:16-17). It is presumably intentional that the sage’s words in 24:30-34 echo the prophets Isaiah and Ezekiel. Speaking in close proximity to the temple (24:10-11), Ben Sira sees his role as bringing forth water in a stream that grows from a rivulet into a large river (24:30-31). In this way, Ben Sira himself brings about what was announced for the new temple by the prophet Ezekiel

30 JÜNGLING, Der Bauplan, 97; cf. LIESEN, Strategical Self-References, 63-74; PRATO, Il problema della teodicea, 84-86. 31 ROTH, On the Gnomic-Discursive Wisdom, 60. The next two quotations are also from p. 60. Searching for structure and redaction in Ben Sira 31

(Ezek 47:1-12). Then Ben Sira promises that his teaching will go forth like light from his base adjacent to the temple (24:32; cf. 24:27). This declaration echoes God’s statement that the divine word would go forth from Jerusalem (Isa 2:3), with the invitation to Israel to walk in the light of the Lord (Isa 2:5). The second major autobiographical section (33:16-18 Ms E) occurs at the end of the sapiential poem (32:14–33:18) introducing Part VI of the book.32

I also have been vigilant as the last person, and like a gleaner after the grape harvesters. By God’s blessing I also have advanced, and like a grape harvester I have filled my wine vat. See that not only for myself have I toiled, but for all those seeking instruction.

Here Ben Sira asserts that in his ministry of the word he has been vigilant (Sir 33:16), just as God declares at the call of Jeremiah that he is watchful over his word to perform it (Jer 1:11-12). Immediately afterward, Ben Sira employs the imagery of the vintage harvester (Sir 33:17), which echoes Isa- iah’s parable of the vineyard planted on the fertile hill of Zion (Isa 5:1-7). In fact, the sage’s toil has not been simply for his own benefit, but to help his students, and indeed for everyone seeking wisdom (51:23-28). As a concluding refrain, 33:18 G matches the Greek text of 24:34. Evidently Ben Sira at the start of Part VI has deliberately echoed his words at the start of Part V, to show that he is adding another section to his book. At the opening of Part VII of the book, the author’s third major self-reference occurs in 39:12 G, at the end of the poem praising the scribe (38:24–39:12), and just before the passage on theodicy (39:13-35).

Having reflected, I will again make a declaration, and I am full like the full moon.

Since he is filled with illuminating things to say (like Elihu in Job 32:18), Ben Sira compares himself to the full moon (cf. Sir 50:6). Elsewhere he expresses his fullness with images of water (24:30-33) and harvest (33:17). There is also an echo of the scribal reader of earlier prophecies (39:1), who “will be filled with the spirit of understanding” (Sir 39:6 Gr), rather like the Spirit-filled prophets Elijah, Elisha, and Micah (Sir 48:12 Gr; Mic 3:8).

32 For the lacunae in 33:16-18 Ms E I have followed SEGAL,Se¯per ben-Sîra¯’ hasˇsˇa¯le¯m, 207. 32 Jeremy Corley

2.3 Notice of Authorship (Sir 50:27-29)

The view taken here is that the notice of authorship in 50:27-29 is the work of Ben Sira himself.33 According to some scholars, the mention of the author’s own name marks a new stage in the history of Israel’s wisdom tradition. Martin Hengel asserts that among Jewish teachers, “Ben Sira was the first to venture to emerge clearly as a personality (50:27). Here is the beginning of a new development, for the stressing of the personality of the individual teacher derived from Greek custom”.34 Influence from Greek culture is certainly possible; for instance, Theognis declares his authorship of his poetry near the start of the collection of his sayings (cf. Theognis 19-23). How- ever, Ben Sira may also have been adapting a usage found in the Book of Jeremiah, where the prophetic words end with the statement: “Thus far are the words of Jeremiah” (Jer 51:64; cf. Job 31:40). Indeed, the author’s view of himself as a prophet whose teaching flows out like water (according to the reconstructed text of 50:27cd below) echoes his declaration at the end of the great sapiential poem opening Part V of the book (Sir 24:30-33).35 A reconstructed Hebrew text of 50:27-29 (adapted from Segal’s edition) follows:36 arys !b rz[la !b [wXyl ~ynpwa ylXmw lkX rswm twnwbtb [ybh rXaw wbl rwtpb abyn rXa ~kxy wbl l[ !twnw hghy hlab Xya yrXa ~yyx yyy tary yk qzxy lkl ~hXw[ yk Instruction in prudence and fitly spoken proverbs by Jeshua son of Eleazar son of Sira, which he prophesied in the interpretation of his heart, and which he poured forth with insights. Happy the man who meditates on these things, and one who places them in his heart will become wise.

33 So SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 559; SEGAL, Se¯per ben-Sîra¯’ hasˇsˇa¯le¯m, 350; HASPECKER, Gottesfurcht, 87-89 (cf. 72-75); HENGEL, Judaism and Hellenism, I, 79 and I, 131. For the view that 50:27-29 is inauthentic, see SCHRADER, Leiden und Gerechtigkeit, 66. There are also diverse scribal notes identifying the author in the various manuscripts after 51:30, but these probably do not derive from Ben Sira himself. 34 HENGEL, Judaism and Hellenism, I, 79. 35 Scribal notices often occur at the end of Egyptian sapiential writings, but the reference is generally to the copyist rather than to the author. 36 SEGAL,Se¯per ben-Sîra¯’ hasˇsˇa¯le¯m, 350 (including his retroversion of 50:29a from the Greek). I have made three changes from Segal’s text. First, in 50:27a I read ylXmw (“and proverbs”), where Ms B has the strange form lXwmw (“and likeness” or “and dominion”); cf. SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 556-557. Second, in 50:27b I correct Ms B from Gr for the author’s name; cf. SKEHAN –DI LELLA, ibid. Third, in 50:27c I read abyn rXa (“which he prophesied”), where Ms B has the form [byn rXa (“which was poured forth”); cf. SMEND, Die Weisheit, 493-494. Searching for structure and redaction in Ben Sira 33

For one who does them will be strong for everything, for the fear of Yhwh is life.

This notice (expanding Prov 15:33a) is reminiscent of phrases occurring earlier in Ben Sira’s book. Most significantly, the terms “he will become wise” (~kxy, 50:28b Ms B) and “for everything” (equivalent to lkl, 50:29a) create an inclusio with “all wisdom” (equivalent to hmkx lk) in the opening of the book (1:1), while the concluding equation of the fear of the Lord with life (50:29b) is reminiscent of the opening poem on the fear of God (Sir 1:12; cf. Prov 14:27; 19:23).37 Moreover, Sir 50:27-29 recalls 6:37 (the end of the opening poem of Part III of the sage’s writing), with shared vocabulary including the Hebrew root !yb (“understand”, 6:37ac; 50:27d), the notion of hary (“fear”, 6:37a; 50:29b) directed toward God, the verb hgh (“meditate”, 6:37b; 50:28a), the noun bl (“heart”, 6:37c; 50:27c.28b), and the verb ~kx (“be wise”, 6:37d; 50:28b). In addition, the vocabulary of Sir 50:28 echoes the start of Part IV (14:20-21), with a particular similarity existing between 14:20a and 50:28a:

14:20a Ms A: hghy hmkxb Xwna yrXa happy the mortal who meditates on wisdom;

50:28a Ms B: hghy hlab Xya yrXa happy the man who meditates on these things.

Thus, the notice of authorship serves to emphasize important themes in the sage’s work, especially wisdom and the fear of God.

2.4 Close of the Final Acrostic Poem (Sir 51:30)

According to the geniza manuscript, the acrostic poem that concludes Ben Sira’s book ends with the words: “Do your deeds with righteousness, and he will give you your reward in its time” (Sir 51:30 Ms B). We have already seen that these words exhibit a resemblance to the conclusion to the Book of Proverbs (Prov 31:31), and also to the end of P. Insinger (35.11). In fact, the geniza manuscript differs slightly from the ancient versions. On the basis of Gr and S, we may reconstruct the original Hebrew thus:

wt[b ~krkX !tyw t[ alb ~kyX[m wl[p Perform your deeds before the due time, and he will give your reward in its [or: his] due time.38

37 Furthermore, within the Syriac version Sir 50:29 echoes 25:12 and 40:26. 38 For the expression “before the due time” (Sir 51:30 Gr and S) see Qoh 7:17; Sir 30:24. For the phrase “in its due time” compare Deut 11:14; Ps 1:3; Prov 15:23; Qoh 3:11; Sir 4:23; 31:28; 39:16.33.34. 34 Jeremy Corley

If this reconstructed text is correct, its first two words form an inclusio with the ending of Part III (14:19) and the opening of the great hymn on creation (42:15cd). Moreover, the mention of “deeds” and “reward” echoes Sir 16:14, the last line of 15:11–16:14.39 In addition, the opening and conclusion of Ben Sira’s final acrostic have a curious resemblance to lines 73-76 of the Akkadian poem (also an acrostic) known as the Babylonian Theodicy, though Ben Sira’s affirmations oppose the scepticism of the Mesopotamian sufferer:40

When I was young I sought the will of (my) god, I sought my goddess with humility and prayer, and yet I had to do forced labour without reward, instead of riches my god decreed poverty for me.

We may compare the start of Ben Sira’s final poem: “I was a youth before I went wandering, and I sought her [= wisdom]” (51:13 Mas). In 51:28b Ms B (where the Greek differs slightly) Ben Sira promises riches to the seeker for wisdom: “Silver and gold you will acquire through me”. Lastly, the Hebrew sage affirms that there will indeed be a reward in due time for one who performs his allotted tasks (51:30).41

3. Major divisions of Ben Sira’s Book

Leaving aside the appendices (50:25–51:30) and the grandson’s prologue to the Greek version, the bulk of Ben Sira’s book (1:1–50:24) may be divided up into eight main sections.42 Each of the eight parts starts with a sapiential poem, while the appendices end with a wisdom poem:43

39 According to PRATO (Il problema della teodicea, 231), Sir 15:11–16:14 is the first half of a long passage on human sin and divine mercy in 15:11–18:14. 40 The Babylonian text is quoted from BEYERLIN, Near Eastern Religious Texts, 135. 41 One other point deserves consideration: the concluding of Ben Sira’s book with two poetic hymns (excluding Sir 51:12i-xvi, attested only in one geniza Hebrew manuscript). The books associated with Moses and with David both include near their end two different poetic hymns: near the end of Deuteronomy are the Song of Moses and his last blessings of the tribes (Deut 32:1-43; 33:2-29), while near the end of Second Samuel are David’s thanksgiving psalm and his last words (2 Sam 22:2-51; 23:1-7). 42 One view is that the structure of Ben Sira (two parts of four sections each) serves to match the four major parts of the Book of Proverbs (chaps. 1-9; 10-24; 25-29; 30-31); see SEGAL, Se¯per ben-Sîra¯’ hasˇsˇa¯le¯m, introduction, 16. Alternatively, leaving aside the concluding acrostic poem in 31:10-31, the Book of Proverbs could be divided into eight sections, all except two introduced by a superscription (1:1-9:18; 10:1–22:16; 22:17–24:22; 24:23-34; 25:1–29:27; 30:1-14; 30:15-33; 31:1-9); cf. SCHRADER, Leiden und Gerechtigkeit, 65. 43 I have adapted the following structure from SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, Searching for structure and redaction in Ben Sira 35

Part I, 1:1–4:10: “Understanding Wisdom“, begun by wisdom poem (1:1-10); Part II, 4:11–6:17: “Applying Wisdom Personally“, begun by wisdom poem (4:11-19); Part III, 6:18–14:19: “Applying Wisdom Socially“, begun by wisdom poem (6:18-37); Part IV, 14:20–23:27: “Applying Wisdom to Speech and Thought“, begun by wisdom poem (14:20–15:10); Part V, 24:1–32:13: “Applying Wisdom to Household Life“, begun by wisdom poem (24:1-34); Part VI, 32:14–38:23: “Using Wisdom to Make Good Decisions“, begun by wisdom poem (32:14–33:18); Part VII, 38:24–43:33: “Demonstrating the Results of Wisdom“, begun by wisdom poem (38:24–39:12); Part VIII, 44:1–50:24: “Wisdom in History“, begun by wisdom poem (44:1-15); Appendices, 50:25–51:30, ended by wisdom poem (51:13-30).

The same refrain delimits the end of the wisdom poems opening Parts V and VI (24:34 Gr = 33:18 Gr). Similarly, another refrain occurs near the conclusion of the sapiential poem opening Part VII and at the end of the introduction to Part VIII (39:10 Gr = 44:15 Gr). Ben Sira links each of the parts together more or less immediately by means of a catchword or mot crochet:44

Part I (4:10c Ms A): !b (“son”); Part II (4:11a Ms A): hynb (“her sons”). Part II (6:16b Ms A): ~gyXy (“he will attain them”); Part III (6:18b Ms C): gyXt (“you will attain”).

xiii-xvi. See also HARVEY, Toward a Degree of Order, 61, whence I have taken the titles of Parts I-IV, VI-VII (on p. 53 Harvey calls 32:14–33:18 a wisdom poem). The section divisions correspond to the analysis of SEGAL (Se¯per ben-Sîra¯’ hasˇsˇa¯le¯m, introduction, 16), who ends the seventh section with 43:33 and starts the eighth section with 44:1 (on this point I alter my earlier view; cf. CORLEY, Ben Sira’s Teaching on Friendship, 23). For different outlines of Ben Sira’s book see SMEND, Die Weisheit, xxx-xxxiv; PETERS, Das Buch Jesus Sirach, xli-xlii; MARBÖCK, Structure and Redaction History”, 66-68; JÜNGLING, Der Bau- plan, 104-5; SAUER, Gedanken, 61; MULDER, Simon the High Priest, 37. 44 Unless indicated in this footnote, all the catchwords listed occur in a Hebrew manuscript (except for the reference to the Greek in chaps. 23-24). In 4:10d and 4:12a the Greek text has a further mot crochet with the verb À avgapa,w (“love”). In 6:16b, where the text of Ms A reads ~gyXy (“he will attain them”), a singular object (“him,” as in Gr) fits the context better, so the original reading may have been wngyXy (“he will attain him”). A further mot crochet links Parts IV and V in the Syriac, which has the term “earth” in 23:27a and in 24:3b. The readings of 32:12 and 32:16 follow MINISSALE, La versione greca, 68 and 79. The verb in 38:20a follows the margin of Ms B. In 43:33b, where the Hebrew text has a lacuna, the reading ~ydysxlw (“and to the devout”) is Segal’s retroversion from the Greek (Se¯per ben-Sîra¯’ hasˇsˇa¯le¯m, 290). In addition, the untranslatable accusative particle ta in 43:33a Ms B and in 44:1b Mas serves as a further link between Parts VII and VIII. 36 Jeremy Corley

Part III (14:19ab Ms A): wyrxa … lk (“all … after him”); Part IV (14:22ab Ms A): lkw … hyrxa (“after her … and all”). Part IV (23:24a G): evkklhsi,an (“assembly”); Part V (24:2a G): evkklhsi,a (“assembly”). Part V (32:12b Ms B): la ... taryb (“in the fear of God”); Part VI (32:16a Ms B): yyy ary (“one who fears Yhwh”). Part VI (38:20a Ms B / Bm): bl … tyXt la (“do not set [your] heart”); Part VII (38:26b Ms B): tyXy bl (“he sets [his] heart”). Part VII (43:33b Segal): ~ydysxlw (“and to the loyal”); Part VIII (44:1a Ms B): dsx yXna (“men of loyalty”).45

Moreover, many of the parts of the book are united by inclusiones:

Part II, 4:11–6:17: 4:12 Ms A: ~yyx wbha hybha (“her friends love life”); 6:16 Ms A: hnwma bhwa ~yyx rwrc (“a faithful friend is a bundle of the living”). Part III, 6:18–14:19: [stylistic inclusio with non-alphabetic acrostics] 6:18-37 = 22-line poem; 13:24–14:19 = 23-line poem. Part IV, 14:20–23:27: 14:20 S: atwntlwksbw (“and on understanding”); 23:27 S: !wlktsnw (“and they will understand”). Part VI, 32:14–38:23: 32:16 Mss BEF: aycwy (“he will bring forth”); 38:23 Ms B: tac (“going forth”). Part VII, 38:24–43:33: 38:24 Gr: sofi,a (“wisdom”); 43:33 Gr: sofi,an (“wisdom”). Part VIII, 44:1–50:24: 44:1 Ms B and Mas: dsx (“loyalty”); 44:1 Ms B: twmym (“from the days”). 50:24 Ms B: wdsx (“his loyalty”); 50:24 Ms B: ymyk (“like the days”).

4. Delimitation of Ben Sira’s poetic units

Although Ben Sira sometimes uses other genres (e.g., hymn, prayer, encomium), most of his book consists of didactic poems.46 In much of the work, therefore, no difference of genre indicates the start and finish of the individual units. Hence, in order to clarify the architecture of his book, Ben Sira employs several stylistic markers to delimit longer or shorter units. Three

45 Elsewhere Ben Sira often makes use of a catchword or mot crochet to link adjacent passages; see 12:18/13:1 (hand); 13:23/24 (rich/poor); 15:9/11 (from God); 19:17/20 (law); 49:16/50:1 (glory). 46 Hymnic compositions include Sir 18:1-7; 39:13-35; 42:15–43:33; 51:1-12; prayers include 22:27–23:6; 36:1-22. The Praise of the Ancestors in 44:1–50:24 uses the form of an encomium, according to LEE, Studies, 206-239. Searching for structure and redaction in Ben Sira 37 of these markers occur frequently: inclusio, non-alphabetic acrostic, and opening/closing rhyme.47 The presence of inclusio can be a strong indicator in delimiting a passage. Examples of Ben Sira’s pericopes delimited by means of inclusioinclude the following eight passages: 7:18-36 (on social duties); 13:1-23 (on caution in dealing with the rich); 14:20–15:10 (on wisdom); 37:27–38:23 (on health, sickness, and death); 42:15–43:33 (on God’s glory in creation); 44:1-15 (preamble to the Praise of the Ancestors); 49:1-16 (on Israel’s early and late heroes); 50:1-24 (on Simeon the high priest).48

7:18 Ms A: bhwa (“friend”); 7:35 Ms A: bhat (“you will be loved”). 13:1 Ms A: [gwn (“one who touches”); 13:23 Ms A: w[ygy (“they make … reach”). 14:20 Ms A: hmkxb (“on wisdom”); 15:10 Ms A: ~kx (“a wise person”). 37:27 Mss BD: $vpn (“your soul/self”); 38:23 Mss BD: wXpn (“his soul/life”). 42:15a Ms B and Mas: la yX[m (“the works of God”); 43:32b Ms B: wyX[mm (“of his works”). 44:1 Ms B: hllha (“I will praise”); 44:15 Ms B and Mas: ~tlhtw (“and their praise”). 49:1 Ms B: ~X (“name”); 49:16 Ms B: ~X (“Shem”). 50:1 Ms B: wymybw (“and in his days”); 50:24 Ms B: ymyk (“like the days”).

We have already mentioned the final alphabetic acrostic describing Ben Sira’s search for wisdom (51:13-30), in imitation of the alphabetic acrostic on the “capable wife” that concludes the Book of Proverbs (31:10-31).49 Apart from Sir 51:13-30, elsewhere the sage often uses non-alphabetic acrostics of either twenty-two or twenty-three lines. The commentary of Patrick Skehan and Alexander Di Lella provides a listing: “1:11-30 (the opening poem of the book); 5:1–6:4; 6:18-37 (the opening poem of Part III); 12:1-18; 13:24–14:19 (the closing poem of Part III); 21:1-21; 29:1-20; 29:21–30:13; 38:24-34; 49:1- 16”. In addition, the twenty-two lines in Lady Wisdom’s speech in Sir 24:3- 17.19-22 (omitting 24:18 as a later gloss) match the number of letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Besides these eleven non-alphabetic acrostics, we may suggest three more: 28:8-26 (23 bicola on the harm caused by a quarrelsome

47 On Ben Sira’s use of the devices of inclusio, acrostic, and rhyme, see SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 63-74. On these stylistic features in the Hebrew Bible see WATSON, Classical Hebrew Poetry, 282-287 (inclusio); 199 (non-alphabetic acrostics); 229-234 (rhyme). 48 Other examples of poems united by inclusio include Sir 1:1-10; 1:11-30; 6:18-37; 10:19–11:6; 27:16-21; 29:14-20; 32:14–33:18; 36:1-22; cf. SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 73-74. Outside Ben Sira, inclusio occurs in biblical texts such as many Psalms (see Psalms 8; 21; 103; 104; 139; 150). 49 On alphabetic acrostics in the Hebrew Bible see SOLL, Psalm 119, 5-34; WATSON, Classical Hebrew Poetry, 190-200. Biblical examples of non-alphabetic acrostics include Lam 5:1- 22 (22 bicola); Ps 33 (22 bicola); Prov 2:1-22 (22 bicola); 7:6-27 (23 bicola). A list of non- alphabetic acrostics in Ben Sira appears in SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 74, from where the following quotation comes. 38 Jeremy Corley tongue); 36:26–37:11 (23 bicola on discernment in choosing associates); 40:18–41:4 (23 bicola on life and death). Ben Sira’s text also has at least four double non-alphabetic acrostics: 22:27–23:27 (44 bicola on control of the tongue and of the passions); 25:13–26:27 (46 bicola on good and bad wives); 41:5–42:14 (45 bicola on shameful persons and actions); 42:15–43:26 (45 bicola on God’s glory in creation). The presence of a non-alphabetic acrostic, however, is not always conclusive in delimiting a pericope. On occasions, such an acrostic may highlight part of a wider pericope (e.g., 24:3-17.19-22 within 24:1-34; or 36:26–37:11 within 36:23–37:15; or 38:24-34 within 38:24–39:12). At other times, a non-alphabetic acrostic may serve to unite several smaller units (e.g., 5:1-8; 5:9–6:1; 6:2-4 within 5:1–6:4; or 29:1-7.8-13.14-20 within 29:1-20; or the units in 49:1-16). Opening and closing rhyme can also serve to delimit a passage. Here are four examples, taken from the pericopes previously mentioned in connection with inclusio (7:18-36; 13:1-23; 14:20–15:10; 37:27–38:23):

7:18a Ms A: ryxmb (“for a price”) // 7:18b Ms A: rypwa (“Ophir”); 7:35a G = bawk (“sick”)50 // 7:35b Ms A: bhat (“you will be loved”). 13:1a Ms A: wdy (“his hand”) // 13:1b Ms A: wkrd (“his way”); 13:23c Ms A: wrmay (“they will say”) // 13:23d Ms A: whwpdhy (“they will push him down”). 14:20a Ms A: hghy (“he will meditate”) // 14:20b Ms A: h[Xy (“he will gaze”); 15:10a Ms A: hlht (“praise”) // 15:10b Ms A: hndmly (“he will teach it”). 37:27a Mss BD: $Xpn (“your soul/self”) // 37:27b Mss BD: hl (“to it”); 38:23a Ms B: wrkz (“his memory”) // 38:23b Ms B wXpn (“his soul/life”).

Indications of the opening of a passage can be given in various other ways. First, there may be an initial call to attention, often with a command to “hear” (e.g., 23:7; 31:22; 33:19; 39:13; 41:16 Ms B and Mas [= 41:14 Gr]). Sec- ond, the author may use the address “my child” or “children” (though this may also occur within the body of a poem). We can consider the example of 37:27–38:23, a poem of four subunits dealing respectively with health (37:27-31), medicine (38:1-8), sickness (38:9-15), and death (38:16-23); in this poem, each of the four subunits except the second begins with the term “my child” (ynb) in the geniza manuscript. Third, there may be an illustrative observation from the natural world: see 3:25 (opening 3:25-29); 3:30 (beginning 3:30–4:10); 5:9 (opening 5:9–6:1); 9:10 (beginning 9:10-16); 13:1 (opening 13:1- 23); 22:19 (beginning 22:19-26). Fourth, Ben Sira may employ a numerical proverb to begin a unit: compare 23:16 (opening 23:16-27); 25:1-2 (beginning 25:1-6); 26:28 (opening 26:28–27:7). And fifth, in the Praise of the Ances-

50 On this reading (a retroversion from Gr) see CORLEY, Ben Sira’s Teaching on Friendship, 220. Searching for structure and redaction in Ben Sira 39 tors there may be a play on the Hebrew name of the character: 44:19 (Abra- ham); 44:23g (Moses); 46:1 (Joshua); 46:13 (Samuel); 47:13 (Solomon); 47:23 (Rehoboam); 48:17 (Hezekiah).51 In addition, several common themes often serve to mark the opening of a poem or a section of a poem, though some of them can be used at other points in the poetry. One theme is the “fear of God”: 1:11 (opening 1:11-30); 10:19b Gr (beginning 10:19–11:6); 19:20 (opening 19:20–20:31); 21:11 (beginning 21:11-21). Another theme is the “beginning”: 29:21 (opening 29:21-28); 37:16 (opening 37:16-26). The conclusion of a passage can often be marked by means of a biblical allusion. Here are several examples: Sir 2:18 (ending 2:1-18) echoing 2 Sam 24:14; Sir 5:8 (concluding 5:1-8) echoing Prov 11:4; Sir 6:17 (ending 6:5- 17) echoing 1 Sam 25:25; Sir 7:17 (concluding 7:1-17) echoing Job 25:6; Sir 10:18 (ending 9:17–10:18) echoing Job 14:1; Sir 13:23 (concluding 13:1-23) echoing Job 20:6; Sir 14:19 (ending 13:24–14:19) echoing Job 21:33; Sir 19:17 (concluding 19:4-17) echoing Lev 19:17; Sir 30:13 (ending 30:1-13) echoing 1 Kgs 12:14; Sir 40:16 (concluding 40:1-17) echoing Job 8:12; Sir 40:27 (ending 40:18-27) echoing Isa 4:6. In addition, refrains can frequently serve to indicate the conclusion of a passage (as in Psalms 46 and 67). Instances of refrains include the following: 6:4a Ms A = 19:3b Ms C (ending 5:1–6:4 and 18:30–19:3); 20:30-31 Gr = 41:14-15 G (concluding 19:20–20:31 and 41:5-15); 24:34 Gr = 33:18 Gr (ending 24:1-34 and 32:14–33:18); 31:11b Ms B = 39:10b Gr = 44:15b Ms B and Mas (concluding 30:14–31:11 and 38:24–39:12 and 44:1-15). A further refrain found in the Syriac seems authentic: 2:18d S = 6:17b S.52 There are also several themes that frequently mark the closing of a literary unit. One of Ben Sira’s favorite concluding themes is the fear of God: 1:30 (ending 1:11-30); 6:16 (concluding 6:5-17); 6:37 Ms A (ending 6:18-37); 9:16 (ending 9:10-16); 23:27 (ending 22:27–23:27); 25:6 (ending 25:1-6); 25:10- 11 (concluding 25:7-11); 32:12 Ms B (ending 31:12–32:13); 40:26-27 (ending 40:18-27); 50:29 (concluding 50:25-29). A second favorite concluding theme is the term “Law” or “commandments”: 6:37 (ending 6:18-37); 9:15 Gr (concluding 9:10-16); 19:17 Gr (ending 19:4-17); 23:27 (ending 22:27–23:27). Anoth- er frequent concluding theme (compare Ps 111:10; Prov 31:31) is “praise”: 15:9-10 (concluding 14:20–15:10); 31:11 Ms B (ending 30:14–31:11); 39:9-10 (concluding 38:24–39:12); 39:35 (ending 39:13-35); 44:14-15 (concluding 44:1- 15). Furthermore, a phrase that sometimes appears at the end of a passage

51 On these wordplays in Sirach 44-50 see SMEND, Die Weisheit, xlii. 52 Compare the refrain in Isa 9:11.16.20 and 10:4; or Cant 2:7; 3:5; 5:8. On refrains in biblical Hebrew verse see WATSON, Classical Hebrew Poetry, 295-299. On Ben Sira’s use of refrains see SMEND, Die Weisheit, xliii note 1. Occasionally a refrain will not mark an ending (e.g., Sir 5:6c Mss AC= Sir 16:11c Ms A). 40 Jeremy Corley is “all the living”: 42:1d (ending 41:16–42:1d); 42:8 (concluding 42:1e-8); 44:23 (ending 44:17-23); 49:16 (concluding 49:1-16). Lastly, words associated with finality or death often fittingly close Ben Sira’s poems. Sometimes the term “end” appears: 7:36 (concluding 7:18-36); 11:27-28 (ending 11:7-28); 21:10 (concluding 21:1-10); 34:8 (ending 34:1-8); 43:27 (introducing 43:27-33 which concludes 42:15–43:33).53 More commonly, there is a mention of death (or the grave or worms): 7:17 (ending 7:1-17); 7:36 (concluding 7:18-36); 9:9 (ending 9:1-9); 11:28 (concluding 11:7-28); 14:19 (ending 13:24–14:19); 19:3 (concluding 18:30–19:3); 28:7 (ending 27:22–28:7); 39:11 (concluding 38:24–39:12); 44:14 (ending 44:1-15).54 When taken individually, the above-mentioned indications of delimitation may be more or less probative. However, in combination the cumulative force of these features is weighty. Several pericopes are clearly delimited by a combination of the above-mentioned stylistic features. For instance, Ben Sira employs inclusio together with a non-alphabetic acrostic to delimit several poems (1:11-30; 29:1-20; 29:21–30:13; 49:1-16). Perhaps the most clearly delimited passage is the sapiential poem in 6:18-37, which can serve to illustrate five of these points (non-alphabetic acrostic, inclusio, opening and closing rhyme, opening motif, favorite closing theme). The poem is a non-alphabetic acrostic of twenty-two lines. The composition is marked off by an inclusio: the noun hmkx (“wisdom”) is the last word of 6:18 Ms C, while the verb $mkxy (“he will make you wise”) is the last word of 6:37 Ms A. Moreover, there is significant opening rhyme: hmkx (“wisdom”) in 6:18b; hyla (“to her”) in 6:19a; htawbt (“her produce”) in 6:19b; hyrp (“her fruit”) in 6:20b. There is also closing rhyme: $bl (“your heart”) in 6:37c and $mkxy (“he will make you wise”) in 6:37d. Furthermore, the poem opens with the standard sapiential address “[my] child” (6:18 Gr), which can often (though not always) indicate the beginning of a new poem. Finally, the poem ends with two favorite closing motifs, the Law (6:37 Hb, Gr, S) and the fear of God (6:37 Hb, S; not in Gr).

53 In the declaration: “The end of the matter: he is the all” (Sir 43:27), Ben Sira may perhaps be reworking a saying in the epilogue to Qoheleth: “The finish of the matter: everything is heard. Fear God and keep his commands” (Qoh 12:13). 54 Other biblical authors end pericopes with mention of death (or similar terms); see Prov 5:23; 7:27; 8:36; 9:18; Isa 22:13; Ps 137:9 (cf. Ps 55:24; Job 7:21; 8:22; 32:22). On closure in biblical poetry see WATSON, Classical Hebrew Poetry, 65. Searching for structure and redaction in Ben Sira 41

5. A plausible reconstruction of redactional stages

In our earlier discussion of Ben Sira’s self-references, we noted Roth’s hypothesis concerning redactional stages in the book.55 According to Roth, the first edition of the book consisted of 1:1–23:27 and 51:1-30. Thereafter, three new editions cumulatively added supplements (24:1–32:13; 32:14–38:23; and 38:24–50:29). In each case, the supplement began with a wisdom poem (24:1-29; 32:14–33:15; 38:24–39:11) followed by an autobiographical note (24:30-34; 33:16-18; 39:12). In general, this theory offers a good understanding of the material. With two major changes, let us see if this proposal can be developed to make sense of the structure of the book. The first major change, following Segal,56 is to divide the last section into two supplements: 38:24–43:33 and 44:1–50:29 (but unlike Segal, to separate 50:25-29 as two postscripts). The second major change is to see the thanksgiving hymn in Sir 51:1-12, not as part of the first edition, but as a supplement to 38:23. This investigation will note literary indications to support the view that each new section represents a further redactional stage within Ben Sira’s book. Admittedly, this hypothesis of redactional stages does not explain everything about the structure, but is offered tentatively as a theory explaining as many aspects as possible.

1. First Edition (Original book = 1:1–23:27 and 51:13-30):

1:1-10, Sapiential prologue to whole book (somewhat like Prov 1); 1:11-30, Twenty-two-line poem on fear of God (like Prov 2); 2:1–23:27, Body of original book; 51:13-30, Alphabetic poem on Lady Wisdom (like Prov 31:10-31).

Note the inclusio for 1:11–23:27, with the phrase fo,boj kuri,ou (“fear of the Lord”) in 1:11 matching the similar phrase fo,bou kuri,ou (“than fear of the Lord”) in 23:27. If the original book ended with Sir 22:27–23:27 (control of tongue and of passions) before 51:13-30 (acrostic on Lady Wisdom), there is some similarity with Proverbs 30-31, namely: Prov 30:5-6 (words); 30:18-20 (adultery); 31:2-3 (adultery); 31:8-9 (words); 31:10-31 (acrostic on capable woman). Because Proverbs 30-31 lacks anything corresponding to the thanksgiving in Sir 51:1-12, it is better to see the thanksgiving as having been inserted for the third edition (see below).

55 ROTH, On the Gnomic-Discursive Wisdom, 60. 56 SEGAL,Se¯per ben-Sîra¯’ hasˇsˇa¯le¯m, introduction, 16. 42 Jeremy Corley

2. Second Edition (1:1–32:13 and 51:13-30), including a supplement on “Applying Wisdom to Household Life” (24:1–32:13):

24:1-29, Sapiential prologue; 24:30-34, Autobiographical note; 25:1–32:13, Body of first supplement.57

An inclusio for 25:1–32:13 is provided by the Semitic root ~lX (“be complete/be at peace”), since the term !ymlX (“at peace”) in 25:1 S (where the Hebrew text is lost) matches the verb ~lXw (“and fulfil”) in 32:12 Mss BF.

3. Third Edition (1:1–38:23 and 51:1-30), including a new supplement on “Using Wisdom to Make Good Decisions” (32:14–38:23) plus a thanksgiving psalm (51:1-12):

32:14–33:15, Sapiential prologue; 33:16-18, Autobiographical note; 33:19–38:23, Body of second supplement;58 51:1-12, Psalm of deliverance (like 2 Sam 22 near end of book of Samuel).

There is a semantic inclusio for 33:19–38:23, whereby the injunction in 33:20- 21 not to give power to other living persons before one’s death (33:21, “living”) is balanced in 38:20-23 by the recommendation of moderate mourning by the living after another person’s death (38:23, “dead”).59 There are several reasons for suggesting that the hymn in 51:1-12 may have been added at this stage. First, it relates to the saying of 34:13: “I have often been in danger of death, but have escaped because of these experiences” (NRSV). Second, the thanksgiving for deliverance from death in 51:1- 12 could smoothly follow the treatment of death in 38:16-23. Third, because Proverbs 30–31 has nothing corresponding to this hymn, it does not match the concluding parts (22:27–23:27 and 51:13-30) of the first edition according to the pattern presented above.

4. Fourth Edition (1:1–43:33 and 51:1-30), including an extra supplement on “Demonstrating the Results of Wisdom” (38:24–43:33):

38:24–39:11, Sapiential prologue; 39:12, Autobiographical note; 39:13–43:33, Body of third supplement.60

57 Note the opening feature of numerical proverbs (25:1-2), and the closing motif of praise of God (32:13). 58 Observe the opening motif of the call to attention (33:19), as well as the closing motif of death (38:23). 59 There is also a verbal inclusio: 33:21 Ms E has $dw[ (“you still”), while 38:20 Ms B has dw[ (“still”). 60 Note the opening call to bless God (39:14c-15), as well as the closing motif of praise of God (43:27-33). Searching for structure and redaction in Ben Sira 43

We can suspect an inclusio of four Hebrew words for 39:13–43:33:

39:14cd Segal: wyf[m lk l[ yyy … wnt 39:14cd Gr: dia,dote … ku,rion evpi. pa/sin toi/j e;rgoij (“Give … the Lord for all that he made”); 43:33 Segal: !tn … yyy hf[ lkh ta 43:33 Gr: pa,nta … evpoi,hsen ov ku,rioj ,…e;dwken (“The Lord made everything, … he gave …”).61

Note that 42:15–43:33 consists of a double non-alphabetic acrostic of 45 bicola (42:15–43:26) followed by a sapiential doxology of 8 bicola (43:27-33). The longer section (42:15–43:26) is unified by inclusiones of the Hebrew root l[p, “do,” and the noun !wcr, “will”:

42:15 Mas: wncr l[pw (“and the doer/doing of his will”); 43:26 Ms B: !wcr l[py (“it does [his] will”).

The conclusion (43:27-33) is unified by the word lkh (“everything”) in 43:27 Ms B and 43:33 Ms B, while its length of 8 bicola matches the length of the book’s opening poem (1:1-10), which also mentions “all” in its opening and closing lines (1:1 and 1:10). Furthermore, the ending “he has given wisdom to the devout” (43:33b Gr) loosely echoes the ending of the book’s first poem, “he has lavished it [= wisdom] on those who love him” (1:10b Gr). A few references in the latter part of the book suggest that the author had had to face up to his own mortality, since 40:1–41:13 deals respectively with life’s miseries (40:1-17), death (41:1-4), and a concern for honorable descendants (41:5-13). Earlier passages also had suggested that Ben Sira was ageing: the trials of ill health (30:14-17); keeping possessions till one’s deathbed before distributing them (33:20-24); dealing with sickness (37:27–38:15); mourning the dead (38:16-23).

5. Fifth Edition (1:1–51:30), including the last supplement on “Wisdom in History” (44:1–50:24), plus a further numerical proverb (50:25-26) and the author’s signature (50:27-29):

44:1-15, Sapiential prologue; [This preamble to the Praise of the Ancestors replaces the autobiographical note;] 44:17–50:24, Body of fourth supplement; 50:25-29: Numerical proverb and author’s signature.

There is an inclusio for 44:17–50:24, with the word wtyrbbw (“and by his covenant”) in 44:17 Ms B matching tyrb (“covenant”) in 50:24 Ms B.

61 See SEGAL,Se¯per ben-Sîra¯’ hasˇsˇa¯le¯m, 260 and 290. 44 Jeremy Corley

The Praise of the Ancestors (44:1–50:24) is the most highly structured portion of Ben Sira’s book.62 Five aspects of the structuring deserve attention here. First, 44:1–45:26 and 46:1–50:24 both end with a similar doxology (45:25e-26; 50:22-24), with each doxology being preceded by a lengthy description of priestly activity (45:6-25d; 50:1-21).63 Second, the caesura between 45:26 and 46:1 marks the canonical division between the Torah segment (44:17–45:26) and the Prophets segment (46:1–49:16).64 Third, the Torah section consists of a description of seven persons (from Noah to Phinehas) with whom God made a covenant.65 Fourth, several poems consist of eight or sixteen or thirty-two lines: Moses is allocated 8 bicola (45:1-5), both David and Solomon receive 16 bicola each (47:2-11 and 47:12-22), and Aaron is given 32 bicola (45:6-22). Fifth (as already noted), Ben Sira often introduces his characters with wordplay on their Hebrew names (Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Samuel, Solomon, Rehoboam, Hezekiah).

6. Conclusion

While we cannot solve every problem of the structure of Ben Sira’s book, comparison with other sapiential writings indicates that to some extent Ben Sira followed existing models. The greatest similarity is with the Book of Proverbs, but there are lesser structural resemblances with the Book of Job, the prototype of Papyrus Insinger, the poetry of Theognis, and the pre-Mac- cabean portions of 1 Enoch. Consideration of opening and closing features has led to some interesting observations. Special structural significance belongs to several key passages. In the book’s opening (Sir 1:1-10), the author sees “all wisdom” as a divine gift available for those who love him (possibly a contrast with the opening of the Epic of Gilgamesh). The three main authorial self-references (24:30-34; 33:16-18; 39:12) attest to Ben Sira’s consciousness of being in the tradition of Israel’s prophets, and offer hints about stages in the book’s development. Ben Sira’s third-person signature in 50:27-29 suggests a deliberate authorial conclusion to his work, prior to the appendices in 50:25–51:30. The final alphabetic acrostic indicates an intentional modeling of Ben Sira’s work on

62 Besides LEE, Studies , see MACK, Wisdom and the Hebrew Epic; MARBÖCK, Die ‘Geschichte Israels’, 103-123; GOSHEN-GOTTSTEIN, Ben Sira’s Praise, 235-267. 63 LEE, Studies, 6 and 12-15. 64 GOSHEN-GOTTSTEIN, Ben Sira’s Praise, 241. 65 MARBÖCK, Die ‘Geschichte Israels’, 109-118. Mention of the covenant with David also appears in 45:25. I disregard the reference to Enoch in Mss of 44:16 as a later gloss, since it is absent from the Masada Ms. Searching for structure and redaction in Ben Sira 45 the Book of Proverbs, while the last line (51:30) offers an affirmation of the value of perseverance, in a curious contrast to the sufferer’s lament in the Akkadian acrostic poem known as the Babylonian Theodicy. The widely accepted division of Ben Sira’s book into eight major parts (each begun by a wisdom poem) is supported by the presence of catchwords (mots crochets) linking each part to the preceding material. Such internal poetic evidence suggests that the book has been put together carefully and deliberately. To indicate the delimitation of passages, Ben Sira very frequently employs stylistic devices, particularly inclusio, non-alphabetic acrostics of twenty-two or twenty-three lines, and opening/closing rhyme. Sometimes the beginning of a unit is indicated by features such as a call to attention or use of the address “my child”. The end of a unit may be marked by biblical allusions, refrains, or favorite closing themes (such as the fear of God). Indeed, the sapiential poem in 6:18-37 is delimited by five of these stylistic features (non-alphabetic acrostic, inclusio, opening and closing rhyme, opening address, and favorite closing themes). The three major authorial self-references (24:30-34; 33:16-18; 39:12) appear to offer information about the book’s redactional stages. It is likely that the first edition of the book consisted of 1:1–23:27 and 51:13-30. There- after, three new editions cumulatively added supplements, each one beginning with a wisdom poem (24:1-29; 32:14–33:15; 38:24–39:11) and an autobiographical note (24:30-34; 33:16-18; 39:12). Since the Praise of the Ances- tors (44:1–50:24) is a self-contained unit of its own, it forms the last supplement for the book’s final edition (the fifth). This tentative reconstruction seems to make most sense of the evidence, but cannot be proven. Proposing redactional stages is largely hypothetical, since apart from the self-references in a few passages, we have little direct evidence of the author’s literary intentions. However, the plausible theory of Roth provides the basis for the proposal here, which is admittedly based mainly on circumstantial evidence. This hypothesis is not intended as the last word on the subject, but as a possible way of seeing a literary progression through Ben Sira’s writing. In conclusion, I note that despite the textual problems, many indications of the author’s careful construction of the book become apparent with patient study. I am sure that more aspects remain to be uncovered by future readers. 46 Jeremy Corley

Bibliography

ARGALL, R. A., 1 Enoch and Sirach: A Comparative Literary and Conceptual Analysis of the Themes of Revelation, Creation and Judgment (SBL.EJL 8), Atlanta 1995. BEYERLIN, W., Near Eastern Religious Texts Relating to the Old Testament, London 1978. CORLEY, J., Ben Sira’s Teaching on Friendship (BJSt 316), Providence 2002. CORLEY, J., Wisdom versus Apocalyptic and Science in Sirach 1,1-10, in: GARCÍA MAR- TÍNEZ, F. (ed.), Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Bib- lical Tradition (BEThL 168), Leuven 2003, 269-285. DALLEY, S., Myths from Mesopotamia, Oxford 1989. GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ,F.– TIGCHELAAR, E. J. C., The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition, 2 vols., Leiden 1997-1998. GILBERT, M., L’Éloge de la Sagesse (Siracide 24): RTL 5 (1974), 326-348. GOSHEN-GOTTSTEIN, A., Ben Sira’s Praise of the Fathers: A Canon-Conscious Reading, in: EGGER-WENZEL, R. (ed.), Ben Sira’s God (BZAW 321), Berlin 2002, 235-267. HARVEY, J. D., Toward a Degree of Order in Ben Sira’s Book: ZAW 105 (1993), 52-62. HASPECKER, J. , Gottesfurcht bei Jesus Sirach (AnBib 30), Rom 1967. ISAAC, E., 1 (Ethiopic Apocalypse of) Enoch, in: CHARLESWORTH, J. H. (ed.), Old Testa- ment Pseudepigrapha, vol. 1, New York 1983. JÜNGLING, H.-W., Der Bauplan des Buches Jesus Sirach, in: HAINZ, J. ET AL. (eds.), Den Armen eine frohe Botschaft, Frankfurt a.M. 1997, 89-105. LEE, T. R., Studies in the Form of Sirach 44-50 (SBL.DS 75), Atlanta1986. LICHTHEIM, M., Ancient Egyptian Literature, vol. 3, Berkeley 1980. LIESEN, J., Strategical Self-References in Ben Sira, in: CALDUCH-BENAGES, N. – VERMEYLEN, J. (eds.), Treasures of Wisdom. Studies in Ben Sira and the Book of Wisdom. FS M. Gilbert (BEThL 143), Leuven 1999, 63-74. MACK, B. L., Wisdom and the Hebrew Epic: Ben Sira’s Hymn in Praise of the Fathers, Chicago 1985. MARBÖCK, J., Die ‘Geschichte Israels’ als ‘Bundesgeschichte’ nach dem Sirachbuch, in: FISCHER, I. (ed.), Gottes Weisheit Unter Uns. Zur Theologie des Buches Sirach (HBS 6) Freiburg i.B. – Basel – Wien 1995, 103-123. MARBÖCK, J., Structure and Redaction History of the Book of Ben Sira: Review and Prospects, in: BEENTJES,P.C.(ed.), The Book of Ben Sira in Modern Research (BZAW 255), Berlin 1997, 61-79. MIDDENDORP,TH., Die Stellung Jesu ben Siras zwischen Judentum und Hellenismus, Leiden 1973. MINISSALE, A., La versione greca del Siracide. Confronto con il testo ebraico alla luce dell’attività midrascica e del metodo targumico (AnBib 133), Roma 1995. MULDER, O., Simon the High Priest in Sirach 50 (JSJ.S 78), Leiden 2003. PETERS, N., Das Buch Jesus Sirach oder Ecclesiasticus (EHAT 25), Münster i. W. 1913. PRATO, G. L., Il problema della teodicea in Ben Sira. Composizione dei contrari e richiamo alle origini (AnBib 65), Roma 1975. PRITCHARD, J. B., Ancient Near Eastern Texts, Princeton 1950. ROTH,W. , On the Gnomic-Discursive Wisdom of Jesus Ben Sirach: Semeia 17 (1980), 59-79. SANDERS, J. T., Ben Sira and Demotic Wisdom (SBL.MS 28), Chico 1983. SAUER, G., Gedanken über den thematischen Aufbau des Buches Ben Sira, in: CALDUCH- BENAGES, N. – VERMEYLEN, J. (eds.), Treasures of Wisdom, 51-61. Searching for structure and redaction in Ben Sira 47

SCHRADER, L., Leiden und Gerechtigkeit: Studien zu Theologie und Textgeschichte des Sirachbuches (BET 27), Frankfurt a.M. 1994. SEGAL, M. Z., Se¯per ben-Sîra¯’ hasˇsˇa¯le¯m, Jerusalem 19723. SKEHAN, P. W., Structures in Poems on Wisdom: Proverbs 8 and Sirach 24: CBQ 41 (1979), 365-379. SKEHAN, P. W. – DI LELLA,A. A., The Wisdom of Ben Sira. ANew Translation with Notes, Introduction, and Commentary (AncB 39), New York 1987. SOLL, W., Psalm 119: Matrix, Form, and Setting (CBQ.MS 23), Washington, DC 1991. SMEND, R., Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach erklärt, Berlin 1906. TOURNAY, R. J., Début de l’épopée de Gilgamesh: nouveau fragment cunéiforme: RB 106 (1999), 5-7. VANDERKAM, J. C., Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition (CBQ.MS 16), Washington, DC 1984. WATSON, W. G. E., Classical Hebrew Poetry (JSOT.S 26), Sheffield 19862.

An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira

GIUSEPPE BELLIA

The work of Ben Sira is the only book of Old Testament Scripture of which we possess spatio-temporal coordinates recognised by all as accurate and reliable. To set it against the background of its times, however, it is necessary to take up the lesson of annalistic historiography with much more determination. Sirach is an anomalous wisdom text. It was at one time much loved by the ancient generations of Christians who made it the object of public reading in the Church to the extent of changing its name to Ecclesi- asticus, according to the explanation passed down by Cassiodorus. Today, by contrast, it does not meet with much of a consensus among the specialists. So as not to slide into the hermeneutic inertia of an exegetic understanding that is perforce repetitive, we must attempt a multidisciplinary reading, making use of new approaches. The problem of historical reconstruction in texts like ours, however, is that of not being able to distinguish satisfactorily, in the weave of the narrative, the literary composition which explains the facts from the truth of what happened. This risks confusing the interpretative witness of the memory passed on with the historical fact narrated and this with the real event.1 According to the now valued and revealing paradigm of reading history proposed by Paul Ricoeur, in order to obtain this separation between the explanatory level of writing history, which should be based on documents and objective, and the interpretative level of historiography, which remains in the sphere of literature, it is necessary to try new ways.2 In order to grasp the historico-social identity which the author shares with his addressees behind the tapestry of the text, we need to make the historical- critical method work alongside the diachronic contribution offered by the material culture and, above all with the various human disciplines (psy- chology, sociology, economics, history of thought) which more than others allow us to investigate the cultural universe underlying the work of the author and implicitly shared with his addressees.

1 A useful indication with which to recognise the realistic significance of the historical narrative and to distinguish pseudo-explanations from non-ideological arguments, is to be found in HEMPEL, The Function, 241. 2 From the vast production of RICOEUR, one could look at Il conflitto delle interpretazioni; Dell’interpretazione. Saggio su Freud; Tempo e racconto, La configurazione nel raccon- to di finzione, Il tempo raccontato; and, further, La memoria, la storia, l’oblio. 50 Giuseppe Bellia

In order to avoid a reduction of the hermeneutic solely to the documentary level, as I have already explained in other essays, it seems more pro- ductive to consider a Biblical text in its totality and, therefore, as the bearer of multiple memory, of wide range.3 The historico-anthropological approach shows, above all with regard to ancient texts, a reliable flexibili- ty and an adequate competence in introducing a more realistic understanding of the sense and of the true intention of a sapiential writing which, more than others, together with rather complex textual make-up, presents a narrative clothing which is extremely refractory in reflecting a real historical society. This difficulty is increased by the fact that the sapiential tradition of Israel, different from what happened in classical Greece which had learned to distinguish between historiography and mythology, had not elaborated effective criteria of historical criticism.4 In the face of texts that are enigmatic on the documentary level, it seems to me illuminating yet again to make use of the historiographical criterion which F. Braudel borrowed from the thought of H. Bergson, distinguishing the past as “time” and “duration”.5 “Time” is an abstract concept, malleable and inert, easily tamed by historians, and by exegetes, and is a different thing from “duration” which, with its distance, short, medium, and long articulates temporal happenings, defining them as “events”, “trends”, and “structures”. In fact, these times can be distinguished because they arebound respectively: to the event-based history of political and military life with its tumultuous and spectacular happenings; to the more stable organisational sphere of institutional forms, the economic and cultural systems of society, even if these are not always evident; and, finally, to the material and envi- ronmental life of the great cultured civilisations in their almost immobile geo-historical stability.6 The historiographical viewpoint of the annalist school, which is not limited to the simple descriptive observation of facts, values and magnifies the mediatory role of the historian, his creative imagination which reconstructs

3 I am referring to my Historical and Anthropological reading of the Book of Wisdom, 83-91. 4 Already, starting from Herodotus, Greek historiography had gradually elaborated adequate criteria and methods to distinguish the spatium historicum from mythical narration, establishing the requirement to base a documented account on the factual truth of the reality narrated. Cf. CANFORA, La storiografia greca, in particular 26-43 and 61-74. Simi- lar processes of distiniguishing have been encountered in the historical literature of the Hittites and of the Old Testament. Cf. CANCIK, Mythische und historische Wahrheit Inter- pretationen. 5 The “Summa” of this way of understanding history is Civiltà e imperi del Mediterraneo. 6 For Braudel’s vision of history see the critical renewal of it by VOVELLE, Storia e lunga durata, 49-80; it is always useful to consult BRAUDEL (ed.), Problemi di metodo storico. For a balance sheet of the latest tendencies of the third generation of the “Annales”, see BURKE, Una rivoluzione storiografica, 70-102, with a bibliography on 139-157. An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira 51 the truth of events, joining them up in an universe of sense in which the past shows its profound disposition to interpret a present which is open to the future.7 Without this mediation, which prepares for a holistic and circular understanding of the real, there is no understanding of the past, no understanding of history. Something similar, as we shall see, must have happened to Ben Sira, the scribe, who, perhaps, the first to find himself faced with the mediation of the “book of the Law”: the written work, with its process of becoming literary tends to give a literary unitary organisation to the knowledge of the past, aimed at transforming the addressee, thus objectivising a tradition and bringing it to an end. This is an action which requires from the sage a difficult task of mediation, demanding at the same time a precise assumption of identity.8 In these pages, following a method which has already been tested, the enquiry will be carried out in three stages: first I shall present, in brief, the historico-literary framework of the book, seeking, in the second phase, to arrive at the culture of the text with a sociological and anthropological investigation; finally, with a historico-anthropological reading, I shall try to discover the real context of the work of Ben Sira.9

1. The historico-literary framework of the book

It must immediately be remembered that the work of Ben Sira has reached us by way of a varied and complex process of textual transmission, Greek, Latin, Syriac and, finally, Hebrew. The Hebrew text, which is incomplete, has reached us only in the last hundred years or so during which excep- tional archaeological discoveries have restored two thirds of it10 by means of three groups of fragments: the manuscripts of the eleventh century recov-

7 On the primacy of the mediation of the historian in the work of historiographical reconstruction, see VEYNE, Come si scrive la storia; for more ample coverage, I refer also to BELLIA, La “nuova archeologia biblica”, in particular to pp. 231-252 and 369-385. 8 Cf. BLENKINSOPP, Sage, Priest, Prophet, 9-65; always interesting is the collective work edited by GAMMIE –PERDUE, The Sage in Israel; and the study of LEMAIRE, Scribes. 9 The historico-anthropological reading is an attempt to integrate the historical-critical method with the structural approach of the human sciences, enriched with the diachron- ical contribution of the material culture: cf. BELLIA, Proverbi: una lettura storico-antropologica, 55-90. 10 It is a question of 1098 distichs compared with 1616 in the Greek text. From the Hebrew text we still lack 1:1–3:5 and 16:28–30:10 (of which we possess about thirty isolated verses). It should be noted that, as well as the first chapters, we are lacking Chapter 24, the eulogy to Wisdom, and the pericope 38:27–39:14, where the portrait of the sage is to be found. Cf. GILBERT, Introduction au livre de Ben Sira, 8-9, and, by the same author, L’Ec- clésiastique. 52 Giuseppe Bellia ered in the geniza of the Qaraite synagogue in Cairo,11 the texts of Qumran (before AD 69),12 and the fragments from Masada (before AD 73),13 together with some citations in the works of the Tannaim, Amoraim and other ancient Jewish authorities.14 Putting together the various pieces of information on the transmission of the text, it can be said that there is a huge consensus for holding that Ben Sira wrote in Hebrew in Jerusalem (cf. Sir 50:27) between 200 and 175 BC, probably in several stages (Hb I), but that text has not come down to us because the work which we possess betrays additions (Hb II) which the specialists date to around 80 or 60 BC (A. A. Di Lella) or, more generally, in the first century BC (G. L. Prato). Towards 132 BC in Egypt, the grandson undertook the translation into Greek for the Jews of the Alexandrine diaspora (Gr I) while between AD 150 and 200 must be dated the translation of Gr II, based on Hb II, which must have taken place before the time of Clement of Alexandria who cites the additions to be found in Sir 1:21a.22a; 19:5b and 26:22.15 The literary dimension of Sirach, closely related to Proverbs, emerges sufficiently clearly from the fact that it does not present the reader with isolated aphorisms of one stich but develops thematic compositions in the form of the short didactic poem, the instruction and the pedagogic exhortation.16 The repetitions of some themes in the different sections probably serve to develop some kind of function in the overall scheme, just as the gaps in the discourse where the worshipper turns to his God must enjoy a strategic position, something which does not seem to be matched in the previous wisdom literature.17 Similarly singular is the reference made in Sirach to the

11 There are six manuscripts classified by the letters of the alphabet: A B C D E F. The first two are the most extensive, while the third is an anthological work. The others contain chapters which help the comparison. 12 2Q18 with Sir 1:19-20; 6:14-15.19-31; 11QPsa with Sir 51:13.20b.30b. 13 Sir 39:27-32; 40:10-19.26-30; 41:1–44:71. 14 The geniza manuscripts confirm the order of chapters of the Syriac and Latin versions, while the more recent discoveries at Qumran (especially Sir 6:20 -31) and Masada, beyond confirming the authenticity of the Cairo manuscripts also support the antiquity of their presentation in verses of two stichs per line, according to the writing of the manuscripts B and E. One must refer the ancient Syriac translation of the Peshitta to the Hebrew text. As far as the effective utilisation of the work is concerned, however, the Greek translation holds first place and it comes to us in two different recensions: the short recension of the great uncial codices (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and Alexandrinus = Gr I); and the long one of miniscule manuscript 248 (= Gr II). With this latter is connected the translation of the Vetus latina, probably carried out in North Africa by Christians in the second half of the second century and later received without change into the Vulgate. 15 The Vetus latina refers to this second edition, even if it presents its own additions. Final- ly the Vulgate contains passages which could be of Christian redaction. 16 For the didactic poem, cf. 10:6-18; 22:19-26; 27:22-29. For the instruction, cf. 10:26–11:9; 12: 1-7; 13:8-13; 31:12-24 17 Prayer is found in direct form (in 23:1-6; 36:1-17; 51:1-12), or indirect (39:12-35; 43:27-33; 50:22-24). An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira 53 religious history of Israel, especially in that dense treatise (44-50) which presents a fresco focused on the history of salvation. Ben Sira does not demonstrate any outstanding creative originality and does not come across as a sophisticated master of style, and yet he shows himself capable of employing different literary forms with ease, not to say mastery. A careful and enterprising assimilator of the Scriptures, but also a reader not preju- diced by the turmoil brought by Greek culture and by Hellenism itself, he draws on a variety of literary genres from his own religious and cultural heritage. In particular, from the sapiential literature, he is aware of and utilises: short poems and hymns of praise (1:1-10; 18:1-14; 39:12-35; 42:15–43:33), a psalm of thanksgiving (51:1-12), prayers of petition (22:17–23:6; 36:1.22), numerical proverbs (23:16-18; 25:7-11; 26:5-6; 50:25-26), macarisms (26:5-6), autobiographical narratives (24:30-34; 33:16-l8; 39:12; 51:13-15), lists of names and onomastic poems (43:27-28; 43:32-33), didactic narratives (44:11-15) and the extensive didactic poem in Praise of the Ancestors (44:1–50:24). The influence of Hellenistic literary usages can be seen in some formal features of the work such as the headlines of separate sections, the presence of con- nective transitional formulas from one argument to another.18 The number and variety of literary genres displayed contribute to give Ben Sira’s exposition a certain narratival vivacity and a compositional style that is not short of originality. The content of the book revolves around the central theme of wisdom seen, both in its practical-pedagogic function, which impels it to be concerned with the usual themes of ethical reflection in the sapiential literature, and also in its theoretical and intellectual nature, concerned with philosophical and theological speculation and, therefore, inclined to tackle the great issues of life and history. Not a few scholars have tried to grasp the true structure of the text and of its formation but there is still no agreement in defining the logic of the whole, and there are even some who claim that we are faced with an anthology of texts of different genres which do not follow a coherent pattern and so the work does not display an obviously unitary structure. One group of scholars, taking their cue from the convincing reconstruction by Roth,19 has identified eight sections (thus Skehan and Di Lella), placing the emphasis, above all, on the recurring of the poetic sections devoted to wisdom and on some literary characteristics.20 There are

18 HENGEL, Giudaismo ed ellenismo, 278. 19 For ROTH, On the Gnomic-Discursive Wisdom, the original edition would have comprised 1:1–23:27 + 51:1-30, subdivided in its turn into four sections introduced by a Prologue on wisdom (1:1–2:18; 4:11-19; 6:18-37; 14:20–15:10), and concluded, like Proverbs, with an alphabetic poem (51:13-29). Later, there would have been three further contributions: 24:1–32:13; 32:14–38:23; 38:24–50: 24(29), a scheme shared by NICCACCI, Siracide o Eccle- siastico. 20 Cf. MORLA ASENSIO, Libri sapienziali, 187. 54 Giuseppe Bellia those who consider significant two large sections, each subdivided into four parts (Peters recognises two symmetrical sections [A, B], structured, in their turn, into five parts), others make out three (Minissale and Bonora), giving a special place to the last: the glory of the works of the Lord in creation and in the history of Israel (42:15–43:33; 44:1–50:29).21 Finally, for yet others, the structuring principle consists of the three basic hymnic sections of 1:1-10 on the divine origin of wisdom, of 24:1-29 on the historical revelation of wisdom in the Law, and of 42:15–43:33 on the praise of God in creation.22 Among more recent attempts at a solution, we should mark the synthetic study of Marböck which helps to organise the work better, pointing out thematic and stylistic unities that are larger and more measured.23 In order to identify the historical and social context closest to our book, I can summarise some commonly agreed observations on the author, date, place, aim and addressees of the work:

1. Ecclesiasticus is the only writing of the Old Testament which is not presented as anonymous or attributed pseudepigraphically to glorious characters from Israel’s past such as David or Solomon. The manuscripts we have, however, show a certain difference with regard to the name of the author. In particular, in 50:27 and in 51:30 (Ms B), we read: «Simon, son of Jesus, son of Eleazar, son of Sira». In addition, in 51:30, there appears a different ascription: «Simon, son of Jesus, called Ben Sira». In its turn the Syr- iac colophonindicates him to be «Jesus, son of Simon, called the son of Asira».24 There is now a broad agreement that the name «Simon» should be considered a late and corrupt form; for this reason, the original sequence of the correct name of the author of Ecclesiasticus must have been “Jesus, son of Eleazar, son of Sira”.25

2. For the date of composition, many hold that Ecclesiasticus must have been written shortly before the Maccabean Revolt and base this dating largely on the information provided by two precise passages of the book and by other clues which have undergone critical scrutiny by the historians. In the Prologue, the Greek translator is introduced as the grandson of the author and claims to have reached Egypt in the thirty eighth year of the reign of Ptolemy Euergetes,26 undertaking, after a certain time, the work of trans-

21 MINISSALE, Siracide (Ecclesiastico). 22 Cf. MORLA ASENSIO, Libri sapienziali, 186 and note 30. 23 MARBÖCK, Weisheit im Wandel. 24 Asira, «prisoner», is undoubtedly an erroneous reading. 25 As in contemporary cultures, when one “first name” – in our case the patronymic Ben Eleazar – is not sufficient to identify a person, recourse is had to a second, in this case, the patronymic with the name of the grandfather: Ben Sira. 26 The importance of this dating is emphasised by VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, XVII-XXVIII. An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira 55 lating the book from the Hebrew. Two kings are recorded with the appella- tion Euergetes (“Benefactor”): Ptolemy III Euergetes I (247-221 BC) and Ptole- myVII Physcon Euergetes II (170-164 and 145-117 BC). Because of the extraordinary length of his reign, it must be a question of Ptolemy VII and, consequently, the arrival of Ben Sira’s grandson in Egypt must be placed around 132 BC. The grandfather would have written in Hebrew in the first decades of the second century and, in any case, before the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes of which there is not a trace in the book. Another indication is the passionate and unrestrained eulogy which Ben Sira composes in honour of the High priest Simon, son of Onias in 50:1-24, as of a personage who, although already dead (50:1), must still enjoy a reputation that is still alive and widespread. Filtering out the information of Flavius Josephus on the two high priests with this name, the older and legendary Simon I, the Just (ca 300 BC), of whom, however, there is no trace in the traditions of the Mish- nah and the Talmud, must give way to Simon II who was in office around 200 BC. From these converging pieces of information one can situate the composition of Ecclesiasticus between 195 (the approximate date of the death of Simon II) and 171 BC, the year in which Antiochus Epiphanes deposed Onias III (the last Zadokite high priest) and his brother, Jason, in favour of the Benjaminite, Menelaus. This was such a sacrilegious violation of the priestly law that had the enlightened conservative, Ben Sira, known of it, he could not have passed over it in silence.27 Indirect references and clues to concrete situations are scattered here and there in the book. Above all, they can be discerned in all those polemical passages where the cautious Ben Sira, for all his shrewd and careful language, seems to set himself against a part of the Jerusalem aristocracy, tepid in their observance of the Law and oppressive with regard to the poor (36:9; 41:8-9), or against the intrigues of the sons of Simon (45:26), or, finally, against the inept rule of Onias III (7:4- 7).28 But this is a question of reconstructions which are purely hypothetical and which, therefore, await more detailed proof and confirmation.

3. As for the place of composition, there has never been any serious dispute regarding the traditional attribution of Jerusalem to the author and his book. The different clues that have been gathered about Ben Sira concern his deep roots in the theological traditions of Israel: in the prophetic ones of which he feels himself to be, variously, the sharer (24:33), careful collector (33:16- 17) and continuer (39:6 Gr; 48:12), but also in the Deuteronomistic heritage

27 On the historical context of the work of Ben Sira beside the works dated by SMEND, Die Weisheit, XIV-XXVIII, see HENGEL, Giudaismo ed ellenismo, 276-278; MARBÖCK, Weisheit im Wandel, 9-12; SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 8-16; STADELMANN, Ben Sira als Schriftgelehrter, 4-26. 28 HENGEL, Giudaismo ed ellenismo, 280-282 and 310-312. 56 Giuseppe Bellia towards which he allows a profound bond to shine through his work. Nat- urally, he is, in his own way, an original spokesman for the older sapiential traditions, but his deeply felt reverence for the great traditions of the Tem- ple together with the emerging Gentile culture and the pleasure in cosmopolitan sensibility, reveal an acceptable Hellenistic influence with a Ptole- maic imprint. All these details combine to confirm a judgement in favour of a cultivated, urban environment for both the work and the author who, it is speculated, is a personage who, if not necessarily a priest, shows himself quite close to the restricted priestly circle of the Temple of Jerusalem, the city to which he expressly declares himself to belong (50:27).

4. The addressees and the aim of the work, as well of the author as of the translator, are identified by the specialists from the indications explicitly formulated in the Prologue with its clear statement of reasons: the grandfather “was led to write something pertaining to instruction and wisdom in order that, by becoming conversant with this also, those who love learning should make even greater progress in living according to the law” (Sir prol. 12-14). The grandson too for his part puts down an analogous noble intention that is ethical and didactic: “When I found a copy affording no little instruction, it seemed highly necessary that I […] publish the book for those living abroad who wished to gain learning, being prepared in character to live according to the law” (Sir prol. 29-30; 34-36). Concerning the real addressees, however, it must be remembered that the grandfather must have had the aim of instructing the young of the well-to-do class (51:23), but must also have been inspired by a polemical purpose directed at the powerful groups influential in Jerusalem, attracted by deceptive speculations (3:21-24), tempted by superficiality, and with little zeal in the observance of the Law (42:1c-2); or even with renegades and apostates who had abandoned the faith of their fathers (41:8-9). The grandson must have had analogous motives, even if not quite so spectacular, with his translation, as he lets us glimpse from the linguistic adaptation which he makes to the passages just cited, even if concerning his real addressees some differences deserve to be taken into more close consideration.

2. The sociological examination of the text

The quarrel of the wisdom texts with history is an old and fundamental question. In all of these books the memory of the past is missing or seems to be viewed from an a-temporal perspective where the theological densi- ty always end up by having the upper hand over the requirements of a realistic contextualisation and, therefore, of ancient historiography itself. The An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira 57 wise scribe of Israel seems to have a predilection for a dehistoricised form of Scripture and finds himself at home in employing a gnomic language, deliberately detached from particular events and almost alien to any factual connection with persons or events in time. He prefers, in short, a system of reference that is culturally layered and markedly a-temporal which allows values of a universal type to emerge. For this reason, it is not surprising if, in the face of a sociological examination, for our wisdom text too, the particular cultural background of the author is presented in general terms, short of useful details and difficult to identify in its spatio-temporal coordinates since it is not concerned to explain or make understood how much of real historical content is conveyed by its language. This is a state of affairs even more blatant for a work like ours because Sirach, as has been said, not only is the only Biblical author who breaks with the tradition of a whole chain of anonymous or pseudepigraphic Scripture by openly declaring his identity (50:27), or his sympathies for the ancient priestly class (Sir 50),29 but also is the only one who sketches a portrait of the characteristics of the principal characters who, in his opinion, are the heroes of the history of salvation of ancient Israel (44-50).30 Theses are undoubtedly bold and innovative features which represent the changed religious and cultural climate of Jerusalem but which, at the same time, signal a significant discontinuity with the previous theological traditions (3:18-24) though we should not see already in Ben Sira the pernicious influence of Hellenism – something which still awaits better investigation and clarification from within the sapiential tradition itself.31 The text transmits to us a striking picture of the author and of his spiritual progress but does not give us a reciprocally vivid description of the society in which he lived. The sociological reading has to strain to make out the presence and the role of the traditional religious specialists (king, priest, prophet and sage), the leading figures of the social life of the time in an ancient text of wisdom provenance. These socio-religious specialists are all present, in different measure, in our text, but they do not appear as figures equally representative of a real historical dialectic, showing themselves rather as functional elements of the narrative strategy of the author. In fact, in this book, there is no evident trace of that necessary dramatic relationship which is objectively established between public and institutional figures; an ambiguous and flexible relationship which can assume the traits of collaboration or subjection, working cooperation or polemical confronta-

29 See in particular OLYAN, Ben Sira’s Relationship to the Priesthood. 30 In this encomium or epic poem, the deliberate omission of illustrious persons must also have significance; in this regard, see the explanation of LEE, Studies, 56, on the hymn interpreted as a constitutive document of Second Temple Judaism. 31 So MURPHY, L’albero della vita, 106. 58 Giuseppe Bellia tion, to the point where we reach those concurrent initiatives which can easily degenerate into forms of conflict.32 The book does not give useful indications concerning the role of king or prophet for us to uncover sure fragments of history or reconstruct the concrete functioning of these institutional figures. In particular, in the Praise of the Ancestors, which more than a record of illustrious men is a history of the covenant and of the mediators concerned,33 although there is a safe- guarding the Davidic Covenant (47:11), there is a suggestive criticism of the downward, and now in political terms finished, spiral of the royal dynasty in Israel. From the loaded emphasis on the high position of David, the blessed of God, to the retreat of Solomon, wise to no purpose, into the shad- ows, from the cowardly and stupid Rehoboam to the treacherous and idolatrous Jeroboam, the royal mediation seems to be consigned to the realms of discreditable memory. It is not without importance, therefore, that Sir- ach ascribes the title of king to God (51:2), wishing in this way to demonstrate the supreme and absolute divine governance of the world (10:4.8). In fact, the power of the king, is willed by God (46:13) who dispenses it and transmits it to whom he wills (45:25) or sets it aside and divides it at his pleasure (47:21). It is always in God’s power, therefore, to bring down the king (48:6) or raise him up (48:8), to cause powerful tyrants to fall or to raise nobodies to the throne (11:5). Moreover, the Lord has the ability to make the king die (10:10) or to prolong his life (48:3), even giving to whoever is faithful to his covenant a stable and secure dynasty (47:11). However, our author also knows the violent and arbitrary aspect of royal power, often exercised in history by inept and wicked men (49:3), with venal rapacity (8:2) and does not have any doubts about the scant reliability of the monar- chical institution when it is in the hands of a king who is dissolute, or, better, inept because «without discipline» (10:3). The author’s distancing himself from the abuse of power, according to his terse and cautious, though firm and resolute, style, is formulated in a cautious and respectful way: “do not oppose those who rule”, and “do not strive with a great man” is his motto – it would be as useless and as dangerous as to go against the current in a river that is full (4:26-27 and 8:1). The only positive note on royalty, so it is said, occurs in the reference to the royal covenant of the son of Jesse (45:25 and 47:11.22), a covenant which is reaffirmed but which seems to remain in the shadow compared with the priestly covenant of Aaron (45: 7.15.25b). Is the Praise of the Ancestors, with its messianic allusions with regard to both the priesthood and to royalty, already preparing the ground

32 By contrast, GRABBE, Sacerdoti, profeti, indovini, 212: claims that Sirach tells us “much […] about the society in which he lived”, even if he does not then go on to refer to any of these social and cultural characteristics! 33 MARBÖCK, Die “Geschichte Israels” als “Bundesgeschichte”. An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira 59 perhaps for that double expectation of the royal and priestly Messiah peculiar to the theological vision of the Essenes? A similar situation of something faded by time is evident in the pauci- ty of prophetic terminology used throughout the chapters cataloguing the famous ancestors (46-50), giving us to understand that prophetism, though valued by the author with a lively and sympathetic appreciation (24:33; 33: 16-17), is considered with regret as solely a religious phenomenon of the past, now replaced by the sapiential function (39:6 Gr; 48:12).34 Sirach’s admi- ration is directed rather towards figures venerated by the tradition for their strong personality, like Samuel (46:13.15), or like the prophetic figures of the fiery and terrible Elijah (48:1.8), the unyielding and proud Elisha (48: 12-16) or the great visionary Isaiah (48:22). Finally, only a sober direct mention is reserved for the attractive, if awkward, figure of Jeremiah and his role of judging the destinies of Israel (49:7), while there is not missing a reverent mention of the twelve minor prophets (49:10).35 Interesting from the sociological point of view is the Deuteronomistic concept which associates under the name of prophet all those who perform a work of mediation for the salvation of the people, even if they are public characters like the kings Hezekiah and Josiah. Again, the sociological reading of the book observes the thematic coincidence and the temporal correspondence between the threefold division of the sacred Hebrew books mentioned in the Prologue and the place assigned to prophetism in the celebratory and rationalising recapitulation of our author. In this he seems to reflect the rethinking of the role of prophecy which had taken place in the sapiential school and which had already prepared its own theory to explain the decrease in the ancient role of the prophets and the development of the prophetic function at the time of Ben Sira: the mediation of these respected religious functionaries could now be successfully realised by other and more adequate mediators such as the priests, the scribes, and, naturally, the wise (33:16-17). Sociological observation also helps us to set in its proper light the excep- tional work of religious and political mediation performed by the sacerdotal function, based on the majestic liturgy of the Temple and centred on the socio-economic system of blood sacrifices. This delivers us moreover a more nuanced knowledge of the culture of the author which, focusing primarily on scribal wisdom, makes the claim that he belonged to the priestly fami- lies very problematic.36 The description – a little over the top – of the mag-

34 GILBERT, Spirito, Sapienza e Legge, identifies that which Ben Sira preaches about wisdom with what Joel says of the Spirit. 35 Possible references to Jeremiah in Sir 33:16 (Jer 1:11-12) and in Sir 50:27-29 (Jer 51:64). 36 We cannot share the thesis of STADELMANN, Ben Sira als Schriftgelehrter,40-176, who makes of Ben Sira a spokesman for the priestly class; he was probably not even a representative of the aristocratic class of Jerusalem, but a talented scribe who had succeeded in climb- 60 Giuseppe Bellia nificent figure of Simon, the High Priest, sung in the splendour of the cultic framework of the great and moving celebrations of the Temple in Jerusalem (50:1-21), and the same emphasis on the covenants with Aaron and Phineas (45:7.11.25b) should not deceive us. To the theological valua- tion of the sacerdotal function, there is no corresponding language in the compositional fabric with regard to the common cultural tradition which would be useful in recognising something of the organisation of Jewish society in that period.37 A hint at a probable administrative function in the Tem- ple is encountered in 45:24; while in 50:1-4, we find a reference to the political role exercised by the High Priest, Simon, under the Ptolemies.38 On the whole, Ben Sira addresses the descendants of Aaron with deference and respect (7:29-31), but uses the technical terms for the various offerings in a vague manner, thus showing his scant attendance, his lack of familiarity, certainly his minimal competence in a matter so characteristic of the specific mediation of the priests which he so exalts.39 Otherwise, apart from the passages just cited which witness to the Jerusalem environment of our author, there is no indication in the text of any other duty proper to the sacerdotal function which he celebrates, in its liturgical function, with an admir- ing, even ecstatic eye; the priestly role is exalted above all with reference to the august figure of Aaron (45:6-22), the zealous action of Phineas (45:23- 24) and the contemplation of the cultic ministry of Simon (50:1-21), but is this enough on which to detect a messianic vein in the theology of Sirach?40 The amount of literary space allocated to them should not make us forget that these priestly figures occupy the second and third places in the catalogue of glory and are placed after Moses, the “chosen out of all mankind” for teaching the Law (45:6). The conclusion of the pericope which warns all the descendants of Aaron from separating themselves from the example of the fathers (45:26), according to the opinion of many, seems to allude precisely to the coming dissolution of the family of the Oniads in the time immediately preceding the Maccabean Revolt. In short, even if the priests

ing the social ladder, as can be read in 33:16f, according to the interpretation also of ALBERTZ, Storia della religione nell’Israele antico, 644, note 3. 37 There is no reference to the administrative institutions typical of the Ptolemaic period; no hint of the council of elders (gerousi,a) or to the priestly college (to. koino,n tw/n i`erw/n), formed from representatives of the priests, the levites, and the Temple personnel, organised for twba tyb (cf. Neh 2:16; 3:1; 12:1-7; 13:4.28; Ezra 2:36ff.61f.): cf. HENGEL, Giudaismo ed ellenismo, 70-74; ALBERTZ, Storia della religione nell’Israele antico, 513-514 and 639- 641. 38 Whether or not the High Priest was the competent authority also in financial matters remains controversial: cf. Sir 5:1-4; JOSEPHUS, Ant. 12,158. 39 Cf. DUESBERG –FRANSEN (eds.), Ecclesiastico, 71-81; DAVIDSON, Wisdom and Worship, 98- 117. 40 The proof is to be had in Sir 50:23-24, where the grandson, no longer being able to recall with honour the descendants of the High Priest, Simon, changes his grandfather’s text. An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira 61 are respected and celebrated for their function, they are not proposed to the reader as the central mediators around which to construct the historico-religious development of the future of Israel before the other nations. In this case, they would not have performed a role that was solely cultic, but would have exercised an effective political role. This is a view of power totally absent in our scribe but practised with the result of which we are aware form the history of the priestly family of the Maccabees up to the High Priest Caiphas. The heart of Ben Sira was pulsing towards another, emerging form of mediation: the sapiential function, by now endowed with a theological and moral authority not inferior to that of the other mediators and consecrated by God with his blessing, full of every good, intellectual and moral (39:1-11). From the linguistic point of view and through the thematic and theological content of his mediation, the wise man, compared with Proverbs, is now characterised in a social sense because he is described as a leader (9: 17; 10:1; 37:23), respected by the people and honoured by God (37:24.26), who several times puts forward his personal way of life as instructive testimony of the gift which he has received (24:28-32; 33:16-18; 50:27-29), which even acts as an invitation to those who are without instruction to take up lodging in his house (51:23), with the result that we have the very rich and new figure of the religious specialist described by Sirach. From the initial poem (1:1-10) to the autobiographical confession which concludes his work (51:13-30), by way of the centrality of a wisdom which reveals itself (24:1- 22) to the portrait of the wise scribe (38:24–39:11), everything in Ecclesias- ticus is redolent of the absolute good of the fearful knowledge of God, of the knowledge of God which, in faithful prayer, the wise scribe simultaneously receives and gives.41 The task of this religious specialist is to educated and advise the young and doubtful so as to make them know, understand and practise choices of life that are coherent and firm in their witness to the faith in the invasive context of the Hellenistic cultural hegemony which has not yet done irreparable damage. Perhaps it is reasonable to think that among the aims pursued by Sirach, there is also a form of resistance to xenophilic fashions and a disguised condemnation of the arrogant count- er-testimony of the Jerusalem aristocracy. The key word in this regard is the term rs'Wm, discipline, translated by the grandson into Greek with paidei,a.42 The very format of the book, composed principally of “instructions” impart- ed to the young or to the student by the scribe-master allows us to understand, along with the pedagogic intention of the book, the centrality of this

41 PRATO, Il problema della teodicea, 102. 42 HENGEL, Giudaismo ed ellenismo, 131, claims that the author is “a master of wisdom with a stable scholastic organisation open to young men, particularly those exposed to the danger of the allurements of Hellenistic civilisation”. 62 Giuseppe Bellia new kind of mediator. Ben Sira is presented as rpws, scribe (38:24), more exactly as a master who is aware of incarnating the sapiential ideal of the tradition (39:1-11), because he is a religious specialist who:

will seek out the wisdom of all the ancients, and will be concerned with prophecies; he will preserve the discourse of notable men and penetrate the subtleties of parables; he will seek out the hidden meanings of proverbs and be at home with the obscurities of parables. He will serve among great men and appear before rulers; he will travel through the lands of foreign nations, for he tests the good and the evil among men (39:1-4).

This last trait emphasises for us the versatility of a master who is of traditional stamp but alive to the great lesson of Greek universalism, who seems devoted to the education of the young which he intends to expand by means of a balanced pedagogic system, able to join the religious heritage of the faith of the Fathers with the more acceptable part of the cultural novelty introduced by the Hellenistic schools,43 accepting perhaps a more direct confrontation with the educational world of the Stoa.44 Because of this, he recognises and welcomes in equal measure the oral teaching of the popular traditions passed on by the masters and the written literature: in his view, the living wisdom generated by the people makes whole and completes the teaching of the sacred books (8:8-9). Scripture and Tradition are, therefore, the best fruits of this sapiential mediation of which Sirach remains the most successful witness and the most considerable.45 Notwithstanding the luminous portrait of the sage painted by the author in his presentation of scribal activity (38:24–39:11), still problematic and veiled in mystery is the place in history and the institutional form of these religious specialists, their concrete conditions of work, their entire development. In which schools did the scribes study and how did they complete their religious, theological and intellectual instruction, but, above all, where were they initiated into the problems of public affairs, of national and international policy? Who supervised their educational expeditions among the foreign nations to finish off their education and increase their

43 GILBERT, Siracide, 1407; cf. by the same author, Il concetto di tempo (‘t) in Qohelet e Ben Sira, in: BELLIA –PASSARO (eds.), Il libro del Qohelet, 69-89. 44 According to MIDDENDORP, Die Stellung, 34, Ben Sira has written “a school book” on the Greek model; he has brought together the philosophical teaching of the Stoics and that of the OT. 45 In this sense, as DUBARLE has written, we find in Sirach “the inventory of a heritage” (Les Sages d’Israël, 147). An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira 63 knowledge?46 The Hebrew text of Sirach (51:23) knows of a “house of study” (bet midrash), which the grandson has translated in a figurative sense (house of paideia), while someone has had the good idea of locating it as “a scholastic, dialectic teaching where the master and pupil enjoy reciprocal conversation on the theoretical problems most relevant to existence”.47 In fact we are faced here with a hasty reading which superimposes and confuses understanding on the literary level, which undoubtedly betrays the undeniable formal influence of the Greek school, and the historical and institutional level of the concrete educational system practised in Israel which requires further proofs if one wishes to advance beyond the merely hypothetical. In sum, as far as the text is concerned, even if we are faced with an advanced passage composed from the system of general instruction, nothing much is to be learned about the existence of schools and of teachers, of places of study and of forms of cultural education;48 while we are informed about the fervent religious atmosphere which animated the Pales- tinian society of the time and about the pre-eminent place afforded in religious formation to meditation and prayer to acquire the supreme benefit of wisdom which would procure, together with divine favours, the possibility of performing a valued and well-paid job among the people and among the nations.49 All in all, with the exception of the emerging figure of the wise scribe, the sociological information does not prove to be of much use, yielding knowledge and information very close to that furnished by the book of Proverbs.

3. From text to society

The anthropological examination is not concerned with the macro-social aspects but seeks to point out what there is of the cultural weave of the text, beyond the theological intention pursued by the author, which is really shared by the addressee-reader and, therefore can be read and communicated as the common cultural background in that precise social reality. If we proceed, therefore, from the text to society, we should be able to pick out in the final redaction those day to day characteristics which make up the existence of particular social groups and which, within the social con-

46 Cf. 39:4 and 34:9-12. It is useful to make a comparison with what PHILO says on the sue- fulness of journeys for instruction (De Ebrietate 158), cited in MINISSALE, Siracide. (Eccle- siastico), 163f. 47 Cf. PAX, Dialog und Selbstgespräch, 256. For the device of the master-pupil dialogue or the interior dialogue, cf. 5:1-4; 23:18; 27:5.7; 30:23. 48 MORLA ASENSIO, Eclesiástico, 191. 49 On the ideal of the sage according to Sirach, cf. RICKENBACHER, Weisheitsperikopen, 176- 196. 64 Giuseppe Bellia vention proper to the time, are not only comprehensible in terms of that particular group but also recognisable from other cultural traditions. In our case, the complex state of affairs with regard to the text confronts us with an added difficulty: it is a question of indicating, from time to time, beyond the narrative device adopted by Ben Sira, what kind of effective social organisation is conveyed by the redaction of the Greek text in its long form or by the Hebrew text when it is different. The phenomenon of different textual traditions, short and long, between the primitive Hebrew text and the ensu- ing Greek version, is known also in other books of the Bible as the inevitable hermeneutic expansion consequent on the transmission of a work through different theological traditions. The development of a system of glosses is still more understandable in a book like Sirach which has been transmitted in the course of many years and, therefore, destined to include redactional expansions which should really be considered as marginal glosses inserted into the text.50 Or else because it is written according to that typical “anthological style” which allows the author to take up and repeat expressions drawn from previous writings of the Bible and its conceptual and figurative vocabulary, adopting their terminology and even their very phraseology, weaving a narrative texture composed of citations, direct and indirect, of references and allusions, of images and symbols gathered from within the great Biblical tradition.51 The particular “anthological composition” of his writing helps us to understand that the originality of an author like Ben Sira, bound with a double thread to the difficult Deuteronomistic heritage and to part of the sapiential tradition, cannot be detected in the innovatory content of his reflection but in the able presentation of the preceding theological patrimony conveyed by means of a shrewd literary strategy which succeeds in unit- ing and making fluent a discontinuous body of maxims, proverbs and isolated sayings, making it evolve into ordered thematic compositions where the different literary genres adopted are composed into a discursive continuity which at times is even harmonious, a truly surprising outcome!52 This displays incomparable editorial dexterity on the part of an author brought up within a tradition which, for the theologian, clung obstinately to the doctrinal synthesis of the retributionist school,53 “as if Job and Qoheleth had never been written”,54 while without any fuss he adopts here and there responses, criticisms and solutions to them, things which had by now become inevitable or which had already been taken up in the popular her-

50 MURPHY, L’albero della vita, 95. 51 SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 21-30. 52 DUESBERG –FRANSEN (eds.), Ecclesiastico, 64-71; MURPHY, L’albero della vita, 99. 53 SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 83-87. 54 So again, MURPHY, L’albero della vita, 100. An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira 65 itage of the sapiential tradition. Always attentive, from this point of view, to the literary dimension, we must take into account the many repetitions of content which lead our author to re-present and repeat some themes in different sections of his work, without an apparent logical criterion and without any harmonising tendency. There are those who have seen in some of these repetitions a thematic progression and even a theological development bound up with the three hymnic sections.55 With great circumspec- tion, the anthropological reading will be concerned with these reconstructions as evidence of the culture implicitly present in these repetitions in order to organise the data verified according to typologies which need to be compared with those of the previous sapiential texts. The universally recognised compositional and conceptual closeness between Proverbs and Sirach allows us to pick out some notable and obvious anthropological differences between the two books. Both of them breathe the same air of having found faith again in the capacity of man to discover Wisdom by means of a disciplined use of his faculty of reason, but, compared with the socially convulsed and agitated atmosphere of the former, which is marked with those forms of widespread immorality characteristic of metropolitan areas, Ben Sira describes a rarefied urban environment, one would say an almost tranquil provincial city of the great Hellenistic universe; in short, a secure place, liveable in because of the shelter it affords from the incursions of armies, a homogeneous and ideal society where social contrasts and unlawful conduct are all able to be put down to the ordinary weakness of the human being; he certainly does not allude to situations of moral degradation and social ruthlessness typical of the social organisation in areas of advanced urbanisation. A careful anthropological stemmatisa- tion is able to indicate the realism of a written work, showing that there is no question of literary fiction: the pedagogic style of our author, eirenic and optimistic to the last, however much in places it appears taken for granted and mannered, does not distort the reality of the cultural links shared by the scribe with the addressees of his work of mediation.

1. If we pick out in detail the anthropological typologies conveyed by the text, there emerges an urban environment where prosperity and poverty and the inevitable social differences, such as the contrasts between rich and poor, are abundantly and realistically known (vide: 11:10-21; 14:11-19; 31:1- 11; 33:20-24), still able to live together without degenerating, for in the healthy and lively society of Jerusalem there is room for a virtuous solidarity of ancient tradition, practised by one part of the upper classes.56 Upon this cir-

55 Cf. MORLA ASENSIO, Libri sapienziali, 181 and 195-196. 56 The practice of forms of solidarity between the social classes in Jerusalem would go back to the time of the great social and religious crisis which broke out in the late Persian peri- 66 Giuseppe Bellia cle of wealthy Judaeans, faithful to the social traditions of the fathers (29:9.11), is incumbent the duty of seeking a demanding social justice (4:1-10; 34:21- 27; 35:14-26), which recognises care of the poor and practises almsgiving (3:29–4:10; 7:32-36; 18:15-18; 22:23; 29:1-3.8-13.14; 35:11–36:17), going so far as to condemn abuse of power, even to threatening the rich with the eschatological judgement (35:13-19); with this attitude, the explosion of graver social conflicts is prevented 13:1–14:10). In the same way, more than bad government, there is an awareness and detestation of the malaise of social injustice caused by the petty pride of the rulers, or, better, of the governing classes (10:1-18) whose political careerism is condemned, with an ironical playing, which is courteous and discreet, on the succession of kings, gov- ernments and empires (10:19-25). This acceptance of social life, however, includes awareness of slavery the unhappy existence of which is recorded without particular moral apprehensions (23:10; 33:25-33; 41:25), thus approv- ing the social behaviour widespread at the time and already sanctioned in the Deuteronomic Law (7:20-21; 41:24). In short, a social climate that is not turbulent but also, given the possibility of practising social solidarity, distinct from relative economic well-being allows to emerge the typical traits of an ordinary, comfortable existence. We should mark the human cloese- ness of domestic life and family relationships, through their firmness and their infracultural strength (3:1-16; 7:8-28; 30:1-13; 42:9-14).57 Day to day life does not know pervasive forms of moral corruption, but singular and isolated infractions of the Law, such as adultery (23:16-27), greed rather than usury (14:3 -10) and the intemperance of the arrogant which dissipates inher- itances and destroys the family name (21:4).58 Indicative in this regard is the condemnatory attitude towards traders whose activity exposes them easly to sin (26:29–27:3) and the negative description of the greedy rich always in search of filthy lucre like a ravenous dog (11:30, from the Hebrew text), while the humble toil of the farmer is declared pleasing to God (7:15; 20:28). There is still room for the beauty of relationships and for the value, and the risks, of friendship in particular.59 The brief list of known vices, all reducible to sensual passion, sloth and garrulousness,60 together with the simple joys of common life (14:11-19; 30:21-25) and of healthy nourishment, not to be separated from good manners at table,61 as well as living soberly and in

od, as would appear from Neh 5 and from the book of Job according to the reconstruction of ALBERTZ, Storia della religione nell’Israele antico, 580-594; for Jewish charitable organisation, cf. p. 600. 57 For the relationships between husband and wife, between man and woman, and between father and son, cf. 9:1-9; 3:16-27; 23:22-26; 25:13–26:18; 36:21-27; 42:9-14. 58 Cf. HENGEL, Giudaismo ed ellenismo, 309 note 4 and 310 note 1. 59 Cf. 6:5-17; 9:10-18; 11:29–12:18; 19:13-16; 22:19-26; 27:16-21; 37:1-6. 60 Cf. 6:2-4; 18:30–19:3; 21:1–22:15; 22:27–23:6. 61 Cf. 29:21-28; 31:12–32:13; 37:27-31. An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira 67 conformity with virtue,62 seems to contribute to the picture of a social set- up which is well suited to the Jerusalem of that period and an environment far distant from the social excesses and moral disorders known in other sapiential texts such as Proverbs and Qoheleth.63

2. Of notable anthropological interest in this connection is the comparison between the thematic repetitions and contrasts present in the text. Let us take, for example, the theme of shame which, anticipated in 4:20-31, is then projected on to the double list of true and false shame which goes under the title of “Instruction on Shame” in 41:14–42:8.64 Whereas the Hebrew text of 4:20-31 seems to take aim at the shy behaviour and awkwardness typical of the young who “in the time of plenty” are driven from egoism to insincerity and false restraint and are, therefore, invited not “contradict God”; in the Greek translation, however, for his addressees dispersed in Hellenistic society, the grandson does not scruple to lay down that there should be no human respect and no “opposing the truth”. Remaining with the same theme of shame, the thematic development of 41:14–42:8, sum- marising the previous teaching expounded by the author, allows him to indicate, along with his own sensitivity, how much of the moral sentiment proper to the Biblical tradition of the Second Temple in social relationships is common and shared with the morality of the other cultures, such as the Stoic, which were present within the Hellenistic civilisation of Alexandria. However, the instruction shows itself to be rather valuable for us because, together with the comparison of values and moral behaviours, it allows to emerge the culture implicit, more or less, and shared by grandfather and grandson. So, for example, we learn that, while in the Hebrew text it is shameful “to commit immorality in front of father and mother” (41:17), in the Greek text, which is aware of the loosening of bonds and parental controls, conditions typical of advanced urban societies, it becomes an object of shame to “prostitute oneself in front of father and mother” (porneías). To be ashamed “before master and mistress” (41:18) in a society that is no longer rural and patriarchal from the strong organisation of the state like Alexan- dria becomes “in front of judges and rulers”. The intuitive being ashamed of “breaking oaths and covenants” before parents and friends (41:19b) becomes in the land of the diaspora, where family ties are less intense, the «not being ashamed of his covenant”.65 And again: the generic “not to sin

62 Cf. 1:19–2:18; 3:17-28; 4:20-28; 10:26–11:6; 13:25–14:2; 18:19-29; 22:16-18; 30:14-25; 33:25-33; 36:18-20; 40:28–41:4. 63 Cf. BELLIA, Proverbi: una lettura storico-antropologica, 78 and ID., Lettura storico-antropologica di Qohelet, 193f. 64 The pericope has been studied by MINISSALE, La versione greca, 99-109. 65 One can read the Greek text according to the more coherent correction proposed by Grotius, “be ashamed to forget God and the covenant”: ibid., 106. See also the pertinent 68 Giuseppe Bellia out of human respect” (42:1c) becomes in the Greek text, addressed to those who live in the midst of a foreign people, the more explicit and realistic “do not let partiality lead you to sin”. The specific nature of the cultural environments of the different readers impinges, then, directly on the work of the author and translator, determining the linguistic procedure and the conceptual apparatus, in short, the com- municative register to be adopted to succeed in communicating with the respective addressees. At the same time, they bear witness to the substantial reliability of the information given by the grandson on the time and place of writing, of the scribal labour of Ben Sira and of the succeeding translation into Greek. The passage of the Hebrew into the Greek translation involved an understandable transformation of the text, not only because of the progressive maturing which time can bring to bear in the understanding of the faith of each believer, but especially through those right and proper responses which the ideological provocations and the practical anxieties of the Hel- lenistic diaspora required from every practising Jew – without forgetting the descriptive and thematic variations imposed by that necessary linguistic adaptation, actualising in nature, required by the new social situation.66 The traditional faith, confronted with specific and disconcerting historical and cultural experiences of the world of pagan idolatry was called on to prepare theological and pastoral solutions which were also of a practical and down-to-earth character. The sages had tried to give a faithful explanation, whether by elaborating and re-elaborating rationally what they already knew of God’s revelation to Israel, whether by deepening and con- ceptualising their personal theological experience. The understanding of the faith must bring to conclusion a double commitment: on the one hand, the wise must face up to what they have received and learned of the historico-salvific traditions which were Israel’s heritage in the Book of the Covenant; on the other hand, they have to accept the encounter with the universal wisdom which comes from sincere human enquiry. The anthropological typologies and the linguistic modifications examined, as also the different indicators, stylistic, historical and theological, as has been seen, converge in crediting as probable the precise information contained in the Prologue. This is the direction in which for years the majority of the historical reconstructions of the exegetes has moved. The first draft of the work, in Hebrew, can be placed, therefore, in Jerusalem before 175 BC, while the Greek translation of the grandson can be dated fifty years afterwards, in Egypt, very probably in Alexandria. Concerning the addressees and the aims of the author and translator the specialists are work-

reflections which Minissale makes with regard to the use and the meaning of diatheke in the Greek Sirach, at pp. 109-115. 66 For the techniques of translation in the Alexandrian context, cf. LE DEAUT, La Septante un Targum?, 147-195. An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira 69 ing to find agreement, but the approach by means of the human sciences, as we shall see, has something relevant to say, indicating solutions that are better constructed and complimentary.

4. Proposal for an historico-anthopological reading

The circular movement which has led us from the Gestalt of the leading religious characters to their anthropological verification in the text of Sirach, and from the compositional stratum of the book to the implicit culture of the author, allows us now to attempt to go beyond the question of the text with an historico-anthropological reading. Our enquiry, however, more than fixing the where and the when of the book, must seek to grasp the intention and the whole sense of the scribal work. In particular, once we have identified the cultural behaviour that is most rooted and the mental forms most representative of the social life con-signed in the book, it must contribute to recovering the profound reasons which led Ben Sira to be the first and only Biblical author to declare his scribal identity in the face of the process of the sapientalisation of the Scripture of Israel and, above all in view of the ancient and majestic history of salvation of which he is aware of being a participant. On this quite banal and still little investigated situation – this self-advertisement of the author is not a futile search of vain originality – it is necessary to offer, without pretensions, some starting point for useful reflection after having given some indications as to the probable readers/addressees. The very complex vicissitudes of the transmission and diffusion of the Hebrew and Greek text and of the various versions do nothing to impugn the validity of the results reached but rather confirm the correctness of the spatio-temporal coordinates discovered and the probable specification of the first readers. For an historico-anthropological enquiry, the distance in time and environment between author and translator is a strong element for clarifying the identity of the real subjects who are the focus of interest and the aim of the work. The geographical and cultural distance between Jerusalem and Alexandria, the time lag and all the tragic and blissful events which took place in that tormented half century would have allowed the grandson to free up a certain stylistic reserve on the part of the grandfather or to elucidate, at least in part, the literary form employed in the Hebrew text. In all those passages where it is possible to identify the polemical targets, the translator, although he has the opportunity, is not preoccupied with defining history or with explaining its make-up.67 Now this is the case either

67 There are many interesting passages; cf. in particular 2:12-14; 3:17-24; 4:19; 10:12-18; 28:23; 41:8-9. 70 Giuseppe Bellia because the translator is not in a position to recognise these features or because, in his own time and in his different religious and political context, he does not regard them as meaningful any more: undoubtedly he had to concern himself with negative figures of lesser importance but they were no longer topical and significant in the Alexandrian climate. This obvious reflection must lead us to exclude from the addressees the followers of the incipient apocalyptic circles or the putative Enochic groups. From a lexicographical analysis, with is quantitative parameters, it is clear that, beside the vocabulary of hm'k.x'-sofi,a, the semantic field most widespread is that which focuses on the lo,goj.68 They are the fundamental terms of the “book of the law of the covenant of the Most High”: the believer can prepare his heart to be open continually to listen, advancing in the steep and luminous paths of creative wisdom (1:4-5.9-10),69 or shutting himself up in the presumptuous refusal of non-belief, so losing himself in ways that are easy but slippery with violent and arrogant ungodliness or with visionary and vague nonsense. The “fool”, the “ungodly”, the “buffoon“ and the “violent”,70 with their supposed sufficiency, become, therefore, the antithe- sis of the modest and industrious believer who lives in the protection of the holy fear of God.71 These figures outline a new anthropology which models in an ethico-religious sense the society itself and which, in the particular historical situation, allows to peep through also some negative figures of a turbulent epoch of transition which has already been described as harrowing and distressing.72 As for Proverbs, what unites these two terms is precisely the scribal function.73 Sirach does not step away from that culture

68 On the thematic grouping of the word or, in figurative language , on the use of the tongue in Sirach, cf. 11:7-9; 19:4-17; 20:1-8.18-26; 23:7-15; 27:11-29; 28:8-26; 34:7-18. The figurative language which revolves around terms like “mouth”, “lips”, and “tongue”, develops the so-called “ethics of the word”: in Sirach, see in particular 4:20-29 e 5:9–6:4; for reference to the theme in Proverbs and in Egypt, see BARUCQ, Le livre des Proverbes, 35 and 137-141. To the vocabulary of the word and its ethics, can be linked connected and traditional themes, such as that of the family, of the woman and of friendship. For an overall view of the practical themes touched on by Ben Sira cf. MINISSALE,Siracide. Le radici nella tradizione, 18-19; on friendship, see CORLEY, Ben Sira’s Teaching on Friendship, 7-11. 69 “Sapiential custody” is a theme which, from Ben Sira on, will permeate the spiritual life of the ‘anawim: cf. BELLIA, «Confrontando nel suo cuore», 215-228. 70 To these categories of adversaries of “wisdom», HENGEL, Giudaismo ed ellenismo, 309 and the respective notes, has drawn attention. 71 On “fear of the Lord” see the study of HASPECKER, Gottesfurcht, 328-332; also, SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 75-80. On the trajectory which, in Sirach, joins wisdom (1:1-10), fear of the Lord (1:11-30) and growth of the pupil (2:1-18), see CALDUCH- BENAGES, Un gioiello di Sapienza. 72 Probably those indicated here are the Oniads and the Tobiads rather then the Seleucid rulers of the time; cf. HENGEL, Giudaismo ed ellenismo, 309-311. 73 For Sirach, as for the final editor of Proverbs, the young man is “innocent”, one “without instruction” (51:23), that is, as one who does not yet have knowledge of the word- An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira 71 of the word which is proper to Proverbs, but is conspicuous in that strong role which is assigned to the sage, in an Umwelt where, it is well to remember, the absence of the prophetic function, had now for some time conferred on the scribe the increasing awareness of having become the heir and deposi- tary of it,74 as the grandson himself seems to have been concerned about since he did not hesitate to place his translation in the wake of the most authoritative tradition (24:32-34).75 W. Baumgartner has already seen in Ben Sira the awareness that he had a true prophetic role to perform and speaks of “a singular contamination of wisdom and prophecy”.76 In his writing, the author was moved to assume not only some traits of Biblical prophecy,77 but also the tones of polemical invective against the injustice of the rich (34[31]:24-27), against the moral and religious apostasy of the first Hellenis- ers (2:3; 3:17-24; 4:19; 10:12; 28:23) and against the haughty pride of the ungodly (41:8-9), all of them typical of the prophetic tradition. In fact, the historico-anthropological approach shows us that Sirach is the witness but also the protagonist of a most impressive, if underestimated, religious and cultural metamorphosis: the slow and definitive passage from the knowledge of the divine will through the mediatory work of judges, kings, prophets and priests to the direct and personal hearing of the Law, more exactly,of the Book of the Covenant. Thus, in the relationship between God and man, there is introduced an objective mediation, bound to the process of Scripture’s becoming literature and no longer dependent on the subjective authority of the mediator.78 The revelation of God is now handed over to the authority of a writing regarded as necessary to mediate the divine will through the subsidiary activity of competent interpreters. Knowl- edge of the Covenant, as wisdom proceeding from the mouth of the Most

law and, therefore, does not yet have discipline, education (apaideutos). Received into the heart, the word produces in man the reverent knowing which receives from God the gift of knowledge. On the other hand, whoever does not know how to receive the word in humility, proves the vanity of a knowing which is in fact partial and fallacious. Cf. BELLIA, Proverbi: una lettura storico-antropologica, 85-87. For ALONSO SCHÖKEL –VILCHEZ LINDEZ, I Proverbi, 197: “The word is the principal instrument in the field of wisdom and its opposites”. 74 See in this connection the critical opinion of GAMMIE, The Sage in Sirach, 370-371. 75 Cf. RÜGER, Le Siracide: un livre à la frontière du canon, 67-69. 76 In this connection, always relevant is the study of BAUMGARTNER, Die literarischen Gat- tungen, 186-189, where he explains that Ben Sira in his work uses a variety of typically prophetic genres. 77 So HENGEL, Giudaismo ed ellenismo, 282. 78 The process of becoming literature is to be distinguished from the passage form oral form into writing, governed by rhetoric; it indicates rather that complex phenomenon of literary organisation of a text in which the cognitive material is not aimed solely at communication but, according to the intention of the redactor, is constructed in view of th transformation of the reader. Cf. PESCE, I limiti delle teorie, 101. 72 Giuseppe Bellia

High, had inundated the earth and finally taken up its dwelling in Jacob, operating by means of all the ancestors as exemplars of the concrete manifestations of this process of historical embedding. Now, at the conclusion of this emptying out, this striking will to deprive itself of power, the wisdom of the Most High, handing itself over to the weakness of a work of men’s hands, becoming “book”, could reach the heart of every believer and every man.79 And the God-fearing scribe was now at the centre of this work of divine grace beacsue he had acquired the awareness of being not only the witness and the careful interpreter of this final kenosis of the divine love, but also of being called to collaborate in this work of illumination by allowing wisdom to complete its work in the depth of hearts, just as in the midst of history. From the days of Nehemiah, the people gathered together, not only for the solemn liturgical celebrations but also to hear and understand “the book of the law” by means of the work of mediators qualified and recognised as they were, to wit, the scribes. These new religious specialists had the task of making “the reading understood” for as many as were “capable of understanding” (Neh 8:3.8). Their job was to translate the text into Aramaic for the uneducated people and so render the sense of the text accessible and persuasive. This innovatory pastoral initiative was destined to modify the organisation of the religious life of Israel because, by involving the community in the hearing and understanding of revelation conceptualised and transmitted by the written text, it handed over a liturgical role to the communal reading of Scripture which was placed in parallel with the Temple cult, thus favouring religious pluralism.80 The promotion through personal hearing/study of a form of religiosity more interior and demanding, led to the desacralisation of an inaccessible language and at the same time to the consecration of the mediatorial function of the scribe/sage who was called to be not only the interpreter and the mediator of the book, but also the vigilant protagonist of this continual and widespread mediatorial process of divine revelation which joined the sapiential tradition with the Yahwistic religion. In this environment there emerges slowly the “community of the book” which will lead to embracing, as the third Canon, the complex of works which go under the name of Writings and constitute an obvious whole made up of books of varying scribal provenance, not having a precise organising centre but which are placed in dialogue with their own

79 Cf. GILBERT, L’éloge de la Sagesse, 326-348; ID., Spirito, Sapienza e Legge, 65-69; ID., Lec- ture mariale, 539-540. 80 According to ALBERTZ, the cultic structure of the synagogue brought together elements of the microcult of private religiosity and elements of the macrocult of official religiosity, allowing the formation of a communitarian theology more rooted in the real, and, at the same time, favouring the process of the theologising of personal religion (Storia della religione nell’Israele antico, 601-602). An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira 73 tradition and with their own historico-social context.81 The book of Sirach, as the work of grandfather and his translator grandson, would then be the supreme witness to this wonderful theological fusion between official religion and personal experience which is not frightened of contaminating the culture of the Jerusalem community with that of the community of the diaspora.82 However, just as it was not enough to belong to the priestly class to have “wisdom of heart” (46:26), so it was not enough to be a scribe to have nuptial experience of wisdom; hence the call to quiet listening, to diligent labour in study, to perseverance in the crucible of trial, and, finally, to the humble and trustful prayer which joins the praise of God indissolubly to the sapiential didactic activity itself.83 This explosive transformation of the relationship between the believer and God into a more interior and personal relationship, no longer mediat- ed entirely by the old institutional forms, was not understood in its irreversible religious and social effects by the priestly class and not even by the movement of the Maccabean Revolt which exploited to the full, however, its political possibilities. The transformation in progress was an inevitable tendency which was to have social repercussions of vast cultural importance, as would be shown by the flourishing of the different movements which grew up in the wake of that period and which would contribute to the development of Second Temple Judaism.84 The reason for the centrality of this radical change lies in the fact that it is located historically at “the point of intersection between the Biblical text and the concrete society in which it is ‘actualised’ at the very moment in which there is accomplished an impressive hermeneutical perichoresis in the Scriptural process of Israel”85 which, as P. Beauchamp has said, accepted that “the original interpretations of the Law and the prophets had begun to give place to the same interpreted: the original word of God had generated in the heart of the believer the word to God”,86 becoming also in its turn the word of God. The figure of the sage was at the centre of this process of the Scriptural conceptualisationof the faith of Israel and of the giving of

81 MORGAN, Between Text and Community, 71, claims that the impossibility of reducing the “Writings” to a systematic unity is the hermeneutical and theological gift which these books have passed on to the Biblical communities which follow (p. 40). 82 ALBERTZ, Storia della religione nell’Israele antico, 607; MORGAN, Between Text and Com- munity, 53. 83 As REITEMEYER, Weisheitslehre als Gotteslob, has shown. 84 For the debate on the movements of the Second Temple, cf. KAMPEN, The Hasideans, 1- 43; also see the judgements of TCHERIKOVER, Hellenistic Civilisation, 196-198; the reconstruction of HENGEL, Giudaismo ed ellenismo, 361-372; ALBERTZ, Storia della religione nel- l’Israele antico, 345-349; SACCHI, Storia del Secondo Tempio, 142-178. 85 Cf. BELLIA, Proverbi: una lettura storico-antropologica, 86-87. 86 Cf. BEAUCHAMP, Teologia biblica, 235. 74 Giuseppe Bellia new meaning to the Covenant in a troubled time of epochal change. Ben Sira, the scribe, shows an awareness of this transformation in progress and invites those who have not experienced it to do just that, taking their place in the “house of study” (51:23). The catalogue of the famous ancestors and the trace of his own identity left at the end of the historical fresco perform this function of conscious witness; yes indeed, wisdom, having operated by means of the great figures in the history of Israel, was continuing to act in the present by means of the work of the scribe Joshua ben Eleazar ben Sira. An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira 75

Bibliography

ALBERTZ, R., Storia della religione nell’Israele antico. 2: Dall’esilio ai Maccabei, Brescia 2005. ALONSO SCHÖKEL, L. – VILCHEZ LINDEZ, J., I Proverbi, Roma 1988. BARUCQ, A., Le livre des Proverbes, Paris 1964. BAUMGARTNER, W., Die literarischen Gattungen in der Weisheit des Jesus Sirach: ZAW 34 (1914), 186-189. BEAUCHAMP, P., Teologia biblica, in: LAURET,B.– REFOULÉ, F., Iniziazione alla pratica della teologia. I: Introduzione, Brescia 1986, 197-254. BELLIA, G., Historical and Anthropological reading of the Book of Wisdom, in: PASSARO, A. – BELLIA G. (eds.), The Book of Wisdom in Modern Research. Studies on Tradi- tion, Redaction, and Theology (DCLY 2005), Berlin – New York 2005. BELLIA, G., La “nuova archeologia biblica”: dalla svolta epistemologica all’antropolo- gia storica: Ho Theológos 15 (1996), 205-252 and 369-419. BELLIA, G., «Confrontando nel suo cuore». Custodia sapienziale di Maria in Lc 2,19b: BeO 25 (1983), 215-228. BELLIA, G., Proverbi: una lettura storico-antropologica, in BELLIA,G.– PASSARO, A. (eds.), Il libro dei Proverbi. Tradizione, redazione, teologia, Casale Monferrato (AL) 1999, 55-90. BELLIA, G., Lettura storico-antropologica di Qohelet, in: BELLIA,G.– PASSARO, A. (eds.), Il libro del Qohelet. Tradizione, redazione, teologia, Milano 2001, 171-216. BLENKINSOPP, J., Sage, Priest, Prophet: Religious and Intellectual Leadership in Ancient Israel, Louisville 1995. BRAUDEL, F., (ed.), Problemi di metodo storico. Antologia delle “Annales” (BUL 24), Bari 1982. BURKE, P., Una rivoluzione storiografica, Roma – Bari 19995. CALDUCH-BENAGES, N., Un gioiello di Sapienza. Leggendo Siracide 2, Milano 2001. CANCIK, H., Mythische und historische Wahrheit Interpretationen zu Texten der hethi- tischen, biblischen and griechischen Historiographie, Stuttgart 1970. CANFORA, L., La storiografia greca, Milano 1999. Civiltà e imperi del Mediterraneo nell’età di Filippo II, Torino 1953. CORLEY, J., Ben Sira’s Teaching on Friendship (BJSt 316), Providence RI 2002. DAVIDSON, R., Wisdom and Worship, London – Philadelphia 1990. DUBARLE, A. M., Les Sages d’Israël, Paris 1946. DUESBERG, H. – FRANSEN, I. (eds.), Ecclesiastico (LSB), Torino – Roma 1966. GAMMIE, J. G. – PERDUE, L. G., The Sage in Israel and the Ancient Near East, Winona Lake 1990. GAMMIE, J. G. , The Sage in Sirach, in: GAMMIE, J. G. – PERDUE, L. G., The Sage in Israel, 355-372. GILBERT, M., Introduction au livre de Ben Sira, ou Siracide, ou Ecclésiastique, Roma 1985-86. GILBERT, M., L’Ecclésiastique: Quel texte? Quelle autorité?: RB 94 (1987), 233-250. GILBERT, M., Spirito, Sapienza e Legge secondo Ben Sira e il libro della Sapienza: PSV 4 (1981), 65-73. GILBERT, M., L’éloge de la Sagesse (Siracide 24): RTL 5 (1974), 326-348. 76 Giuseppe Bellia

GILBERT, M., Lecture mariale et ecclésiale de Siracide 24,10 (15): Marianum 47 (1985), 536-542. GILBERT, M., Siracide, in: DBS XII, 1389-1437. GILBERT, M., Il concetto di tempo (‘t) in Qohelet e Ben Sira, in: G. BELLIA – A. PASSARO (eds.), Il libro del Qohelet. Tradizione, redazione, teologia, Milano 2001, 69-89 GRABBE, L. L., Sacerdoti, profeti, indovini, sapienti nell’antico Israele, Cinisello Balsamo 1998. HASPECKER, J., Gottesfurcht bei Jesus Sirach (AnBib 30), Rom 1967. HEMPEL, C. G., The Function of General Laws in History, in: ID., Aspects of Scientific Explanation, New York – London 1964. HENGEL, M., Giudaismo ed ellenismo. Studi sul loro incontro, con particolare riguar- do per la Palestina fino alla metà del II secolo a.C., Brescia 2001. KAMPEN, J., The Hasideans and the Origin of Pharisaism (SCSt 24), Cambridge, MA 1988. LE DEAUT, R., La Septante un Targum?, in: KUNTZMANN,R.– SCHLOSSER, J. (eds.), Études sur le Judaïsme hellénistique (LeDiv 119), Paris 1984, 147-195. LEE, T. R., Studies in the Form of Sirach 44-50 (SBL.DS 75), Atlanta 1986. LEMAIRE, A., Scribes: I. Proche-Orient; II. Ancien Testament – Ancien Israël, in: DBS XII, 244-266. MARBÖCK, J., Weisheit im Wandel (BBB 37), Bonn 1971. MARBÖCK, J., Die “Geschichte Israels” als “Bundesgeschichte” nach dem Sirachbuch, in: ZENGER, E. (ed.), Der neue Bund im alten. Studien zur Bundestheologie der beiden Testamente (QD 146), Freiburg i.B. – Basel – Wien 1993, 177-197. MIDDENDORP,TH., Die Stellung Jesu Ben Sirac zwischen Judentum und Hellenismus, Leiden 1973. MINISSALE, A., Siracide (Ecclesiastico) (Nuovissima Versione della Bibbia 23), Roma 1980. MINISSALE, A., Siracide. (Ecclesiastico), Cinisello Balsamo (Mi) 1989. MINISSALE, A., Siracide. Le radici nella tradizione (LoB 1.17), Brescia 1988. MINISSALE, A., La versione greca del Siracide. Confronto con il testo ebraico alla luce dell’attività midrascica e del metodo targumico (AnBib 133), Roma 1995. MORGAN, D. F., Between Text and Community: The «Writings» in Canonical Interpre- tation, Minneapolis 1990. MORLA ASENSIO, V., Libri sapienziali e altri scritti, Brescia 1997. MORLA ASENSIO, V., Eclesiástico, Texto y comentario (El mensaje del Antiguo Testamen- to 10), Salamanca – Madrid – Estella 1992. MURPHY, R. E., L’albero della vita. Una esplorazione della letteratura sapienziale biblica, Brescia 1993. NICCACCI, A., Siracide o Ecclesiastico. Scuola di vita per il popolo di Dio, Cinisello Bal- samo (Mi) 2000. OLYAN, S.M., Ben Sira’s Relationship to the Priesthood: HTR 80 (1987), 271-286. PAX, E., Dialog und Selbstgespräch bei Sirach 27,3-10: SBFLA 20 (1970), 247-263. PESCE, M., I limiti delle teorie dell’unità letteraria del testo, in: FRANCO, E. (ed.), Mys- terium Regni ministerium Verbi. Scritti in onore di mons. Vittorio Fusco, Bologna 2000. PRATO, G. L., Il problema della teodicea in Ben Sira. Composizione dei contrari e richiamo alle origini (AnBib 65), Roma 1975. An historico-anthropological reading of the work of Ben Sira 77

REITEMEYER, M., Weisheitslehre als Gotteslob. Psalmentheologie im Buch Jesus Sirach, Bodenheim 2000. RICKENBACHER, O., Weisheitsperikopen bei Ben Sira (OBO 1), Göttingen 1973. RICOEUR, P., Il conflitto delle interpretazioni, Milano 1972. RICOEUR, P., Dell’interpretazione. Saggio su Freud, Milano 1967. RICOEUR, P.,Tempo e racconto; La configurazione nel racconto di finzione; Il tempo raccontato, 1-3, Milano 1986-1988. RICOEUR, P., La memoria, la storia, l’oblio, Milano 2003. ROTH, W., On the Gnomic-Discursive Wisdom of Jesus Ben Sirach: Semeia 17 (1980), 59-79. RÜGER, H. P., Le Siracide: un livre à la frontière du canon, in: KAESTLI, J.-D. – WERMELINGER, O. (eds.), Le canon de l’Ancien Testament. Sa formation et son histoire (MoBi), Génève 1984, 47-69. SACCHI, P., Storia del Secondo Tempio. Israele tra VI secolo a.C. e I secolo d.C., Torino 2002. SKEHAN,P. W.,– DI LELLA, A. A., The Wisdom of Ben Sira. A New Translation with Notes, Introduction, and Commentary (AncB 39), New York 1987. SMEND, R., Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach, Berlin 1906. STADELMANN, H., Ben Sira als Schriftgelehrter (WUNT 6), Tübingen 1980. TCHERIKOVER, V., Hellenistic Civilisation and the Jews, Philadelphia – Jerusalem 1961. VATTIONI, F., Ecclesiastico. Testo ebraico con apparato critico e versioni greca, latina e siriaca, Napoli 1966. VEYNE, P., Come si scrive la storia, Roma – Bari 1973. VOVELLE, M., Storia e lunga durata, in: LE GOFF, J. (ed.), La nuova storia, Milano 1990, 49-80.

Ben Sira and Qumran

ÉMILE PUECH

As with the Book of Wisdom, the canonicity of Ecclesiasticus or Ben Sira among the Writings has a long history. Should it be counted into the Greek canon of Alexandria or be excluded according to the shorter list of the Hebrew Biblical books? Before its translation into Greek in Egypt around 130 BC, the book first appeared in Hebrew during the first decades of the second century. What was its original status as a wisdom book before being excluded from the normative books by the Rabbis?1 The Prologue by his grandson, who had taken so much care to translate it correctly, gives a quite precise idea of the utility of the book for a Jewish reader. Following others, M. Gilbert pronounced his belief in the inspiration of both textual forms: the short text or Greek I (= Gr I) from Hebrew I (= Hb I), and its revision, the long text or Greek II (= Gr II) translated from Hebrew II (= Hb II) but with some particular additions.2 The manuscript tradition is still somewhat more complicated, because there exists a Latin translation (VL) of Gk II in the 2nd century AD and a Syriac translation (the Peshitta) around the 3rd ca. of a Hebrew text near to Hb I,3 both of them being witnesses in various places of particular recensions. Therefore, to find the shape of the original text, where it is possible with the help of manuscripts, could be a profitable enterprise so as to examine the cultural milieu of the author and also the reinterpretations of the successive translators. In an excellent status quaestionis M. Gilbert wrote: “Une étude d’ensem- ble sur les rapprochements entre Ben Sira et Qumrân fait encore défaut. Sur le rôle des Qumrâniens dans l’élaboration d’Hb II, thèse prônée par C. Kearns (...), manque également une étude systématique”.4 The present work attemps to outline some elements of a response, firstly focusing on the generally accepted points as first stated by M. Gilbert.5 We will review the

1 See KOPERSKI, Sirach and Wisdom, 261f where the author reports that Talmud and other Jewish writings occasionally quote Ben Sira with the formula “it is written”, formula normally intended for canonical books. LEEMANS, Canon and Quotation, 265-277, shows that the subject is disputed, see further DORIVAL, L’apport des Pères de l’Église, 104-106. 2GILBERT, L’Ecclésiatique: quel texte?, after particularly GRELOT, La Bible Parole de Dieu, 177. 3 While we are still waiting for a critical edition of the Peshitta, see CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER –LIESEN, La Sabiduría del escriba, who give an editio princeps of codex Ambrosianus (VIIth century?). 4GILBERT, Siracide, 1415. 5 See further GILBERT, The Book of Ben Sira, 81-91, and a first approach of the subject by PUECH, Le livre de Ben Sira, 411-426. 80 Émile Puech

Hebrew manuscripts of Ben Sira which have been found, and the citations, allusions and some common points in the manuscripts of Qumran which permit one to suppose a dependence of the latter on the former, and then we will analyse their respective positions on some important points.

1. The Hebrew manuscripts of Ben Sira at Qumran, Masada and Cairo

Whereas a copy of the Hebrew text had been translated into Greek by his grandson and later on another one into Syriac, the fact that the rabbis who have not greatly regarded the book, excluding it from the canon at Jamnia, have occasionally alluded to it6 and that Jerome had known a copy in the 4th century AD,7 before the book in its original language was forgotten for ever, the recent discoveries from Cairo to Masada, spread over a century, nevertheless give quite a good idea of the Hebrew text for about two thirds of the composition.

1.1 The Cairo manuscripts

The six manuscripts recovered in the geniza of the Karaite al-Fustat synagogue in Old Cairo and published between 1896 and 1912 are of three forms: manuscripts B (with marginal glosses), E and F are copied in stichometry, A, C and D are in a continuous script, but C is only an anthology. These copies from the High Middle Age (Xth-XIIth centuries) are not a mere translation from Greek or Syriac, but they derive in their entirety from manuscripts found just before 800 in one of the caves of the Jericho area, very probably from Qumran.8 The continuous or stichometric script was already

6 See SCHECHTER, The Quotations: 24 citations; COWLEY –NEUBAUER, The Original Hebrew: 79 citations. But only 19 hemistichs in 106 correspond to the terminology of the Cairo Hebrew manuscripts, the 87 others are more or less free paraphrases without a precise conformity of vocabulary, probably because the authors were dependent on an oral tradition or on translations instead of a copy at hand. On the other hand, Saadiyah Gaon quotes 26 hemistichs essentially in the shape of Cairo Ms A and another rather ad sensum, see DI LELLA, The Hebrew Text, 95f, and LEHMANN, 11QPsa and Ben Sira, 242-246, but BEENTJES, The Book of Ben Sira in Hebrew, does not give any mark of that. 7 See the preface of Jerome to the Salomo’s books, Biblia Sacra juxta Vulgatam versionem, 957. 8 On that discovery, see the Letter of Patriarch Timotheus I to Sergius Metropolite of Elam, in BRAUN, Ein Brief des Katholikos Timotheos I, 299-313, and DUVAL, Une découverte, 174-79. The identification to a cave of Qumran also explains the discovery of two copies Ben Sira and Qumran 81 that of the scriptorium of Qumran for the literary genre of wisdom texts. Compare for instance on the one hand the latest manuscript of Proverbs, 4QProverbsa (4Q102) in stichometry and 4QProverbsb (4Q103), the earliest manuscript from the middle of the 2nd century BC in a continuous script and, on the other hand, the manuscripts of Ben Sira from Qumrân and Masa- da in stichometry in the 1st century BC. Finally the manuscripts B and E confirm the order of chapters known from the Syriac and Latin versions.

1.2 The Qumran manuscripts

1.2.1 2Q18

The first Hebrew fragments of Ben Sira at Qumran were identified among the fragments of Cave 2 discovered in 1952, thus reinforcing the hypothesis of the origins of the Karaite copies. The manuscript 2Q18, dated to the third quarter of the 1st century BC,9 has a text in a prosodic arrangement, securely identified on the basis of manuscript A from the Cairo geniza: fragment 2 = Sir 6:20-31. The fragment which belongs to the left side of a sheet (with stitching) shows ink dots for the lines, fixing the remains of 14 lines.10 In spite of the meager final remains of lines 9-10 and 13, the nature of the preserved text confirms the sequence of the verses retained in Greek contra the Cairo manuscript A which intercalates the two stichs of 27:5-6 in place of 6:23-25. Even without preserved written remains, lines 4-6 of fragment 2 must have contained the three verses 6:23-25.11 But compared to Ms A, this fragment attests an unnoticed variant reading in xk[n which is more than a defective orthography, being also a masculine form. Consequently, instead of restoring xk[nayh12 with the Ms A hxwkn ayh, we have to read xk[nawh,in

of the Damascus Covenant and of Testament of Levi in Aramaic among those manuscripts and the copy of 26 hemistichs from a Hebrew text of Ben Sira used by Saadiyah Gaon in the Xth ca., whereas that book, no longer handed down by the Rabbanites, was known to them only by paraphrases. On this origin, see also DI LELLA, Qumrân and the Genizah Fragments of Ben Sira, 245-267, who shows well the Qumranic origin of the manuscripts and the scribes at work. 9 See BAILLET, Les ‘Petites Grottes’, 75-77. 10 The place is not necessarily on the left lower corner of the sheet, contrary to BAILLET, Les ‘Petites Grottes’, 75, since, contrary to fragment 1, no trace of a lower margin is preserved, only the reconstruction of the scroll and the number of lines per column would enable one to assert that. 11 With BAILLET, Les ‘Petites Grottes’, ad loc. The transcript of BEENTJES, The Book of Ben Sira in Hebrew, 123 and 133-134, does not give a precise idea of the text arrangement of 2Q18, frg. 2, still with a mistake in the transcript of 6,22: hk[ for xk[, and read hmXk, not hXmk in 22a. 12 BAILLET, Les ‘Petites Grottes’, follows Cairo Ms A. Likewise, SKEHAN, The Acrostic Poem, 400, read two times ayh !k and xk[nayh. 82 Émile Puech agreement with the masculine substantive of 22a: awh !k hmXk rswmh yk. The Greek reads sofi,a – a feminine substantive.13 The identification of fragment 1 has been difficult due to the fragmentary state of the Hebrew text of Ben Sira. The editor hesitated between 6:14- 15 and 1:19-20. In favor of 6:14-15, which he preferred, he notes the material aspect of the fragment, and in favor of 1:19-20 he notes a long interval, at first sight difficult to explain, in the reconstruction of 15a. Some authors give their preference to 1:19-20,14 which is far from certain. The reading !ya is palaeographically secure, if the break and the distension of leather on which is found the stroke of the letter are taken into account and if the thickness of the upper stroke of the letter on the left of the arm along the break for y is noted, compare frag. 2 10. The downstroke is almost of the same length, but in that script the dimensions of letters are variable. Thus the placing of the fragment in 6:14-15 is much more preferable. The irreg- ular disposition of the beginning of verse 15 may be due to the greater dimension of letters, to the variable distance between the words, to a defect of the surface, to an erasure or to a haplography of bhwa at v. 14 and to a supralinear correction. But whatever about the precise restoration of fragment 1 with 6:14-15, fragment 2 assures the identification of the manuscript.

1.2.2 11Q5 (= 11QPsa) XXI 11 – XXII 1 = Sir 51:13-30

Among the scrolls of Cave 11 discovered in 1956, there is a liturgical collection dated to the first half of the 1st century AD, which contains biblical Psalms, apocryphal compositions and the alphabetical poem of Sir 51:13- 19[...]30 in a continuous script. Only the first half of this poem is preserved, at column XXI 11-18, between Psalm 138 and the acrostic Hymn to Zion: the stichs a-k where many words are missing at line 18 but with remains of stichs, and the last two words of the last stich at column XXII 1. Even once one recognizes the superiority of the Greek over a perturbed transmission

13 Since the confusion of w/y is much more difficult in the manuscripts of the Middle-Ages while it is very easy and frequent in a copy of the 1st century BC, it is probable that the mistake of manuscript A originates from a wrong reading of its original (awh > ayh), then involving the correction of a masculine into a feminine form hx(w)kn. For other errors of this genre, see DI LELLA, The Hebrew Text, 97-101. Syriac translating hnplwy “his teaching” (masc.) can also have read a masculine form. 14 See SEGAL, Ben Sira in Qumran, 243; the Traduction Œcuménique de la Bible, 2141; GILBERT, Siracide, 1394; MARTONE, Ben Sira Manuscripts, 82: “much more likely”. This author seems to understand by “in both manuscripts” (p. 83) that the Cairo Ms A is also copied in stichometry, what is not true. FLINT, «Apocrypha», 36, keeps 1,19? and estimates as three the number of chapters found at Qumran. But BEENTJES, The Book of Ben Sira in Hebrew, 123, identifies the fragment with 6:13-14. Ben Sira and Qumran 83 of the Hebrew of Ms B in its first half,15 the restoration of this latter from the Greek (where the order has been somewhat revised), is not without difficulty. The proposition of Skehan for instance does not take into account the l preserved below the n of !nwbta (l. 17), and it is much too long for the space.16 It would be palaeographically possible to read with the remains of the letters, l. 11 (= vv. 20def): h(n)bz[a ]a[l!k]lXa[rm hm[ ytynq bl hytacm ]h[rh]j[bw] partially with B and Greek.17 The line 17 (= vv. 19cd-20c) has also given rise to different readings. The editor has proposed: ]Xrp and yt]xtp,18 but the reading ]xtp is certain, with B. Then the reading is: .hyla ytwrbh ypk !nwbta (with 42:18 and Greek) hymr[mbw 19ha[yb h]xtp ydy We would have another indication partially supporting the reading of the Syriac in agreement with B contra the Greek ta.j cei/ra,j mou evxepe,tasa pro.j u[yoj (already line 16). I understand thus this badly preserved passage of 11Q5 XXI:

15 Accordingly, many authors agree to see there a pure retroversion of the Syriac text following LÉVI, L’Ecclésiastique, XXI-XXVII, 225-233. 16 SKEHAN, The Acrostic Poem, 388, proposes hbz[a al !k rwb[b. It is the same with hnbzga awl !k rwb[b hlxtm ytynq bl by SANDERS, The Sirach 51 Acrostic, 432. The remains of l belong almost certainly to the second hemistich, not to the first as reconstructed by MURAO- KA, Sir. 51,13-30, 176, followed by MARTONE, The Ben Sira Manuscripts, 84, with debat- able arguments for the inclusio in 11QPsa (pp. 87f). 17 B: [h(n)bz[a al ]!k rwb[b htlxtm hl ytynq blw hytacm hrhjbw. The last proposition of GILBERT, «Venez à mon école», completes the Greek and Syriac according to B, and reads: ..!k rwb[b hlxtm hl ytynq bl. This solution is not possible, since there is no remain of l in hlxtm whereas there are remains of and of a previous letter, possibly a, then remains of l of !kl instead of !k rwb[b of B; beyond that, the space requests to read hm[ with Greek instead of hl: kardi,an evkthsa,mhn met v auvth/j avp v avrch/j dia. tou/to ouv mh. evgkataleifqw/. The proposition of MINISSALE, La versione greca, especially 137-149, hnbz[a al !k rwb[b htlxtm yl ytynq bl is not convincing; it is followed by DAHMEN, Psalmen- und Psalter-Rezeption, 91 and 242-244; this abridges the stich, and instead of the 27 lines supposed by this last author, I hold to 26 lines for this column XXI (= XXX of the scroll). 18 SANDERS, The Psalms Scroll, 42: ]Xrp hymr[m[... and ?la, and 80-82: hymr[m[w ... yt]xtp and ...la. These readings left traces afterwards. RABINOWITZ, The Qumran Hebrew 175: ?? hyt]lbq ytwkzh ypk !nwbta hymr[m[bw...yt[rp , but ]la ytwrbh of Sanders is certain. MARTONE, Ben Sira Manuscripts, 84, reads: la... hymr[m [...] Xrp, and SKEHAN, The Acrostic Poem, 388: (sic) hymwr[mbw hr[X hxtp and hyla.DELCOR, Le texte hébreu, 31 and 36, reads: hymr[m[w ... yt]xtp, and MURAOKA, Sir. 51,13-30, 176: hymr[m...... xtp and ...l.MINISSALE, La versione greca, reads: !nwbta hymr[mw hyr[X hxtp ydy. The reading of BEENTJES, The Book of Ben Sira in Hebrew, 125, is incomprehensible: hymr[[]tp, as the break in 51:20 which does not take into account the acrostichs with y and k.DAHMEN, Psalmen- und Psalter-Rezeption, 91 reads: ...hymr[m[wyt]xtp, which is excluded. 19 I amend my proposition of the note in the Le livre de Ben Sira, 415. A more contrasted photograph permits us to read a and the likely remains of h for ha[yb (with more difficulty ha[wbm a little too long) excluding hr[X according to B: hyr[X and Syriac h[rt. At l. 18, j seems secure, and excluding !wqn of Skehan which I accepted first. B read: [h]b jybaw rdxa hlw hyr[X hxtp ydy. 84 Émile Puech

j 20ab I was continually looking for her and I never ceased to exalt her.20 y 19cd My hand opened her[ ent]rance, and to her secrets I paid attention. k 20cd I purified my hands for her, [and] in pu[rity I found her. l 20ef I clung to her from the beginnin]g, th[erefore ]I will ]n[ot abandon her.

Consequently, by means of some adjustments of B for the second half and of 11QPsa for the first, the Hebrew of the original acrostic poem is entirely recovered. But the Hebrew of 11QPsa, which may represent a form of the text quite near the original, does not especially support the exclusive sexual character of images which some authors will wish to find there.21 Whatever it could be, and this must be expected, the pre-Qumrân acrostic has nothing to do with the sublimation of celibacy of the members of the Community, and 11QPsa cannot be a Qumranic rewriting. Finally, compared to 11QPsa, it is clear that B lost a good part of the acrostic arrangement in the first part of the poem and that it could not be a witness of the original for this passage.

1.2.3 The Masada manuscript (Mas1h or Mas)

On the 1st April 1964, fragments of a scroll of Ben Sira22 which cover chapters 39:27 to 44:17 were discovered in the ruins of Masada, but with no remains of 39:33 to 40:7;23 40:9-10.22-25, and 43:26-28 and 30-33.24 The manuscript, dated to the beginning of the 1st century BC,25 is stichometrically

20 The authors do not agree on the reading of hymwrbw of B and several prefer to read hmmwrbw, an infinitive polel instead of a plural substantive hymwr, “his heights”, but this last form could also be understood as an infinitive qal with the feminine singular suffix in an orthography already known at Qumran, for instance in 4Q525 2 ii 2, and the meaning “to exalt” is attested also for qal; there is no reason to correct B. 21 SANDERS, The Psalms Scroll, 83-85; ID., The Sirach 51 Acrostic, 433f; DELCOR, Le texte hébreu, 36f; MURAOKA, Sir. 51,13-30; MARTONE, The Ben Sira Manuscripts, 86f. Thus in that stich, Greek did not need to avoid the much too explicit words in that direction, since Hebrew does not seem to have them! GILBERT, «Venez à mon école», concludes in that way also. Besides, Martone (87f) takes up without new arguments the conclusion of Sanders on the non authenticity of this Psalm in Ben Sira, but see also GILBERT, The Book of Ben Sira, 83, who thinks that this acrostich could be a conclusion of the book as well as the alphabetic composition of Prov 31:10-31 in Proverbs, likewise still GILBERT, «Venez à mon école». For FLINT, «Apocrypha», 36-37, who accepts the erotic interpretation, the copy of this acrostich in 11QPsa could prove its original independence before its insertion in the Ben Sira’s book. 22 YADIN, The Ben Sira Scroll, 151-225 and 227-252. 23 The Yadin edition includes a number of reading mistakes, and line I 23 accurately deci- phered belongs to 40:8, not to 40:10, see the review by Skehan: JBL 85 (1966), 260. 24 See MILIK, Un fragment mal placé; BAUMGARTEN, Some Notes; STRUGNELL, Notes and Queries, even if not all the remarks are acceptable, see further SKEHAN, Sirach 40,11-17, and ID., Sirach 30,12, 541f. 25 See YADIN, The Ben Sira Scroll, 4 and note 11, quoting the opinions of F. M. Cross and of N. Avigad. It is difficult to understand the proposition of MARTONE, Ben Sira Manuscripts, Ben Sira and Qumran 85 arranged, like 4QProverbsa,26 a contemporary manuscript of a comparable genre. Accordingly it is somewhat earlier than 2Q18, a copy of a similar type. Since Ben Sira had not been included in the canon by the Rabbis in the 2nd century AD, it is more probable that the Masada scroll comes from Qumran, like the Shirot ‘Olat ha-Shabbat scroll brought to the resistance net- work by the last escapees among the refugees of the Judaean Desert.27 One of the indications is the replacement, in a former period, of the tetragrammaton of the original manuscript by ynda (in defective orthography) in 42:15 and 17c (Ms B ~yhla), 42:16 and 43:5 (Ms B yyy and !wyl[ in the marginal gloss in 43:5), 43:10 (Ms B la, Greek a`gi,ou) or by a suffix wytwalpn in 42:17b and already in the Greek Vorlage (Ms B yyy, suffix of a marginal gloss in a supplementary predicate). The scribes of Qumran used the same processes of substitution in their own compositions, compare 4Q521, etc. Accordingly the Masada copy already supposes some revision, at least at this level, but a revision which has apparently not yet occurred in the copy translated by the grandson of Ben Sira.28 The importance of this manuscript is first due to its age, since it dates a century after the original, i.e. a generation after the translation by the grandson. Because of the substantially preserved passages which overlap large portions of Ms B, it is now possible to appreciate to some extent the

88: “...with some early Herodian characteristics ... between 40 B.C.E. and 20 C.E.”! This writing is quite comparable to that of 4Q521, see PUECH, Qumrân Grotte 4. 26 See SKEHAN, Qumrân. IV. Littérature de Qumrân, 818. See also SKEHAN –ULRICH, Qum- ran Cave 4 XI, 181f. 27 GILBERT, The Book of Ben Sira, 84, sets aside this hypothesis assessing that this discovery would prove that Ben Sira was read also by other Jews. Furthermore this would explain the quotations in the ancient Rabbanite writings. But those quotations could very well come from other copies. The linking of the Masada scroll with Qumran seems very probable. Clearly, would the last non-Essenes opponents have thought to bring scrolls which they thought to be non normative or so unrepresentative in that hiding place? Certainly, the Rabbanite milieu could have held the book as authorized, Babli, Baba Qamma 92, Sanhedrin 100b (rabbi Yoseph), but most often as forbidden, Yerushalmi, Sanhedrin X 1 (rabbi Aqiba). Although little known, Ben Sira is sometimes quoted by the Rabbis, see LEHMANN, 11QPsa and Ben Sira, 243-245. 28 These indications could show that the copies of Cairo Ms B and A were made after a manuscript dated prior to the middle of the 2nd century BC, and partially corrected with another copy somewhat later but in a defective orthography (for example ynda), see BAILLET, Les ‘Petites Grottes’, 75. Indeed, many times the tetragrammaton had not been corrected, see 10:22; 40:26 and 51:1 in the well known expression hwhy tary, except in 40:27, and in Ms A 9:16; 10:12 (~yhla tary), the same in ~yhla ynpl (14:16, Ms A) or yet Ms B in 45:2 ~yhla but yyy in the margin, etc. In 51:15, Ms B reads ynda which is not found again in 11QPsa XXI 13 in another phraseology (see Greek). This would then be a witness of the beginning of that process. For the cases of tetragrammaton retained in Hebrew, see BEN HAYYIM (ed.), The Book of Ben Sira, 157f. The stichometric order would reinforce that remark. 86 Émile Puech value of the Medieval copies on one hand and, on the other, that of the different translations: Gr I and II, Syriac and Latin. This manuscript confirms quite well the Hebrew text of Ms B and especially the value of the marginal gloss, though one must judge each case individually.29 In a great number of cases, sometimes impossible to evaluate given the difficulty of recogniz- ing the original word among the possible synonyms, the manuscript agrees with the Greek. This agreement is found in the cases where the vv. are missing in manuscript B: 40:12; 41:22; 42:5.18c-d.22; 44:12, or the manuscript agrees with B against the Greek in 42:11e, but the Greek and B are in agreement against the Masada manuscript in 44:16 about Enoch.30 In return, in a number of cases, Mas agrees with Ms B against the Greek in the sequence of the verses, or in other cases with the Syriac against the Greek, thus showing that the Syriac is not dependent on the Greek but on a Hebrew manuscript which has itself been somewhat revised. Thus Mas and indirectly the geniza manuscripts could accordingly claim a Qumranic origin which, with 2Q18 and 11Q5, are then the only remains of the Hebrew text handed down by the Essenes with the exception of the rare more or less literal citations of the Rabbanites who did not include this book in their canon. But the Qumranic origin of the copies explaining the old stichometric arrangement, does not as such point to an Essene book. With a little more than two thirds, circa 68%, of the Hebrew text recovered, the study of the book has been greatly renewed, more especially as the fragments from Qumran and Masada give the state of the text from around 100 BC., and as the copies of Cairo are not late retroversions but copies of a Hebrew text, sometimes certainly revised, originating from Qumran and found a little before 800 AD. Lastly, this Hebrew text, being quite close to that translated by the grandson, substantiates the short Greek text or Gr I before the different revisions31 of the book.

29 On this subject, see the lists noted by the editor, YADIN, The Ben Sira Scroll, Table 1 (pp. 7-8 of Hebrew part) collects the 51 examples (but 41:12) where the manuscript agrees with the corrections in the margin against Ms B, table 2 (p. 9) the 37 examples (but 42:4 and 22) where the manuscript follows the text of Ms B against the glosses in the margin, and table 3 (pp. 11-13) the 88 examples (but 43:23 and 25) where the manuscript diverges from the text of Ms B and the glosses. 30 On this subject, see YADIN, The Ben Sira Scroll, 38. 31 For an account story of the complexity of the text of Ben Sira and of its transmission and of its revisions, see GILBERT, Siracide, 1407-1412. The marginal Persan glosses of B prove nothing as to the origin of the manuscript at the basis of the copy. The Qaraïtes presence in Palestine and in Babylon is well known, see DI LELLA, The Hebrew Text, 96-97. Ben Sira and Qumran 87

2. Citations, points of contact and allusions

By itself the discovery of Hebrew manuscripts at Qumran proves that the Hebrew text of Ben Sira, composed between 195 and 175 BC, was known among the Essenes there before the book went over to the Jewish community in Egypt in the Greek translation of the grandson, shortly after 132 BC. But other testimonies such as citations, points of contact and allusions strengthen this conclusion.

2.1 Citations

The identification of a stich in a wisdom Hebrew manuscript, 4Q525 (4QBéat- itudes), is in itself a first proof. On the very badly preserved fragment of 4Q525 25 4, I read and restored with certitude:32

sykb !ya hmw]amw ab[wsw llwz yht la Do not be a glutton nor a dr]unkard when there is [nothing in the purse!

This Hebrew maxim literally preserved by manuscript C of Sir 18:33 found in the Cairo geniza, must be a citation of that book rather than an isolated proverb belonging to the common background of the Wisdom literature. Indeed, there are too many points of contact, as will be shown later on, between Ben Sira and 4Q525, although the latter is badly preserved, for the Essene author33 not to have quoted his predecessor. Consequently, this Hebrew proverb copied in 4Q525 which is an approximately dated composition of around the middle of the 2nd century BC, confirms the antiquity or originality of the formulation of manuscript C contra that of Gr I:

32 PUECH, Qumrân Grotte 4, 164-165. 33 With the edition of 4Q525, (cf. my Qumrân Grotte 4, 117-119), I gave arguments in favour of an Essene composition of this wisdom text, underlining particularly the exclusive use of la and ~yhwla, see above and the remarks (n. 28) on the tetragrammaton in manuscript B with its marginal glosses and Mas. But there are many more approaches of Wisdom which meet the Essene points of view known from elsewhere, as also the very probable quotation of 4Q525 11-12, 1-2 in 1QS IV 7-8 where the Spirit of light or of truth takes the place of the speeches of Wisdom (for another point of view, see TIGCHELAAR, «There are the Names of the Spirits of...», 545-546); and for lines 3-4, see PUECH, Qumrân Grotte 4, 141-142, and for further contacts between 1QS and 4Q420-421 [Ways of Righteousness] with 4Q525, see below. The manuscript seems to be the product of the first Esseno-Qumranic generation, maybe of the Teacher of Righteousness teaching his disciples, as a wise teacher, or of a pious man or wise man of the two previous decades before the exile into the wilderness in 152. BROOKE, Biblical Interpretation, 205 note 13, does not view 4Q525 as an Essene composition. 88 Émile Puech

mh. gi,nou ptwco.j sumbolokopw/n evk daneismou/ kai. ouvde,n soi, evstin evn marsippi,w| translated into Christian-Palestinian Aramaic:34

asykb $l [t]yl ~wlkw a[(?)[wlm] !m albws[d] $qlwx bhy !yksm aht al Do not impoverish yourself by borrowing to feast, when there is nothing in the purse!

The translation of Gr I has certainly given the meaning of the first hemistich, but without translating it precisely. It passed from concrete situations to a more moralising generalization. This tendency of Gr I is found again apro- pos of other more abstract themes.

2.2 Contacts and allusions

Besides the citation, several other rapprochments or points of contact have already been underlined,35 but they mostly cover citations common to more than one specific biblical book rather than direct borrowings to Ben Sira. However, the influence of Ben Sira on Qumranic literature, wisdom or otherwise, seems clear, especially in 4Q525, but the question requires to be further explored for the Instruction.

2.2.1 4Q525

The wisdom text 4Q525 2 ii 2 lays a stress upon the search for wisdom like Sir 14:20ff or 51:13-30. In both compositions, Wisdom is identified with the Law or at least is in a very close relationship to the Law, Sir 1:26; 15:1; 19:20; 24:22ff and 4Q525 2 ii 4. Besides, the syntagma !wyl[ trwt is also found in Sir 41:4.8; 42:2 and 49:4 (Hebrew), see further o` no,moj tou/ u`yi,stou in 9:15; 19:17;

34 See MÜLLER-KESSLER –SOKOLOFF (eds.), The Christian Palestinian Aramaic, 204, where I propose a restoration. But the sequence ry]t[ [a]lad[...]l[p which translates 19:1 strength- ens the late addition of Gr II at verse 18:33c. 35 See CARMIGNAC, Les rapports. On this subject, GILBERT, Siracide, 1414, writes: “Ben Sira faisait partie, selon Carmignac, de la littérature proprement Qumranienne”. This is not totally exact, since Carmignac sums up his tought (p. 218): “Cela (les différences) empêche au moins d’affirmer de façon définitive que l’Ecclésiastique fasse partie de la littérature proprement qumranienne”, and in note 29: “le dernier chapitre ... si indépendant du reste de l’ouvrage ... offre tant de rapprochements avec les textes de Qumrân, que l’on pour- rait plus facilement envisager qu’il ait bel et bien été composé à Qumrân», and lastly «Si les recherches ultérieures confirmaient que l’Ecclésiastique n’a pas été composé au sein de la communauté de Qumrân, ...”. The comparisons at various levels underline first of all in Carmignac’s opinion the proximity of different milieux. Ben Sira and Qumran 89

23:23; (24:23); (29:11); 38:34; 44:20; add 11QPsa XVIII 14 (= Syriac Psalm II = Ps 154) and Testament of the Twelve Patriarches, Levi 13,1,36 but nowhere else in the Bible.37 The formula Wisdom/Law is to be understood as an innova- tion of Ben Sira or of the Sages of his generation, taken up in compositions found at Qumran. Among the points of contact, let us quote particularly: - the word of comfort in Sir 3:31b: ![Xm acmy wjwm t[bw (A), “and at the moment of falling he will find support”, taken up and adapted in 4Q525 14 ii 7: ![X]m acmt $jwm t[b, “and at the moment of your falling you will find su[pport”; - the saying about listening and the way of answering in Sir 11:8: rbdt la hxyX $wtbw [mXt ~rj(b) rbd byXt la (A and B), “Do not answer before having listened, and do not interrupt a speech before it is finished”, taken up and adapted in 4Q525 14 ii 22-24: hkyrbd]b byXt rxaw ~rma [mX ~ynpl hdawm[...lhbyXq]h ~hylm ta [mXt ~rj xyX $wpXt [law, “Do [not ] pour out speech before having listened to their points of view. Pay [attention to...] specially. First listen to their words and then answer with [your words”. This recommendation is also taken up and adapted in the Rule of the Community, 1QS VI 10: rbdl whyxa hlky ~rj wh[r yrbd $wtb Xya rbdy la, “No man may speak during the speech of his fellow before his brother has finished speaking”. This same maxim is yet taken over and adapted in the Qumranic composition The Ways of Righteousness, 4Q420 1a-b ii 1-3 – 4Q421 1a-b ii 13-14:38 ]rbd aycwy [dw][w ~gtp byXy ~ypa $rab[ !yby ~tj]br[bdy awl]w [[]mXy~rjbbyXyawl, “he will not answer before he hears, and will not speak before he understands. With great patience will he give answer and [furthermore] he will utter a word of[...”; - the word on the dangers of the tongue in Sir 22:27: “Who will set a guard on my mouth, and an efficient seal on my lips, to keep me from falling, and my tongue from causing my ruin?”, and in 28:18: “Many have fallen by the edge of the sword, but many more have fallen by the tongue”, and 4Q525 14 ii 26-28:

36 The Testament of Levi in Aramaic has been found at Qumran in many copies and another one among the manuscripts of the Cairo geniza, see PUECH, Le Testament de Lévi en araméen; ID., Notes sur le Testament de Lévi de la grotte 1; and STONE –GREENFIELD , Ara- maic Levi Document. 37 Contra DE ROO, Is 4Q525 a Qumran Sectarian Document?, 340 and 345 (the author gives the numbers of fragments and lines after a pirate, faulty and incomplete edition, which are not those of the editio princeps). For a biblical background of the syntagma, see HAY- WARD, El Elyon. 38 See ELGVIN, 4QWays of Righteousness, 175f and 188f. The editor would understand it as a Qumranic composition with use of pre-Qumranic sources (p. 173). TIGCHELAAR, More on 4Q264A, understands it as a halakhic composition but not as a sapiential one. 90 Émile Puech

!w]Xlb dxy htXq[wnw] hkytwtpXb dklt !p[..].gb hdawm rmXh !wXl lqtmw hkytpXb, “...]by your lips and from an error of speech refrain mostly in..[..] lest you fall by your lips[ and that you not] be ensnared at the same time by the ton[gue”. The passage of Ps 15:3a wnXl l[ lgr awl is taken up in Sir 4:28d lgrt la $nwXl l[w, in Sir 5:14b [r lgrt la $nwXlbw, also in 4Q525 2 ii 1: wnwXl l[ lgr awlw,“and does not slander with his tongue”, and in 4Q185 1-2 ii 13: h]yl[ lgr alw. The content of stichs 6:36: dymt 39hghy wtwcmbw !wyl[ taryb tnnwbthw (A), 6:18: hmkx ygXt (C), 14:20a: hghy hmkxb Xwna yXra (A), 50:28a: hghy hlab Xya yXra(B) is clearly taken in 4Q525 2 ii 3-4: dymt hghy hb yk ...hmkwx gyXh ~da yXra, “Blessed is anyone who overtakes wisdom...when he thinks over her day and night”. These many points of contact of vocabulary and thought of 4Q525 2 ii with various passages of Ben Sira, in particular on the happiness of one who meditates on the Law and Wisdom and clings to them, are probably also at the origin of the strophic composition of the “eight beatitudes plus one” in this passage of the Qumranic manuscript, a literary genre which the author must have recognized already in Sir 14:20–15:1 and where he has found the inspiration for that particular structure. This last passage of Ben Sira is the first and the oldest known group of eight Hebrew beatitudes, even if there is only one yrXa at the beginning. I have shown elsewhere the text arrangement into two strophes of four stichs or four beatitudes organized in sub-groups, two by two.40 The author has meticulously composed his passage counting the words and ordering them according to a deter- mined order. These two strophes of eight short beatitudes are followed by yk, whereas the other macarisms of Ben Sira are in a usual form: 26:1; 31(34):15 (LXX); 48:11 (LXX); 50:28; 25:(7b).9 (LXX), but only 34(31):8 with a positive hemistich followed by a negative one, 25:8 and 28:19 (LXX) with a positive hemistich followed by three negatives confirm for the first time this structure taken up also in 4Q185 1-2 ii 13-14. The manuscript 4Q525 2 ii 1-6 knows this same structural genre: the short macarisms are composed of a positive hemistich followed by a negative one, whereas the long macarism includes four positive hemistichs after a positive one as an introduction, followed by four other negative ones. As the preserved strophe of four short macarisms with feminine suffixes supposes other macarisms of the same type where Wisdom and the Law, to which theses suffixes refer to, must have been mentioned, a first strophe in the same form must be presupposed. It is remarkable that the strophe of

39 Manuscript Areads hghw, which is certainly a mistake in the transcription of y by a scribe of the Middle Ages; hghy is necessary for the parallel structure of the hemistichs. 40 PUECH, 4Q525 et les péricopes des Béatitudes; ID., The Collection of Beatitudes, 357 and 361. Ben Sira and Qumran 91 four macarisms of short type as well as that with a long macarism, contain each 31 words, 15 in the positive hemistichs and 16 in the negative ones.41 Such a finely formed structure cannot be a product of chance. It is taken up in a passage in Greek in Mt 5:3-12 with its two strophes of four short macarisms and one with a long macarism, each strophe of 36 words. This Greek composition clearly applies the rules of that literary genre, of which the first known example is Sir 14:20-27 comprising two strophes of four macarisms of 23 words each.42 Because of the strong influence of Ben Sira already noted on 4Q525, it is highly probable that the structure of this peculiar passage also depends on it.

2.2.2 4QInstruction

Remains of at least seven manuscripts of this wisdom text have been found: 1Q26, 4Q415, 416, 417, 418, 418*, 423.43 Such a number of copies shows a large diffusion among the Qumran Community, compared to the scanty remains recovered of the Book of Ben Sira. Most of those copies are dated to the late Hasmonaean or early Herodian periods, but the composition must precede the installation of the Community in the wilderness and goes back at the latest to the first part of the 2nd century, thus more or less contemporary to the book of Ben Sira.44 It cannot be excluded that this compo-

41 The same number of 31 words is also found in a strophe of macarisms in the Hymns scroll 1QHa, col. VI, see PUECH, ibid. 42 The copy of Ms A contains faint alterations of the original: addition of lk at v. 22b (absent in Greek, Latin and Syriac) and the infinitive tacl in 22a for the participle (but already an imperative in Gr I which is also not original). Concerning this structure, it is difficult to understand the cautions of FABRY, Die Seligpreisungen, who reproaches us (p. 195) for restoring five (sic) beatitudes in this passage. It is evident that a strophe of 4 took place at the bottom of the previous column where the search of Wisdom and Law was surely present, in order to explain the feminine suffixes in the following lines. It is similarly not possible to accept the conclusions of BROOKE, The wisdom of Matthew’s Beatitudes, who thinks to find a better parallel in the Lukan composition in a more Semitic original (!), nor those of VAN CANGH, Béatitudes de Qumrân, who concludes to the “Lukan original”. Jesus spoke in Aramaic, not in Greek, and Matthew did not add anything to restrain Jesus’ message. The “poor in spirit” include also the other categories of poor, seven of which are clarified, whereas Luke has manifestly reworked a previously Semitic structure, a wholly clear Semitic (vocabulary and syntagmas) composition in Matthew. 43 MILIK, Qumran Cave I, 100-102; STRUGNELL –HARRINGTON –ELGVIN, Qumran Cave 4 XXIV; PUECH –STEUDEL, Un nouveau fragment. 44 See STRUGNELL –HARRINGTON –ELGVIN, Qumran Cave 4 XXIV, 21f, and HARRINGTON,Two Early Jewish Approaches, 263. The editors would favour likewise a somewhat earlier datation, while VERMES, The Complete, 402, concludes to a clearly Essene composition (“unquestionably sectarian”), while ELGVIN, 4QWays of Righteousness, 173, considers this sapiential composition in the period of the formation of the Essene movement or just in the previous phase, and that LANGE, Wisdom and Predestination, 341 note 2, places it 92 Émile Puech sition, largely read and copied at Qumran, comes from Jewish forerunner groups of the Community. In this direction point the numerous points of contact of vocabulary and concepts, particularly the Rules (1QS, CD) and the Hymns, already quoted by the editors but without having retained this possibility.45 The editors did not note the relationship of dependence between the Instruction and Ben Sira, even though both works are similar in form (instruction of a wise man to a disciple called “[my] son” or “O wise child” or “O understanding one”), in the content and in the theological perspective. Both compositions display interest in financial transactions, loans (Sir 8:12; 29:1- 2 and 4Q417 2 ii 21-23), and pledges (Sir 29:14-20 and 4Q416 2 ii 5-7.17-18), in the social and familial relations, the honor due to parents (Sir 3:1-16 and 4Q416 2 iii 15-19), the authority of the husband over his wife (Sir 3,1-16 and 4Q416 2 iii 19 – iv 11 but without the misogyny of Sir 25:14-24; 42:14 because the author links these relations to the mystery to come from which they must not divert 4Q416 2 iii 18-21), vows and votive offerings of the wife annulled by the husband (2 iv 6-13) as displaying patriarchal authority. Rather surprisingly, the Instruction addresses itself also directly to the woman, to honor her father-in-law like her father, to hold fast to her husband and to be the honor of all (4Q415 2 ii 1-9). In both compositions these recommandations are based upon the Law but without mentioning that explicitly: the honor of parents in Exod 20:12 or Deut 5:16,46 and also Gen 2:24 (to become one flesh) and 3:16 (your yearning will be for your husband and he will dominate you), Num 30:6-15 (annulling the vows and votive offerings). The same is true also with the interdiction of mixing species (Lv 19:19; Deut 22:9-11 and 4Q418 103). The sages make clear their counsels on the basis of Mosaic traditions to such a point that Wisdom and Law are not distinguished in Sir 24:23-34 and 4Q525. However, if Sir 24:1-22; 51:13-20 = 11QPsa XXI 11-18, the Hymn to the Creator (11QPsa XXVI 9-15) as well as Lady Madness in 4Q184, know the personification of Wisdom, the Instruction in the present state of the text does not.47

more generally in the pre-Essene movement. Some have proposed to isolate the sapiential parts, which would be the oldest, from the more theological parts of the address where the more Essene wording is found, see ELGVIN, The Mystery to Come, 115. But FREY, Flesh and Spirit, 396f, concludes to a pre-Essene period. HARRINGTON, Wisdom and Apocalyp- tic, estimates the composition in the 1st century BC at the latest or even before, without any other explanation. 45 STRUGNELL –HARRINGTON –ELGVIN, Qumran Cave 4 XXIV, 22-33, takes up a note of STRUGNELL, The Sapiential Work 4Q415ff; see also HARRINGTON, Wisdom and Apocalyp- tic, 263. 46 And of the wife based on Deut 13:7 and 28:54.56 for the new custom 4Q416 2 ii 21 and iii 16-19, see STRUGNELL –HARRINGTON –ELGVIN, Qumran Cave 4 XXIV, 108f, but this is controversial. 47 See ibid., 29 and 34. Ben Sira and Qumran 93

While Ben Sira often invokes the “Fear of God”, !wyl[ / ~yhla / hwhy tary,48 the Instruction, where the use of the divine name hwhy seems taboo, invokes as a Leitmotiv “the mystery to come” or “the mystery of existence”, hyhn zr linked to the knowledge of justice and of impiety, on which the future depends, in order to motivate in this way the present conduct of man. The expression hyhn zr is found again in other Essene compositions (1QS XI 3; 1Q27 [Book of mystery] 1 i 2 and 3)49 but the word zr appears already in Sir 8:18 and 12:11. The cosmology of Ben Sira is biblical and rather traditional, his theodicy articulated in a ”system of pairs” (Sir 33:15; 42:24): God the creator is sovereign but the creation, which is good, can also chastise the wicked by its cataclysms (39:27). If the timid dualism of Ben Sira does not yet invoke an obscure and demoniac power like the Instruction of the two Spirits (1QS III 13-IV or the [Essene?] addition in Sir 15:14b [A-B]: “and he delivered him to the power of his enemy”), the dualism is more marked in 4QInstruction which insists on the divine election with all its moral consequences. God separated the wise from the spirit of flesh: “For He has separated you from every fleshy spirit, then you shall separate yourself from every thing He abominates, and hold yourself aloof from all that a person hates. For He Himself has made everyone and He will make them to inherit each his inheritance and He Himself is your portion and your inheritance among the children of mankind, and that in His inheritance He has set you in authority, then you honour Him...” (4Q418 81-81a 2-3). God will judge the acts of each one and reward or punish consequently (4Q417 1 i 6-8 [see below], iii 9; 2 i 10-11). This is the meaning of the revelation of hyhn zr to the wise man: from creation to ethics and eschatology. The Instruction of wisdom is no longer based on human experience only, the history of Israel, the Law and the creation as in Ben Sira, but also on the dualist doctrine of election. The understanding one (!ybm) must therefore always remember his inheritance and the portion of glory which God ensures him, if he is faithful to the election, he who is able to distinguish between good and evil, as recalled in 4Q423 1-2 i 7, a fragment paraphrasing Gen 2–3. He belongs to the eternal plantation, that which has received election as its inheritance, the immediately preceding word [jm designating the eschatological community as in 1QH XVI 7,11,17,21 (= VIII)50 which takes up the same image; see also 1QH XIV 18 (= VI 15); 1QS VIII 5; XI 8; CD I 7; 1QAp Gn XIV 13-14. This image is found again in 4Q418 81 12-14: “For by you] He has opened the

48 Sir 6:36; 9:16; 10:22 A-B; 16:2; 32(35):12; 40:26b-c.27; 50:29. 49 For a fresh status quaestionis on this point, see GOFF, The Worldly and Heavenly Wisdom, where the author proposes as a preferable translation “the mystery that is to be”. 50 For the new numbering of Hymns, see PUECH, La croyance des Esséniens, 339-346. 94 Émile Puech fountain for all the Holy ones, and all who are called by His name are holy. [For] during all the periods [are] the brightnesses of His splendour for the eternal plantation, [then, you, search for the fountain of His Truth like a source overflowing and co]vering the world. In it shall walk all those who will inherit the earth. For in hea[ven...”. Clearly the image of the plantation is not unknown from the Bible (Is 5:7; 60:21; 61:3) or other texts like 1 Enoch 93:5.10, etc., where it designates Judah, but 4QInstruction reduces its signi- fication only to the elected ones of the people who are the eternal plantation, as is the case with some Essene texts.51 Only the elect of the last days are really able to distinguish good and evil, whereas in Sir 17:1-14 man, a creature of God, has the ability to do so. Thus eschatology occupies a more important place in the Instruction than in Ben Sira.

2.3 Other Essene compositions

Other more or less direct points of contact can be found, at various levels, in typically Essene compositions, as for example: - The reward of the wicked whom God hates in 1QS VIII 6-7: ~lwmg ~y[Xrl b(y)Xhlw, CD VII 9/ XIX 6 and 1QM XI 13f, and 1QS I 4,10, compared to the punishment that God will impose to the wicked in Sir 12:6: ~qn byXy ~y[Xrlw ~y[r anwX la ~g yk, “For God himself detests sinners, and will repay the wicked what they deserve”. - The noisy laugh of the fool in Sir 21:20: “The fool laughs at the top of his voice” seems to be the source of 1QS VII 14: wlwq [ymXhl twlksb qxXy Xraw, “Whoever guffaws improperly, and makes his voice heard, shall be punished for thirty days”. - God as the origin of all, good and evil, life and death in Sir 11:14; 33:14- 15 is similar to 1QS III 15f. But whereas dualism is very developed in the Essene milieu, evil does not yet depend on the maleficent forces in Ben Sira, cf. a possible Essene addition in Sir 15:14b: “and He had delivered him to the power of his enemy”. - Even if fixed liturgical formulae existed very early, it is remarkable to note parallel formulations between the beginning of the thankgiving Hymn in Sir 51:1-2 and that in 1QH XI 20f (= III 19f):52

51 This image associated with that of the fountain demands a certain continuity between the community of the author of 4QInstruction and that of the Teacher of Righteousness (1QHa), probably nearer than that of the author of the Apocalypse of the Weeks (1 Enoch 93). On this, see STRUGNELL –HARRINGTON –ELGVIN, Qumran Cave 4 XXIV, 511f, and STUCKENBRUCK, 4QInstruction, 250-257. 52 See also LEHMANN, Ben Sira, 107 and 109-110. Ben Sira and Qumran 95

1QH XI 20-21 Sir 51:1-2 ynwda hkdwa20 yba yhla $dwa1 yXpn htydp yk yXpn twmm tydp yk txXm txXm yrXb tkXx2 yntyl[h21 !wdba lwaXmw yXpn tlch lwaX dymw

If the attribution of authorship of this Qumranic Hymn to the Teacher of Righteousness cannot be excluded,53 then about half a century would separate it from Sir 51. Consequently, the dependence of the phraseology should not be surprising. Finally, these comparisons of vocabulary54 and the indisputable affinities of thought underline at least a proximity in space and time, roughly Palestinian Judaism of the 2nd century BC, and a probable influence of Eccle- siasticus on Qumranic writings55 which then could have involved corrections of copies of Ben Sira, without however resulting in identical positions on a number of important points.

3. Survey of some important points

3.1 The priesthood

The Sages, authors of these compositions, come from a literate class, and their belonging to a priestly class cannot be excluded, whether for Ben Sira who favourably views the temple, cult and especially the Aaronic priests,56 or the authors of the Qumranic compositions generally considered as Zadokite.57 Still, Ben Sira does not mention Esdras and Levites, ignoring

53 See PUECH, La croyance des Esséniens, 366. 54 For other possible points of contact, see LEHMANN, Ben Sira, who gives a list of words or idiomatic expressions characteristic of the language of Ben Sira and of Qumran: rgs at the nif‘al, #px ynba, bybX, hawXmw hawX, xyrbw ~ytld, ~atp [tp, rare and scattered in one or the other biblical book, and chiefly xwpn rwk, jwm (hitpa‘el), !qz-XyXy, ~yt[bX, bbl ~hy, zr, rwg, txX, hwqm, ~yyx rrc, sam, hgh, dm[m and tlXmm, #q, d[wm in relation with hpwqt. See also IWRY,A New Designation, lydg in 1QS X 4 and Sir 43:5 (Ms B, lwdg Mas); HARRINGTON, Wisdom at Qumran, 146ff; CALDUCH-BENAGES, Trial Motif, 140: the image of the crucible – @rcm for the purification in Ben Sira and at Qumran, etc. 55 An influence of the Qumranic literature on Ben Sira is chronologically out of the question. I noted above that the Instruction could be situated between Ben Sira and the beginning of Qumrano-Essenism on the basis of a strong dualistic and eschatological perspective, see HARRINGTON, Two Early Jewish Approaches. 56 See STADELMANN, Ben Sira als Schriftgelehrter; OLYAN, Ben Sira’s Relationship; WRIGHT, Fear the Lord,189-222. 57 Concerning 4QInstruction which is not an Esseno-Qumranic composition for the editors, STRUGNELL –HARRINGTON (cf. DJD XXXIV, 20f,) underlines the Aaronic affinities of the 96 Émile Puech even the Zadokite origin of Simon but cleaving to the sons of Aaron and to the covenant with Phinehas and his posterity (50:24 Hb). In favour of the acting priesthood and its legitimacy, Jesus Ben Sira at least belongs to this socio-religious group, while the authors of Aramaic compositions found at Qumrân, like 1 Enoch and Testament of Levi, openly blame the acting priesthood, praised by Ben Sira, as being much too compromised with the surrounding cultural milieu, and they insist on the priestly legitimacy of the Levitical class.58

3.2 Calendars

Our authors diverge completely on this very fundamental point of religious pratice. The Essene Community, as we know, is unique in using a solar calendar of 364 days inherited from the tradition and attested to in particular by the Astronomical Book and the Book of Watchers of 1 Enoch and the Testa- ment of Levi as a revealed calendar, see 1 Enoch 75:1-3; 80:2-8; 82:4-7. On the other hand, in his preamble to the Praise of the Ancestors (42:15–43:33) and in 50:6, Ben Sira underlines the preeminent roll of the moon, which gives the name to the month and determines seasons and feasts, as he deliberately discards the roll assigned to both luminaries in the priestly narrative of creation (Gen 1:14f). This, therefore, is quite clearly a central object of controversy.59

3.3 The Law and the revealed mysteries

We have noted above the specificity of the practice of the Law at the core of the search for wisdom in Ben Sira, a practice taken up by 4Q525 and comprising, besides, a quotation of Ben Sira.60 In fact, Ben Sira cautions his disciple against any form of search for what is hidden or would be beyond his own powers (3:21-24), but to observe the revealed Law, to fear God, is all

sage’s authority: scribe, teacher, administrator, judge and priest. See also FLECHTER-LOUIS, All the Glory of Adam, 179. But this point is refuted by others, see for instance TIGCHELAAR, The Addressees of 4QInstruction, 75; GOFF, The Worldly and Heavenly Wisdom, 22f. 58 Specially sections of the Book of the Watchers, and the Astronomical Book in 1 Enoch and the Testament of Levi (for a new edition of the Aramaic text of the geniza, see PUECH, [cf. note 36]). For a convenient glance of the subject, see WRIGHT, Fear the Lord, 197-201, and OLYAN, Ben Sira’s Relationship, 279f. 59 See WRIGHT, Fear the Lord, 204-207, and for the complexity of the subject, GLESSMER, Cal- endars in the Qumran Scrolls. 60 This point common to both compositions and the citation strengthen the conclusion of a dependence of 4Q525. Ben Sira and Qumran 97 that must be sufficient to attain wisdom, because “what you have been taught already exceeds the scope of the human mind” (3:23b). The true basis of wisdom remains the practice of Law (15:1; 24:23; 32:24; 33:3). There is possibly there another reaction of the author to the revelations of mysteries of cosmos and of the eschaton to which Enoch and Levi refer in their compositions so as to discredit the practices of the acting priesthood. And to complete the list, Ben Sira explicitly condemns dreams and visions as means to reach this knowledge: these are only mirages from which it is urgent to turn away, as the Law recommends (Deut 18:10f), unless the vision be sent by the Most High (34:1-8), as was the case with the seer Isaiah who saw the end of times and revealed the hidden things (48:22-25). In his somewhat sharp remark, “dreams give wings to the fool”, Ben Sira could very well be aiming at Enoch in his heavenly journey and Elijah who also had visions at Bethel (4Q213a 1 ii 14-18). However, the Patriarch Enoch is seen as an extraordinary figure in Sir 44:16 and 49:14, based on Gen 5:24.61 On this subject, the author of 4QInstruction writes the reverse, asking his disciple to meditate continuously and to understand the mysteries concerning him, because the eternal rewards or punishments will be dependent on his acts (4Q417 1 i 6-27):62

6[And by day and by night meditate upon the mystery] of existence, and study it continually. And then you shall know truth and iniquity, wisdom 7[and foolish]ness you shall discover in [their] acts. Understand all their ways together with their visitation in all everlasting ages, and the eternal 8Visitation. And then you shall discern between good and evil according to their deeds. For the God of knowledge is the foundation of truth, and in the mystery of existence 9He has laid out all its foundation, and indeed [He di]d [it with wis]dom, and to every one[ with cun]ning He fashioned it, and the domain of its deeds 10for each, it is his reward, and the whole knowledge, all...[ ] He expounded to all his creatures according to their understanding so that they could walk 11in the inclina- tion of their understanding. And He expounded for[...]all[...] and in abundance of understandings were made known the secrets of 12His plan, together with perfect behaviour in all His deeds. These things seek early and continually and meditate all 13their out- comes. And then you shall know about the glory of His might together with His mar- velous mysteries and the might of His deeds. But you, 14O understanding one, look for

61 Even if the phraseology of 44:16 (Ms B) takes again words of 44:17 (~ymt acmn) and that the verse is missing in Mas, its presence in Greek is in favour of its authenticity, as an inclusion with 49:14. For the attacks of Ben Sira against the esoteric teaching of Jewish groups and against the Greek science, see CORLEY, Wisdom Versus Apocalyptic, especially 275ff. 62 I take back the presentation of my note published in: Apports des textes apocalyptiques, but with some changes, in particular, line 7, read: ...lwkb [!bh ~hy(X[m)]bj[b]tt[lwa], ll. 9- 10, read: Xr[p]...l[w]kt[[d] lwkw hmlX hz l[w]kl10 ...hmr[[b] lklw hm[kxb hX][ hX[w hXwa lwk Xrp and line 14, read: ab[ yk #]qh !wrkzb instead of ab[ yk ~wl]Xh following the editors with a little too long restoration; for the meaning of #q, see 1QS III 15; IV 25; 1QH XIV 32 (= VI 29); 4Q369 1 i 6. There is manifestly there an allusion to the book of memorial which will be opened at the last judgment. 98 Émile Puech

your reward in the book of memorial of the en[d, for] it comes engraved {your} the destiny and ordained is all the retribution, 15for engraved is that which is ordained by God about all the iniquities of the children of Seth, and written before Him is a book of memorial 16of those who keep His word. And that is the vision of the meditation on the book of memorial. And He gave it as an inheritance to man together with a spiritual people. For 17according to the pattern of the Holy ones He fashioned him but He had not given the vision to a fleshly spirit, for he knows not the difference between 18good and evil according to the judgment of his spirit. vacat And you, O understanding child, gaze on the mystery of the existence and know 19the [path]s of every living being and the manner of his walking appointed to [his] deeds[... 20Under]stand the difference between the great and the small, and in your counsel[... 21...]your[...]in the mystery of the existence[... 22...]s of each vision know, and in all[... 23and you shall stand always firmly. Do not be contaminated with wickedness[... For every one who is contaminated] 24with it shall not be treated as guiltless. According to his inheritance in it he [shall inheritate... But you,] 25O sage child, understand the mysteries concerning you, and in..[...] 26shall be founded upon you all their[ deeds] together with the reward of[ their...] 27You shall not go astray after your heart or after your eyes[...

While wisdom in Ben Sira is based upon the observation of the organization of the creation and the obedience to the revealed Law (Sir 1:25-27: “If you desire wisdom, keep the commandments”), 4QInstruction further calls upon another facet, the mystery of existence hyhn zr, the meaning of which is to be meditated upon. The mystery is not based on revelations through a medium or an angel like in Apocalyptic literature. This wisdom surpasses the mere search which man could reach by his own power, for his parents have first opened his ears to mysteries of existence, and also because the God of fidelity is He who “from of old disposed all things and instructed the ear of the wise] 15to explain to the just the distinction between good and evil, to make known each judgment[.., for] 16he is a fleshly creature” (4Q416 1 14-16 and 2 iii 14-16 // 418 9 15-17, see also 4Q418 123 ii 3-8). Cre- ation is presented to the elect and the learned as a mystery normally inaccessible to man63 but revealed by the God of knowledge (see also 1QS III 13 – IV), and his meditation shall give him the meaning of existence and encourage him thus “to keep His Word” (see 4Q416 2 ii 8-9: “and the statutes laid down for you do not abandon, but with your secrets take good heed of yourself”). If the word “Law” does not appear in the present state of the Instruc- tion in a comparable way to Ben Sira, the reality is not absent concerning moral conduct in daily practice. The sage insists a lot on the meditation of “the mystery of existence” or “the mystery to come” in order to give a direction to human activity and thus to establish the observance of the commandments which God prescribed for the salvation of the elect and his eternal glory:

63 This idea is found again in 1QH V 18ff (= XIII 6ff), see PUECH, Un Hymne essénien, 67f. Ben Sira and Qumran 99

[Gaze upon the mystery of] 11existence, and comprehend the birth-times of salvation, and know who is to inherit glory and raising up.64 Is there not[ rejoicing for the contrite of spirit] 12and for those among them who mourn eternal joy? (4Q417 2 i 10-12).

In that way, the meditation of the mystery to come which is revealed only to the elect as spiritual people, encourages them in steadfastness to fulfil the Law in the midst of so many difficulties in their path towards holiness, and prepares them for the future judgment, which the foolish one, the fleshly spirit, cannot understand, he who is not expecting an afterlife. Conse- quently, this passage is particularly near to the spirituality of “the poor” of the Gospels Beatitudes (Mt 5:3-12 and Lk 6:20-26).65

3.4 Eschatology

3.4.1 Ben Sira

The most common position consists in relegating the expectation of a future life solely to the additions to the text of Ben Sira.66 However, bearing in mind that “life and death are before man”, Ben Sira insists on underlining that “the Lord is almighty and all-seeing” (15:17-18). He rewards and punishes: “Do not take pleasure in what pleases the godless; remember they will not go unpunished at death (Hb)/ here to Sheol (Gr) (9:12), and also “Bear in

64 In DJD XXXIV (173ff and 182f), the editors propose to read lm[w and to understand “and toil”; GOFF, The Worldly and Heavenly Wisdom, 60, reads l[w][w and translates “and ini[qui]ty”. But the most obvious reading is l[w “and the height/elevation/raising up” (a substantive of the root hl[), as a synonymic parallel to dwbk, as further “the rejoicing for the contrite of spirit” is parallel to “the eternal joy for those who mourn”. Would it be possible to understand [Xy ydlwm as “the genitures/horoscopes of salvation” rather than “the birth-times of salvation”? 65 See above and note 42. 66 See SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 83: “Rewards and punishments in the afterlife were not even considered”, and 86: “The possibility of rewards and punishments in some sort of afterlife receives no mention at all in the original Hebrew Text of Ben Sira”; GILBERT, L’Ecclésiatique: quel texte?, 245: “l’attente d’une vie future apparaît seulement dans les additions”. HARRINGTON, Two Early Jewish Approaches, 269-270: “Although there is no explicit denial of life after death, neither is there much affirmation of it (see 38,21- 23). The most important form of immortality is the good ‘name’ – the reputation that one leaves behind (41,1-4). The closest thing to an apocalyptic scenario comes in the prayer for God’s people in 36,1-22... But even here Ben Sira’s focus seems to be on some event in the near future (the overthrow of Antiochus III or Seleucus IV?)”. And lastly BURKES, God, Self, and Dead, 87-157 (on Ben Sira and Daniel) keeps the common position. In the citations below, I translate the Hebrew when it is known and differs from Gr I in order to show that the question very much interests the author and that he answers to it in his sentences like a sage. 100 Émile Puech mind the retribution of the last days, the time of vengeance when God averts His face” (18:24), for “Yet it is a trifle for the Lord on the day someone dies to repay him as his conduct deserves” (11:26-28 Gr). Accordingly, “in everything you do, remember your end, and you will avoid eternal corruption” (7:36 Hb). For nothing is hidden from God and “One day He will rise to reward the just and repay their deserts on their own heads” (17:15-23), but “the meeting of the lawless is like a heap of tow: they will end in a blazing fire. The sinners’ road is smoothly paved, but it ends at the pit of Sheol” (21:9-10). These quotations underline how the end of human life is important for Ben Sira who is haunted by death, on which the fate of man seems to depend. That is to say that death does not introduce an absolute noth- ingness. Certainly, everyone must die (7:17 Hb; 14:17; 25:24) and he cannot hope to return to life (38:21-23; 41:3-4), children only can perpetuate the name or renown of a father on earth (30:4-6). Consequently, you should do good before dying, enjoy yourself in your lot of happiness, for there are no pleasures in Sheol (14:12-16), and there the dead cannot praise the Most High (17:27-28). These few verses allow us to suppose that ultimately Sheol is not a place which is eternally the same for all. At death it at first clearly defines the final end of every living person who gives back his vital breath, but it will also be the place of punishment at the eschatological Visitation, when the whole creation shall be shaken and God will remember everyone,67 as 16:14.17-23 notes precisely (see also 2:14 and 18:24). If Ben Sira should hope for nothing after death, not even for a divine judgment, then why all his repeated exhortations to observe the commandments until death, to live as a just man and to remember his end: “Remember the last things (ta. e;scata), and stop hating, remember corruption (katafqora,n) and death, and be faithful to the commandments. Remember the commandments... the covenant of the Most High and overlook ignorance” (28:6-7, see 7:36: “In everything you do, remember your end, and you will never sin”)? Since everyone is responsible for his own fate, the transitory character of life shall indeed encourage him to make use of his goods for himself and friends, taking care of his name which shall survive. Do not be too much afflicted by the death of those who belong to you, because it is as useless for the dead as for the living. But this does not mean that everything finishes there; what is after death is God’s matter, He who commands us to live according to His commandments in the present life.68 Such is the opinion of Ben Sira on rewards and chastisements in the afterlife in the book of maxims, where he proceeds by

67 An image which recalls the memorandum, the book of memorial on which the names of the wicked and of the justs are inscribed, as the Instruction affirms. 68 See KAISER, Zwischen Athen und Jerusalem, 275-292: „Das Verständnis des Todes bei Ben Sira“. Ben Sira and Qumran 101 cunning touches or allusions, in agreement with the pious and the sages of his generation. In the Praise of the Ancestors, he is not ignorant that men have been saved from death, escaping the power of Sheol: “No one else has ever been created on earth like Enoch, for he was taken up (before) the Face” (49:14),69 taking over what is said about Elijah “taken up in the whirlwind” (48:9). Elijah who roused a corpse from death (48:5), as well as his disciple Elisha who, even dead, revived a corpse (48:12-14),70 shall come back “to allay God’s wrath before the Day of hwhy to turn the hearts of fathers towards their children and to restore the tribes of Israel (48:10 Hb, see Mal 3:23-24). Eli- jah will continue his mission in those days, which is why Ben Sira can write: “Blessed, he who will see you before dying, for you will restore him[ to life and he will ]live again” (48:11 Hb).71 The just who will die then, shall come back to live, at least for the messianic times, as a reward for their conversion.72 The Greek recension (Gr I) is yet more explicit about the hope of rewards and punishments in the afterlife in 7:16-17b: “Do not swell the ranks of sinners, remember that the retribution will not delay. Be very humble, since the recompense for the godless is fire and worms”, and in 7:36: “In all your

69 The reading “Enoch” is primitive with the Greek, and for the construction and meaning of the passage, the copyist’s mistake in $ynhk can be easily explained by the scribe of Ms B, in spite of MULDER, Simon the Hight Priest, 90-102, the lectio difficilior is not necessarily to be retained. A translation of ~ynp into “in person” seems to be a tautology after awh ~gw, it is better to keep the meaning of “face” with perhaps a haplography of ynpl. 70 The Hebrew passage seems to say that Elisha filled with the spirit of Elijah performed twice as many wonders, even in death, and that his body will be recreated (resurrected) from his tomb/underground wrXb arbn wytxtmw, see PUECH, La croyance des Esséniens, 76- 78, as if Elisha would participate in the eschatological times in the company of the just. The Greek reads: “and having fallen asleep, his body prophesied”. This reading is not necessarily the primitive one. In that case Elisha would only be compared to Samuel who, alive or dead, prophesied, but did not give back life to anybody (46:20). The wish that the bones of judges and of the twelve prophets flourish again (46:12 and 49:10) can very well be understood in this way, as a hope of the resurrection at the Visitation, compare 4QPseudo-Ezéchiel, see La croyance des Esséniens, 73f. For this opinion, see also SARACINO, Resurrezione. 71 See PUECH, La croyance des Esséniens, 74-76 where I sum up a previous note explaining the priority of the Hebrew text which is at the origin of the Greek, Syriac and Latin recensions: h[yxyw ~yyx] !tt yk tmw $ar (y)rXa. This reading is also retained by MINISSALE, La versione greca, 225. The exegesis of KEARNS, The Expanded Text, 183f, which limits the eternal life to Elijah only in reading hyxt hwyx yk $(y)rXaw in order to stay to the habitual concept, is palaeographically not acceptable. 72 It is difficult to follow Di Lella (SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 86), declaring that clear allusions to the retribution in the afterlife do appear only with the translation of Gr I in Alexandria after the publication of Dan 12:1-3. The text of Hb I, at the origin of Gr I, which I have presented, is earlier and probably primitive. But Ben Sira does not say clearly how God will reward the just in the eschaton. 102 Émile Puech words, remember your end, and you will never sin”. Moreover, it extends the hope in the resurrection to all the just in 48:11: “Blessed those who have seen you and who have fallen asleep/have been honored in love, for we too shall certainly have life”.73 Consequently, Ben Sira waits for a judgment at the eschatological Vis- itation with rewards and chastisements (Sheol then changing meaning to fire and eternal corruption), which he does not explicitly state, and a resurrection for the just is not denied in Hb I, for then God will remember and reward a good way of life.

3.4.2 The Instruction

The fear of the divine Visitation already present in Ben Sira is certainly found yet again in 4QInstruction with an eschatological perspective marked out from the first column by a judgment scene from which nothing can escape. The sage’s recommendations and the insistent reminder of study and meditation of the mystery to come in order to orient his life, still keeps the fate of the human condition in its view, the chastisements of the foolish and the rewards of the faifthful elect, who have been informed of the consequences of the universal judgment, the object of the divine plan, 4Q416 1 10-16 // 4Q418 2 2-9:74

Then] 10in Heaven He shall judge the work of wickedness, and all His faithful children will find favour be[fore Him, and wickedness will be coming to] 11its end. And they will be frightened and shaken all who defiled themselves in it, for the heavens shall fear, [earth shall shake from its place,] 12the seas and the depths shall fear. And every fleshly spirit will be destroyed, but the sons of heaven sha[ll rejoice and be glad in the day of] 13his judgment, and all iniquity shall come to an end, whereas the epoch of truth will be perfected forever, and [the spiritual people will sing] praising 14in all periods of eternity. For He is a God of fidelity. From of old, from years of [eternity He has ordered all things and He has opened the sage’s ear 15to explain to the just how to distinguish between good and evil, to make [known] each judg[ment..., for] 16he is a creature of flesh, and [his] understandings[...

(see also 4Q418 123 ii 3-8). The name of the just with all his deeds is written in a memorial book, as well as that of the wicked, but the latter is inscribed among the sons of the Pit (see above 4Q417 1 i 6-19 and //). Another passage of the Instruction sums up well the point of view of the sage on this subject, 4Q418 69 ii:75

73 Explicited further in Gr II: 2:9c; 16:22c; 19:19, Syriac: 1:12b.20+; 3:1b; 48:11b and Vetus Lati- na: 18:22b; 21:10b; 24:22b+; 27:8+. 74 I give my readings with some restorations of lacunae in italic: read l. 10: [d[ h[Xr artw ynp]l, line 11: [#ra hmwqmm X[r]twary, lines 12-13: hjp[Xm13 ~wyb wxmXyw wl]g[y~]ymXh (with 4Q418 212 1-2), line 13: [xwr ~[ ryXy h]lhtw ~lw[[l t]mah (with the support of 4Q418 2), line 14: l[ykXm !za hlgw lwkh !ykh ~lw[] ynX. 75 DJD XXXIV, 281. For the restoration of the text with the adjoining fragment 60 at lines 4- Ben Sira and Qumran 103

4...vacat And now, O you foolish-minded ones, what is good to one who has not been 5created? And what is tranquillity to one who is not come into existence? And what is a decree to one who has not been established? And what lament shall the dead make over all their [days]? 6You, you were fashioned for Sheol, and to the everlasting Pit shall your return be, when it shall awaken and [expo]se your sin. [And the inhabitants of] 7its cav- ern shall cry out against your pleading, and all who shall endure forever, who search for the truth, shall rouse themselves to judge you. [And then] 8will all the foolish-minded ones be destroyed, and the children of iniquity shall not be found anymore, and all who hold fast to wickedness shall be shameful/ wither away. [And then] 9at the passing of judgment upon you, the foundations of the firmament will cry out, and all the celestial hosts will thunder forth to separate those who love [righteousness.] 10(vacat) But You, the truly chosen ones, who pursue [understanding and] who seek eagerly for [wisdom, and] who keep vigil 11over all knowledge, how can you say: We are tired of understanding, and we have been vigilant in pursuing knowledge a[lways] and everywhere? 12But nobody becomes weary for all the years of eternity! Does he not take delight in truth forever? And does not knowledge [forever] serve us? And the sons of 13heaven, whose lot is eternal life, will they truly say: “We are tired of doing the works of truth, and we have grown weary 14at all times? Will they not walk in the everlasting light [all in garments of] glory and abundance of splendour with those [who stand] 15in the firmament of [holiness and in] the council of the divine ones, all [the days of eternity? va]cat.”

This passage of the Instruction promises the faithful elect, as rewards, the rising of the dead or resurrection to everlasting life in glory in the company of the angels, but to the foolish ones or wicked, as chastisements, the annihilation in the Pit of everlasting destruction, at the judgment when their sins will be revealed. The eschatological concept is the same as that of Isa 26 and Dan 12 (Hebrew); the just alone will rise for the everlasting life understood as a return to the original condition of man created by God to His image and living before Him, whereas the wicked is fashioned for the everlasting chastisements in Sheol. In 4Q418 69 ii 7 like in 1QH XIV 32, the image is that of “awakening” wrw[y like in Dan 12:2 wcyqy parallel to that of “to rise

5, see PUECH, La croyance à la resurrection des justes, with some corrections in ID., Apports des textes apocalyptiques. I do another correction of line 6, reading hmkajx[bhar]tw instead of [l[ twl]lgl, but the meaning is the similar. GOFF, The Worldly and Heavenly Wisdom, 173, understands “it will awaken [to condemn] you[r] sin”, this restoration is improbable for the remains of letters and for the meaning, because the Pit does not condemn but is to receive and give back what had been entrusted to it, and also the translation of line 7 [173 and 177]: “all who exist forever, those who seek truth, will rouse themselves for yo[ur] judgment” as refering to angels, the same in DJD XXXIV, 286f). At lines 8-9, would it be more difficult to understand w]Xby “shall be shameful” as a defective orthography in this manuscript (see al, l. 12) preferable to “shall wither away” parallel to “will be destroyed”, and then w[wry “shall be shaken” (see already 4Q416 1 11) preferable to w[yry “shall cry out” parallel to “will thunder forth”?, as proposed by CAQUOT, Les textes de sagesse, 21. TIGCHELAAR, Increase Learning, 210f, keeps the reading “be ashamed” because of a parallel with Isa 41:11-12. PUECH, Les fragments eschatologiques, 99 and 102, prefers now “se desséche[ront”, see also now, PUECH, Apports, 90. 104 Émile Puech again” or “to stand up” ~wqy in Isa 26:19 or Wis 5:1,76 to evoke the fate of the just at the divine Visitation, a motif found many times in other Qumranic texts. The whole creation is included in this divine judgment: heaven, the abyss, and Sheol now described as a place of punishment of the foolish-minded, who will stay in the Sheol-Pit when it will awaken, while the faithful will revive to participate in their judgment. Then their pleading will be useless and their fate is fixed for ever. Accordingly Sheol changes meaning when it will awake for the judgment: from a place of a common abode for all after death, it is transformed into a place of everlasting chastisement for some, while the others receive their reward.77 The meditation of “the mystery to come” had already taught them: “Gaze upon the mystery] 11that is to come, and comprehend the birth-times of salvation, and know who is to inherit glory and raising up.78 Has not [rejoicing been appointed for the contrite of spirit] 12and eternal joy for those among them who mourn?” (4Q417 2 i 10- 12). It taught them how “to know truth and iniquity, wisdom 7[and foolish]ness, and to recognize every act in all their ways, together with their punishments in all ages everlasting and the eternal 8Visitation” (4Q417 1 i 6-8). To accede to glory and raising up, the just resurrect, awakening at the final judgment,79 and look on the judgment of the foolish who will be anni-

76 I treated the eschatology of Wisdom in: The Book of Wisdom and the Dead Sea Scrolls, or an updated version in: La conception de la vie future dans le livre de la Sagesse. For the study of Daniel 12, see particularly ALFRINK, L’idée de résurrection , or PUECH, La croyance à la resurrection des justes, 79-85. COLLINS, The Mysteries of God, holds to the soul’s immortality in Wisdom; but an immortality without any kind of pre-existence as in Greek thought, but which is directly linked to the reward of a just way of life, is no longer Greek; furthermore, if immortality enters God’s eternal plan for all mankind, it is before the first fall when Adam was not a mere soul! The proximity of concept with the apocalypses of Daniel 12 and 1 Enoch supports the concept of a personal resurrection in glory in the angels’ company. And all those who will endure forever, those who investigate the truth cannot be the angels who are already living in eternal glory and do not have to search neither to keep vigil and become weary, pace Collins who does not understand there the scene of the last Judgment with the theophany and the shaking of the creation, preferring the entering of the soul into glory at death, as he understands it also in Wisdom. 77 GOFF, The Worldly and Heavenly Wisdom, 197-204, assesses that this passage does not descibe Sheol as a place of punishment for the foolish-minded: but then why do these intercede at the judgment? Why would they seek to go out of it, since they are now pris- oners in it, whereas the others rouse (and consequently escape) from there? If the Pit- Sheol is to be avoided, it is because it will be a place of punishment. 78 See note 64. 79 In 4Q418 69 ii 7, tma yXrwd ~lw[ hyhn lwk opposed to foolish-minded can only describe the just, not the angels, contrary to the opinion of GOFF, The Worldly and Heavenly Wisdom, 177f (with bibliography), following Tigchelaar and Collins in particular. How could angels awake at the judgment, beings who do not tire themselves but are always servants in the divine council as these lines remind us. Their sleep would mean that they can become tired, but then how can they be said to be a model to imitate? They possess already eternal life as an inheritance and they already walk in the everlasting light. Like all the cre- Ben Sira and Qumran 105 hilated and will disappear in the Pit where their return is fixed forever, as the text specifies, the Pit which becomes a place of imprisonment from where they shall not escape; then iniquity will be no more (see also 4Q418 126 ii 6-9).80 The reward of the just is glory and raising up in the firmament of holiness in the angels’ company for ever in the everlasting light. That life in the company of the angels is initiated by the just at the resurrection at the last judgment, but not so early as the death of each one.81 This passage is very near to Dan 12:1-3 and 13, where the sages (~ylykXm) will awaken and shine. But if the just can awaken, it is because he benefits also from divine forgiveness at the judgment: “For before His [anger] 16none will stand, and who will be declared righteous when He gives judgment? And without forgiveness how can [any] poor man [stand before Him?]” (4Q417 2 i 15-16). This is an implicit statement that, while waiting for the judgment, Sheol is common to all as a place of the sojourn of (the spirits of) the dead as in 1 Enoch, and that there is no praise of God in Sheol before it awaken (#yqt yk, line 6). But it already has this meaning in Sir 17:27-28. Finally, no more than the other Essene manuscripts, 4QInstruction no longer knows a realized eschatology.82 Since the just aims at the future life and at eternal glory in the company of the angels as the promised inheritance,83 and since he faithfully observes the Word in this life, this proves

ation, they assist the judgment giving voice to divide the just (l. 9). TIGCHELAAR, Increase Learning, 211-13, excludes categorically all idea of resurrection, and understands: “and all who exist for ever, who seek the truth, will arise to judge you”. 80 “]6judgment to repay vengeance to the workers of iniquity, and a visitation of re[tribution...] 7and to imprison the wicked but to raise up the head of the poor, [...] 8in glory everlasting and peace eternal and the spirit of life to separate[...among] 9all the children of Eve”. 81 As GOFF asserts, The Worldly and Heavenly Wisdom, 206-215 and passim. For the author, the just participates spiritually in the world of angels at death, death which concerns only his body of flesh, his spirit continuing to live in a form of astral immortality without having to wait for the theophany “at the time of wrath” to get his reward. Whereas for the foolish-minded whose body also disappears, his fleshly spirit goes down into Sheol at death. But then why would the sage recall the fear of the judgment? and what to do with the last and universal judgment to which all the creation must participate, even the awakening of the Pit with the rise of the just, but not of the angels? The text does not give material for these extrapolations. 82 Thus ELGVIN, Early Essene Eschatology, 144, partially accepted by GOFF, The Worldly and Heavenly Wisdom, and mostly COLLINS,Apocalypticism, 120 and 143-147, or HARRINGTON, Two Early Jewish Approaches, 272: “Indeed, the righteous already participate in the glorious existence of the angels”. 83 See 4Q418 81 1-5: “...Because by the utterance of] 1your lips He has opened a fountain to bless the holy ones, you, as an everlasting fountain, praise [His] n[ame. Because ]He has separated you from every 2fleshly spirit, you, you have to separate yourself from everything that He hates, and hold yourself aloof from that which a soul abominates. Because, He, He has made everyone, 3and that He has made them to inherit each his own inheritance and that, He, He is your portion and your inheritance among the children of men, 106 Émile Puech that he is not yet living among the divine council, while the sage admon- ishes him to persevere and not to tire himself for the reward “in all the years of eternity”. In fact, if the just shared in it already even somewhat, he would not have any reason to be discouraged, nor would he find an encouragement in the way he has to follow, since he would already possess partially what shall be eternal and he would be certain to enjoy its full possession without waiting for forgiveness at the judgment. But this is manifestly not the case: the just feels his way in faith hoping that the meditation of the mystery will be fulfilled for him if he succeeds in complying with the sage’s exhortation. This conception of eschatology coincides again perfectly with what is found in 4Q521, Hymns, the Rule (Instruction on Two Spirits), and other Essene texts which I have presented at length elsewhere,84 a concept known already by Ben Sira’s contemporary, 1 Enoch 92:3-5: “3The just will rise from his sleep [...] 4God will forgive the just, He will give him eternal justice [...] and they will walk in the eternal light. 5But sin will disappear forever in the

and that in His inheritance He has set you, then you, 4because of that, honour Him by consecrating yourself to Him, because He has appointed you as a holy of holies over all the earth, and that among the [a]n[gels] 5He has cast your lot, He has greatly magnified your glory and He has appointed you for Himself, a first-born among[ the children of Israe]l. [ Because He has said: “I will bless you] 6and my bounty I will give you”, then you, do His good things not belong to you? Likewise in His faithfulness walk continually.[ Because He, He knows all] 7your works, then you, look for His judgments from everyone who blames you in each re[buke. Because He acts with bounty over all ] 8who love Him and with {eternal} loving-kindness and with mercy for all those who keep His Word but (that) His zeal[ is for all who hate Him,] 9but as for you, the insight He has opened and He has established you over His treasure, and a true measure has been entrusted upon you,[ because judgment and righteousness] 10are with you and at your disposal to turn away anger from the men of (His) good pleasure and to punish[ the wicked. Because His favour is always] 11with you, before receiving your inheritance from His hand, glorify His Holy ones, and be[fore finishing it, (you,) bless Him/His name(?). Because] 12He has opened the fountain for all the Holy ones and (that) every one who is called by His name [is] holy[, you, make yourself holy(?). Because] 13the ornaments of His beauty are for all periods for an ever[lasting] plantation, [you then look for the fountain of His learning, such as a spring overflowing] 14and co]vering the world; in it shall walk all those who are to inherit the earth, for in hea[ven a book of memorial is inscribed before Him(?)...”. For the readings, see also now PUECH, Les fragments eschatologiques. The passage indicates what is the glorious inheritance which God has prepared for the elect and the just, in the company of the angels, if he is faithful and accomplishes his duty, but it does not say that the just possesses it already now, since, even being set aside, he shall ratify this choice and live accordingly, separating himself from every evil. This is a strong reasoning in order to admonish to faithfulness, as in 4Q418 69 ii 10-15. 84 See PUECH, La croyance des Esséniens, volume II, or Apports. There is no difference between these concepts of punishments and rewards in the afterlife, merely expositions more or less developed and precise, even if most of the texts are fragmentary, contrary to GOFF, The Worldly and Heavenly Wisdom, 213 for example. Ben Sira and Qumran 107 darkness, and it will not be seen anymore, from that day and forever”. All these expression are found in 4QInstruction (particularly 418 69 ii and 417 2 i 15-16), or 1 Enoch 102-104, where all souls go down to Sheol, but the last Judgment will select everlasting chastisements for some and rewards for others according to what will be found written in the memorial books.85

3.5 Messianism

In the eschatological perspective, the Jewish hope waits for the coming of messianic times around the central figures of a king and a priest, as some texts say more precisely.

3.5.1 The priestly covenant and the Davidic covenant

In the eulogy of the glory of God in the world (Sir 42:15–43:33) and in history (Sir 44-49), the chronological order is generally followed from Enoch to Nehemiah (Sir 44:16 to 49:13) but it comes back to Enoch, Joseph, Sem, Seth and Adam in 49:14-16 as an inclusion of this vast fresco, finishing with the High Priest Simon, son of Onias, his contemporary (Sir 50:1ff). Yet, the chronology is somewhat disturbed in 45:23-26: running from the priest Aaron to Phinehas, then to David and again to Phinehas and coming back then to the historical ordering with Joshua in 46:1. Ben Sira wants in this way to link the covenant with David dywd ~[ wtyrb and his sons through direct succession to the priestly covenant ~wlX tyrb with Aaron-Phinehas and their lineage,86 while these notions are specified, but specified separately and in their expected place in 45:7 ~lw[ qx for Aaron and in 47:11 wnrq, tklmm qx for David. Several biblical passages have already brought together the covenant of kingship and the covenant of priesthood: Jer 33:17-22 and Zech 6:9-14; compare also 1 Chr 17:14 and 2 Sam 7:16; 1 Chr 29:22 and 1 Kgs 1:39 where the perpetuity of both covenants or institutions is secured in the future. This

85 The “Enoch Epistle” of 1 Enoch is identified among the Aramaic and Greek fragments, see MILIK, The Books of Enoch, and PUECH, Sept fragments grecs. TIGCHELAAR, Increase Learning, 208-224 and 247f, estimates that the Instruction is older than the “Enoch Epis- tle” and that the dependence of the last one is not proven: are they two independent works? According to ELGVIN, The Mystery to Come, 116f, 138, 146, the Instruction should be dependent from the Enoch Epistle. COLLINS, Jewish Wisdom, 115-131, sees there an influence of the Apocalyptic on the writings of wisdom, whereas KNIBB, The Book of Enoch, thinks that the authors of 1 Enoch, 4QMysteries and 4QInstruction are very close to each other. 86 The Hebrew text of 45:26c is corrupt but it is possible to recognize in it the original at the basis of the Greek: wdbl wnbl $lmh tlxn changed into wdwbk ynpl Xa tlxn, see klhronomi,a basile,wj ui`ou/ evx ui`ou/ monou/. 108 Émile Puech

Pre-Maccabean hope87 prepared the double-headed messianic hope of Jubilees 31 and of the subsequent Qumranic texts.88 If the Greek never makes messianic thoughts explicit, kingship having disappeared, on the other hand the Hebrew Psalm inserted after 51:12 testifies to it,89 vv. 12h-j:

hPraised be he who rebuilds his city and his sanctuary, for His love endures forever. iPraised be he who grows a horn to David’s house, for His love endures forever. jPraised be he who chose the sons of Zadok as priests, for His love endures forever.

Even if the Psalm which insists on the Zadokite election seems to be an Essenian addition,90 it is inserted itself logically in the sequence of the Ances- tors’ eulogy. In the praise of Aaron, with Phinehas and Simon being considered as Aaronic, Ben Sira holds priesthood in high esteem, without however leaving totally aside the covenant with David and his lineage (Sir 45:25; 47:11.12). Thus he writes in 50:24 (Hb):

May His mercy be faithfully with Simon and may it keep for him the covenant with Phine- has, so that it will not be broken for him nor for his lineage as long as last the days of heaven.91

87 Contrary to COLLINS, The Scepter and the Star, 31-41. 88 For a status quaestionis, see PUECH, Messianisme, eschatologie et résurrection, 265-286, but without the analysis of these passages of Ben Sira, and KNIBB, Eschatology and Messian- ism. 89 The authenticity and the origin of this psalm modeled on Ps 136 are debated. The Psalm is known only in Hebrew (Ms B). It could be an Essene addition in a copy of the scroll, see DI LELLA, The Hebrew Text, 101-105; ID., Qumrân and the Genizah Fragments of Ben Sira, 263-265, who shows that the Davidic messianism prevailed in the time of Ben Sira, Sir 49:11 taking up Ha 2:23; 45:25 and 47:11.22. 90 See DI LELLA, Qumrân and the Genizah Fragments of Ben Sira; TRINQUET, Les liens ‘sadocites’, 290: “Authentique ou inauthentique, ce psaume par sa présence dans les fragments hébreux de l’Ecclésiastique paraît indiquer qu’au moins ceux-ci furent entre les mains des ‘fils de Sadoq’”. This does not demand a composition prior to 171/0 BC (murder of Onias III), but at the earliest of the last third of that century, see the following note. 91 Is this passage written during the life of Simon (in the past in 50:1-5) or of his offspring (Onias III?) or of his son, Simon III who became High Priest from 159 to 152, probably to be identified with the Teacher of Righteousness (see PUECH, Le grand prêtre), or later? Since this passage would not have a basis after the expulsion of the Zadokites, it is easi- er to explain that the translator into Greek has reworked it, see SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 569. DI LELLA, Qumrân and the Genizah Fragments of Ben Sira, 265- 266, did a similar analysis and supposed that, if Ben Sira has not composed this Psalm (adopted position), on the other hand the stich j (and even the whole Psalm) could have been composed by a Qumranite who could have inserted it in the Psalm. This should confirm the Qumranic origin of scrolls copied by Qaraites. Ben Sira and Qumran 109

The Hebrew Psalm has a directly messianic colouration, whereas the others passages of the book hold to the two covenants. But are they so distant from each other? The accent on priesthood is the predominant accent, as was the case during the author’s life, without forgetting the covenant of kingship.92 Was there not a pierre d’attente of first order for the reception of the book among the Essenes who, once in the opposition camp after the loss of the High Priesthood, could only wait for the coming of the two messiahs?

3.5.2 Elijah

In fact, the Essene Community waited for the coming of two messiahs, the messiah of Aaron who had precedence and the Messiah of Israel whom the prophet might accompany (1QS IX 10-11 and 4Q175).93 Qumranic texts, 4Q521 2 iii and 4Q558 51 4 in particular, both referring to Mal 3:23-24, explicitly report Elijah’s return. But the figure of Elijah redi- vivus, the eschatological prophet, is similarly present in Sir 48:11 (Hb I – Gr I) prior to the additions of Gr II.94 After the praise of the historical prophet comes the mention of the figure of the eschatological prophet who, after his ascent into heaven, must return before the day of Judgment to allay God’s wrath, to exhort to conversion and to restore the tribes of Israel (48:9-10). This passage states that those who will be present at the return of Elijah and should die after having obeyed the preaching of the prophet, will rise for their reward at the day of judgment and of restoration (see above). Thus in the Praise of the Ancestors where his personal sensibility expresses itself more than in the maxims of traditional wisdom, Ben Sira recalls the perpetuity of both priestly and kingly covenants and the preparation of the day of hwhy with the coming of the prophet, as a way towards a twofold messianism, and the belief in the resurrection of the just which both will be taken up by both Essenes and Pharisees.95

92 PRIEST, Ben Sira 45,25 in the Light, 118: Ben Sira is nether a Qumranite nor a proto-Qum- ranite, but a predecessor or pioneer who knew the Hasîdîm milieu. The reminder of two covenants would certainly prepare the way to messianism in the following generations, therefore the negative answer of CAQUOT, Ben Sira et le messianisme, seems too clear cut. 93 See PUECH, Messianisme, eschatologie et résurrection, 282-286, without adopting the argument of POIRIER, The Endtime Return: the attribution of the eschatological priesterhood to Elijah by association with Phinehas is certainly late. Until there is more information, there is no indisputable remnant in the Qumranic writings. 94 The Aramaic composition 4Q558 is certainly pre-Qumranic; it can be more or less contemporary to the book of Ben Sira, whereas 4Q521 might be dated in the second half of the 2nd century. 95 These conceptions are not especially opposed to Pharisaic thought on eschatology and messianism, as GILBERT seems to say, Siracide, 1415. But they prepare the developments in the Pharisaic milieu which is a little later. 110 Émile Puech

4. Additions of essene origin?

As a book read and copied at Qumran, as different discoveries of Hebrew manuscripts show (2Q18, 11QPsa, Mas and the copies of the geniza), it should not be surprising that here and there additions have been inserted. If here is not the place to study all the additions,96 it is at least useful to note the remarks already made on this subject. Some hold the Greek additions as a Pharisaic recension,97 others ascribe them to the school of Aristobulos.98 It has even been proposed that the additions of both stichs of 16:15-16, known in the Greek manuscripts 248 and 106, in the Peshitta and Ms A of Cairo but missing in Latin, comes from the Essene milieu.99

15 God hardened Pharaoh’s heart so that he did not know Him while His deeds reveal Himself under Heaven. 16 His love shall been made manifest to all creation (Gr)/ His creatures (Syr-Hb) His light and His darkness He shared between the children of Adam/men.

As an explanation of 16:4: “To every man who does righteousness there is reward, and everyone is treated as he deserves”, the addition quotes the example of Pharaoh who did not know the God whose deeds are manifest (Exod 5:2; 7:3), changing the relative proposition into a final one (Greek and Syr, Ms A not precise): “so that he did not know Him”. If 16:15 extends the demonstrative historical part of 16:6-11b, verse 16 takes up again the idea of retribution of 16:11c-14: the pair light-darkness corresponds to the pair mercy-forgiveness and wrath-reproof. The obduracy of Pharaoh’s heart introduces a deterministic note (the copyist of Ms A has changed wkXxw into wxbXw by metathesis), to be compared to the teaching of the Instruction on the Two Spirits in 1QS III 13 – IV 26:

He (God) created man for the dominion of 18the world, and He designed for him two spirits in which to walk until the appointed time for His Visitation, namely the spirit of 19truth and of deceit. In a spring of light (walk) the generations of faithful but in a well of darkness the generations of deceit (III 17-19). And He alloted them to the sons of man for the knowledge of good and evil, thus God assigned the lots for every living being according to his spirit for the time of the Visita- tion (IV 26).

The addition of Sir 16:16 inscribes itself fully in this line of thought, as did 15:14b (Hb) and 4Q418 81 already (see note 83). In the same vein are the antitheses which lengthen 11:4: “Good and

96 See KEARNS, The Expanded Text, note 71. 97 See HART, Ecclesiasticus, 272-320. 98 SCHLATTER, Das neu gefundene, and PRATO, La lumière interprète, 341ff. 99 PHILONENKO, Sur une proposition essénisante. Ben Sira and Qumran 111 bad, life and death, poverty and wealth come from hwhy” in the addition 11:15-16:100

(Ms A) 15 Wisdom, learning and knowledge of the word come from Yhwh, (sin corruption for) love and path of uprightness come from Yhwh, (Gr/Syr/Lat) 15 Wisdom, learning and knowledge of the word come from Yhwh, love and paths of good deeds come from Yhwh. 16 Madness (Ms A)/ error and darkness are created for the sinners, those who delight in evil grow old in evil.

These dualistic developments, present together in Ms A of Cairo and in the additions of the versions, could apparently come only from an Essene milieu which hold this book in great esteem. But the question is more disputable for the additions of the 12 stichs (a to l) after 1:20 in Syriac instead of verses 1:21-27. If the passage is missing in Gr I, it could have been inserted in another copy by a sage101 familiar with 4Q521, for instance, or with similar compositions at an early date prior to the translation into Syriac, without the Syrian translator having himself enriched the text or introduced new expectations.102 Indeed,”the wreath and everlasting rewards among the angels (c), the rejoicing of angels of God in him (e), the inheritance of life, eternal inheritance and great joy (h), be inscribed in the book of life (i)” are eschatological themes already well known in the 2nd century with Daniel, the Instruction,4QPseudo-Ezechiel and other Qumranic texts. However, it is difficult to prove an Essene origin of this addition which is known only in the Syriac tradition without any Hebrew witness.103 In conclusion, the book of Jesus Ben Sira, of which several Hebrew copies were found to come more or less directly from Qumran, strongly influenced

100 See PRATO, La lumière interprète, 353f. 101 Following KEARNS, The Expanded Text, 190-201; LEGRAND, Siracide(syriaque), 123-134, collected a number of parallels taken from Jewish apocryphal texts and Qumranic manuscripts which are not all Essene compositions. Some are pre-Qumranic, and the Apoc- rypha prove nothing. 102 See CALDUCH-BENAGES, Traducir – Interpretar. The author translates atwkz (c) by “une vic- toire”, but it is better to translate it as in Aramaic “le mérite, la récompense”, see for example 4Q542 1 ii 13. In (e), the translation is “les anges de Dieu se réjouiront/ssent en lui” not “en elle” as the author translates (p. 337 and note 63), see 1 Enoch 104:1-5 for example: the rejoicing of angels envisages man who performs Wisdom and Law of God and who will be judged as deserving eternal life in their company, not Wisdom. This concept is already in 4QInstruction and is well attested elsewhere at Qumran. 103 Contrary to LEGRAND, Siracide(syriaque), 123f and 133. To do that, it must be proven that the translator had access to an Essene copy of the book or that these themes and images are exclusively Essene, which is clearly not the case. KEARNS, The Expanded Text, attributed the additions to the influences of Wisdom and to the Essene milieu but the argumentation could be much disputed. 112 Émile Puech the Essenes and left traces in their own compositions, specially in the wisdom writings, as well as on other writings found in that same library. Many points of contact, parallels or oppositions have been pointed out, in particular concerning the Aaronic or Zadokite priesthood, the lunar or solar calendars, the central importance of Law or the meditations on mysteries in compositions of the 2nd century, and their respective points of view upon two very fundamental topics in the Judaism of that period – the messianic and eschatological hopes – have been presented. In spite of rather varied literary genres, the points of view are less distant than is often believed, as they both differently reflect the evolution of ideas and beliefs in different milieux of sages in the 2nd century, be it before Qumran or a Qumranic one. Copied and recopied, revisions of Ben Sira became unavoidable in the Essene milieu and later on in the versions of Christian communities who received this book without difficulty. Ben Sira and Qumran 113

Bibliography

ALFRINK, J. B., L’idée de résurrection d’après Dan XII,1-2: Bib 40 (1959), 355-371. BAILLET, M., Textes des grottes 2Q, 3Q, 6Q, 7Q à 10Q, in: BAILLET, M. – MILIK, J. T. – DE VAUX, R., Le ‘Petites Grottes’ de Qumran. Texte – Planches (DJD III), Oxford 1962, 45-164. BAUMGARTEN, J. M., Some Notes on the Ben Sira Scroll from Masada: JQR 58 (1968), 323-327. BEENTJES, P. C., The Book of Ben Sira in Hebrew. A Text of All Extant Hebrew Man- uscripts and a Synopsis of All Parallel Hebrew Ben Sira Texts (VT.S 68), Leiden 1997. BEN HAYYIM, Z. (ed.), The Book of Ben Sira. Text, Concordance and an Analysis of the Vocabulary, Jerusalem 1973. Biblia Sacra juxta Vulgatam versionem... recensuit WEBER, R., II: Proverbia – Apoc- alypsis, Appendix, Stuttgart 1969. BRAUN, O., Ein Brief des Katholikos Timotheos I über biblische Studien des 9 Jahrhun- derts: Oriens Christianus 1 (1901), 299-313. BROOKE, G. J., Biblical Interpretation in the Wisdom Texts from Qumran, in: HEMPEL, C. – LANGE, A. – LICHTENBERGER, H. (eds.), The Wisdom Texts from Qumran and the Development of Sapiential Thought (BEThL 159), Leuven 2002, 201-220. BROOKE, G. J., The wisdom of Matthew’s Beatitudes (4QBéat and Mt. 5:3-12): ScrB 19 (1988-89), 35-41. BURKES,SH., God, Self, and Dead. The Shape of Religious Transformation in the Sec- ond Temple Period (JSJ.S 79), Leiden – Boston 2003. CALDUCH-BENAGES, N., Trial Motif in the Book of Ben Sira with Special Reference to Sir. 2,1-6, in: BEENTJES, P. C. (ed.), The Book of Ben Sira in Modern Research. Pro- ceedings of the First International Ben Sira Conference 28-31 July 1996, Soester- berg, Netherlands (BZAW 255), Berlin – New York 1997, 135-151. CALDUCH-BENAGES, N., Traducir – Interpretar: La versión siríaca de Sirácida 1: EstB 55 (1997), 313-340. CALDUCH-BENAGES, N. – FERRER,J.–LIESEN, J. , La Sabiduría del escriba – Wisdom of the Scribe, Estella 2003. CAQUOT, A., Les textes de sagesse de Qoumrân (Aperçu préliminaire): RHPR 76 (1996), 1-34. CAQUOT, A., Ben Sira et le messianisme: Sem. 16 (1966), 43-68. CARMIGNAC, J., Les rapports entre l’Ecclésiastique et Qumrân: RdQ III (1961-62), 209-218. COLLINS, J. J., The Scepter and the Star: the Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Ancient Literature, New York 1995. COLLINS, J. J., Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls, London-New York, 1997. COLLINS, J. J., Jewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age, Louisville 1997. COLLINS, J. J., The Mysteries of God. Creation and Eschatology in 4QInstruction and the Wisdom of Solomon, in: GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ, F. (ed.), Wisdom and Apocalyp- ticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Biblical Tradition (BEThL 168), Leu- ven 2003, 287-305. CORLEY, J., Wisdom Versus Apocalyptic and Science in Sirach 1,1-10, in: GARCÍA 114 Émile Puech

MARTÍNEZ, F. (ed.), Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Biblical Tradition, 269-285. COWLEY, A. E. – NEUBAUER, A., The Original Hebrew of a Portion of Ecclesiasticus (XXXIX.15 to XLIX.11) Together with Early Versions and an English Translation, Followed by the Quotations from Ben Sira in Rabbinical Literature, Oxford 1897. DAHMEN, U., Psalmen- und Psalter-Rezeption im Frühjudentum. Rekonstruktion, Textbestand, Struktur und Pragmatik der Psalmenrolle 11QPsa aus Qumran, Leiden 2003. DELCOR, M., Le texte hébreu du Cantique de Siracide LI,13 et ss. et les anciennes versions: Textus 6 (1968), 27-47. DE ROO, J. C. R., Is 4Q525 a Qumran Sectarian Document?, in: PORTER, S. E. – EVANS, A. (eds.),The Scrolls and the Scriptures. Qumran Fifty Years After (JSPE.S 26), Sheffield 1997, 338-367. DI LELLA, A., The Hebrew Text of Sirach. A Text-Critical and Historical Study, Lon- don – The Hague – Paris 1966. DI LELLA, A., Qumrân and the Genizah Fragments of Ben Sira: CBQ 24 (1987), 245-267, DORIVAL, G., L’apport des Pères de l’Église à la question de la clôture du Canon de l’Ancien Testament,in: AUWERS, J.-M. – DE JONGE, H. J. (eds.), The Biblical Canons (BEThL 163), Leuven 2003, 81-110. DUVAL, R., Une découverte de livres hébreux à Jéricho: Revue sémitique d’épigra- phie et d’histoire ancienne 10 (1902), 174-179. ELGVIN, T., 4QWays of Righteousness (DJD XX), Oxford 1997. ELGVIN, T., The Mystery to Come: Early Essene Theology of Revelation, in: Qumran Between the Old and New Testament (JSOT.S 290), Sheffield 1998, 113-150. ELGVIN, T., Early Essene Eschatology: Judgment and Salvation according to Sapien- tial Work A, in: PARRY, D. W. – RICKS, S. (eds.), Current Research and Techno- logical Development on the Dead Sea Scrolls: Conference on the Texts from the Judean Desert, Jerusalem, 30 April 1995 (STDJ 20), Leiden 1996, 126-165. FLINT, P. W., «Apocrypha», Other Previously-Known Writings, and «Pseude- pigrapha» in the Dead Sea Scrolls, in: FLINT, P. W. – VANDERKAM, J. C. (eds.), The Dead Sea Scrolls After Fifty Years. A Comprehensive Assessment, II, Leiden – Boston – Köln 1999, 24-66. FABRY, H.-J., Die Seligpreisungen in der Bibel und in Qumran, in: HEMPEL, C. – LANGE, A. – LICHTENBERGER, H. (eds.), The Wisdom Texts from Qumran and the Devel- opment of Sapiential Thought, 189-200. FLECHTER-LOUIS, C. H. T., All the Glory of Adam: Liturgical Anthropology in the Dead Sea Scrolls (STDJ 42), Leiden 2002. FREY, J., Flesh and Spirit in the Palestinian Jewish Sapiential Tradition and in the Qumran Texts. An inquiry into the Background of Pauline Usage, in: HEMPEL, C. – LANGE, A. – LICHTENBERGER, H. (eds.), The Wisdom Texts from Qumran and the Development of Sapiential Thought, 367-404. GILBERT, M., L’Ecclésiatique: quel texte? Quelle autorité?: RB 94 (1987), 233-250. GILBERT, M., Siracide, in: DBS XII, 1389-1437. GILBERT, M., The Book of Ben Sira: Implications for Jewish and Christian Traditions, in: TALMON,SH. (ed.), Jewish Civilization in the Hellenistic Roman Period, Philadelphia, 1991, 81-91. Ben Sira and Qumran 115

GILBERT, M., «Venez à mon école» (Si 51,13-30), in: FISCHER, I. – RAPP, U. – SCHILLER,J. (eds.), Auf den Spuren der schriftgelehrten Weisen. Festschrift Johannes Marböck anlässlich seiner Emeritierung (BZAW 331), Berlin – New York 2003, 283-290. GLESSMER, U., Calendars in the Qumran Scrolls, in: FLINT, P. W. – VANDERKAM, J. C. (eds.), The Dead Sea Scrolls After Fifty Years. A Comprehensive Assessment, 213-278. GOFF, M. J., The Worldly and Heavenly Wisdom of 4QInstruction (STDJ 50), Leiden 2003. GRELOT, P., La Bible Parole de Dieu, Paris 1965. HAYWARD, R. C. T., El Elyon and the Divine Name in Ben Sira’s God, in: EGGER- WENZEL, R. (ed.), Proceedings of the International Ben Sira Conference Durham – Ushaw College 2001 (BZAW 321), Berlin – New York 2002, 180-198. HARRINGTON, D. J., Two Early Jewish Approaches to Wisdom Sirach and Qumran Sapiential Work A, in: HEMPEL, C. – LANGE, A. – LICHTENBERGER, H. (eds.), The Wisdom Texts from Qumran and the Development of Sapiential Thought, 263- 275. HARRINGTON, D. J., Wisdom and Apocalyptic in 4QInstruction and 4 Esra, in: F. GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ (ed.), Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Biblical Tradition, 343-355. HARRINGTON, D. J., Wisdom at Qumran, in: ULRICH,E.– VANDERKAM, J. (eds.), The Community of the Renewed Covenant. The Notre Dame Symposium on the Dead Sea Scrolls, Notre Dame 1993, 137-152. HART, J. H. A., Ecclesiasticus: the Greek Text of Codex 248, edited with a textual commentary and prolegomena, Cambridge 1909. IWRY, S., A New Designation for the Luminaries in Ben Sira and in the Manual of Discipline (1QS): BASOR 200 (1970), 41-47. KAISER, O., Zwischen Athen und Jerusalem. Studien zur griechischen und biblischen Theologie, ihrer Eigenart und ihrem Verhältnis, Berlin – New York 2003. KEARNS, C., The Expanded Text of Ecclesiasticus. Its Teaching on the Future Life as a Clue to its Origin, Rome 1951. KNIBB, M. A., The Book of Enoch in the Light of the Qumran Wisdom Literature, in: GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ, F. (ed.), Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Biblical Tradition, 193-210. KNIBB, M. A., Eschatology and Messianism in the Dead Sea Scrolls, in: FLINT,P. W. –VANDERKAM, J. C. (eds.), The Dead Sea Scrolls After Fifty Years. A Compre- hensive Assessment, II, 379-402. KOPERSKI, V.,Sirach and Wisdom: a Plea for Canonicity, in: AUWERS, J.-M. – DE JONGE, H. J. (eds.), The Biblical Canons, 254-264. LANGE, A., Wisdom and Predestination in the Dead Sea Scrolls: DSD 2 (1995), 340- 354. LEGRAND,TH., Siracide(syriaque) 1,20c-z. Une addition syriaque et ses résonances esséniennes, in: AMPHOUX,CH.-B. – FREY,A. – SCHATTNER-RIESER, U. (eds.), Études sémitiques et samaritaines offertes à Jean Margain (Histoire du texte biblique 4), Lausanne 1998, 123-134. LEEMANS, J., Canon and Quotation: Athanasius’ use of Jesus Sirach”, in: AUWERS, J.- M. – DE JONGE, H. J. (eds.), The Biblical Canons, 265-277. LEHMANN, M. E., Ben Sira and the Qumran Literature: RdQ III (1961-62), 103-116. LEHMANN, M. R., 11QPsa and Ben Sira: RdQ XI (1982-84), 239-251. 116 Émile Puech

LÉVI, I., L’Ecclésiastique ou la Sagesse de Jésus, fils de Sira. Texte original hébreu édité, traduit et commenté (BEHE.R 10,2), Paris 1901. MARTONE, C., Ben Sira Manuscripts from Qumran and Masada, in: BEENTJES, P. C. (ed.), The Book of Ben Sira in Modern Research. Proceedings of the First Inter- national Ben Sira Conference 28-31 July 1996, Soesterberg, Netherlands, 81-93. MILIK, J. T., Qumran Cave I, Oxford 1955. MILIK, J. T., The Books of Enoch. Aramaic Fragments of Qumrân Cave 4, Oxford 1976. MILIK, J. T., Un fragment mal placé dans l’édition du Siracide de Masada: Bib 47 (1966), 425-246. MINISSALE, A., La versione greca del Siracide. Confronto con il testo ebraico alla luce dell’attività midrascica e del metodo targumico (AnBib 133), Roma 1995. MULDER, O., Simon the Hight Priest in Sirach 50. An Exegetical Study of the Signif- icance of Simon the High Priest as Climax to the Praise of the Fathers in Ben Sira’s Concepts of the History of Israel (JSJ.S 78), Leiden – Boston 2003. MÜLLER-KESSLER,CH.– SOKOLOFF, M. (eds.), The Christian Palestinian Aramaic Old Testament and Apocrypha Version from the Early Period. A Corpus of Christ- ian Palestinian Aramaic, Vol. I, Groningen 1997. MURAOKA,T., Sir. 51,13-30: An Erotic Hymn To Wisdom?: JSJ 10 (1979), 166-178. OLYAN, S., Ben Sira’s Relationship to the Priesthood: HTR 80 (1987), 261-286. PHILONENKO, M., Sur une proposition essénisante dans le Siracide (16,15-16): OrSuec 33-35 (1984-86), 317-321. POIRIER, J. C., The Endtime Return of Elijah and Moses at Qumran: DSD 10/2 (2003), 221-242. PRATO, G. L., La lumière interprète de la Sagesse dans la tradition textuelle de Ben Sira, in: GILBERT, M. (ed.), La Sagesse de l‘Ancien Testament (BEThL 51), Leu- ven 1990, 317-346. PRIEST, J., Ben Sira 45,25 in the Light of the Qumran Literature: RdQ V (1964-66), 111- 118. PUECH, É., Le livre de Ben Sira et les manuscrits de la mer Morte, in: CALDUCH- BENAGES, N. – VERMEYLEN, J. (eds.), Treasures of Wisdom. Studies in Ben Sira and the Book of Wisdom. Festschrift M. Gilbert (BEThL 143), Leuven 1999, 411- 426. PUECH, É., Qumrân Grotte 4. XVIII (DJD XXV), Oxford 1998. PUECH, É., La croyance des Esséniens en la vie future: immortalité, résurrection, vie éternelle?, I-II, (EtB 21-22), Paris 1993. PUECH, É., Le Testament de Lévi en araméen de la Geniza du Caire: RdQ 80 (2002), 511-556. PUECH, É., Notes sur le Testament de Lévi de la grotte 1 (1Q21): RdQ 82 (2003), 297- 310. PUECH, É., The Collection of Beatitudes in Hebrew and in Greek (4Q525 1-4 and Mt 5,3-12), in: MANNS,F.– ALLIATA, E. (eds.), Early Christianity in Context. Monu- ments and Documents (SBF.CMa 38), Jerusalem 1993, 353-368. PUECH, É., Apports des textes apocalyptiques et sapientiels de Qumrân à l’eschatologie du judaïsme ancien, in: GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ, F. (ed.), Wisdom and Apoc- alypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Biblical Tradition, 133-170. PUECH, É., Un Hymne essénien en partie retrouvé et les béatitudes. 1QH V 12-VI 18 (= col. XIII-XIV 7) et 4QBéat.: RdQ XIII (1998), 59-88 [Mémorial Jean Carmignac]. Ben Sira and Qumran 117

PUECH, É., 4Q525 et les péricopes des Béatitudes en Ben Sira et Matthieu: RB 98 (1991), 80-106. PUECH,É.,La croyance à la resurrection des justes dans un texte qumranien de Sagesse: 4Q418 69 ii, in: COHEN,CH.– HURVITZ, A. – PAUL,SH. M. (eds.), Sefer Moshe. The Moshe Weinfeld Jubilee Volume. Studies in the Bible and the Ancient Near East, Qumran, and Post-Biblical Judaism, Winona Lake 2004, 427-444. PUECH, É., Les fragments eschatologiques de 4QInstruction (4Q416 i et 4Q418 69 ii, 81-81a, 127): RdQ 85 (2005), 89-119. PUECH, É., Apports des manuscrits de Qumrân à la croyance à la résurection dans le Judaïsme ancien, in: LEMAIRE, A.– MIMOUNI, S. (eds.), Qoumrân et le judaïsme du tournant de notre ère. Actes de la Table Ronde, Collège de France, 16 novem- bre 2004, Paris – Louvain 2006, 81-110. PUECH, É.,The Book of Wisdom and the Dead Sea Scrolls: an overview, in: PASSARO, A. – BELLIA, G. (eds.), The Book of Wisdom in Modern Research. Studies on Tra- dition, Redaction, and Theology (DCLY 2005), Berlin – New York 2005, 117-141 (it. Il Libro della Sapienza e i manoscritti del Mar Morto, in: BELLIA, G. – PASSARO, A. [eds.], Il Libro della Sapienza. Tradizione, redazione, teologia [Studia Bibli- ca 1], Roma 2004, 131-155). PUECH, É., La conception de la vie future dans le livre de la Sagesse et les manuscrits de la mer Morte: un aperçu: RdQ 82 (2003), 209-232. PUECH, É., Messianisme, eschatologie et résurrection dans les manuscrits de la mer Morte: RdQ XVIII (1997), 255-298. PUECH, É., Sept fragments grecs de la Lettre d’Hénoch (1 Hén 100, 103 et 105) dans la grotte 7 de Qumrân (= 7QHéngr): RdQ XVIII (1997), 313-323. PUECH, É., Le grand prêtre Simon (III), fils d’Onias (III), le Maître de Justice?, in: KOLLMANN,B.– REINBOLD,W.–STEUDEL, A. (eds.), Antikes Judentum und früh- es Christentum. Festschrift für H. Stegemann zum 65. Geburtsag (BZNW 97) Berlin 1998, 137-158. PUECH, É. – STEUDEL, A., Un nouveau fragment du manuscrit 4QInst (XQ7 = 4Q417 ou 4Q418): RdQ XIX (2000), 623-627. RABINOWITZ, I., The Qumran Hebrew Original of Ben Sira’s Concluding Acrostic on Wisdom: HUCA 42 (1971), 173-184. SANDERS, J. A., The Sirach 51 Acrostic, in: CAQUOT, A. – PHILONENKO, M. (eds.), Hom- mages à André Dupont-Sommer, Paris 1971, 429-438. SANDERS, J. A., The Psalms Scroll of Qumrân Cave 11 (11QPsa) (DJD IV), Oxford 1965. SARACINO, F. , Resurrezione in Ben Sira?: Henoch 4 (1982), 185-203. SCHECHTER, S., The Quotations from Ecclesiasticus in Rabbinic Literature: JQR 3 (1891), 682-706. SCHLATTER, A., Das neu gefundene hebräische Stück des Sirach. Der Glossar des gri- eschischen Sirach und seine Stellung in der Geschichte der Jüdischen Theolo- gie (BFChTh 1, 5-6), Gütersloh 1897. SEGAL, M. H., Ben Sira in Qumran: Tarbiz 33 (1963-64), 243-246. SKEHAN, P. W., The Acrostic Poem in Sirach 51:13-30: HTR 64 (1971), 387-400. SKEHAN, P. W., Sirach 40,11-17: CBQ 30 (1968), 570-572. SKEHAN, P. W., Sirach 30,12 and Related Texts: CBQ 36 (1974), 535-542. SKEHAN, P. W., Qumrân. IV. Littérature de Qumrân – A. Textes bibliques, in: DBS IX, 805-903. 118 Émile Puech

SKEHAN,P. W. –DI LELLA,A.A., The Wisdom of Ben Sira. A New Translation with Notes, Introduction, and Commentary (AncB 39), New York 1987. SKEHAN, P. W. – ULRICH, E., Qumran Cave 4 XI. Psalms to Chronicles (DJD XVI), Oxford 2000. STADELMANN, H., Ben Sira als Schriftgelehrter: Eine Untersuchung zum Berufsbild des vor-makkabäischen Sofer unter Berücksichtigung seines Verhältnisses zu Priester-, Propheten- und Weisheitslehrertum (WUNT 2/6), Tübingen 1981. STONE, M. – GREENFIELD, J. C. , Aramaic Levi Document (DJD XXII), Oxford 1998, 1- 72. STRUGNELL, J., Notes and Queries on the Ben Sira Scroll from Masada: ErIs 9 (1969), 109-119. STRUGNELL, J. – HARRINGTON, D. J. – ELGVIN, T., Qumran Cave 4 XXIV, Sapiential Texts, Part 2 (DJD XXXIV), Oxford 1999. STRUGNELL, J., The Sapiential Work 4Q415ff and Pre-Qumranic Works from Qum- ran: Lexical Considerations, in: PARRY, D. W. – ULRICH, E. (eds.), The Provo Inter- national Conference on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Technological Innovations, New Texts, and Reformulated Issues (STDJ XXX), Leiden 1999, 595-608. STUCKENBRUCK, L., 4QInstruction and the Possible Influence of Early Enochic Tradi- tions: An Evaluation, in: HEMPEL, C. – LANGE, A. – LICHTENBERGER, H. (eds.), The Wisdom Texts from Qumran and the Development of Sapiential Thought, 245- 261. TIGCHELAAR, E. J.-C., Increase Learning for the Understanding Ones. Reading and Reconstructing the Fragmentary Early Jewish Sapiential Text 4QInstruction (STDJ XLIV), Leiden – Boston – Köln 2001. TIGCHELAAR, E. J.-C., «There are the Names of the Spirits of...»: a Preliminary Edi- tion of 4QCatalogue of Spirits (4Q230) and New Manuscript Evidence For the Two Spirits Treatise (4Q257 and 1Q29a): RdQ 84 (2004), 529-547. TIGCHELAAR, E. J.-C., More on 4Q264A (4QHalakha or 4QWays of Righteousnessc)?: RdQ 75 (2000), 453-456. TIGCHELAAR, E. J.-C., The Addressees of 4QInstruction, in: FALK, D. – GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ, F. – SCHULLER, E. (eds.), Sapiential, Liturgical and Poetical Texts from Qumram: Proceedings of the Third Meeting of the International Organization for Qumran Studies, Oslo 1998 (STDJ 35), Leiden 2000, 62-75. Traduction Œcuménique de la Bible, Paris 19893. TRINQUET, J., Les liens ‘sadocites’ de l’écrit de Damas, des manuscrits de la mer Morte et de l’Ecclésiastique: VT 1 (1951), 287-292. VAN CANGH, J.-M., Béatitudes de Qumrân et Béatitudes évangéliques, antériorité de Matthieu sur Luc?, in: GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ, F. (ed.), Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Biblical Tradition, 413-425. VERMES, G., The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, London 1997. WRIGHT, B. G., “Fear the Lord and Honor the Priest”. Ben Sira as Defender of the Jerusalem Priesthood, in: BEENTJES, P. C. (ed.), The Book of Ben Sira in Modern Research. Proceedings of the First International Ben Sira Conference 28-31 July 1996, Soesterberg, Netherlands, 189-222. YADIN, Y., The Ben Sira Scroll from Masada, Jerusalem 1965 (reprinted from ErIs 8 (1965), 1-45 ‘ivrît); reprinted in: Masada VI. The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963- 1965, Final Report, with Notes on the Reading by E. Qimron, and Bibliography by F. García Martínez, Jerusalem 1999. The hymn to the creation (Sir 42:15–43:33): a polemic text?

NURIA CALDUCH-BENAGES

1. Introduction

Ben Sira begins the last part of his book with a hymn of praise to the wisdom of God, manifested in nature (42:15 – 43:33: hymn to the creation) and in the history of Israel (44:1 – 49:16: the Praise of the Ancestors) which concludes with the glorification of the High Priest Simon (50:1-24). With these two compositions in hymnic style, the sage succeeds in harmonising the universal dimension of the creation with the national character of salvation, rooted in Israel (24:1-22). Both the creation which embraces all men and the important characters of the history of Israel – whether they are heroes or anti-heroes – are different manifestations of the same divine wisdom which stimulates its disciples towards the search for God.1 The hymn to the creation, or, if you wish, the hymn to the Creator, can be described as “a composition that is successful on the literary level and poetically inspired”2 in which the sage praises the sovereignty and the supreme wisdom of God diffused in the universe, and invites his hearers/readers to unite themselves to him in this attitude of praise. The majority of commentators on the Book of Sirach as well as those authors who have made a more detailed study of the passage follow this line of interpretation. We now cite them in chronological order. Johannes Marböck, in his by now classical monograph (1971),3 studies Sir 42:15–43:33 as an essential contribution to the theology of creation expressed in the book. Gian Luigi Prato, in his volume on the problem of theodicy in Ben Sira (1975),4 highlights the function of the elements in the contemplation of the creation. Twelve years later, Keith W. Burton, in his Glasgow doctoral thesis of 1987, still unpublished,5 proposes the theme of creation (divided into eight sections) as the structuring element of the book. Sir 42:15–43:33 is the last of the series. In a study on the connection between wisdom and creation, Leo G. Perdue (1994)6

1 Cf. CALDUCH-BENAGES, L’inno al creato, 54. 2ZAPPELLA, La contemplazione sapienziale, 41. 3MARBÖCK, Weisheit im Wandel. 4PRATO, Il problema della teodicea. 5BURTON, Ben Sira and the Judaic Doctrine of Creation. 6PERDUE, Wisdom and Creation, 243-290 (“I Covered the Earth like a Mist”: Cosmos and History in Ben Sira). 120 Nuria Calduch-Benages concentrates on the metaphor of the divine wisdom as guarantee of the order present in the world (“a world of elegance and wonderment”), a metaphor which, according to him, constitutes the centre of the hymn. Final- ly, and more recently, George Sauer (2000) has published an article on the Old Testament background of Sir 42:15–43:33.7 In it he points out all the texts of the tradition from which the sage has derived inspiration in com- posing his poem. As far as the composition of the hymn is concerned, despite the multiplicity of proposals that have been advanced, all agree in identifying an introduction which exalts the power of God in creation (42:15-25)8 and a conclusion which is actually a summons to praise the Creator (43:27-33).9 The central part of the hymn dedicated to the individual works of creation (43:1-26) is more debated: some consider it to be unitary; others divide it into two or even three strophes. In his commentary, Alexander Di Lella suggests instead a division of the entire poem into four strophes, of 15, 14, 16 and 8 stichs respectively: 42:15-25; 43:1-12; 43:13-26; 43:27-33.10 This study does not intend to follow the studies mentioned above. It aims rather to confine itself to the polemical dimension of the hymn and that, obviously, supposes the presence of a group of adversaries who are opposed to the school (51:23: Xrdm tyb) of the sage. It is probable that Ben Sira would have thought of such a group when he taught the hymn to his disciples. To establish the identity of these people (perhaps belonging to one or maybe to different schools of thought) is a difficult undertaking, impossible in practice in so far as, not only in our text, but also in the rest of the book, these people (groups, communities, schools) are never mentioned explicitly. To this we must add the total absence of information or clues of an historical character which could offer precise tracks for research. Perhaps we can catch a glimpse of the adversaries behind the old debate formula (rmat la: “do not say” which Ben Sira employs on nine occasions (5:1-6 [4x]; 11:23.24; 15:11.12; 16:17) and above all in the didactic/hymnic compositions on theodicy (16:24–17:14; 36[33]:7-15; 39:12-35; 42:15–43:33). With the old debate formula is linked the expression “no on can say” repeated three times in 39:12-35 (39:21a: what use is this?; 39:21b: this is worse than that; 39:34: this is bad, what is this?) with which Ben Sira rejects his adversaries’ opinions on the thorny problem of theodicy.According to James Crenshaw – the first to have an inkling of any religious controversy in the work of the sage – behind the formulae just mentioned one can perceive the urgent threat of the anonymous, implicit opponents of Ben Sira and,

7SAUER, Der traditionsgeschichtliche Hintergrund. 8MINISSALE, La versione greca, 116-125. 9CALDUCH-BENAGES, God Creator of All. 10 SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 491. The hymn to the creation (Sir 42:15–43:33): a polemic text? 121 even if we cannot identify these people or groups for certain, we can at least discern “the basic thrust of their attack”.11 As far as the theme of Sir 42:15–43:33, the creation and the Creator, is concerned, there are three areas which could have inspired polemic in the teaching of Ben Sira. The first is the Jewish sapiential tradition, the second are the Enochic apocalyptic circles, and the third is Greek-Hellenistic culture. In any case, the possible polemic dimension is not the predominant element of the hymn, certainly less evident than in the other three poems on theodicy.12

2. The jewish sapiential tradition

As Prato, Di Lella and Sauer, among others, have well noted, Sir 42:15–43: 33 is full of references to other Biblical texts, among which are the priestly account of the creation in Gen 1 (Ben Sira seems, however,not to have known chapters 2-8 and 10-11 of Genesis), Job 28 and 38–41 and a few Psalms (96; 136; 104; 147; 148 to cite only some).13 What is most striking is the original and free use that Ben Sira made of these and other texts. He then avoided them when he considered it convenient.14 Let us record some examples, always with reference to Gen 1. In the introduction to the hymn in 42:15c, we read: “by the word of God his works [were made]”, a clear reference to the creative activity of God as it is presented in the first chapter of Genesis. However, we should observe that at no stage does he allude to the creation in six days, to the first human couple (cf. Sir 17:1-12) or to the Sabbath on which God ceased from his labour. In 42:16, it is suggestive that the sun precedes the moon as if Ben Sira had wished to correct the naïve picture of the Genesis account which presents the creation of the light (1:3) before that of the sun (1:16) which is its principal source.15 In 43:1-10 the creation of the firmament, of the sun, the moon and the stars refers to Gen 1:14-18. Ben Sira follows the same order in the creation of the stars which is found in Genesis. However, he not only devotes much more attention to the moon than to the son; he modifies the meaning of the Genesis text: “And God

11 CRENSHAW, The Problem of Theodicy, 47; COLLINS, Jewish Wisdom, 81. 12 CRENSHAW, The Problem of Theodicy, 53: “The final didactic hymn [...] (42,15–43,33) shows a decided advance in the direction of praise over polemic”. 13 Cf. also the Song of the Three Children in the Greek additions to the Book of Daniel and the hymns of Qumran, especially 1QH IX, 10-14. 14 For the midrashic use of Gen 1, cf. ALONSO SCHÖKEL, The Vision of Man, with reference to DE FRAINE, Het Loflied. 15 Cf. MORLA ASENSIO, Eclesiástico, 208. 122 Nuria Calduch-Benages said, ‘Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, and let them be lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth’”. While here the son and the moon serve to distinguish and fix the times and seasons, in the text of Ben Sira this function is reserved only to the moon. Moreover, it is to be noted that in 43:11, Ben Sira describes the rainbow which embraces the arch of the sky with its splendour, without, however, mentioning either the flood, or Noah, or his covenant with God (Gen 9:12-17). These are not the only differences which surprise us. Besides these, there are other “polemical notes”, to use the words of Crenshaw,16 which seem to be directed against the same sapiential tradition to which Ben Sira is heir. In fact, in 42:21, the sage says to God: “He has established the power of his wisdom, he is the only one from all eternity. There is nothing to be added or taken away, and he has no need of any teacher”. This verse seems to reject the idea of a pre-existent Wisdom which in the role of “counsellor”17 assisted God in the creation of the world (cf. Prov 8:22-31, especially 8:30). According to Crenshaw, this idea would be the fruit of speculation on personified Wisdom from which Ben Sira would be completely distanced in view of the correspondence between Wisdom and Law.18 In the doctrine of the sage, wisdom is present as eternal (1:4.9; 24:9) and pre-existent (1:1b; 24: 9b), but, above all, it is described as created by God (1:4.9; 24:9). In the three verses which precede 42:21, Ben Sira praises the unlimited knowledge of God with regard to space and time and the totality of his wisdom: “He searches out the abyss and the heart; he understands all their secrets. For the Most High knows all that may be known, and foresees the things which happen in the world. He reveals what has been and what is to be, and he reveals the most hidden mysteries. No thought is absent from him; no word escapes him” (42:18-20). These statements seem designed to refute Eliphaz the Temanite, witness of the traditional wisdom, when, in interpreting ten- dentiously the previous declarations of Job he replies: “And you say, ‘What does God know? Can he judge through the deep darkness? Thick clouds enwrap him, so that he does not see, when he walks on the vault of heaven’” (Job 22:13-14). In my opinion, however, in the hymn to creation, Ben Sira is not openly opposing the sapiential tradition of Israel but rather he is reformulating

16 CRENSHAW, Old Testament Wisdom, 158: “Surprisingly polemical notes can be heard now and again within this hymn”. 17 This would be one of the possible interpretations !wOma; intended as a derivation from the Akkadian ummãnu, “scribe, sage; heavenly scribe” (in Hebrew !M'a') which the Massoretes vocalised incorrectly. Cf. CLIFFORD,Proverbs, 100-101. 18 CRENSHAW, Old Testament Wisdom, 158. The hymn to the creation (Sir 42:15–43:33): a polemic text? 123 it in his own way, emphasising some aspects which he, as teacher, considers useful for the instruction of his disciples in praise.

3. The enochic apocalyptic circles

“The classical image which thought him [Ben Sira} to be the representative ofIsrael against advancing Hellenism, appears, in fact, inadequate to express the complexity of his thought”.19 Thus Gabriele Boccaccini expresses himself at the conclusion of a famous study on the Book of Sirach and its connections with Qoheleth and apocalyptic (1993) in which he takes up again and develops the same ideas which he had already published elsewhere in 1986.20 According to him, Ben Sira, would not have feared to confront directly the instances of the apocalyptic tradition. Such a polemical connection between Ben Sira and 1 Enoch had already been suggested by George W. E. Nickelsburg (1983) – who even sees the poor of the time of Ben Sira as possible authors of the Epistle of Enoch – Saul Olyan (1987) and Lewis J. Prockter (1990).21 The recent studies on the Book of Enoch and, above all, the latest research on the intellectual and sociological characteristics of the group which hides under this literature (cf. Henoch 24[2002]) have demonstrated that Enochic Judaism was, at least in a certain measure, “one of the targets of Sirach’s polemic arrows”.22 Many authors today consider Ben Sira and 1 Enoch not only as two different reactions to the threat of Hellenism, but as the expression of two schools of wisdom that were not only in disagreement but were also rivals (“konkurrierende Schule”). On the other hand, to speak of schools of wisdom in this context opens the way to a further problem, that is, how far do these literary texts allow us to reconstruct those groups of Jews which were hostile to one another?23 Was Ben Sira – per impossibile – the only representative of the wisdom which he promoted in his book, or was he part of a sacerdotal community? Are the authors of the different parts of 1 Enoch able to consider themselves as belonging to a precise social group or community? What was their degree of representativeness in the society of the

19 BOCCACCINI, Il Medio Giudaismo, 85. To the authors cited in the note, we add HENGEL, Judaism and Hellenism, 131-175. 20 BOCCACCINI, L’origine del male, 34. 21 NICKELSBURG, Social Aspects, 651; OLYAN, Ben Sira’s Relationship, 279-280; PROCKTER, Torah as a Fence. Cf. also MARBÖCK, Das Buch Jesus Sirach, 367. 22 BOCCACCINI, Introduction, 11; NICKELSBURG, 1 Enoch, 63: “It is possible that Ben Sira is polemicizing against those in the Enochic camp”. 23 WRIGHT, Sirach and 1 Enoch, 182. 124 Nuria Calduch-Benages period? All these questions would merit further detailed study. One thing is certain, however: Both in the book of Ben Sira and in 1 Enoch, the identity of the opponents always remains hidden. Despite this, there are some texts in which the antagonism between the two groups is more obvious. For example, in 1 Enoch 98:15, we read: “Woe to you who write lying words of impiety; for they write their lies that men may hear and not forget their folly; and they will not have peace, but will die a sudden death”.24 The text is aimed at those who are opposed to the doctrine of the sages. But who are these people? Could they be the followers of Ben Sira, promoters of another type of wisdom? In 1 Enoch 104:10, the author has in his sights the “many sinners who will alter and distort the words of truth and speak evil words among themselves and lie and concoct great fabrications and write books in their own words“. According to Sir 50:27, Ben Sira has written a book of wisdom. Would he, therefore, be one of these sinners? In 1995, Randal A. Argall published his doctoral thesis which he had defended in 1992 at the University of Iowa under the supervision of George E. W. Nickelsburg on the connection between Ben Sira and 1 Enoch, a study which inaugurated a new seam of research.25 After having examined the literary forms and the theological themes of revelation, creation and judgement in both books, Argall arrives at the conclusion that Ben Sira (representative of traditional wisdom) and 1 Enoch (representative of the apocalyptic tradition) were very close both at the level of form and of content. Both the books share themes, literary forms, oral traditions and large perspectives which are explained as deriving from a common background. In fact, the book of Ben Sira and some parts of 1 Enoch are contemporary. While the majority of scholars are in agreement over the dating of Ben Sira (between 200 and 175 BC), that of 1 Enoch is more disputed. In spite of the difference of opinions on the dating of the different sections of the book, today it is held that the Book of Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36) and the Book of Heavenly Luminaries (1 Enoch 71-82) – if not the whole, then a good part of it – already existed in the second century BC. The Epistle of Enoch (1 Enoch 92-105), on the other hand, presents a later dating. If account is taken of the fact that the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes in 167 BC is not mentioned in the Apocalypse of Weeks, which is inserted into the Epistle (93:1-10; 91:11-17), one can suppose that Chapters 92-105 are prior

24 Basically I cite the Book of Enoch in the edition of SPARKS (ed.), The Apocryphal Old Tes- tament. For suggestions with regard the english translation of italian edition of SACCHI, Apocrifi dell’Antico Testamento, I am grateful to dr. Michael Tait . English editions/translations may be found in CHARLESWORTH (ed.), The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha; NICK- ELSBURG, 1 Enoch. 25 ARGALL, 1 Enoch and Sirach. The hymn to the creation (Sir 42:15–43:33): a polemic text? 125 to this date.26 We have spoken first of similarities, but clearly there are substantial differences with regard to the content of the wisdom revealed (the doctrine of opposites v. speculative cosmology; temporal judgement for each person v. catastrophic and universal judgement at the end of time) and, as Argall puts it, “such differences are the stuff of the conflict”.27 According to him, each of the traditions – represented by Ben Sira and 1 Enoch respectively – sees the other as a rival to be challenged. In 1997, Benjamin G. Wright published an article28 in which he holds that Ben Sira is responding polemically to the criticisms of certain groups who questioned the legitimacy of the Jerusalem priesthood in their writings and were opposed to the cult in Jerusalem. These writings are the Book of Watchers, the Book of Heavenly Luminaries and the Aramaic Document of Levi which goes back to the third century BC.29 Beyond the priesthood and the cult, there are other points at issue between Ben Sira and the apocalyptic circles: dreams and visions, the use of the calendar (solar, lunar or both) and esoteric knowledge (cosmological speculations, eschatological realities). Both Argall and Wright deepened the argument in the first seminar on Enoch held at Sesto Fiorentino in June 2001.30 To these contributions I would like to add only the study of Gabriele Boccaccini on Zadokite Judaism and sapiential Judaism,31 and that of Martin Ebner which appeared in 2003. The subtitle reveals the viewpoint of the author: Weisheitskonzepte in Konkurrenz.32 Argall’s comparative study has made clear the similarities and differences between the texts of creation in 1 Enoch and in Ben Sira. He distinguishes between the observable aspects of creation (1 Enoch 2:1–5:4; 101: 1-9; Sir 16:24–17:14; 33(36):7-15; 39:12-35; 42:15–43:33) and the hidden ones (1 Enoch 12–36; 93:11-14; 72–80; 82:4-20; Sir 1:1-10; 24:3-7).33 My contribution is of a different nature and clearly more modest. I shall take into consideration only those elements of Sir 42:15–43:33 which, in my opinion, allow us to glimpse a polemical dimension against the apocalyptic tradition. Our presentation follows the order of the text.

1. The presence and the role of the angels. In 42:17, Ben Sira states: “Not even the holy ones of God are sufficient to declare all his marvels. God has made

26 Cf. ibid., 5-7. 27 Ibid., 250. 28 WRIGHT, Fear the Lord, which is really an expanded revision of Putting the Puzzle Together. 29 STONE, Enoch, 159, note 2, and KUGLER, From Patriarch to Priest, 222-224. 30 ARGALL, Competing Wisdoms, and WRIGHT, Sirach and 1 Enoch, 179-187. 31 BOCCACCINI, Roots of Rabbinic Judaism, 113-150, especially 136-137. 32 EBNER, “Wo findet die Weisheit ihren Ort?„. 33 ARGALL, 1 Enoch and Sirach, 99-164 (Part II: “The Creation Theme in 1 Enoch and Sirach”). 126 Nuria Calduch-Benages his hosts strong so that they may stand firm before his glory”. Here “the holy ones of God”, unable to tell of the works of the Creator, are the angels who form the heavenly hosts and have the office of standing before God (cf. Deut 33:3; Zech 14:5: Job 15:15: Pss 89:6.8; 103:21; 148:2). This description of the angels, in part negative and, what is more, unique in the book, contrasts strongly with the significant role they perform in 1 Enoch. From the introduction to the Book of Watchers, we learn that God “has come with 10,000 holy ones (angels)” to do justice for the elect and to destroy the wicked (1 Enoch 1:9). Particular emphasis is given to the figure of Uriel “one of the holy angels” (20:1; 72:1), the angel responsible for all the movements of the stars (75:3). In 1 Enoch 81:5, it is “three holy ones (angels)” who lead Enoch back to earth. Surprisingly, in Sir 42:17, Argall does not discover any trace of polemic (and even believes it appropriate to note this fact) against the role of the angels in the other traditions.34 We, however, taking account of the context, claim that Ben Sira’s observations on the angels are not without motive.

2. The knowledge of God. According to Sir 42:18-20, God is the only being to possess total knowledge (18c: “all that may be known”, pa/san ei[desin)35 of the secrets of the universe, of history and of the hearts of men. This statement of the divine omniscience anticipates the conclusion of the hymn where Ben Sira confesses to having seen only a small part (j[m) of the works of God because many still remain hidden (cf. 43:32). This limited knowledge of his is opposed to the unlimited knowledge of Enoch to whom the angel Uriel showed everything and made everything manifest (80:1). He, in his turn, manifested everything to his son Methuselah so that it was all transmitted from generation to generation (82:1). It is appropriate, moreover, to mark out Enoch’s declaration concerning his own knowledge: “And I, Enoch, I alone saw the sight, the ends of everything, and no man has seen what I have seen” (19:4).36

34 Cf. ARGALL, 1 Enoch and Sirach, 144, note 357; differently ALBANI, Astronomie und Schöp- fungsglaube, 151. 35 For the Hebrew, cf. QUIMRON, Notes on the Reading, [230]: Yadin reconstructs [][d and Strugnell, following the versions, proposes to read [t][d lk. Cf. also [205] and [220]. 36 In Sir 44:16 Ms B, Enoch is remembered as a “sign of knowledge“ (t[d twa), while in the Greek tradition he becomes “an example of conversion for the Gentiles” (u`po,deigma metanoi,aj tai/j geneai/j), something that cannot possibly be considered a translation error. Cf. MINISSALE, La versione greca, 221: “G transforms the text to attribute to Enoch, assimilated to Elijah on the basis of their common assumption into heaven, a prophetic preaching before the flood, which might have provoked the repentance of the angel-sinners (1 Enoch 12-13)”. According to ALBANI, the Hebrew text has been modfied for doctrinal reasons: “Mit der Theologie des Sirachbuches ist es unvereinbar, dass ein Irdischer auch nur annähernd in die Nähe der göttlichen Weisheit gelangt” (Astronomie und Schöpfungs- glaube, 149). The hymn to the creation (Sir 42:15–43:33): a polemic text? 127

3. The immutability and obedience of the creation. It is mentioned first of all at a general level in Sir 42:23 (“All these things live and endure for ever; all are necessary and all obey”)37 and then underlined with particular emphasis with regard to the stars in 43:10. (“At a command from God, they occupy their posts and they are untiring in their watches”). In fact, Ben Sira, good master as he is, often makes reference to the obedience of creation to spur his disciples to a similar attitude in their relations with God: 16:24-30; 39:28-31. The idea of the incorrupt nature of the universe contrasts strongly with the apocalyptic tradition according to which, at the moment of creation, some stars refused the post assigned to them, upsetting the order of the universe before the fall of the angels. And so it was their disobedience which allowed the entrance of evil into the world. On his otherworldly journey, Enoch reached a deserted place, without water or birds where he saw “stars like great burning mountains”. The angel Uriel who accompanied him on his journey explained to him that that place was “the prison of the stars of heaven and the heavenly army”. The stars who were turning back and forward over the fire were those who had “transgressed the order of the Lord from the beginning of their rising” because they had not arrived [at their assigned post] at the time [appointed for them] (1 Enoch 18:14-15). In 20:3-6, the seven rebel stars are bound together above the deserted and fearful place to expiate their sin with a punishment that would last ten thou- sand years. The same idea is found again in the Book of Heavenly Lumi- naries. After having described with much care “the law of the stars of heaven”, that is to say, all the laws which govern heaven and secure the order and harmony of the universe (79:1-6; 80:1), Enoch notes that this ideal order no longer holds. The whole universe has been upset by the sin of the angels, and so, “in the time of the sinners”, order and harmony will vanish and all the things on earth will be changed and will not appear at their appointed time: “The rain will be withheld and heaven will retain it... And the moon will change its customary practice and will not appear at its proper time... And in those days... [the sun] will shine rather more than the laws of light (permit). And many heads of the stars in command (that is, the angels) will go astray and change their course and their activity and not appear at the times established for them” (80:2-6). “It is the currency of such concepts – Boccaccini claims – that makes Ben Sira so careful to underline the uncor- rupted nature of the universe”.38

37 With the Hebrew text of Ms B and Gr. According to Mas: “they are kept for every necessity”. 38 Cf. BOCCACCINI, Il Medio Giudaismo, 62. The author notes that death as a consequence of the sin of Adam and Eve (cf. Gen 3) is the only variation which Ben Sira admits to have happened in the movement of creation: “From the woman comes the beginning of sin; because of her, all die” (Sir 25:24). 128 Nuria Calduch-Benages

4. The sun. After having presented in 42:16 the sun as first witness of the glory of God (Ms B and Mas: “the sun which rises manifests himself to all the creation39 and the glory of the Lord is over all his works”), in the central part of the hymn, Ben Sira devotes four other verses to it (43:2-5):

2 The sun at its rising spreads warmth, How marvellous the works of the Lord! 3 At midday it parches the land, who can resist its heat? 4 A blazing furnace smelts metal, as a ray of the sun burns the mountain. The tongue of the sun consumes the inhabited land and its light dazzles the eyes. 5 Since great is the Lord who has made it, And whose word makes his warrior shine.40

The description of the sun is dominated almost throughout (with the exception of vv. 2b and 5ab) by the image of fire and heat (to parch, to blaze, to burn, to consume, to dazzle... warmth, heat, furnace). In fact, this seems to the only characteristic of the sun which is able to arouse the sage’s interest. It is astonishing that Ben Sira does not attribute to the sun any function with regard to the calendar (cf. by contrast Jub. 2:9 where the sun uniquely ful- fils this function). In the Enochic tradition, on the other hand, the laws which regulate the course of the sun are of great importance. At the end of 1 Enoch 82, a chapter devoted entirely to the greater star reads: “And thus [the sun] rises and sets; it neither decreases nor rests but runs day and night I its char- iot. And its light is seven times brighter than that of the moon, but in size the two are equal” (82:37). In Sir 43:2-5, Ben Sira not only opposes 1 Enoch but also, as we hinted before, the priestly account of Gen 1:14-15. The fact that the cooperation between the sun and the moon as regards the determination of the dates and the flow of the seasons is completely ignored by Ben Sira can be read in a polemic key. Benjamin G. Wright, taking his cue from an article by Alexander Rofé almost ten years before his own,41 thinks that this silence of Ben Sira is deliberate. He is not prepared to make even

39 In the Gr “The sun which shines sees all from on high”, refers to 42:18ab: “He scrutinis- es the abyss and the heart; he understands all their secrets” referred to the Creator. 40 Sir 43:5b Ms B (wyryba xcny wyrbdw) is difficult to translate and the scholarly suggestions diverge: “und sein Wort lässt dahineilen seinen gewaltigen Diener” (Smend), “sus órdenes espolean a sus campeones” (Alonso Schökel), “at whose orders it urges on its steeds” (Skehan – Di Lella), “and his words make brilliant his mighty ones” (Perdue). The Greek version reads: kai. evn lo,goij auvtou/ kate,speusen porei,an, “and with his words he speeds it on its way“. 41 ROFÉ, The Onset of Sects, especially 43-44. I quote his conclusion on p. 44: “In my opinion, it becomes clear that Ben Sira is here polemicizing against an adverse tendency we may define as proto-Essenian”. The hymn to the creation (Sir 42:15–43:33): a polemic text? 129 an apparent concession to those Jews who, like the author of the Book of Watchers, the Book of Heavenly Luminaries, and the Aramaic Document of Levi, defend the priority of the solar calendar.42

5. The moon. Ben Sira dedicates three verses to the moon. Different form the sun, the function of the moon consists in fixing the seasons, dates and feasts. It is a question of a more complex function because linked to the problem of the calendar:

6 And also the moon watches over the times, regulator of seasons and eternal sign. 7 To it [belong] the solemnities and feasts, and when it wanes it resumes its cycle. 8 The new moon as its name (indicates) is renewed, it is splendid in its phases! Military signal for the heavenly army of the clouds, which covers the firmament with its splendour.

The Jewish calendar to which Ben Sira makes reference in this passage is a lunar calendar which establishes the sacred times of the days and months of the year according to the phases of the moon. The function of the moon, therefore, becomes central because it is it that determines the Sabbath, the feasts of pilgrimage, the times of fasting... that is, the liturgical feasts. It is a very important question because it is linked to the different religious groups that were in conflict with one another. To control the calendar means, in a certain way, to control the feasts and religious observances. The Book of Heavenly Luminaries contains the astronomic and cosmological material which stands behind the solar year of 364 days (1 Enoch 72-82).43 For the author, the solar year is superior to the lunar because only with the solar year can the feasts fall on the days truly fixed with regard to the position of the stars in the sky. “Only a liturgy which had feasts on fixed dates – Paolo Sacchi comments – could be in harmony with the cosmos”.44 More than the intricate explanations of the movement of the stars in heaven, what interest us is those passages which can hide a polemical intention. For example, in 75:2, Enoch mentions “the men who go wrong” in their calculation of the solar year, and in 82:4-7 (cf. 80:2) those who do not accept this calendar are considered sinners:

4 Blessed are all the righteous, blessed are all those who walk in the way of righteousness, and do not sin like the sinners in the numbering of all their days in which the

42 WRIGHT, Fear the Lord, 207-208 (= Putting the Puzzle Together, 137-138). Also the Book of Jubilees and the group of Qumran followed a solar calendar of 364 days. Cf. ALBANI, Zur Rekonstruktion, and LIORA, The Book of Jubilees. 43 Cf., in connection with this, the study of ALBANI, Astronomie und und Schöpfungsglaube. 44 SACCHI (ed.), Apocrifi dell’Antico Testamento, 597. 130 Nuria Calduch-Benages

sun journeys in heaven, coming in and out through the gates for thirty days with the heads over thousands [...] with the four days that are added and which their com- manders divide between the four parts of the year. 5Because of them men go wrong in the reckoning of time since they err and do not know them accurately. 6 In fact, they [the epagomeni days] belong in the reckoning of the year and are truly recorded therein [...] and the year (consequently) is completed in three hundred and sixty four days. 7And the account of it is true and the recorded reckoning of it is exact for the lights, the months, the feasts, the seasons of rain and the days Uriel showed me, and he inspired what the Lord of all creation had ordained for me in the power of heaven.

We do not know whether, for the author of these texts, the sinners were Ben Sira and those who followed his teaching. On the other hand, we can observe that Ben Sira attributed the function of fixing and controlling the times solely to the moon while it is probable that he was aware of the solar calendar. In spite of the absence of precise indications, we hold it quite probable that Sir 43:6-8 is a response to the defenders of the solar calendar.

6. The stars. Ben Sira says not very much about the stars. He underlines only their beauty and their unconditional obedience to the Creator:

9 The glory of the stars is the beauty of heaven and their light shines in the heights of the Lord. 10 At a command from God, they take their positions and they never relax in their watch.

This brief allusion to the stars (cf. 44:21d and 50:6) could reflect an attitude of indifference and perhaps also of rejection on the part of Ben Sira towards astrology, a science very widespread in Israel (and also in the pagan world),45 as demonstrated by the Enochic tradition, especially the Book of Heaven- ly Luminaries. Thanks to the witness of Pseudo-Eupolomes,46 we are aware that the Book of Heavenly Luminaries was also known outside of the group of the elect, that is of the narrowly Enochic circles. In his brief History of the Jews (158 BC), the anonymous author gives an eulogy of Enoch, presenting him as the inventor of astrology: “The Greeks, however, say that Atlantes invent- ed astrology and that Atlantes is to be identified with Enoch. Enoch’s son was Methuselah, he who is supposed to have received all (wisdom) through

45 Cf. SAUER, Der traditionsgeschichtliche Hintergrund, 317: “Bezüglich der babylonischen Astrologie ist bekannt, dass Isarel die Macht der Sterne und damit die der durch sie repräsentierten Götter depotenzierte, indem alle diese himmlischen Kräfte unter die Ver- fügungsgewalt Jahwes gebracht wurden. Der griechisch-hellenistischen Astrologie steht Ben Sira vollkommen ablehnend gegenüber”. 46 Cited in ALBANI, Astronomie und und Schöpfungsglaube, 151. The hymn to the creation (Sir 42:15–43:33): a polemic text? 131 the angels of God, and in this way we have learned (everything)”. If we can trust this information, then it appears very probable – in agreement with Matthias Albani – that Sir 42:15–43:33 is Ben Sira’s riposte to the astronomic wisdom which Enoch had received through angelic revelation (1 Enoch 72-82) and to the idea of a universal knowledge bound to it.47

4. The graeco-hellenistic culture

4.1 Astronomy

The connection of Ben Sira with Greek literature has been amply studied by Theodor Middendorp48 who has discovered more than a hundred parallels between the word of the sage and Greek literature, the most quoted author being the sixth century (BC) poet Theognis. Middendorp’s thesis according to which Ben Sira would be a mediator between Judaism and Hellenism has, however, been contested by Hans Volker Kieweler.49 As far as the connection with Greek philosophy is concerned, the classical work of Martin Hengel50 and the recent study of Uta Wicke-Reuter51 on Ben Sira and Stoicism offer exhaustive coverage. In this study, we intend to refer to the world of science, and particularly astronomy, a science which was developed in Greece in the second half of the third century BC when the Ptolemies were governing Palestine. The famous names are Aristarchus of Samos (who lived to at least after 264), Archimedes (287-212), Eratosthenes (c. 275-193), the third director of the library of Alexandria and, most famous of all, Apol- lonius of Perga (262-190) and Conon of Samos, who lived in Alexandria at the court of Ptolemy Euergetes and his wife Berenice. Among these names, there is a figure who moves between didactic poetry and astronomy: Aratus of Soli (Cilicia),52 a poet contemporary with Cal- limachus (born in 315 or 310 and dead before 240 BC) who wrote hymns, epigrams, elegiac poems, funeral laments, but, above all, works of a scientific character, such as Iatrica, a poem on medicine, the Canon, which deals with the harmony of the spheres, or the Astrica (On the stars) composed in at least five books. All these works have been lost. Luckily we have his main work, the only one remaining. It is a poem of 1154 hexameters, composed

47 Ibid., 152. 48 MIDDENDORP, Die Stellung. 49 KIEWELER, Die Stellung Jesu Ben Siras. 50 HENGEL, Judaism and Hellenism. 51 WICKE-REUTER, Göttliche Providenz. 52 EASTERLING –KENNEY (eds.), The Cambridge History. 132 Nuria Calduch-Benages at the request of the ruler of Macedonia, Antigone Gonata. The poem is called Phaenomena and is concerned with astronomy and meteorology. Oth- ers before him had already written poems on astronomy: Cleostratus of Tenedo, author of an Astrology and Alexander Aetolus, himself too author of a Phaenomena. The poem of Aratus had such a success that many after him composed other Phaenomena without ever reaching his fame. Even many poets wrote commentaries on his poem, which had a great influence on the literature which followed. Aratus was inspired by a treatise in prose by a celebrated mathematician and astronomer of the first half of the fourth century BC, Eudoxus of Cnidus. This work, also called Phaenomena was a precise description of the sky and of the fixed stars with an almanac of their risings and settings, together with temporal prognostications linked to them. Although not a Stoic work, Phaenomena begins with a hymn to Zeus (ll. 1-18) which recalls the famous hymn to Zeus by the philosopher Cleanthes. At the conclusion of the hymn, the poet speaks of having ask the god for “telling about the stars” in an appropriate way and finally he asks him to guide his song to its end. And in fact, the first part of the poem (ll. 19-732) is completely dedicated to the stars which, throughout the year, mark the seasons and scan the work of men. Here are the first verses: “All together, though so numerous and so dispersed, the stars are dragged by the movement of heaven, day after day, without interruption, eternally” (ll. 19-21).53 The second part (ll. 773-1154) treats of the phases of the moon, of the prognostications which start from an examination of the moon and the sun, the atmospheric phenomena and their connection with nature, with the animals and with men. In short, the poem of Aratus is, in substance, not a technical work, a manual of astronomy, but a very fine poetic composition of scientific content. To use the words of Jean Martin, the poem of Aratus is an invitation to discover gradually the presence and the messages of Zeus in the regular movement of the stars just as in the smaller and uncertain events of life on earth.54 Did Ben Sira know the Phaenomena of Aratus or other similar poems? Had he ever read the Astrica, his vast treatise on the stars or other works of astronomy? Were these works to be found in the library of Alexandria? Had Ben Sira ever been to the capital of Hellenism: Had he visited the famous library founded by Ptolemy I? In the face of these questions we find ourselves in great difficulty because we do not know the answer to them. We can move only in the field of hypotheses. We have already seen that in his hymn to the creation Ben Sira dedicates only two verses to the stars (Sir 43:9-10) – that which is already high-

53 ARATOS, Phénomènes, 2. 54 Ibid., LXXXV. The hymn to the creation (Sir 42:15–43:33): a polemic text? 133 ly significant by itself55 – without ever making any allusion to notions relating to astronomy or meteorology. On the contrary, the sage’s interest is quite otherwise. He concentrates on two rather different but complementary aspects: the aesthetic (the beauty of the stars) and the spiritual (their obedience to the Creator). As far as appears, the way in which Ben Sira speaks of the heavenly bodies, especially the stars, and of the atmospheric phenomena in 42:15–43:33 does not seem to conceal any criticism of the works of astronomy as such. If, however, we try to read between the lines, perhaps we shall discover a message, or even a warning touch, directed at all those who feel themselves attracted by books which are concerned to explain all the mysteries of the heavens simply by human science. Ben Sira knows that men have always desired to know the secrets of the world and the dangers which this involves when it is does not take account of the Creator and his law (cf. 3:21-24).

4.2 The astral cult

In the Biblical tradition, the Law, the prophets and the sages all condemn the astral cult. In Deut 4:19, we read: “And beware lest you lift up your eyes to heaven, and when you see the sun and the moon and the stars, all the host of heaven, you be drawn away and worship them and serve them, things which the Lord your God has allotted to all the peoples under the whole heaven” (cf. Jer 8:2; Ezek 8:16; Job 31:26ff). The astral cult, common in the ancient world, was a widespread practice in the Hellenistic environment of the second century BC, especially at Alexandria in Egypt, cultural capital of Hellenism and seat of a numerous Jewish community. In the Pro- logue to Sirach, the translator places his literary activity in Egypt, probably in Alexandria, in the thirty eighth year of King Euergetes, almost certainly Ptolemy VII Euergetes Physcon, who reigned in Alexandria in two periods interrupted by a break: from 170 to 164 BC and from 145 to 117 BC. With these dates, we can assume that Ben Sira’s grandson began his translation around 132 BC, finishing it about 117 BC, the year of the king’s death. Between the Hebrew text (Ms B and Mas) and the Greek version of Sir 42:15 – 43:33 there are a few differences which have been studied in a very careful way by Antonino Minissale.56 We would like to confine our attention to some verses of the hymn where the Greek translation avoids the

55 In this connection SAUER comments: “Dieses Schweigen [riferito alle stelle] ist bemerkenswert. Spricht sich doch darin eine Nichtachtung der Sterndeutekunst aus, wie sie rings um Israel seit eh und je geübt worden war [...]. Er [Ben Sira] verliert über die Sterne kein Wort” (Der traditionsgeschichtliche Hintergrund, 317). 56 MINISSALE, La versione greca, 116-125 (on 42:15-25). 134 Nuria Calduch-Benages mythological allusions to the heavens, the sun and the moon: 42:17cd; 43: 6ab; 43:7ab; 43:8ab.57 In 42:17ab, both the Hebrew and the Greek texts speak of the holy ones of God (la yX[w]dq; toi/j agi,oij kuri,ou), that is of his angels who are not able to recount his wonders. In 42:17cd, the two texts differ. While the Hebrew text continues to speak of the angels, using a military metaphor (“God gives strength to his armies/soldiers so that they may stand before him”), the Greek refers to the wonders of God: “the things which the Lord almighty has established so that the universe may be firm through his glory”, thus eliminating the military image of the heavenly army. In 43:5a, the Hebrew and Greek texts coincide: “[For] great is the Lord who has made it” (referred to the sun). Not so in the following stich, 43:5b: “and his word makes his warrior (= the sun) shine” (Hebrew); while the Greek text eliminates the metaphor of the warrior applied to the sun and speaks simply of its course: “with his words he speeds it on its way”. In 43:6ab Hebrew and Greek differ. While the first underlines the dominion of the moon over time and its divisions: “And also the moon watches over the times, regulator of seasons and eternal sign”, the latter eliminates this idea completely: “and the moon has also its importance which is the indication of the dates and an eternal sign”. The same phenomenon is prominent in 43:7ab. The Hebrew text goes: “To it [belong] the solemnities and feasts, and when it wanes it resumes its cycle”, while the Greek has: “from the moon (comes) the sign of the feast; heavenly body which vanishes after its fulness”. The translator restricts himself to laying down that the moon does not control, only indicates, the term of the feast. In 43:8ab, Hebrew and Greek differ once more. The first has: “The new moon (Xdx) as its name (indicates) is renewed (Xdxtm), it is splendid (arwn) in its phases”; the Greek reads: “the month takes its name from it, increas- ingly marvellously in its phases”. While in the Hebrew the term arwn is attributed to the moon,58 the corresponding Greek qaumastw/jdescribes the growth of the month. Thus any possible personification of the moon disappears. How are we to understand these modifications? We can speculate, with Minissale,59 that the Greek translator, aware of an anti-idolatrous concern that was more acute in Alexandria than in Jerusalem, wanted to remove

57 Cf. also Sir 43:25b (Mas): “the might of Rahab” (bhr trwbg) becomes in Gr “the creation of sea monsters” (kti,sij khtw/n). The grandson’s translation avoids the mention of Rahab, one of the names which the OT attributes to the monster of the ocean (cf. Isa 51:9; Ps 89: 11; Job 9:13; 26:12). Cf. SPRONK, Rahab, 1292-1295. 58 On the other hand, it refers 43:8ab to the month (in fact, vd

5. Conclusion

After having studied the polemical dimension of Ben Sira’s hymn to the creation within the sapiential tradition, in comparison with the Enochic literature and with the Graeco-Hellenistic culture, we can hazard some conclusions. Despite there being no clear and explicit references to opponents in the text, there are many indications which make us think of the existence of such a group. How are we to explain this position of Ben Sira ? Perhaps it could be said that the sage is so committed to his own didactic objectives that he leaves no space in his book for the viewpoint of other contemporary schools/groups of thought. Instead of quoting them directly, he hides them beneath his own viewpoint. From the pedagogic point of view, this is a good choice: when one wants to rebut certain ideas (angelic revelations, speculative cosmologies, the solar calendar, intellectual pride, the astral cult) it is better not to attract the attention of one’s disciples directly on to these, but to present one’s own opinion in such a way that they are able to make a free decision. Besides, such a context of freedom is a characteristic of the sage’s school (cf. 2:1; 6:32-33; 15:15-17). To take Sir 42:15–43:33 specifically, there is no doubt that we are presented with a contemplation of nature as the source of joy that is both aesthetic and spiritual. The manifestations of beauty and splendour in creation are seen as reflections of the glory of God. On the other hand, the description which Ben Sira gives of the stars (without at all forgetting his silence on some elements), allows us to glimpse a polemic, certainly veiled, against those who do not share his doctrine, especially those points held by him as fundamental for the young in their time of education. At a general level, although admitting in the sage’s work some traces of polemic against apocalyptic thought and the Graeco-Hellenistic culture/science,60 we would claim that the book of Ben Sirach was not “born with precise polemic intent”.61 The principal aim of the sage was never to debate openly with his adversaries, but to instruct his disciples in true wisdom, that is, the fear of the Lord and the observance of his Law.

60 Cf., for example, the study of CORLEY, Wisdom versus Apocalyptic. 61 BOCCACCINI, Il Medio Giudaismo (“Ben Sira tra Qohelet e l’apocalittica”), 85. 136 Nuria Calduch-Benages

Bibliography

ALBANI, M., Astronomie und Schöpfungsglaube. Untersuchungen zum Astronomis- chen Henochbuch (WMANT 68), Neukirchen – Vluyn 1994. ALBANI, M., Zur Rekonstruktion eines verdrängten Konzepts: Der 364-Tage-Kalen- der in der gegenwärtigen Forschung, in: ALBANI,M.– FREY,J.– LANGE, A. (eds.), Studies in the Book of Jubilees (TSAJ 65), Tübingen 1997, 79-125. ALONSO SCHÖKEL, L., The Vision of Man in Sirach 16,24–17,14, in: GAMMIE, J. G. – BRUEGGEMANN, W. A. – HUMPHREYS, L. W. ET AL. (eds.), Israelite Wisdom. Theo- logical and Literary Essays in Honor of Samuel Terrien, Missoula, MT 1978, 235-245. ARATOS, Phénomènes, tome I. Texte établi, traduit et commenté par Jean Martin (Col- lection des Universités de France), Paris 1998. ARGALL, R. A., 1 Enoch and Sirach. A Comparative Literary and Conceptual Analy- sis of the Themes of Revelation, Creation and Judgement (SBL.EJL 8), Atlanta, GA 1995. ARGALL, R. A., Competing Wisdoms: 1 Enoch and Sirach: Hen 24 (2002), 169-178. BOCCACCINI, G., Il Medio Giudaismo. Per una storia del pensiero giudaico tra il terzo secolo a.e.v. e il secondo secolo e.v., Genova 1993. BOCCACCINI, G., Roots of Rabbinic Judaism. An Intellectual History from Ezechiel to Daniel, Grand Rapids, MI – Cambridge, UK 2002. BOCCACCINI, G., L’origine del male, libertà dell’uomo e retribuzione nella Sapienza di Ben Sira: Hen 8 (1986), 1-35. BOCCACCINI, G., Introduction: The Rediscovery of Enochic Judaism and the Enoch Seminar: Hen 24 (2002), 9-13. BURTON, K. W., Ben Sira and the Judaic Doctrine of Creation, PhD thesis (unpublished), Glasgow 1987. CALDUCH-BENAGES, N., L’inno al creato in Ben Sira (Sir 42,15–43,33): PSV 44 (2001), 51-66. CALDUCH-BENAGES, N., God Creator of All (Sir 43,27-33), in: EGGER-WENZEL, R. (ed.), Ben Sira’s God. Proceedings of the International Ben Sira Conference, Durham – Ushaw College 2001 (BZAW 321), Berlin – New York 2002, 79-117. CHARLESWORTH, J. H. (ed.), The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha I, New York 1983, 5-89. CLIFFORD, R. J., Proverbs (OTL), Louisville, KY 1999. COLLINS, J. J., Jewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age, Louisville, KY 1997. CORLEY, J., Wisdom versus Apocalyptic and Science in Sirach 1,1-10, in: GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ,F. (ed.), Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Biblical Tradition (BEThL 168), Leuven 2003, 269-286. CRENSHAW, J. L., Old Testament Wisdom. An Introduction. Revised and Enlarged, Louisville, KY 1998 (1st ed. London 1982). CRENSHAW, J. L., The Problem of Theodicy in Sirach: On Human Bondage: JBL 94 (1975), 47-64. DE FRAINE, J., Het Loflied op de menselijke waardigheid in Eccli 17,1-14: Bijdr. 11 (1950), 10-23. EASTERLING, P. E. – KENNEY, E. J. (eds.), The Cambridge History of Classical Litera- ture, vol. I, Cambridge 1985, 598-602. The hymn to the creation (Sir 42:15–43:33): a polemic text? 137

EBNER, M., “Wo findet die Weisheit ihren Ort?„ Weisheitskonzepte in Konkurrenz, in: FASSNACHT, M. – LEINHÄUPL-WILKE, A. – LÜCKING, S. (eds.), Die Weisheit – Ursprünge und Rezeption. Festschrift für Karl Löning zum 65. Geburtstag (NTA.NF 44), Münster 2003, 70-103. HENGEL, M., Judaism and Hellenism. Studies in Their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period, I-II, Philadelphia 1974. KIEWELER, H.-V., Die Stellung Jesu Ben Siras zwischen Judentum und Hellenismus. Eine Auseinandersetzung mit T. Middendorp (BEAT 30), Frankfurt a.M. 1992. KUGLER, R. A., From Patriarch to Priest. The Levi-Priestly Tradition from Aramaic Levi to Testament of Levi (SBL.EJL 9), Atlanta, GA 1996. LIORA, R., The Book of Jubilees and its Calendar. A Reexamination: DSD 10 (2003), 371-394. MARBÖCK, J., Weisheit im Wandel. Untersuchungen zur Weisheitstheologie bei Ben Sira (BBB 37), Bonn 1971. MARBÖCK, Das Buch Jesus Sirach, in: ZENGER,E.ET AL. (ed.), Einleitung in das Alte Testament, dritte, neu bearbeitete und erweiterte Auflage (Kohlhammer Studi- enbücher Theologie 1.1), Stuttgart – Berlin – Köln 1998, 363-370. MIDDENDORP,TH., Die Stellung Jesu Ben Siras zwischen Judentum und Hellenismus, Leiden 1973. MINISSALE, A., La versione greca del Siracide. Confronto con il testo ebraico alla luce dell’attività midrascica e del metodo targumico (AnBib 133), Roma 1995. MORLA ASENSIO, V., Eclesiástico. Texto y comentario (El mensaje del Antiguo Testa- mento 10), Estella 1992. NICKELSBURG, G. W. E., 1 Enoch. A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 1-36 (Hermeneia), Minneapolis 2001. NICKELSBURG, G. W. E., Social Aspects of Palestinian Jewish Apocalypticism, in: HELL- HOLM, D., (ed.), Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East, Tübingen 19892 (1st ed. 1983), 641-654. OLYAN, S., Ben Sira’s Relationship to the Priesthood: HTR 80 (1987), 261-286. PERDUE, L. G., Wisdom and Creation. The Theology of Wisdom Literature, Nashville 1994. PRATO, G. L., Il problema della teodicea in Ben Sira. Composizione dei contrari e richiamo alle origini (AnBib 65), Roma 1975. PROCKTER, L. J., Torah as a Fence against Apocalyptic Speculation: Ben Sira 3,17-24, in: ASSAF, D. (ed.), Proceedings of the Tenth World Congress of Jewish Studies (Jerusalem, August 16-24, 1989), Division A: The Bible and its World, Jerusalem 1990, 245-252. QUIMRON, E., Notes on the Reading, in: YADIN, Y., The Ben Sira Scroll from Masada with Introduction, Emendations and Commentary – Masada VI. Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963-1965. Final Reports, Jerusalem 1999, [227]-[231]. ROFÉ, A., The Onset of Sects in Postexilic Judaism: Neglected Evidence from the Sepuagint, Trito-Isaiah, Ben Sira, and Malachi, in: NEUSNER, J. – FRERICHS,E. S. – BORGEN,P.– HORSLEY, R. (eds.), The Social World of Formative Christian- ity and Judaism. Essays in Tribute to Howard Clark Kee, Philadelphia 1988, 39-49. SACCHI, P., Apocrifi dell’Antico Testamento, in: ROSSANO, P. (ed.), Classici delle Reli- gioni. II: La religione ebraica, Torino 1981. 138 Nuria Calduch-Benages

SAUER, G., Der traditionsgeschichtliche Hintergrund von Ben Sira 42,15–43,33, in: GRAUPNER, A. – DELKURT,H.–ERNST, A. B. (eds.), Verbindungslinien. Festschrift für Werner Schmidt zum 65. Geburtstag, Neukirchen – Vluyn 2000, 311-321. SKEHAN,W.– DI LELLA, A. A., The Wisdom of Ben Sira. A New Translation with Notes, Introduction, and Commentary (AncB 39), New York 1987. SPARKS, H. F. D. (ed.), The Apocryphal Old Testament, Oxford 1984, 169-319. SPRONK, K., Rahab, in: VAN DER TORN, K. – BECKING, B. – VAN DER HORST, P. W. (eds.), Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, Leiden – New York – Köln 1995, 1292-1295. STONE, M. E., Enoch, Aramaic Levi and Sectarian Origins: JSJ 19 (1988), 159-170. WICKE-REUTER, U., Göttliche Providenz und menschliche Verantwortung bei Ben Sira und in der Frühen Stoa (BZAW 298), Berlin – New York 2000. WRIGHT, B. G., Sirach and 1 Enoch: Some Further Considerations: Hen 24 (2002), 179-187. WRIGHT, B. G., “Fear the Lord and Honor the Priest”. Ben Sira as Defender of the Jerusalem Priesthood, in: BEENTJES, P. C. (ed.), The Book of Ben Sira in Modern Research. Proceedings of the First International Ben Sira Conference 28-31 July 1996 Soesterberg, Netherlands (BZAW 255), Berlin 1997, 189-222. WRIGHT, B. G., Putting the Puzzle Together: Some Suggestions Concerning the Social Location of the Wisdom of Ben Sira, in: SBL 1996 Seminar Papers, number 35, Atlanta, GA 1996, 133-149. ZAPPELLA, M., La contemplazione sapienziale di Dio creatore (Sir 42–43): Parole di Vita 48 (2003), 40-44. “Full Wisdom is from the Lord“. Sir 1:1-10 and its place in Israel’s Wisdom literature

PANCRATIUS C. BEENTJES

In this paper the text of Sir 1:1-10 will be investigated in six successive steps. As a start, some preliminary and methodological questions will be touched on (I). The next two paragraphs (II-III) are devoted to a close reading of the so-called Greek I, followed by an analysis of the additions to this translation, which constitute the so-called Greek II. Thereafter it is time to pay attention to the function of Sir 1:1-10 within the Book of Ben Sira (IV). More- over, the focus will be on similarities and differences between the Book of Ben Sira and other sapiential literature of the Old Testament (V). Finally, we will draw some conclusions (VI). My approach of Sir 1:1-10 will be different from the analysis offered by J. Corley some years ago. He started from the position “that Sir 1:1-10 may be read as a veiled critique of the early Enochic literature. Far from ignoring nascent Jewish apocalyptic, Ben Sira engages in a polemic against apocalypticism in Sir 1:1-10 …”.1

1. Preliminary and methodological questions

1. Whereas in the original Hebrew text Sir 1:1-10 in fact was the opening paragraph of the entire book, in the Greek translation this pericope is preceded by the grandson’s foreword in which he explicitly links Ben Sira’s book with “the law, the prophets, and the other writings of our ancestors” (REB).2 “My grandfather Jesus’, he says, … was moved to compile a book of his own on the themes of learning and wisdom, in order that, with this further help, scholars might make greater progress in their studies by living as the law directs” (REB).3 The final words (dia. th/j evvvnno,mou biw,sewj) are repeated in a slightly different form at the very end of the grandson’s foreword: “and so train themselves to live according to the law” (evvvnno,mwj bioteu,ein).4 Therefore, the reader of the Greek text of Ben

1CORLEY, Wisdom versus Apocalyptic, 270. 2 Prologos 10. Quotation from the Revised English Bible with Apocrypha. 3 Prologos 7-14. 4 In the Septuagint evnno,mwj is only to be found in Prov 31:25. The three remaining words are hapax legomena; see WAGNER, Die Septuaginta Hapaxlegomena, 120-123. 140 Pancratius C. Beentjes

Sira’s Book cannot refrain from this context and should always bear this aspect in mind. 2. An analysis of the vocabulary of Sir 1:1-10, as well as a thorough investigation into this pericope, to a great extent are hindered by the fact that Ben Sira’s grandson apparently made no or little use of the Greek Bible translation, which later on became known as the Septuagint. He either knowingly did not refer to this translation, or the books he wanted to use simply did not yet exist.5 3. An investigation into the Greek text of the Book of Ben Sira to some degree is hampered by the fact that a great deal of reference books does not refer to the so-called Gr II at all.6 Wagner is one of the few scholars who offer an index of words used in Gr II.7 4. Tempting as it may be, the following analysis will not offer a retroversion of Sir 1:1-10 from the Greek into Hebrew. Just a comparison between Segal’s retroversion of Sir 1:2-3 and other scholarly attempts, mainly in commentaries, is solid proof enough that such an approach is far from being satisfactory.8 5. Recently, Sir 1:1-10 has got a liturgical function. In the Missale Romanum promulgated by Pope Paul VI, Sir 1:1-10 is lectured on Monday in the seventh week (impair years).9

2. A close reading of Gr I (Sir 1:1-4.6.8-10b)

The Greek translation of the Book of Ben Sira as we have it now is in fact a composite text, made up of two Greek text forms.10 The first (Gr I) is to be found in the major uncial manuscripts (Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, Sinaiticus) and can be considered the translation of Ben Sira’s original Hebrew text into Greek by his grandson. The second Greek text form (Gr II) is a more extended translation which is represented by a large group of minuscule manu-

5 See especially WRIGHT, No Small Difference: “it is totally unclear which books comprise the group that the grandson calls ‘the other books’”(p. 226); “if the grandson knew Psalms, Job, and Proverbs [in Greek], he did not draw on them very often in his translation” (p. 228); “it seems unlikely that the grandson depended heavily on the OG [Old Greek] for his translation” (p. 229). 6 E.g. HATCH –REDPATH, A Concordance; SMEND, Griechisch-Syrisch-Hebräischer Index; LUST –EYNIKEL –HAUSPIE (eds.), Greek-English Lexicon. 7WAGNER, Die Septuaginta Hapaxlegomena, 413-416 (“Wortindex zur sog. zweiten Über- setzung [Gr II]”). 8SEGAL,Se¯fer ben-Sîra¯’ hasˇsˇa¯le¯m. 9 In the Coptic Church, Sir 1:1-19 is read during the Morning Office on Monday in the Holy Week. See BURMESTER, The Bohairic Pericopae. 10 See the extensive introduction by ZIEGLER, Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach, 7-80. “Full Wisdom is from the Lord“ 141 scripts, especially in the Origenistic / Hexaplaric and Lucianic recensions, and reflects a second Hebrew version of the Book of Ben Sira.11 Since Clemens of Alexandria, who died before 215 CE, is the first author frequently quoting from this second Greek translation, this text form (Gr II) must originate from about 50-150 CE.12 In text editions the layout of Sir 1:1-10 to some degree is a real hindrance to see the basic structure of Gr I. This is completely due to the presentation of v. 9, since it is suggested that we have to do with a tristichon here. How- ever, authoritative authors like N. Peters and O. Rickenbacher categorically deny the existence of such a literary phenomenon in the Book of Ben Sira.13 Even M. Z. Segal who with regard to the Book of Ben Sira accepts a small number of tristichoi – no one of which by the way is accepted by Rick- enbacher – considers Sir 1:9 however to be a distichon.14 Scholars almost unanimously agree that ku,rioj, the word that in text editions has pole position in v. 9, in fact is the final word of vs. 8. For ku,rioj at that specific point creates a climax, since all previous rhetorical questions (“Who …, who …, who …?”; 1:2.3.6) are answered now at last:

One alone is wise …, / seated upon his throne: the Lord.

It is not by chance, of course, that at this climactic point ku,rioj is used for the second – and last – time within this pericope: “All wisdom / full wisdom is from the Lord” (v. 1a) – “One alone is wise: The Lord”(v. 8a). This observation induces me to emphasize some further characteristic features in these two verse lines. Several scholars hold the view that sofo,j in v. 8 should be deleted, since it is the only occurrence in the Book of Ben Sira where it is said that God is wise, as opposed to 24 occurrences relating sofo,j to human beings.15 I would rather argue the other way round, viz. that just the unique application of sofo,j to God is the centre of attention in the opening passage of the book! Even the objection that neither the Syriac nor the Latin version reflects an equivalent to sofo,j cuts no ice, since just their translations of v. 8 not only are quite complicated in itself, but are also at variance with each other. Bringing out that sofo,j in Sir 1:8 cannot be authentic as this word is missing in Sir 43:29 (fobero.j ku,rioj kai. sfo,dra me,gaj) is an inadequate reason-

11 “G II has about 300 cola not found in G I”: SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 55. 12 RÜGER, Text und Textform, 112 and 115. 13 PETERS, Das Buch Jesus Sirach, 230; RICKENBACHER, Weisheitsperikopen, 130-131. 14 SEGAL,Se¯fer ben-Sîra¯’ hasˇsˇa¯le¯m, 16 (Introduction, § 22). 15 SMEND, Die Weisheit, 8 (“vielleicht … unecht”); RICKENBACHER, Weisheitsperikopen, 9; SAUER, Jesus Sirach, 507; ID., Jesus Sirach/Ben Sira, 42. 142 Pancratius C. Beentjes ing, since the latter verse line forms part of a passage dealing with creation, not with wisdom. That the unique application of sofo,j to God could very well be an authentic aspect of Ben Sira’s presentation indeed is also underlined by the rare expression pa/sa sofi,a in the opening line, which has no parallel in the Old Testament too, as we will discuss later. Having established ku,rioj, pa/sa sofi,a, and sofo,j as constitutive elements of Gr I, time has come now to pay attention to its overall structure (A) and its content (B).

(A) Structure

The interplay of two characteristic features (rhetorical questions and statements) builds up a coherent literary structure:

1:1 Statement about God and Wisdom 1:2 Rhetorical question 1:3 Rhetorical question 1:4 Statement about the creation of Wisdom 1:6a Rhetorical question 1:6b Rhetorical question 1:8 Statement about God: He alone is wise 1:9 Statement about the creation and distribution of Wisdom 1:10ab Statement specifying the distribution of Wisdom

(B) Content

The statement of v. 1 in the first place functions as the foundation of the opening poem (1:1-10). One should bear in mind, however, that it also serves as the heading of the entire book. In the first pair of rhetorical questions (vv. 2-3) a series of seven (!) elements is mentioned in order to emphasize that God’s wisdom is incomprehensible and unreachable: Wisdom exclusively belongs to God’s domain. In my conviction, there are no cogent reasons to be found in the Greek manuscripts that sofi,an, being the seventh element, should be a gloss or a later correction anticipating v. 6.16 Moreover, the next statement (v. 4) precisely picks up this seventh element! With the help of a chiastic pattern and in a passive voice – maybe a deliberate action to avoid ku,rioj it outlines the privileged position of wisdom:

16 SMEND, Die Weisheit, 4: “Wahrscheinlich … spätere Korrektur”; PETERS, Das Buch Jesus Sirach, 10: “erläuternde Glosse”; MARBÖCK, Weisheit, 19: “spätere Korrektur”. Cf. RICK- ENBACHER, Weisheitsperikopen, 7. Both the structure and the terminology of Sir 42:18 (LXX) could be adduced in favour of the authenticity of kai. sofi,an in Sir 1:3. “Full Wisdom is from the Lord“ 143

“Before all things wisdom was created / and prudent understanding from eternity”.17 Whereas the first pair of rhetorical questions (vv. 2-3) touched upon cosmic phenomena, the second couple of rhetorical questions (v. 6) exclusively deal with wisdom, bringing out two different aspects: “To whom has wisdom’s root been revealed / Who knows her secrets?”. The first one has been put in the passive voice, i.e. only God Himself can reveal the origin of wisdom. The answer to the second rhetorical question will be that it is also impossible to get knowledge of wisdom’s secrets. These two rhetorical questions serve as a direct preparation for the fundamental statement of v. 8, in which sofo,j cannot be missed. There is only one who is in the position to answer all the questions (1:2-3.6) that have been raised: the Lord. In v. 8 this conviction is put to the fore with the help of a twofold description, both elements of which are essential. The first aspect emphasizes God being the source of wisdom: “One alone is wise: The Lord”. The second aspect lays stress upon his sovereignty: “truly awe- inspiring sitting on his throne”. It is not by chance, of course, that Ben Sira has connected the attribute “wise” with the attribute “awe-inspiring” (fobero,j), since next to “wisdom” “fear of the Lord” (fo,boj kuri,ou) is one of the most important theological notions in this book, which is abundantly shown in the next poem (Sir 1:14.16.18.20.27).18 God’s unique wisdom and awe for his sovereignty over the cosmos are so pointedly presented in order to emphasize that God is totally different from all a human being can discover and track down. God, however, “has created wisdom, saw her and numbered her; he poured her out upon all his works” (v. 9). With the help of the verb evxariqme,w Ben Sira creates a firm inclusio to 1:2b, emphasizing that wisdom exclusively belongs to God’s domain too. The first colon of v. 10 poses a problem, at least at a grammatical level. The majority of scholars consider wisdom to be the (unsaid) subject of v. 10a.19 Considering, however, the parallel structure of v. 9b (kai. evxe,ceen auvth.n ÅÅÅ) and v. 10b (kai. evcorh,ghsen auvth.n ÅÅÅ), another option should be preferred in which v. 10a is to be considered an appo- sition to “all his works”. The advantage of this view would be that all three cola (vv. 9b-10b) have the same subject, viz. God.20 Whatever option is chosen, vv. 9b-10ab in any case offer an ascending progression: “all his works”/ “all flesh”/ “those who love him”.

17 One should notice the pattern of aivw,n in the first part of the poem (1:1b.2b.4b). 18 DI LELLA, Fear of the Lord; HASPECKER, Gottesfurcht. 19 E.g. PETERS, Das Buch Jesus Sirach, 9; RICKENBACHER, Weisheitsperikopen, 4; MARBÖCK, Weisheit, 19; SAUER, Jesus Sirach, 507; ID., Jesus Sirach/Ben Sira, 43; MCKENZIE, Sirach, 24. 20 SNAITH, Ecclesiasticus, 9; SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 136 and 139. 144 Pancratius C. Beentjes

Although the Syriac and a few Greek manuscripts which belong to a subgroup of the Lucianic recension have the reading “those who fear him” (foboume,noij) instead of “those who love him”, there is no need to prefer the former one, since in fact it is a reading to facilitate the transition to the next poem (1:11-30) that explicitly deals with “fear of the Lord”. Discussing this text critical problem, scholars mainly rely on Smend, Haspecker, and Marböck who are in favour of the reading foboume,noij.21 Only Haspecker paid attention to Sir 2:15-16, a passage that two times explicitly puts both notions upon a par: oi` foboume,noi ku,rionÅÅÅ (2:15a.16a) / oi` avgapw/ntej auvto.nÅÅÅ(2:15b.16b).22 He, however, holds the view that – although he has several times defined these lines as a synonymous parallelism – “to love the Lord” cannot be equated with “to fear the Lord”. The present author, on the contrary, wishes to emphasize that (a) the notion “to love the Lord” is found in the final line of the opening section of the book (1:10b); (b) that the subsequent passage deals with “fear of the Lord” (1:11-20); (c) that both notions for the first time have been put together at the very end of the first section of the book (1:1–2:18). Taking the entire opening passage (Sir 1:1-10) into consideration, one becomes aware that Ben Sira has established an intriguing literary and theological “arch” between the opening and the end of this pericope. Where- as in the opening line wisdom is “with him”, viz., the Lord, (1:1b), in the concluding verse she is “with all flesh” too (1:10a).

3. The additions of Gr II (Sir 1:5.7.10cd)

The expanded Greek translation (Gr II) has three extra bicola, which are also to be found in the Old Latin, but are completely absent in Syriac. Since the Greek text of the Book of Ben Sira as edited by Swete only represents codex Sinaiticus (a), codex Alexandrinus (A), and codex Ephraemi Syri rescrip- tus (C), the text of Gr II is not given in this edition.23 Rahlfs in his text edition has printed the text of Sir 1:5 and 1:7 in a note, but does not mention 1:10cd.24 Therefore one always has to consult Ziegler’s edition to be sure of having all textual evidence at hand.25 The author who inserted 1:5 into the text of Gr I has in several ways associated himself with that original passage. The collocation phgh. sofi,aj

21 SMEND, Die Weisheit, 9; HASPECKER, Gottesfurcht, 51-53; MARBÖCK, Weisheit, 21. 22 HASPECKER, Gottesfurcht, 282-290. 23 SWETE, The Old Testament in Greek, 644-754. 24 RAHLFS, Septuaginta, 378-471. 25 ZIEGLER, Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach. “Full Wisdom is from the Lord“ 145 is on a par with collocations such as r`i,za sofi,aj (1:6.20), avrch. sofi,aj (1:14), plhsmonh. sofi,aj (1:16), and ste,fanoj sofi,aj (1:18).26 The expression “God in the heights” is rather like Sir 26:16 and 43:9. The adjective aivw,nioj dove- tails into the noun aivw,n, which is rather dominant in the preceding lines (1:1b.2b.4b).27 It is not so much the conception as the specific location and timing of Sir 1:5 that is troubling. Its insertion at this particular point has a major theological purpose, since wisdom is linked with “the word of God” and “the eternal commandments”. As both collocations undoubtedly refer to Israel’s Torah, from the very outset wisdom and torah are identified here. In the Book of Ben Sira one finds several passages that offer a clear and direct identification of wisdom and torah (15:1; 17:11; 19:20; 21:11; 24:23; 34:8; 45:5cd) and another dozen of occurrences where an identification of wisdom and torah is presupposed or implied (1:26; 2:15-16; 6:36; 15:15; 19:24; 24:22; 24:32- 33; 33:2-3; 38:34cd–39:8; 44:4; 51:15cd; 51:30).28 There are at least two reasons, however, why Sir 1:5 cannot belong to the original layer of the book. First, as compared to all above mentioned occurrences in the book where wisdom and torah are identified, Sir 1:5 is so explicit and massive that all subsequent utterances on this topic would lose a great deal of their expressiveness. Second, within the train of thought of the opening passage of the book, the exposition of Sir 1:5 is both premature and to some extent forgets that wisdom is presented as an attribute of God. Sir 1:7 is given little attention in scholarly literature, since this bicolon is said to be a doublet of 1:6.29 At a closer look, however, there are some aspects that ask for further investigation. If 1:7 would be a mere doublet of 1:6 indeed, it is hard to understand why someone added an identical statement as a sequence to 1:6. It also catches the eye that 1:7 has been translated in quite different ways. As far as the first line is concerned, there is difference of opinion relating to the collocation evpisth,mh sofi,aj. Some scholars consider it to be a genetivus subiectivus (“all that wisdoms knows”),30

26 The collocation phgh. sofi,aj is only found in Bar 3:12: “You have forsaken the fountain of wisdom”. 27 As to aivw,n see RICKENBACHER, Weisheitsperikopen, 22-24. For an overview of evntolh, in the Book of Ben Sira, see ibid., 70-71; 85-87. 28 SCHNABEL, Law and Wisdom, 69-92. 29 “Augenscheinlich Dublette zu v. 6 aus Gr. II”: SMEND, Die Weisheit, 8; “Dublette”: PETERS, Das Buch Jesus Sirach, 10; “V 7 ist sicher Dublette zu V 6”: MARBÖCK, Weisheit, 20; “Der Vers ist nur eine Dublette von 1,6 und daher hier nicht von Interesse”: RICKENBACHER, Weisheitsperikopen, 33; “v 7 merely repeats the ideas of v 6”: SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 137. 30 SNAITH, Ecclesiasticus, 9; REB; “Die Lehre der Weisheit”: MARBÖCK, Weisheit, 20; “Die Kenntnis der Weisheit”: SCHREINER, Jesus Sirach, 18. 146 Pancratius C. Beentjes whereas others obviously prefer a genetivus obiectivus (“an understanding of wisdom”).31 Two observations can be adduced in favour of the latter possibility. First, the passive voice of Sir 1:7 suggests that God is the subject of this colon.32 Second, the similar pattern that is found in Sir 19:22 (ponhri,aj evpisth,mh) and can only mean: “to know about wickedness”. With respect of the second colon of Sir 1:7 striking differences can be observed. Whereas the noun polupeiri,a – which is only found in Sir 25:6 and Wis 8:8 – should be rendered as “extensive experience” or a synonymous expression,33 in the German sphere a rendering such as “multiform avenues”appears to be preferred.34 This latter translation has to a high degree been influenced by the rather obscure variant reading poluporei,an, which is to be considered either a harmonisation prompted by porei/ai in 1:5 or a later correction transmitted by just one Greek minuscule (545) based upon the Old Latin (“multiplicationem ingressus”).35 The Greek text of Sir 1:10cd, which in the Vetus latina has been handed down as 1:14-15 and is missing in Syriac, is found in the Origenistic / Hexa- plaric recension and in only four minuscles that belong to the Lucianic recension.36 It is M. Gilbert who offers a fine and detailed analysis of Sir 1:10cd in the Vattioni commemoration volume.37 I do share by far the most of his observations, and therefore refrain from repeating them here. I cannot subscribe, however, to his final conclusion that the original text of Sir 1:10b has read “those who fear him”.38 If this should be true, one can hardly explain how and why the author of Gr II made the transition to avga,phsij (1:10c).

31 SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 136; “Verständnis für Weisheit”: SAUER, Jesus Sirach/Ben Sira, 42. 32 Both the verb sunie,nai and the verb fanerou/n (1:7; 20:8) are only found in Gr II. 33 “Wealth of experience”: REB; “resourcefulness”: SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 136; “reiche Erfahrung”: PETERS, Ecclesiasticus, 10. 34 “Ihre mannigfachen Wege”: MARBÖCK, Weisheit, 20; SCHREINER, Jesus Sirach, 18; “ihre vielgestaltige Wege”: SAUER, Jesus Sirach/Ben Sira, 42; “ihre vielen Wege”: ID., Jesus Sir- ach, 507. 35 The noun poluporei,a is not found in the Septuagint and, moreover, according to Liddell – Scott – Jones does not even exist in Greek! 36 Sir 1:10cd is not found, e.g., in minuscle 248, being the most important minuscle relating to the Book of Ben Sira. 37 GILBERT, Voir ou Craindre. 38 Ibid., 251. “Full Wisdom is from the Lord“ 147

4. The function of Sir 1:1-10 within the book

Reading the Book of Ben Sira, at least two times the opening paragraph (1:1- 10) will be explicitly brought to mind. The first passage that echoes 1:1-10 is found in Sir 18:1-14, being the conclusion of an extensive and important section of the book, which could be characterized as a “discourse on sin” (15:11–18:14).39 To paraphrase Marböck, it is not too much to say that Sir 18:1-14 can be considered a straight comment upon 1:1-10.40 Both the vocabulary, content, structure and hymnic style of 18:1-14 are solid proof that Ben Sira explicitly harks back to the opening lines of his book. With the help of rhetorical questions, in the first strophe (18:1-7) the eternal and righteous Creator as well as his majesty and inscrutability is praised. The second strophe (18:8-14) lays emphasis upon man’s insignificance as opposed to God’s mercy and forgiveness. Sir 19:20-24, the opening of a new paragraph in the book (19:20–20:31) is another passage that immediately reminds of Sir 1:1-10. Its well-knit literary structure is guaranteed by a twofold inclusio. The first one consists of fo,boj kuri,ou (19:20a) and e;mfoboj (19:24a), the second one has poi,hsij no,mou (19:20b) that antithetically corresponds to parabai,nwn no,mon (19:24b). With- in this double framework the author has concentrated, moreover, a range of theological signals. The first one is produced by the opening words pa/sa sofi,a (19:20a), which are identical to the opening line of the book: pa/sa sofi,a para. kuri,ou (1:1a). In a number of Greek manuscripts there even have been made attempts to replace the text of Sir 19:20a by the opening sentence of Sir 1:1a.41 It is my conviction that Ben Sira in every possible way just wanted to construct here a close connection with Sir 1:1-10. This may be documented by the following observations: (a) The collocation pa/sa sofi,a (1:1; 19:20)42 is a remarkable and rare expression; in the Septuagint it is found only once in a similar context (Job 26:3).43 Within the Book of Ben Sira it therefore serves as a special signal towards its readers. (b) One should notice that – for the first time after 1:4 – the noun fronh,sij makes its appearance in this pericope, and … in a

39 Adetailed investigation into Sir 15:11–18:14 is offered by PRATO, Il problema della teodicea, 209-299. See also the study of WICKE-REUTER, Göttliche Providenz, 106-187. 40 MARBÖCK, Weisheit, 26. 41 Cf. ZIEGLER, Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach, 214. 42 Though this collocation is also found in 37:21, there are strong indications that this verse – and parts of its context – is not genuine. The entire verse line is absent in Hebrew (Ms B), in the Syriac and in the Armenian translation. See especially SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 435. 43 In Ps 106 (107):27 pa/sa h` sofi,a auvtw/n has a complete different meaning: “professional skill”; this is also true for Dan 1:4. 148 Pancratius C. Beentjes twofoldway (19:22a.24b).44 (c) It can hardly be coincidence that su,nesij,which functions in 1:4 too, is also found in 19:24a. These observations justify the conclusion that Sir 19:20-24 harks back to the fundamental opening paragraph of the book. In 19:20 Ben Sira lays emphasis upon his conviction that not every kind of wisdom can be equated with “fear of the Lord”. The Jerusalem Sage wants to make it absolutely clear to his audience that it is just a very specific concept of wisdom, which can be identified with “fear of the Lord”. For this reason pa/sa in 19:20 must be attributed an “elative significance”, such as “full”, “supreme”, “total”, “pure”.45 And it is interesting to ascertain that some recent translations seem to take this view too.46 It is a pity, however, that neither of them has added a further explanation to their rendering. Considering all this, we cannot rule out the possibility that pa/sa sofi,a in Sir 1:1 – being the opening statement of the Book of Ben Sira – has to be translated in the same elative sense: “Full wisdom is from the Lord”.47 Sir 19:20 should be mentioned by the way for another reason too. Only here and in 21:11 “fear of the Lord” and “keeping the law” are explicitly equated with “full wisdom”.48 Would it be far-fetched to assume that this equation has caused the addition by Gr II in 1:5?

5. Similarities and differences between Sir 1:1-10 and wisdom literature of the O.T.

Of course, one could bring out all kinds of expressions, collocations and separate verses from all over the Old Testament – and especially from wisdom literature – to show that Sir 1:1-10 shared the line of thought with Israel’s tradition.49 Inventories of this kind have so often been published, both long ago and in recent times, that I refrain from doing so again.50 There is, however, another reason why I decided not to offer a “telephone book- like” conspectus of every possible connection between Sir 1:1-10 and the

44 Apart from these occurrences, the noun fronh,sij is only found in Sir 25:9 and 29:28. 45 REICKE, pa/j, a[paj, 888. 46 “Die ganze Weisheit”: SAUER, Jesus Sirach, 553; ID., Jesus Sirach/Ben Sira, 154; “The whole wisdom … / complete wisdom“: SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 295 47 See also: BEENTJES, “Full Wisdom is Fear of the Lord”. 48 Sir 15:1 has the nearest approach. 49 “… a more extensive survey of Hebrew Bible references underlying Sir 1,1-10 would show how Ben Sira was steeped in the traditions of biblical wisdom”: CORLEY, Wisdom versus Apocalyptic, 274. 50 EBERHARTER, Der Kanon; GASSER, Die Bedeutung; MARBÖCK, Weisheit, 30-34; SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 137-139. “Full Wisdom is from the Lord“ 149

Old Testament.51 For more and more I carry conviction that research of the Book of Ben Sira should also foster another frame of reference that has been coined “structural use of Scripture” or “structural style”. “Structural use of Scripture” or “structural style” is a phenomenon to the effect that a passage in a Jewish writing to a high degree is structured by elements from one of two biblical texts. It was Daniel Patte who introduced this notion and applied this literary feature exclusively to the structuring of apocalyptic texts.52 He discovered such an application of “structural use of Scripture” just in Jew- ish writings that can be dated to about the second century BC, being the same period in which Ben Sira composed his book. Elsewhere the present author has argued that this phenomenon of structural style could be very useful for the study of the Book of Ben Sira.53 When applying the method of structural use of Scripture to Sir 1:1-10, two specific biblical texts are brought into prominence: Prov 8 and Job 28. We will amplify this point of view, since on the one hand it will shed light upon the question to what extent Ben Sira did concur with Israel’s traditional wisdom. As a consequence, attention is given to the question at what points Ben Sira introduced new concepts. The concept that the Lord created wisdom before all other things – as found in Sir 1:4 and 1:9 – is hardly ever stated in the Old Testament. In fact, it is found only once, viz. in the famous and repeatedly discussed passage of Prov 8:22-30.54 Scholars are unanimous that “Ben Sira’s dependence on Proverbs can be detected in almost every portion of his book”.55 The passage prior to Prov 8:22 is “a lengthy self-recommendation” of Lady Wis- dom in the first person (Prov 8:4-21), “in which she boasts of her power and authority and of the gifts which she is able to bestow. In other words, this is a speech by a supernatural being in praise of herself”.56 Subsequent to this lengthy speech, she continues saying “JHWH created me the first of his works” (Prov 8:22a), a statement that in the following lines is amply illustrated. In order to emphasize that wisdom has gone before all other things, the whole gamut of natural phenomena is recounted: “the earth, the abyss, springs, mountains, hills, the land, uninhabited places, the sky, winds, clouds, springs, foundations of the earth”.57

51 Of course, I do not dispute e.g. the remarkable resemblance of Sir 1:2 (stago,naj u`etou/ ÅÅÅ ti,j evxariqmh,sai) to Job 36:27 (avriqmhtai. de. auvtw/| stago,nej u`etou/). 52 PATTE, Early Jewish Hermeneutic, 171. 53 BEENTJES, Jesus Sirach en Tenach; ID., Canon and Scripture, 600-602. 54 See GILBERT, Le Discours de la Sagesse. As to recent literature on Prov 8:22-30, see e.g. MÜLLER, Proverbien 1-9, 232-250. 55 SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 43: “Sirach’s primary model was undoubtedly the book of Proverbs”; COLLINS, Jewish Wisdom, 44. 56 WHYBRAY, Proverbs, 119. 57 This enumeration is adopted from Prov 8:22-29 (LXX). 150 Pancratius C. Beentjes

In Ben Sira’s text one also finds such a series of natural phenomena: “the sands of the sea, the raindrops, the height of the sky, the breadth of the earth, the depth of the abyss” (1:2-3). The presentation of it, however, has a different order, function and aim. Here the natural phenomena are mentioned prior to the creation of wisdom. It is quite remarkable to ascertain that the final element of the series is not a natural phenomenon, but wisdom: “who can fathom wisdom?” (1:3b). Another striking difference is the literary form to be found in Sir 1:1-2: two rhetorical questions. The only adequate answer to these rhetorical questions, of course, is: “only the Lord can”. And only then Ben Sira starts to say “wisdom was created first of all” (1:4). Whereas in Prov 8:4-21.22-30 it is Lady Wisdom who highlights herself,58 the centre of attention in Sir 1:1-10 – a text using identical concepts – undoubtedly is on the Lord. This is especially demonstrated by 1:8, being another reason why sofo,j can hardly be secondary. Job 28, the magnificent – and at the same time puzzling – poem on the quest for wisdom, and especially the third strophe of it (28:20-28), has been another substantial source – or mine to sustain the metaphor – underlying the opening paragraph of Ben Sira’s book.59

Sir 1:2-3 Job 28:24-26a Sir 1:6 Job 28:20 Sir 1:8 Job 28:23 Sir 1:9 Job 28:27

Job 28 is dominated by a pertinent question, which by means of a refrain to a high degree structures the poem: “But where can wisdom be found, and where is the source of understanding?” (28:12); “Where, then, does wisdom come from? Where is the source of understanding?” (28:20).60 The first reply to this question is given in 28:14 by the personified “Deep” and “Sea”; it is followed in 28:23 by the answer of the personified “Destruc- tion” and “Death”. The Hebrew text runs: “God understands (!ybh) the way to it, and He knows its place” (NRSV). In the Greek we find a slightly different presentation: “God has well made (sune,sthsen)her way, and He knows her place”. In the subsequent lines (28:25-26) wisdom is on a par with natural phenomena (“wind”, “water”, “rain”), just as is the case in Sir 1:2-3.

58 In the Greek text of Ben Sira, it is not till Ch. 24 that Wisdom is personified. Both in Hebrew (Ms A) and in Syriac, however, this is already the case in Sir 4:15-19. 59 I like to refer to the Proceedings of a Colloquium on Job 28, organised by the Royal Nether- lands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Amsterdam 2002: VAN WOLDE, (ed.), Job 28. See also: VAN OORSCHOT, Hiob 28. 60 Translation from the Hebrew according to REB. In the Hebrew, vv. 12b and 20b are completely identical, whereas in the Greek this applies to vv. 12a and 20a. “Full Wisdom is from the Lord“ 151

The most striking parallel to Sir 1:1-10, however, is undoubtedly found in Job 28:27:

to,te ei=den auvth.n kai. evxhgh,sato auvth.n evtoima,saj evxicni,asen

The He saw her and leaded her, He prepared and fathomed (her).

Cf. Sir 1:9:

kai. ei=den kai. evxhri,qmhsen auvth,n

He saw her and took note of her.61

Also Sir 1:3:

kai. sofi,an tij evxicnia,sei*

Who can fathom wisdom?

Wisdom cannot be found by human beings and is inaccessible to mortals; only God knows her way. The only manner for human beings to gain wisdom or to have access to her is in an indirect way, viz. through “fear of the Lord” (ynda tary) / “honouring God” (qeose,beia).62 Whereas fo,boj kuri,ou is the current collocation in the Book of Ben Sira,63 it can hardly be coincidence that the rare noun qeose,beia – as used in Job 28:28 – is also found only once in the Book of Ben Sira, viz. in Sir 1:25 and – moreover – offers exactly the same context as does Job 28:28!

vIdou h` qeose,beia, evstin sofi,a to. de. avpe,cesqai avpo. kakw/n evstin evpisth,mh

Behold, fear of God is wisdom and to abstain from evil is understanding (Job 28,28);64

vEn qhsauroi/j sofi,aj parabolh. evpisth,mhj bde,lugma de. a`martwlw/| qeose,beia.

Among wisdom’s treasures is the model for understanding, but to the sinner fear of God is an abomination (Sir 1:25).65

61 For this translation, see SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 136.139. 62 See the stimulating essay on Job 28:28 by CLINES, ‘The Fear of the Lord is Wisdom’. 63 In Gr I fo,boj kuri,ou is found twenty times, in Gr II another five times; the expression fobei/sqai to,n ku,rion appears twenty eight times in Gr I and three more times in Gr II. 64 It is striking that both qeose,beia (Job 28:28) and qeosebh,j as a characteristic of Job (1:8; 2:3) are part of God’s speech. The only exception is in Job 1:1. 65 The reference to Sir 1:24 in HATCH –REDPATH, 648 s.v. qeose,beia is incorrect. 152 Pancratius C. Beentjes

In my view, however, there is too little evidence, both in phrasing and in context, that Ben Sira’s presentation of God pouring out wisdom (1:9b) should be considered a deliberate allusion to Joel 3:1-2. In the first place, the image in Sir 1:9b relates to“all his works” and only thereafter God’s pouring out wisdom is linked to “all flesh”, which in its turn is followed by a restriction: “according to its bounty”(1:10a). And in the second place, it has undoubtedly been the noun o[rasij of Gr II (1:10d), which has effec- tuated the idea that Joel 3:1-2 comes into play here.66 This, however, would mean that it was not Ben Sira himself, but a later author, who created such an inner-biblical connexion.

6. Conclusions

A comparison between Sir 1:1-10 and other sapiential texts relating to the presentation of wisdom results in the following observations:

1. In Sir 1:1-10 the author employs a pattern of reference, which can be characterised as “structural use of Scripture”. 2. Apart from Sir 1:1, nowhere else in biblical wisdom texts it is explicitly said that “all / full wisdom is from the Lord”. 3. Dealing with the notion of wisdom, biblical wisdom texts as a matter of fact take their starting point in human life, in nature, on earth, or in personified wisdom, and use this train of thought as the way to describe wisdom as originating from God at the end. Ben Sira, however, in the opening paragraph of his book goes the other way round. Presenting his view on the origin and activity of wisdom, he starts with God (“All wisdom is from the Lord”…“He alone is wise”) and at God’s place (“seated upon his throne”).67 4. In Ben Sira’s description, the assignment of wisdom by God has a special climactic dimension that is found nowhere else. God has infused wisdom (1) into all his works, especially (2) into all human beings, and most abundantly (3) into those who love him.68

All this justifies the view that in Sir 1:1-10 we have a precious and unique jewel of wisdom theology in front of us.

66 For more details, see GILBERT, Voir ou Craindre, 250-251. 67 Cf. Sir 24:2 where Lady Wisdom is “speaking in the assembly of the Most High” 68 As to the collocation pa/sa sa,rx (“all human beings”), see RICKENBACHER, Weisheitspe- rikopen, 25-28. “Full Wisdom is from the Lord“ 153

Bibliography

BEENTJES, P. C., Jesus Sirach en Tenach, Nieuwegein 1981. BEENTJES, P. C., Canon and Scripture in the Book of Ben Sira, in: SAEBØ, M. (ed.), Hebrew Bible/Old Testament. The History of its Interpretation, Vol. I/2 (The Middle Ages), Göttingen 2000, 591-605. BEENTJES, P. C., “Full Wisdom is Fear of the Lord”. Ben Sira 19,20-20,31: Context, Composition and Concept: EstBib 47 (1989), 27-45. BURMESTER, O. H. E., The Bohairic Pericopae of Wisdom and Sirach: Bib 15 (1934), 451-465. CLINES, D. J. A., ‘The Fear of the Lord is Wisdom’ (Job 28:28). A Semantic and Con- textual Study, in: VAN WOLDE, E. (ed.), Job 28. Cognition in Context , 57-92. COLLINS, J. J., Jewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age (OTL), Louisville 1997. CORLEY, J., Wisdom versus Apocalyptic and Science in Sirach 1,1-10, in: GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ, F. (ed.), Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Biblical Tradition (BEThL 168), Leuven 2003, 269-285. DI LELLA, A. A., Fear of the Lord as Wisdom: Ben Sira 1,11-30, in: BEENTJES, P. C. (ed.), The Book of Ben Sira in Modern Research (BZAW 255), Berlin – New York 1997, 113-133. EBERHARTER, A., Der Kanon des Alten Testaments zur Zeit des Ben Sira (ATA III, 3), Münster 1911. GASSER, J. K., Die Bedeutung der Sprüche Jesu Ben Sira für die Datierung des althe- bräischen Spruchbuches, Gütersloh 1903. GILBERT, M., Voir ou Craindre le Seigneur? Sir 1,10d, in: CAGNI, L. (ed.), Biblia et Semitica. Studi in memoria di Francesco Vattioni, Napoli 1999, 247-252. GILBERT, M., Le Discours de la Sagesse en Proverbes 8, in: ID. (ed.), La Sagesse de l’Ancien Testament (BEThL 51), Louvain 19902, 202-218; 414-415. HASPECKER, J., Gottesfurcht bei Jesus Sirach. Ihre religiöse Struktur und ihre liter- arische und doktrinäre Bedeutung (AnBib 30), Rom 1967. HATCH,E.– REDPATH, H. A., A Concordance to the Septuagint, Oxford 1897. LUST, J. – EYNIKEL, E. – HAUSPIE, K. (eds.), Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint. Revised Edition, Stuttgart 2003. MARBÖCK, J., Weisheit im Wandel. Untersuchungen zur Weisheitstheologie bei Ben Sira (BBB 37), Bonn 1971. MCKENZIE, R. A. F., Sirach (OTM 19), Wilmington 1983. MÜLLER, A., Proverbien 1-9: Der Weisheit neue Kleider, Berlin – New York 2000. PATTE, D., Early Jewish Hermeneutic in Palestina (SBL.DS 22), Missoula 1975. PETERS, N., Das Buch Jesus Sirach oder Ecclesiasticus (EHAT 25), Münster 1913. PRATO, G. L., Il problema della teodicea in Ben Sira. Composizione dei contrari e richiamo alle origini (AnBib 65), Roma 1973. RAHLFS, A., Septuaginta, Vol. II, Stuttgart 19658. REICKE, B., pa/j, a[paj, in: TDNT V, 585-595. Revised English Bible with Apocrypha, Oxford – Cambridge 1989. RICKENBACHER, O., Weisheitsperikopen bei Ben Sira (OBO 1), Göttingen 1973. RÜGER, H. P., Text und Textform im hebräischen Sirach. Untersuchungen zur Textgeschichte und Textkritik der hebräischen Sirachfragmente aus der Kairoer Geniza (BZAW 112), Berlin 1970. 154 Pancratius C. Beentjes

SAUER, G., Jesus Sirach (Ben Sira) (JSHRZ III/5), Gütersloh 1981. SAUER, G., Jesus Sirach/Ben Sira (ATD 1), Göttingen 2000. SCHNABEL, E. J., Law and Wisdom from Ben Sira to Paul (WUNT, 2. Reihe 16), Tübin- gen 1985. SCHREINER, J., Jesus Sirach 1-24 (NEB), Würzburg 2002. SEGAL, M. Z., Se¯fer ben-Sîra¯’ hasˇsˇa¯le¯m, Jerusalem 19582. SKEHAN, P. W. – DI LELLA, A. A., The Wisdom of Ben Sira. A New Translation with Notes, Introduction, and Commentary (AncB 39), New York 1987. SMEND, R., Griechisch-Syrisch-Hebräischer Index zur Weisheit des Jesus Sirach, Berlin 1907. SMEND, R., Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach erklärt, Berlin 1906. SNAITH, J. G., Ecclesiasticus (CBC), Cambridge 1974. SWETE, H. B., The Old Testament in Greek according to the Septuagint, Vol. II, Cam- bridge 1930. VAN OORSCHOT, J., Hiob 28: Die verborgene Weisheit und die Furcht Gottes als Über- windung einer generalisierten Chkmh, in: BEUKEN, W. A. M. (ed.), The Book of Job (BEThL 114), Leuven 1994, 183-201. VAN WOLDE, E. (ed.), Job 28. Cognition in Context (Biblical Interpretation Series 64), Leiden – Boston 2003. WAGNER, C., Die Septuaginta Hapaxlegomena im Buch Jesus Sirach (BZAW 282), Berlin – New York 1999. WHYBRAY, R. N., Proverbs (NCBC), Grand Rapids 1994. WICKE-REUTER, U., Göttliche Providenz und menschliche Verantwortung bei Ben Sira und in der frühen Stoa (BZAW 298), Berlin – New York 2000. WRIGHT, B. G., No Small Difference. Sirach’s Relationship to its Hebrew Parent Text (SCS 26), Atlanta 1989. ZIEGLER, J., Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach (Septuaginta. Vetus Testamentum Graecum XII/2), Göttingen 1965. The secrets of God. Investigation into Sir 3:21-24

ANGELO PASSARO

The pericope whichis the object of this investigation has been studied recently from the point of view of the identification of the addressees behind its polemical intention.1 Alongside these valuable attempts and in dialogue with them, after having given a synoptic view of the Greek text and of the Hebrew present in Mss A and C, I would like to investigate Sir 3:(17)21-24 from the standpoint of the gnoseological problem which it reveals, in which forms already laid down in the preceding sapiential tradition are taken up again, though coming to conclusions and developments that are different and more advanced.

1. Text and hermeneutic

The pericope presents a textual situation that is homogeneous but complex and which becomes still more intricate if it is investigated from its beginning in v. 17.2 In fact, compared with the Greek text, the two Hebrew manuscripts A and C present notable differences. The Greek text presents v. 19 (from Gr II, received into the edition of Ziegler to which I refer) which is absent from the Hebrew manuscripts even though (and this is probably the reason for Ziegler’s choice) v. 20b of Ms A seems to be the exact match of the Greek v. 19b:

But to the lowest / he reveals his secrets avlla. prae,sin apokalu,ptei ta. musth,ria auvtou/

And to the humble / he reveals his secret wdws hlgy ~ywn[l notwithstanding the singular-plural change (wdws – ta. musth,ria auvtou/). That we are dealing with an addition which amplifies the Hebrew text is to be deduced from the fact that v. 20a of Ms A develops coherently (by means of a causative yk) v. 18b with the theme of the mercy of God: rele-

1 Cf. ARGALL, 1 Enoch and Sirach, 73-78. 2 On the delimitation of the pericope, cf. ibid., 73 and note 184; SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 164; PENAR, Northwest Semitic Philology, 7-9. 156 Angelo Passaro vant to this is the obvious repeat of the term ~xr in the plural at vv. 18b and 20a:

(v. 18b) ~ymxr acmt la ynplw

(v. 20a) ~yhla ymxr ~ybr yk.

The Greek text (Gr I), in fact, insists on the humbling of the disciple and the glorification of the Lord and their relationship of consequentiality as is indicated by the correspondence between the tapeino,w of v. 18a and tapei,noi in v. 20b which almost forms an inclusion:

The greater you are, humble yourself (tapei,nou seauto,n) the more (v. 18a)

Since (o[ti) […] he is glorified (doxa,zetai) by the humble (u`po. tw/n tapeinw/n) (v. 20b).

Ms C does not present the verses corresponding to v. 19 of the Gr and to v. 20 of the Gr and of Ms A. In fact, it presents only vv. 17-18 and 21-22, lacking also vv. 23-24. This notwithstanding, broadly speaking there are notable affinities between it and the Gr. In fact, in v. 17a, along with Gr, and by contrast with Ms A, it does not mention riches, and reference is made only to the need to direct one’s own actions according to meekness and gentleness. Like Ms C, Ms A insists on modesty (hwn[b), the Gr on meekness. So, even if the two Hebrew manuscripts coincide in the indication of modality, they differ in that of situation. Ms A restricts the imperative to the situation of riches ($rX[b) while Ms C and the Gr paint a more general picture which indicates a status, that of the son-disciple. Also, in the presentation of the consequence (v. 17b), the Gr is in line with Ms C both in the arrangement of the words (complement-subject-verb) – different from Ms A which presents subject-verb-complement – and in the syntagm which seems precisely to reflect !tm Xya. Also in v. 18, Gr and Ms C present a text which is similar both in construction and terminology. Prescinding from the presence in v. 18a of ynb which does not have an equivalent in the Greek – a clear attempt at linking up with v. 17a – the syntactic construction “the more…the more” is identical as is the correspondence between the syntagms !x acmt and eu`rh,seij ca,rin; this contrasts with Ms A which presents the term ~xr as object of the verb acm, but above all links finding mercy before God with humbling “before the great things of the age” (~lw[ tlwdg lkm). In v. 21, Ms C introduces an element which does not find any equivalent either in the Greek or in Ms A: the expression $mm ~y[rw, “that is, what is bad for you” (Ms A $mm hswkm; Gr.: ivscuro,tera, sou) – recalled probably by Ms A in v. 24 with regard to “perverse and seductive thoughts (tw[r twnwymdw)“ –, The secrets of God. Investigation into Sir 3:21-24 157 moreover in a context in which two identical verbs are employed even if in a different sequence from Ms A and Gr: rqh and Xrd. V.22 marks the transparent agreement of the Hebrew manuscripts both in the construction of the verse and in the terminology employed: tyXrwh (“what has been handed down to you”); the root !yb in the hithpael imperative (“have understanding”); qs[ (care-thought-effort), but in two different constructions: Ms A emphasises the continuity between the two stichs with a !yaw which could also be read as the consequence of the first stich: “Have understanding of what has been handed down to you / and you will not have concern for secret things”,3 that is, the task of attentive and thorough investigation of what has been handed down will not allow the attention to linger on secret things. Ms C, on the other hand, directs the second stich in the sense of a command, placing qs[ at the beginning of the phrase, followed by a negative imperative in which the verb hyh is marked: “Have understanding of what has been handed down to you / and do not have concern over secret things”. Finally, the two Mss converge in their use of the term twrtsnb. With the use of the term crei,a, the Greek text of v. 22 adds to and underlines the aspect of the absence of advantage in intellectual activity which wishes to enquire into hidden things (ta. kru,pta). It is to be marked that the Gr adopts the construction of the Hebrew of Ms A which does not present the imperative form. In the Greek, this construction confers particular emphasis on the verb dianoe,w, which will be repeated, in a negative context, in v. 24 in substantival form. Vv. 23 and 24, present only in Gr and Ms A, have a text which is essentially homogeneous with regard to content. However, we must mark a textual problem in v. 23a of the Hebrew and a particular nuance in v. 24a. In 23a Hb, the expression rmt la is difficult to understand.4 Di Lella’s proposal which indicates the verbal form qSe[;t.ti, thus taking up the root qs[ of the preceding verse, seems logical. From a different direction, the Greek text runs on the same lines: mh. perierga,zou, which suggests “a wordplay on true work”.5 In this connection, also suggestive for its interpretative consequences, is the proposal of Crenshaw6 which reads rmat la, from the root rma, “and do not speak of secret things” which would be conducive to interpreting the “secret things” as the sphere of theodicy.7 Moreover, in v. 23b, the Gr recalls the su,nesij, the intelligence of men,

3 Cf. in this respect LHVT: non est tibi curandum de. 4 Cf. SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 159; also the critical apparatus of LÉVI, The Hebrew Text, 2, critical apparatus letter e; and ARGALL, 1 Enoch and Sirach, 76. 5ARGALL, 1 Enoch and Sirach, 76. 6 Cf. CRENSHAW, Qohelet’s Understanding, 215. 7 Cf. in this respect HENGEL, Judaism and Hellenism, 139. 158 Angelo Passaro its limit and its desire, already abundantly satisfied, as the motive for not having to wear oneself out with what is too great, while Ms A places the stress, more generically, on the need to know, it too abundantly satisfied. Finally, in v. 24, Gr and Ms A present a construction that is slightly different. The Gr introduces a verbal form (wvli,sqhsen)where the Hebrew repro- duces a participle of the root h[t functioning as an adjective. In this way, the Greek text, in stich b, places in relief “the perverse presumption which has led the thoughts of many astray”, creating a parallelism between u`po,leyij and u`po,noia ponera., between speculation and perverse presumption, subjects of the two different verbs: evpla,nhsen and wvli,sqhsen. The Hebrew text, on the other hand, accuses the ~da ynb, in two clauses which can be held to be nominal, “many opinions” and “perverse and seductive thoughts”. Their notable quantity is thus underlined while in Gr the multiplicity is the subject only of stich a. Despite the differences in the three relevant texts, therefore, which attest a constant attempt at reinterpretation – and this refers not only to the translation of the nephew but also to the complex situation of the manuscript tradition – we can affirm that, as far as general lines are concerned, the texts present a clear uniformity of content, with the Greek translation showing itself to be in line both with Ms C in the parts which it presents and with A where C is lacking. This contentual uniformity is joined with as many clear and detailed emphases, special stresses which do not, however, in my opinion, portray alternative or irreconcilable content. In short, the Greek text takes up the Hebrew, expanding the text (cf. the situation with vv. 19-20), welcoming its ideas and reformulating them, even with regard to terminology,8 for an audience and an historico-anthropological context clearly different from that supposed by the Hebrew text. This conclusion allows us, probably, to overcome, from the methodological and hermeneutical point of view, that impasse in which, with reference to our pericope, that exegesis struggles which is interested only in defining, and in alternative terms, the object of the intelligent and discrete polemical intention of the text. By way of example, it is very surprising in fact that, although basing themselves on the Hebrew text, Di Lella and Argall arrive at conclusions that are diametrically opposed: the first writes in his classic commentary: “In vv. 21, 22b, 23a, 24 Ben Sira urges his readers to beware of the inconsistency, the futility of the teaching of the Greeks, their aims and their techniques, while he recalls to them how much the Lord has granted to them. In short, vv. 22 and 23b aim to show that the Law and the traditions of Israel are sufficient for those who believe in order to live fully and well”.9 In his conclusion, a little polemically it appears to me, Argall,

8 Cf. the careful study of A. Minissale in this volume. 9SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 160. The secrets of God. Investigation into Sir 3:21-24 159 who analyses the pericope in the wider context of the search for more or less clear cross-references between Sirach and 1 Enoch, holds that “it is reasonable to conclude that Sirach 3:17-29 is not a polemic against the Greeks learning, as is often asserted by scholars […]. Ben Sira is responding to Jew- ish groups that propound esoteric teachings. The controversy is fully intel- legible as an intra-Jewish debate over the correct interpretation of Torah”,10 and maintains, after having cited the passage of Di Lella just indicated, that this interpretation (against the teaching of the Greeks) can be made to go back to Smend11 “who suggested that the ‘sons of men’ in Sir 3:24 was a reference to Greeks [...]. The view was populararized by Martin Hengel who, with his customary caution, said of Smend, ‘we may perhaps concede he is right’”.12 It can escape no one that, set in these terms, the question becomes insoluble and does not grasp the whole import of the text. I believe that the two viewpoints, against the Greeks and against Jewish groups are present and compatible if we draw on the results of the analysis of the textual situation which reveals a common arrangement and architecture into which are inserted nuances that are necessarily diverse, because the religious and cultural concerns to which the grandfather and grandson were subjected were different; different, therefore, the environment of the scribal work. In this way the texts itself forces the abandonment of compart- mentalised interpretation and emits a rich complexity of meaning. On the other hand, as Crenshaw wisely suggests13 even if the occasion is polemic against the astrological or cosmological speculations of the Greeks or against Jewish beliefs on the control of one’s own destiny, the aim remains that of portraying, at the epistemological level, the limits – and I would add, the possibilities – of human knowledge in a very structured discourse which, taking up the interpretative forms already indicated – one thinks of Qoheleth and some Psalms – orients them and develops them starting from that cultural and profoundly theological operation which brings together Wisdom and the Torah.

10 ARGALL, 1 Enoch and Sirach, 78 and note 195. 11 SMEND, Die Weisheit, 222. 12 HENGEL, Judaism and Hellenism, 139. 13 CRENSHAW Qohelet’s Understanding, 223. 160 Angelo Passaro

2. Structure and meaning

Vv. 21-24 constitute a unity easily circumscribed with regard to its beginning and its end and coherently structured internally. In fact, v. 20, with a causal clause (yk in the Hebrew, o[ti in the Greek), closes the discourse on humility introduced by the ynb / te,knon of v. 17a. With v. 21a there begins a discourse conducted on the register of synonymous parallelism in which the use of the comparative has a structuring function (calepw,tera, sou – iscuro,tera, sou / $mm twalp – hswkm / $mm ~y[rw // evn toi/j perissoi/j tw/n e;rgwn sou / $mm rtwybw) because it is part of the link between vv. 21 and 23; in this way the motivation of 23b, which is prolonged in v. 24 (the ga,r of the Greek can also be interpreted in a causal sense), is elliptically referable also to the imperatives of v. 21. Moreover, in vv. 21 and 23a, the verbs are all in the negative imperative:

do not seek ( Xwrdt la – mh. zh,tei) / do not enquire (rwqxt la - mh. evxe,taze) do not occupy yourself (qs[tt la) – do not weary yourself (mh. perierga,zou) and the objects are placed in parallel:

what is wonderful (twalp) – what is difficult (calepw,tera)/ what is hidden [Ms C: bad] / (hswkm [Ms C: ~y[r]) – what is too great (ivscuro,tera) what is greater (rtwyb) – what is too great (toi/j perissoi/j).

Ms C closes at v. 22 (cf. Ms A), but in v. 21 it presents a parallelism between twalp (“what is marvellous”) and ~y[r (“what is bad”). Thus there is anticipated in the object of the search the motivation of the command: whatever is twalp, if investigated, becomes a search for what is bad. Thus is explained, probably, the inversion of the two verbs rqx and Xrd compared with Ms A. It is to be noted that, in consequential manner, in v. 22b, Ms C presents the construction with ’al + the jussive: the discourse, that is, is closed with the command not to concern oneself with secret things (twrtsnb, same term in Ms A; in Gr. the equivalent ta. kru,pta). Moreover, coherently with the absence in the first part of the conclusion of the openness of God to reveal his secrets, there is a complete lack of reference to “what has already been shown and revealed” (v. 22b Gr and Ms A). In this way, in a deliberate fashion, v. 22a becomes central: “Of that which has been handed down to you (Gr: commanded) to you / have understanding (!yb)”. In fact, also in the Greek and in Ms A, in the organisation of the discourse, v. 22 performs a central role. Within a sequence of verbal forms in the negative, it presents the verb in the positive: “have understanding”, and is constructed according to antithetical parallelism. Moreover, the fact that in stich b, by contrast with Ms C, the form of a command is not pre- The secrets of God. Investigation into Sir 3:21-24 161 sented, showing instead a consequence of what has been said in the positive (qs[ $l !yaw), with a particular underlining in the Greek of the uselessness of this particular enquiry (cf. the use of crei,a), on the one hand emphasises the relationship existing between “having understanding of what has been handed down/commanded” and “the not having concern for secret things”, that is, the enquiry which is open to the understanding of what has been handed down is itself the condition and possibility for not weary- ing oneself in the enquiry into secret things; there is an indication of paci- fied sufficiency in the understanding of what has been handed down; on the other hand, it allows the linking of “what has been handed down/commanded” with “what has been shown/revealed” which is specified, along the lines of quantity-possibility, as that which goes beyond the structural possibilities of human knowledge. Thus are joined, in a wonderful manner, the greatness of the gift and the human limitation! To summarise, in Ms C the command, expressed in positive terms: “have understanding of what has been handed down to you” is accompanied by and balanced by the one expressed in the negative: “do not be concerned with secret things”; there is an area of searching not only possible but obligatory, that which has as its object what has been handed down to which there is counterposed another which is absolutely forbidden: here is not the request for a particular quality or intensity in the searching (cf. the term qs[), but the absolute prohibition of an enquiry which wishes to have as its object “secret things”, placed in parallel with “what is recognised as marvellous (= for you)” and “what is bad for you”. In Ms A and in Gr, however, the repeat of this fundamental concept is accompanied by the idea of a necessity, of a need of man, which has already been satisfied, even in a superabundant way, by what has been shown and revealed, submitted to the attention (v. 23b: Ms A har in the hoph.; Gr u`podei,knumi). The expression of v. 23b takes on, therefore, particular relevance and, in the light of the data which has emerged from the analysis of the structure of the discourse, I believe that its significance cannot be limited to a rebuke issued by Ben Sira to his students because they have had access to the teachings of his adversaries.14 Di Lella seems more logical when he refers the verse to the activity of Ben Sira but within an interpretative framework which sees in him one who has explained the Torah to his disciples.15 In effect, the text insists on the parallelism between what is marvellous/difficult, hidden/great, too great for the capacity of human knowledge, secret things, and what has been handed down and commanded. That is, in the face of a reality that is known because it has been revealed,

14 Thus ARGALL, 1 Enoch and Sirach, 74. 15 SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 159. 162 Angelo Passaro there stands out the indication of another reality before which one can only recognise the limits of the capacity of knowledge and, therefore, the uselessness of rational enquiry. As is clear, and has been variously emphasised, Ben Sira is taking up Deut 29:28a:

Wnyhel{a/ hw"hyl: troT's.NIh ~l'A[-d[; WnynEb'l.W Wnl' tl{g>NIh;w> taZOh; hr"ATh; yrEb.DI-lK'-ta, tAf[}l;

ta. krupta. kuri,w| tw/| qew/| h`mw/n ta. de. fanera. h`mi/n kai. toi/j te,knoij h`mw/n eivj to.n aivw/na poiei/n pa,nta ta. r`h,mata tou/ no,mou tou,tou

Secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things which have been revealed are for us and for our sons, for ever, because we practise all the words of this Law a text which is to be understood in the light of the so-called “canonic formula“ (“The word which I command you”) in which the command is given not to add or take away any of the word commanded, of the Law. In this way, the Law and the complex theological structure of the text which confers on it its sacral character is protected. Now, whether this complex theological structure of the text is consti- tuted by a numerical system which represents symbolically the presence of God,16 such as is established by the logotechnical analysis refined by Claus Schedl and used for the interpretation of some Biblical books by various scholars, is a conclusion which escapes my limited competence. However we can accept in part – because otherwise it would be necessary to enter into the paths of Gematria, something to which I would not wish to condemn Ben Sira –, some conclusions with regard to the text of Deuterono- my: the “secret things” refer to the written text of the Law, they are the hidden and complex innervature of the text, they are “for God”, hw"hyl: , they belong to God, while the “things revealed“, the text of the Law with its commandments are for the people, for the benefit of the people (Wnl') in the measure in which they are carried out.17 Ben Sira takes up, that is, the viewpoint of Deuteronomy, not to deny value to searching but in order to confirm that, through divine decree, there is a limit beyond which one runs the risk of perverse deception because there is a limit to what God himself has revealed,18 in the sense that there

16 Thus LABUSCHAGNE, Divine Speech, 388-389 (paper presented at Leuven and previously published in LOHFINK, Das Deuteronomium, 111-126). 17 Ibid., 359. 18 Cf. ARGALL, 1 Enoch and Sirach, 76. The secrets of God. Investigation into Sir 3:21-24 163 remains a mysterious dimension in the very acting of God which is not reducible to what human knowledge can reach. Ben Sira recognises that the effort of willing to know is destined to failure. Even the rational enquiry which wishes to penetrate what is unknown can have perverse consequences, but that depends once again and ultimately on the object of knowledge. For this, the conclusion of Crenshaw on the text which we are analysing: “this attack on the very essence of rational enquiry… does not depend automatically on the humble recognition that the intellect cannot explain the mystery of life. The necessity of the polemic has driven Ben Sira towards an unsustainable position: some realities are not subject to rational enquiry”,19 seems to me not to pay attention to the “quality” of the reality or realities of which one desires to have knowledge. In my opinion, which is confirmed by the evidence of the vocabulary employed, Ben Sira reuses some of the intuitions of the sage Qoheleth which combine with perspectives which had already been transmitted by the tradition to the hymnology of the Psalms. The reference to Qoh 1:13

~yIm'V'h; tx;T; hf,[]n: rv,a]-lK' l[; hm'k.x'B; rWtl'w> vArd>li yBili-ta, yTit;n"w> AB tAn[]l; ~d"a'h' ynEb.li ~yhil{a/ !t;n" [r" !y"n>[i aWh

kai. e;dwka th.n kardi,an mou tou/ evkzhth/sai kai. tou/ kataske,yasqai evn th/ sofi,a| peri. pa,ntwn tw/n ginome,nwn u`po. to.n ouvrano,n\ o[ti perispasmo.n ponhro.n e;dwken o` qeo.j toi/j ui`oi/j tou/ avnqrw,pou tou/ perispa/sqai evn auvtw/|

And I have applied my heart to search and to investigate with wisdom all that is done under heaven: a painful business, which God has given to the sons of men that they may be weary with it. of which I wish to underline the repeat of the verb Xrd and zhte,w placed in parallel in Sirach in v. 21a Gr and Ms A – refers logically and structurally20 to the conclusions on the inscrutability of the work of God of Qoh 8:16-17 where there occur the verbs acm and Xqb, verbs which, together with those of 1:13, indicate intellectual research aimed at knowledge (cf. the use of [dy) and which Ben Sira in his turn utilises in 51:13ff – a text that also should be read in relation to our pericope for the repeat of the verb !yb (51:19 cf. 3:22a; Gr evpi,noew/dianoe,w which, together with ginw,skw, translates !yb hithp.)21 –,

19 CRENSHAW, Qohelet’s Understanding, 223. 20 Cf. PASSARO, Le possibili letture, 31-35. 21 Cf. ARGALL, 1 Enoch and Sirach, 71 and note 180. 164 Angelo Passaro in which is described the journey which has led the sage Ben Sira to the acquisition of the secret things of wisdom.22 Qoheleth, then, in the retrospective conclusion of 8:16-17, as is indicated by the use of the perfect yttn introduced by rXak, summarises the nature and the result of his searching which, although revealing characteristics of intentionality (bl ta !tn) and intensity (effort by day and night), has to register failure: man like the sage must conclude (this is the sense of the verb har which introduces the apodosis of v. 17) the absolute impossibility of “finding” (repeated three times) the work of God. A conclusion which certainly underlines the gnoseological limit of every man is predicated also of the sapiential search (cf. v. 17), but motivated by the object of the search. In other words, the legitimate aim to know, although arriving at some kind of threshold of understanding of the real, does not come to full knowledge of the object that is being enquired into, but the exercise of rational thought, with all its severe limitations, is always under the control of man. Ben Sira, placing himself on this line which runs transversally and carsti- cally throughout the Old Testament, re-presents in terms of invitation-command what Qoheleth in a disillusioned manner presented as the wise conquest of a sapiential search which would not wish to take refuge or lock itself within itself, deprived of common sense and, basically, of the fear of the Lord, because it recognises that everything is in the hands of the Lord (cf. Qoh 9:2). In this context of meaning, we can place the clear references to Ps 131:1: yn:y[e Wmr"-alw> yBili Hb;g'-al{ hw"hy> yNIM,mi tAal'p.nIb.W tAldog.Bi yTik.L'hi-alw>

Lord, my heart is not proud, my eyes are not haughty, I do not occupy myself in great matters, which are too hard for me (tAal'p.nIb.). and 139:6:

Hl' lk;Wa-al hb'G>v.nI yNIM,mi t[;d: [ha'yliP.] hY"ail.Pi

Your knowledge is wonderful for me, so high that I cannot attain it.

With the take up of Ps 131:1, Ben Sira recalls and appropriates a law of the religious experience of Israel, a constant law as is indicated by the verbs in the perfect: the recognition that the transcendent greatness of God, the gadôl par excellence, the great and miraculous signs of the Exodic liberation (tAal'p.nI,

22 For a precise analysis of this text, cf. the essay of S. Manfredi in this volume. Cf. also GILBERT, Venez à mon école. The secrets of God. Investigation into Sir 3:21-24 165 cf. Exod 3:20; 34:10; Judg 6:13; Jer 21:2; Ps 9:2; etc.) and the secrets of the order of creation, of the universe, cannot be attained by man (cf. the use of the verb $lh).23 In fact, God remains “the wonderful” (Ps 139:6: again the root alp), his thought unattainable by the human mind.24 Certainly repetition and re-presentation signify reformulation and new understanding. There are two points on which Ben Sira develops the preceding positions: the advantage of recognising the gnoseological limit and the necessity of an intervention of revelation. If Qoheleth had concluded that knowledge of the limit is the unique advantage of the sage’s searching, for Ben Sira, by contrast, passionate searching of the book of the Law, conducted with discipline, humility and meekness, leads to the acquisition of wisdom, as is clearly affirmed in Chap- ter 51 and in particular in v. 20. In the Hebrew text (which combines Ms B and 11QPsa) we read in fact:

hyr[X hxtp ydy !bwbta hymr[[m]

My hands opened her gates and I understood her bareness25 which the Greek translates

ta.j cei/ra.j mou evxepe,tasa pro.j u[yoj kai. ta. avgnoh,mata auvth/j evpe,nohsa

I raised my hands towards heaven and I understood its hidden things.

The symbolic language of the Hebrew (formulated, according to Argall, on the register on sexual symbolism) is rendered and interpreted, perhaps also to avoid some form of pruderie, in a manner more consistent with the religious sphere; thus “my hands opened her gates“ becomes “I raised my hands to heaven”, attaining the aim of emphasising the need for a pray- ing disposition for the understanding of that which, in spatial terms, is precisely on high. In any case, it is particularly interesting that “bareness” is rendered by the Greek with ta. avgnoh,mata. The reference is, again, to the hidden things which Ben Sira, the sage, understands by means of prayer (cf. also v. 13).

23 On the interpretation of tAal'p. in Sir 3:21 as the equivalent of hwhy yX[m, work of God, I refer to the analysis of WRIGHT, Fear the Lord, 209-211. 24 Cf. RAVASI, Il libro dei Salmi, III, 808. 25 Cf. ARGALL, 1 Enoch and Sirach, 70. One could also look at SANDERS, The Psalms Scrolls, 80-81 and to his later The Sirach 51 Acrostic, 429-438. 166 Angelo Passaro

The new element is the double mediation of the Law and the sage (cf. the verbs in the first person as in Qoheleth), the places where God and wisdom reveal their secrets (cf. 4:18). Without wishing here to enter into questions concerning the “very creative reciprocity” of the language of this chapter,26 its use and its structure reveal, nonetheless, the intention to show that the search conducted into the Torah has led the sage, Ben Sira, to know hidden things and to teach them, has led him to receive wisdom. The equivalence of “hidden things” and “wisdom” is indicated by Ben Sira himself in the splendid text of Chapters 42-43, in 42:19 and 43:33 Gr, verses in which the subject is God, we read:

twyhn tpylx hwxm twrtsn rqx hlgmw

He […] unveils things past and future and reveals the traces of hidden things

pa,nta ga.r evpoi,hsen ov ku,rioj kai. toi/j euvsebe,sin e;dwken sofi,an

The Lord has made all things and has given wisdom to the godly.

As Argall has shown, guided by parallel texts in 1 Enoch, e;dwken sofi,an is a technical expression equivalent to“revealing hidden things”.27 The identification of Wisdom with the book of the Torah (24:23) has allowed Ben Sira to go beyond and develop the teaching of Qoheleth and the standpoint of the Psalms. The sage who has understanding of the Torah (cf. 6:37: “Meditate on the commandments of the Lord, busy yourself always with his precepts. He will make your heart strong, the wisdom that you desire shall be given you”), who possesses it, will obtain wisdom (cf. 15:1: “and he who possesses the Law has wisdom”), and will be able to teach it, and, therefore, to all those who hear him and retain his teachings there will also be given wisdom; they will be shown the hidden things in the Torah. In other words, Ben Sira starts from the reflection of Qoheleth in order to recover the value of the Torah in the search for wisdom, presenting the book of the Torah as the meeting point for two ways: that of wisdom-word which is revealed and dwells in the book and that of the sage who encounters it in the book in order to hand it on. Thus it is in the openness to accept the teaching of the sage who has acquired wisdom and its secrets by means of the humble searching of the book of the Torah that there is the unique and concrete possibility of receiving wisdom.

26 ARGALL, 1 Enoch and Sirach, 69-70. 27 Ibid., 71-72. The secrets of God. Investigation into Sir 3:21-24 167

This simple but decisive truth, which recognises and accepts that the elusiveness/ineffability of the object sought constitutes the necessary condition of the search because it trusts in the faith of the objectivisation of the revelation handed down in the book of the Law, overcomes the vain argumentation of the sons of men who trust in themselves or in their own rational capacity and so lose themselves in the nonsense of tempting and perverse speculations which distance them from God (cf. v. 24). In the face of this truth, the reality of the humble and modest attitude of the searcher becomes obligatory, not so much as a virtuous act but as the condition of the blessed encounter with revelation: that is wisdom. Vv. 17-20, therefore, perform an important function in the organisation of the discourse because they describe, along the lines of a confidential request (“my son”), the necessary attitude for being introduced into the salvific plan of God (musth,ria sou / wdws). The Greek amplifies the perspective, underlining the link which is established in the humble person between musth,ria and dunastei,a tou/ kuri,ou: it is the humble man, in fact, who allows the full revelation of the greatness of God (v. 20b) in his complete openness to be dependent on Him. An openness which is revealed also in the sincere and full relationship between people: “and you will be loved more than a man who is ready to give” (v. 17b). In the background, there is the text of Prov 19:6 (“Many are the flatterers of a generous man and all are the friends of the man who makes gifts”), recalled by the syntagm !tm Xya to which the Greek (a;nqrwpon do,thn) also seems to be aligned. In Proverbs, it is the deceit- fulness of a relationship of interested friendship that is set in relief. Against this background, the comparative introduced by Ben Sira assumes greater emphasis: the accent has shifted from those who seek out of self-interest to the one who is searched for; a modest life and a measured way of acting make up the person more than his readiness to give with great liberality. Thus Ben Sira sketches the anthropological contours of those who seek for wisdom, helping to understand, beyond the particulars of the time, those structural elements which in all ages define the figure of the wise scribe. The pronounced counterposing of the humble of vv. 17-20 and the many who remain anchored to earthly things of v. 24 relates probably to the polemic between the attempt to rationalise the world of the sacred and with that God himself, the risk of that “intellectual pride” (as the happy expression of Di Lella defines it), the “detached critical attitude of Greek ‘wisdom’ which, unleashed from all convention, must have been particularly attractive”.28 The use of the term dia,noia in v. 24 seems to anticipate, in fact, the polemic which later on the book of Wisdom (cf. Wis 4:15: “The peoples see without understanding, they do not reflect on this thing / oiv de. laoi. ivdo,ntej kai. mh. noh,santej mhde. qe,ntej evpi. dianoi,a| to. toiou/to” [i.e.

28 HENGEL, Judaism and Hellenism, 291. 168 Angelo Passaro the premature death of the just man], and 14:15) will raise against the process of divinising the young who have died prematurely – a diatribe that refers to educated and unprejudiced circles and refers to a custom well attested in the Greek world from the 4th century BC.29 Reading the Hebrew text of v. 24, however, one grasps the environmen- tal contrast which marks the polemical targets of the charges of Ben Sira differently from the Greek text. One cannot disregard that the grandfather was aiming at part of the Jewish world exposed too much to particular ideological influences or to the sectarian practices of those who thought that they could foresee future events or know the secret forces of the cosmos. Can we be more detailed with regard to these addressees? The attempts made so far, which identify them with apocalyptic circles or with minority groups of priests who were opposed to the official priesthood or with elu- sive Enochic confraternities, require still further investigation, making use of the contributions of a multidisciplinary research which will furnish elements of knowledge as yet unknown. Beyond the polemical urgency, however, the reading of the sage, Ben Sira, has become the patrimony of Israel since centuries after, commenting on the Book of Job, similar words can be heard: “Do not seek things that are too much for you. Do not try to probe what is far from you; what is more marvellous than you, you can never know; what is hidden from you, do not try to discover. Seek to understand only what God has given you for your inheritance but do not be occupied with mystery” (Midrash on Job).

29 Cf. BASLEZ, The Author of Wisdom. The secrets of God. Investigation into Sir 3:21-24 169 ) lpX MODESTY qal ) with : $lh ) ) Ms C !x rqx (= act) ( ) for you Xrd your actions ) what is bad My son, My son , What is wonderful for you and more than a generous man and in the eyes of God hwn[b direct the greater you are, the more abase yourself ( do not investigate ( you will be loved. you will find grace ( 17a ( b 18a b 21a and do not seek ( ) lkm ) ) ) ) )before( dws ~xr Ms A ~ywn[ ) rqx X[m hithp. ) : ). hwn[b ( $lh Xrd MODESTY What is wonderful for you My son, Because abundant is and you will be loved and before God and to the humble ( What is hidden from you in your wealth live (= walk: with the mercy of God, the great things of the age do not seek ( he reveals his secret ( more than he who gives presents Humble yourself ( you will find mercy ( do not investigate ( 17a b b 20a b 21a b ), ) ) ) tapeino,w ) Gr tapeino,w ca,rij musth,ria (= act) evn prau

Bibliography

ARGALL, R. A., 1 Enoch and Sirach. A Comparative Literary and Conceptual Analy- sis of the Themes of Revelation, Creation and Judgement (SBL 6), Atlanta, GA 1995. BASLEZ, M.-F., The Author of Wisdom and the Cultured Environment of Alexandria, in: PASSARO, A. – BELLIA, G. (eds.), The Book of Wisdom in Modern Research. Studies on Tradition, Redaction and Theology (DCLY 2005), Berlin 2005, 33-52. CRENSHAW, J. L., Qohelet’s Understanding of Intellectual Inquiry, in: SCHOORS,A. (ed.), Qohelet in the Context of Wisdom (BEThL 136), Leuven 1998, 205-224. GILBERT, M., Venez à mon école (Si 51,13-30), in: FISCHER, I. – RAPP, U. – SCHILLER,J. (eds.), Auf den Spuren der schriftgelehrten Weisen. Festschrift für Johannes Marböck anlässlich seiner Emeritierung (BZAW 331), Berlin 2003, 283-290. HENGEL, M., Judaism and Hellenism. Studies in their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period, Philadelphia 1974. LABUSCHAGNE, C. J., Divine Speech in Deuteronomy, in: CHRISTENSEN, D. L. (ed.), A Song of Power and the Power of Song. Essays on the Book of Deuteronomy, Winona Lake, IN 1993, 375-393. LÉVI, I., The Hebrew Text of the Book of Ecclesiasticus (SSS III), Leiden 1904. LOHFINK, N. (ed.), Das Deuteronomium: Entstehung, Gestalt und Botschaft (BEThL 68), Leuven 1985. PASSARO, A., Le possibili letture di un libro difficile, in: BELLIA, G. – PASSARO, A. (eds.), Il libro del Qohelet. Tradizione, redazione, teologia, Milano 2001, 21-39. PENAR,T., Northwest Semitic Philology and the Hebrew Fragments of Ben Sira (BibOr 28), Rome 1975. RAVASI, G., Il libro dei Salmi, I-III, Bologna 1981-1985. SANDERS, J. A., The Psalms Scrolls of Qumrân Cave 11 (11QPsa) (DJD 4), Oxford 1965. SANDERS, J. A., The Sirach 51 Acrostic, in: CAQUOT, A. – PHILONENKO, M. (eds.), Hom- mage à André Dupont-Sommer, Paris 1971, 429-438. SKEHAN, P. W. – DI LELLA, A. A., The Wisdom of Ben Sira. A New Translation whith Notes, Introduction, and Commentary (AncB 39), New York 1987. SMEND, R., Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirachs erklärt, Berlin 1906. WRIGHT, B. G., “Fear the Lord and Honor the Priest”. Ben Sira as Defender of the Jerusalem Priesthood, in: BEENTJES, P. C. (ed.), The Book of Ben Sira in Modern Research. Proceedings of the First International Ben Sira Conference 28-31 July 1996 Soesterberg, Netherlands (BZAW 255), Berlin 1997, 189-222.

The true sage or the Servant of the Lord (Sir 51:13-30 Gr)

SILVANA MANFREDI

To contemplate a work of art is an experience rich with emotions and sen- sations which it is not always possible to characterise or explain. The same is true for whoever approaches the book of Ben Sira. Here and there spots of colour, lines which intersect and separate, and then return and meet. Flashes of light which appear and disappear. Areas of shadow and contrast. Lightness and heaviness of touch. Original strokes and added brushwork. All this is found in Sirach and makes it a minefield to explore and, at times also, in which to risk losing oneself!1 Just as for a work of art the perspective from which one views the whole is often decisive and altering it changes the play of details and of the light, so again when we approach the book of Sirach. As our optical prism here, our choice has fallen on the concluding pericope, Sir 51:13-30. The reason for our interest is based on the content: the presentation of himself as sage which the scribe offers at the moment when he takes his leave of his readers/hearers. Here we have a passage of personal introspec- tion which is offered as a life-plan and which in some measure takes us back to the experience of the prophets of Israel stimulating a comparison between these great figures and our author. We are well aware that this decision runs up against not a few and not insignificant difficulties.2 Comparison with the Hebrew discoveries tells us that the Greek redaction offers in places a new interpretation also with regard to the Hebrew.3 We must say immediately that, with the support of the by now almost unanimous scholarly consensus, we hold Chapter 51 to be an integral part of the book and therefore decidedly interesting for our study as a summary which embraces and illuminates, or is illuminated by, the other leading passages in the preceding reflections. Taking into account the real difficulty of establishing a purely Hebrew text to which reliable and sure reference can be made, we are opting for a

1 For the complexity and difficulty of the situation regarding the text and redaction of the book of Sirach, cf. GILBERT, Siracide. 2 We do not intend to enter into the merit of the purely exegetical discussion on the choice of text and its appraisal. All the recent critical work is concentrated in this direction and thus allows us to refer in summary to the recent MULDER, Three Psalms, and GILBERT, «Venez à mon école», and to the bibliography presented there. 3 Very interesting in this respect are the conclusions of MINISSALE, La versione greca, 259-261. 174 Silvana Manfredi playing field which can be debated if necessary but which appears to us to be legitimate. Our investigation will be carried out on the Greek text in Ziegler’s edition.4 Consequently, all the Scriptural comparisons employed will be not with the Hebrew text but with the Greek of the Septuagint which, even if not completely finished in the second century BC, can render more clearly the correspondences in the Greek language.

1. The internal structure of Sir 51

The Greek text of Sir 51 presents us with two different literary compositions: a hymn of thanksgiving in vv. 1-12; a poem, in personal and paraenetic terms in vv. 13-30. However, the redaction of these two is well organised and such as to stimulate an enquiry which presupposes a literary unity. The Hebrew allows us to catch sight of a third composition, hymnic and laudatory, inserted between these two. It is well suited to the organisation of the concluding chapter and its absence from the Greek text is inexplicable.5

2. Literary presentation of Sir 51:13-50

2.1 Overview of the textual situation of Sir 51:13-30

We may be allowed just a very brief reference to the complex textual tradition of the little poem on wisdom of Sir 51:13-30 on which we are dwelling. In the original Hebrew, our poem takes the form of an acrostic, a typical form for allowing rapid mnemonic memorisation. At Qumran, the kind of language used to praise the beauty of wisdom led to an erotic interpretation of the poem,6 which in all probability actually incorporates ancient elements of this kind which were later re-employed and softened by the pen of Sirach. The Greek translation of Ben Sira’s grandson introduces some variations on the Hebrew text and transforms it into a prayer of intercession which expresses the new perspective of a member of the Jewish diaspora in Egypt in times of great cultural changes.

4SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 62: “For the Greek text of G I and G II, J. Ziegler’s definitive Göttingen edition, Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach (1965), now supersedes all other editions and must be consulted for any serious study of the book”. 5 Cf. the excellent presentation of MULDER, Three Psalms, 171-201. 6 The close examination of such hypotheses is to be found in MURAOKA, Sir. 51,13-30. The true sage or the Servant of the Lord (Sir 51:13-30 Gr) 175

The Syriac translation, with some exceptions, appears to follow the Hebrew text closely. The Vetus latina, for its part, keeps fairly faithful to the Greek text.

2.2 Literary analysis of Sir 51:13-30 Gr

If we look at its literary profile, we see that the pericope 51:13-30 is organised as a unit, as a poem on the search for and transmission of wisdom.

2.2.1 The internal structure

It is structured basically in two parts each reflecting its own literary genre: the first, vv. 13-22, is a confession of the author concerning his personal experience as a man devoted to the search for wisdom; the second, vv. 23- 30, assumes the paraenetic traits of an appeal to the hearers-disciples to listen and calling them to reflect on and take to heart the experience of the sage (25:27). The first part is characterised by the strong presence of the “I” who speaks, with the verbal forms of the first person singular. It is full too of personal pronouns of the first person singular. It flows towards its natural outlet, v. 22, which signals a break from the preceding forms: the subject is no longer the sage but the “Lord”, the ku,rioj, and the activity of the “I” is subordinated to him:

e;dwken ku,rioj glw/ssa,n moi misqo,n mou kai. evn auvth/| aivne,sw auvto,n

The Lord gave me a tongue as my reward, and I will praise him with it.

This second section sees the literary connection between the implied hearers, referred to by the vocative “you”, and the subjective nature of the “I” who does the exhorting. This section too debouches in a passage in the third person singular:

dw,sei to.n misqo.n u`mw/n evn kairw/| auvtou/.

in his time he will give you your reward.

The echo of v. 22 is clear: the verb “to give”, di,dwmi, which governs the noun “reward”, misqo,j, as predicate of the object in v. 22 and as complement- object in v. 30. In the first occurrence, it is in the aorist, “given”, e;dwken, with reference to the ku,rioj; in the second, it is in the future, “will give”, dw,sei, without an explicit subject, but, in view of the previous pronominal references of v. 29, “in his mercy”, evn tw/| evle,ei auvtou, “when you praise him”, 176 Silvana Manfredi evn aivne,sei auvtou/, it must refer here also to the ku,rioj since mercy and praise can belong only to the ku,rioj. Furthermore, the two parts correspond quite well through the presence of common lexicographical elements, not unexpected given the intention of the scribe that his personal experience become the common heritage of all who hear him. The following are the lexicographical elements which occur in both the sections: “instruction”, paidei,a, vv. 16b.23b.26b.28a; “receive”, de,comai, vv. 16a.26b; “find”, eu`ri,skw, vv. 16b.20b.27b; “gain”, kta,omai, vv. 20c.21b.25b.28b; “a little”, ovli,gon, vv. 16a.27a; “delight in”, euvfrai,nw, vv. 15b.29a; “be put to shame”, mh. aivscu,nw, vv. 18b.29b; “soul”, yuch,, vv. 19a.20a.24b.26b.29a; “praise (verb and noun)”, aivne,,w/ai;nesij,vv. 22b.29b; “give”, di,dwmi, vv. 17b.22a.30b; “reward”, misqo,j, vv. 22a.30b.

2.2.2 The context

The context is the search for wisdom associated with the dimension of prayer as can easily be seen from the inclusion given by the initial vv. 13b-14a:

evzh,thsa sofi,an profanw/j evn proseuch/| mou e;nanti naou/ hvxi,oun peri. auvth/j

I sought wisdom diligently in my prayer, before the temple I asked for her. and from the final v. 29b in which it is stated:

euvfranqei,h h` yuch. u`mw/n evn tw/| evle,ei auvtou/ kai. mh. aivscunqei,hte evn aivne,sei auvtou/

May your soul rejoice in his mercy, and may you not be put to shame when you praise him, and again from the presentation in v. 22, central but concluding the first part concerning the self-presentation of the scribe, of the verb “praise”, aivne,,w, corresponding to the substantive, “praise“, ai;nesij, of v. 29b.

2.2.3 The semantic axes

Again, we can look at the semantic axes which run in a unitary fashion throughout the entire pericope and which suggest directions of interpretation. a) There is a temporal semantic axis which in the first part assumes the form of a merism, expressing the entire arc of existence of the man who dedicates himself to the search for wisdom: The true sage or the Servant of the Lord (Sir 51:13-30 Gr) 177

from my youth / e;ti w'n new,teroj (v. 13a), evk neo,thto,j mou (v. 15d); to the last / e[wj evsca,twn (v. 14b); from the first / avpV avrch/j (v. 20c).

And in the second part it is presented as entirely oriented towards the future of fulfilment desired for the disciples, coming together in the double mention of the final v. 30:

before the appointed time / pro.j kairou/; in his time / evn kairw/| auvtou/. b) There is also a semantic axis present throughout for whoever reaches the integrity of the lover of wisdom, expressed by means of many physical references: “my heart”, h` kardi,a mou, vv. 15b.20c; “my foot”, o` pou,j mou,v. 15c; “my ear”, to. ou=j mou, v. 16a; “my soul”, h` yuch, mou, vv. 19a.20a; “my hands”, ta.j cei/ra,j mou, v. 19c; “my bowels”, h` koili,a mou, v. 21a; “my tongue”, glw/ssa,n moi, v. 22a; “my mouth”, to. sto,ma mou, v. 25a. To which correspond in the second part physical elements denoting the totality of the person of the hearers: “your neck”, to.n tra,chlon u`mw/n,v. 26a; “your soul”, h` yuch. u`mw/n, vv. 24b.26b.29a; “your eyes”, ovfqalmoi/j u`mw/n, v. 27a. c) there is a spatial semantic axis:

before the temple / e;nanti naou/ (v. 14a); draw near to me / evggi,sate pro,j me (v. 23a); in the house of instruction / evn oi;kw| paidei,aj (v. 3b); is near / evggu,j evstin (v. 26c); d) there is also the hint of a vertical semantic axis;

high /pro.j u[yoj (v. 19c) receiving / evdexa,mhn – evpidexa,sqw (vv. 16a.26b), which speaks of the movement of the gift: the origin in God and the receiving by man and so embraces the high, towards which the hands of the sup- plicant are extended, and the low, which is the very person of the suppli- cant, the place of reception, but also of transmission, of the gift. e) we encounter a small/big axis which expresses the paradox inherent in the activity of searching:

I inclined my ear a little / e;klina ovli,gon (v. 16a); I found much instruction /pollh.n … paidei,an (v. 16b); I have laboured little / ovli,gon evkopi,asa (v. 27a); 178 Silvana Manfredi

I have found much peace / pollh.n avna,pausin (v. 27b); with a large sum of silver / evn pollw/| avriqmw/| (v. 28a); much gold / polu.n cruso.n (v. 28b).

It is precisely these semantic axes which determine the coordinates of the triple relationship: God, the giver of wisdom – the worshipper who searches for wisdom and becomes master of it – the pupil of wisdom.

3. The testimony of the sage (vv. 13-22)

3.1 The dimension of prayer

The first part can be still further subdivided into two small sections, articulated by the recurring of the dimension of prayer. In fact, v. 17b takes up the theme:

tw/| dido,nti moi sofi,an dw,sw do,xan

to him who gives wisdom I will give glory in which is found twice the verb “give”, di,dwmi, which will return once more at v. 22 which concludes the first part and at v. 30 which ends the second part. However, while these two other occurrences also present further similar terms, such as misqo,j, and both make explicit reference to the verb aivne,,w, in v. 22, and to the corresponding substantive ai;nesij, at v. 29b, here the intensity of the thanksgiving is expressed with do,xan didw/nai. This first part, in its turn, is marked by the centrality of the dimension of prayer. The opening v. 13 says immediately:

evzh,thsa sofi,an profanw/j evn proseuch/| mou

I sought wisdom diligently in my prayer.

Symbolical numerical value also has its importance. In fact, the entire section devoted to the description of the true sage is measured out by a threefold insistence on prayer and, as in the whole of Holy Scripture, whatever is repeated three times indicates the character of perfection that attach- es to a particular element. That shows how decisive the theme of prayer is for the writer. It gives meaning to the educational journey of the sage and is its natural and rightful outcome. It is this perfection of the sage which, through the mediation of teaching, is poured out on the hearers The true sage or the Servant of the Lord (Sir 51:13-30 Gr) 179 who, having become in their turn disciples of wisdom, rejoice in the praise of the Lord. This numerical symbolism leads to the underlining not only of the radical importance of prayer in the search of the sage for wisdom as an individual, but also affirms how perfection is oriented towards the communal sharing of wisdom which ends up in praise of the Most High.

3.2 The formative journey of the sage

By means of the analysis of the text in vv. 13-22 it is possible to try to grasp the journey of the wise scribe. First of all, let us confirm that the dimension of prayer is fundamental:

evzh,thsa sofi,an profanw/j evn proseuch/| mou

I sought wisdom diligently in my prayer (v. 13b);

e;nanti naou/ hvxi,oun peri. auvth/j

before the temple I asked for her (v. 14a).

The search for wisdom is based in such an attitude and this implies a journey, a way of life which pervades the whole of a man’s rational activity and does not take allow for any break: “my feet came”, evpe,bh o` pou,j mou, v. 15c; “I followed her steps”, i;cneuon auvth,n, v. 15d; “I inclined my ear”, e;klina ovli,gon to. ou=j mou, v. 16a; “I resolved to practise her”, dienoh,qhn ga.r tou/ poih/sai auvth.n, v. 18a; “I sought the good”, evzh,thsa to. avgaqo.n, v. 18b; “my soul grappled with her”, diamema,cistai h` yuch, mou evn auvth/|, v. 19a; “I was strict in keeping the Law”, evn poih,sei no,mou dihkribasa,mhn, v. 19b. And this, “from my youth up”: the emphasis is placed at the beginning not so much on the gift of God which comes first as on the will and ability of the man, who is already in possession of rational activity, to orient himself to the gift of wisdom with all his strength. The attitude of the sage departs from the humble awareness that wisdom is a gift to request and receive, but also from the certainty that what is involved constantly from the one who seeks is simply openness to the gift. This availability to wisdom in the concrete is actualised in “keeping the Law”. Keeping the Law, however, is inserted into a circular dynamism within wisdom itself: it is wisdom which teaches one to put the Law into practice, but, in its turn, obedience to the Law leads to a fuller acquisition 180 Silvana Manfredi of wisdom itself. This, again, leads to a life permeated and structured by that prayer which ends up in praise of the Lord. In fact:

I spread out my hands on high / ta.j cei/ra,j mou evxepe,tasa pro.j u[yoj (v. 19c) to acquire the gift;

I directed my soul / th.n yuch,n mou kateu,quna eivj auvth.n (v. 20a) to indicate the decisive orientation;

my bowels were stirred in seeking her / h` koili,a mou evtara,cqh tou/ evkzhth/sai auvth,n (v. 21a) which illucidates the full commitment of the wise man’s love. A first conclusion concerns the life of the writer:

my heart delighted / euvfra,nqh h` kardi,a mou (v. 15b); I made progess in her / prokoph. evge,neto, moi evn auvth/| (v. 17a); I will give glory to him who gives wisdom / tw/| dido,nti moi sofi,an dw,sw do,xan (v. 17b).

But the true conclusion to everything is the reply of God:

e;dwken ku,rioj glw/ssa,n moi misqo,n mou kai. evn auvth/| aivne,sw auvto,n

The Lord gave me a tongue as my reward, and I will praise him with it (v. 22).

It is not difficult to observe something which is held to be true by all, namely how, for Sirach, wisdom is representative of the whole theological patrimony of Israel. In it there meet together elements regarding the cult and the Law according to forms which will be examined in other chapters of this volume. But what, in the superb synthesis offered in Chapter 24, is presented as the self-manifestation of wisdom in the historico-theological realities of Israel – the Temple and its liturgy; the Law and its commandments; the teaching of the prophets – is transformed in this concluding chapter into an exemplification of the life of the individual sage who knows how to value the whole of his preceding heritage and offers it as the mature fruit of the wisdom he has gained. The true sage or the Servant of the Lord (Sir 51:13-30 Gr) 181

4. Exhortation to the search for Wisdom (vv. 23-30)

With v. 23 there occurs a change of tone and of literary genre. We pass to the exhortation to receive the teaching of the scribe. The section opens with the invitation of the sage to the ignorant to approach him and lodge in his school (v. 23). It closes with a promise which is consequent on the attitude displayed by the disciple:

dw,sei to.n misqo.n u`mw/n evn kairw/| auvtou/,

(The Lord) will give you your reward in his own time (v. 30b), exactly parallel to the conclusion of the first part (v. 22). The paraenetic genre is striking from the abundance of imperatives and verbal forms in the second person plural. Interesting is the new sage-pupil relationship which is articulated by the appearance of some verbal forms and pronouns in the first person singular which are inserted into the paraenetic context as reference point and as a model for imitation:

Draw near to me / evggi,sate pro,j me (v. 23a); I opened my mouth and said / h;noixa to. sto,ma mou kai. evla,lhsa (v. 25a);

see… I have laboured little and found myself much rest / i;dete… o[ti ovli,gon evkopi,asa kai. eu-ron evmautw/| pollh.n avna,pausin (v. 27).

We have said how the whole pericope is constructed on different semantic axes. They are present also in this second part which invites and exhorts the hearers to profit from the experience of which the author writes: in fact for them too, different parts of the body are put forward to indicate the totality of their being; for them also, here is an opening for the recption of the gift which comes from on high. At a first glance, the temporal and spatial axes are less visible. The temporal axis is that which, in the first part, connotes the whole of the existence of the one who writes:

from my youth up / e;ti w'n new,teroj (v. 13a), evk neo,thto,j mou (v. 15d); to the last / e[wj evsca,twn (v. 14b); from the first / avpV avrch/j (v. 20c).

In the second part there is no objective correspondence, probably because the witness of the total experience of the master of wisdom is projected wholly into the future of his hearers and only by representing itself as a significant examination of their time will it embrace past, present and future. More interesting is the new presentation of the spatial semantic axis. In fact, the stress on place: 182 Silvana Manfredi

before the temple / e;nanti naou/ (v. 14a), does not have an explicit echo. But there are other elements which come together to evoke the spatial image and they are these:

Draw near to me / evggi,sate pro,j me (v. 23a); in the house of instruction / evn oi;kw| paidei,aj (v. 23b); it is close by / evggu,j evstin (v. 26c).

This last concerns the wisdom which can be found. Now, between the local description of the first part: “before the temple”, e;nanti naou/, v. 14a, and this last affirmation of the closeness of wisdom, is placed the exhortation: “draw close to me”, evggi,sate pro,j me, v. 23a, of the wise scribe who makes of his own person a place of approach and thus assumes a central role between the two other locations, that is between the Temple and the house of instruction or school which leads to wisdom. We can affirm then that the master of wisdom is offering himself to his potential disciples as a place of mediation between the Temple, that is, the presence of God, and wisdom, the gift of God. It seems fair to say that the author is presenting himself – and through himself the figure of the true sage of which he has become the master – as a new locus of mediation, not explicitly liturgical, but certainly prayerful.

5. Literary contacts

The line taken by the scribe is in harmony both with previous affirmations scattered here and there throughout the book of Sirach, with other compositions of a sapiential character,7 and with other books of the Scripture of Israel. However, it is not our task at the moment to undertake an exhaustive study of this kind. Others with more competence have offered and will continue to offer precious contributions to the research on the literary contacts of the sapiential literature with the Psalms and the Law.8 It being the property of a sage to know how to recognise his own limits with grace, I will confine myself simply to observing some of the connections between the chief elements of our pericope and other passages of Sirach; then again to noting some of the more significant references to the prophetic literature in general and to one of the prophets in particular.

7 Cf. BACKHAUS, Qohelet und Sirach. 8 Cf. SNAITH, Biblical Quotations; BEENTJES, Jesus Sirach en Tenach; SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 40-45 in general, but he is much more detailed in the references which he gives in the comments on individual passages. The true sage or the Servant of the Lord (Sir 51:13-30 Gr) 183

5.1 Echoes of other passages in Sirach

Since our pericope is the conclusion, it is not unusual for it to gather together some of the previous matters to which it refers. We can safely say that many of the images and expressions are already present in Sir 6:18-37 passim:

18. te,knon evk neo,thto,j sou evpi,lexai paidei,an kai. e[wj poliw/n eu`rh,seij sofi,an. 23. a;kouson te,knon kai. e;kdexai gnw,mhn mou. 24. kai. eivse,negkon tou.j po,daj sou eivj ta.j pe,daj auvth/j kai. eivj to.n kloio.n auvth/j to.n tra,chlo,n sou. 27. evxi,cneuson kai. zh,thson. 28. evpV evsca,twn ga.r eu`rh,seij th.n avna,pausin auvth/j kai. strafh,setai, soi eivj euvfrosu,nhn. 32. eva.n qe,lh|j te,knon paideuqh,sh| kai. eva.n evpidw/|j th.n yuch,n sou panou/rgoj e;sh|. 33. eva.n avgaph,sh|j avkou,ein evkde,xh| kai. eva.n kli,nh|j to. ou=j sou sofo.j e;sh|. 37. dianoou/ evn toi/j prosta,gmasin kuri,ou kai. evn tai/j evntolai/j auvtou/ mele,ta dia. panto,j. auvto.j sthriei/ th.n kardi,an sou kai. h` evpiqumi,a th/j sofi,aj doqh,setai, soi.

18. My son, from your youth up choose instruction, and until you are old you will keep finding wisdom; 23. Listen, my son, and accept my judgement; 24. Put your feet into her fetters, and your neck into her collar; 27. Search out and seek her; 28. At last you will find the rest she gives, and she will be changed into joy for you; 32. If you are willing, my son, you will be taught, and if you apply yourself you will become clever; 33. If you love to listen you will gain her, and if you incline your ear you will become wise; 37. Reflect on the statutes of the Lord, and meditate at all times on his commandments; It is he who will give strengthen your heart, and your desire for wisdom will be granted.

Again, having spoken of the blessing reserved for the wise man who meditates (cf. Sir 14:20-27), the author, in 15:1b, links the praise of the Lord with the observance of the Law and the acquisition of wisdom:

o` fobou,menoj ku,rion poih,sei auvto, kai. o` evgkrath.j tou/ no,mou katalh,myetai auvth,n

The man who fears the Lord will do this, and he who holds to the law will obtain it (wisdom).

Fully in harmony with the redactional unity of the book, Sir 15:9-10 affirms that:

ouvc w`rai/oj ai=noj evn sto,mati a`martwlou/ o[ti ouv para. kuri,ou avpesta,lh evn ga.r sofi,a| r`hqh,setai ai=noj kai. o` ku,rioj euvodw,sei auvto,n

A hymn of praise is not fitting on the lips of a sinner, for it has not been sent from the Lord. For a hymn of praise should be uttered in wisdom, and the Lord will prosper it. 184 Silvana Manfredi

Much better known is Sir 24, in which the three components: law, cult, and prophecy, are finally sewn together, weaving a tapestry which, although taking up ancient elements, has something of the novel about it through the new centrality of wisdom which gives meaning to all the rest. Now, in the final part of this great chapter which contains – as is well known – the work of the scribe who becomes master of wisdom (vv. 30-34), the author states:

e;ti paidei,an w`j o;rqron fwtiw/ kai. evkfanw/ auvta. e[wj eivj makra,n e;ti didaskali,an w`j profhtei,an evkcew/ kai. katalei,yw auvth.n eivj genea.j aivw,nwn i;dete o[ti ouvk evmoi. mo,nw| evkopi,asa avllV a[pasin toi/j evkzhtou/sin auvth,n.

I will again make instruction shine forth like the dawn, and I will make it shine afar; I will again pour out teaching like prophecy, and leave it to all future generations. Observe that I have not laboured for myself alone, but for all who seek instruction.

According to these statements, the master of wisdom claims to be a true heir of the prophets. Instruction takes the place of prophecy and the mediation of the master is substituted for the ancient mediation of the prophets in a way which is quiet but no less effective. Certainly, the theological datum of the mediator recalls, in the Biblical traditions, above all in those of a Deuteronomistic flavour (cf. Deut 18:15- 18), the figure of the prophet, and, on the other hand, the figure of the prophet is precisely that which is kindled by the words of Sir 24:30-34. Now, the statement of Sir 24:34:

i;dete o[ti ouvk evmoi. mo,nw| evkopi,asa avllV a[pasin toi/j evkzhtou/sin auvth,n

Observe that I have not laboured for myself alone, but for all who seek instruction. appears in certain verses close to 51:27:

i;dete evn ovfqalmoi/j u`mw/n o[ti ovli,gon evkopi,asa

See with your own eyes that I have laboured little.

To be noted is the exact initial form of the appeal i;dete, “see” and the same verb evkopi,asa, “I have laboured” to describe the activity of the writer. Contrary to the classical experience of the prophets of Israel who receive a word from God himself, the emphasis is placed on the labour, that is, on the activity of the sage who is searching for wisdom. Once the fruit of that labour has been obtained, it can and must be shared so as to fill both space and time. The same idea is found again in Sir 33:18 which continues to speak of the experience of the wise scribe: The true sage or the Servant of the Lord (Sir 51:13-30 Gr) 185

Consider that I have not laboured for myself alone, but for all who seek instruction;

katanoh,sate o[ti ouvk evmoi. mo,nw| evkopi,asa avlla. pa/sin toi/j zhtou/sin paidei,an, while, in the following verse, 33:19, the leaders of the (liturgical?) assembly are invited to listen:

avkou,sate, mou megista/nej laou/ kai. oi` h`gou,menoi evkklhsi,aj evnwti,sasqe.

Hear me, you who are great among the people, and you leaders of the congregation, hearken.

5.2 Prophetic allusions in general

Certainly, as scholars have already observed, some expressions of Sir 5:13- 30 recall others of a prophetic flavour.9 We intend to confine ourselves here to what is suggested by the text of our pericope, always in the Greek translation. Isa 1:15 reproves thus the sin of the people:

o[tan ta.j cei/raj evktei,nhte pro,j me avpostre,yw tou.j ovfqalmou,j mou avfV u`mw/n

When you stretch out your hand to me, I will turn away my eyes from you.

The image of the hands stretched out to the Lord in his Temple appears here according to the prophetic style of rebuke to the people for a false attitude to the cult, not following a right way of life. By contrast, a positive tone is assumed in Sir 51:19c, in which the stretched out hands are those of the sage in his prayerful attitude of faithfulness towards the origin of the gift: “the height”:

ta.j cei/ra,j mou evxepe,tasa pro.j u[yoj.

Similarly, Isa 55:1 presents one who is invited to take part in the blessings of a new covenant:

oi` diyw/ntej poreu,esqe evfV u[dwr kai. o[soi mh. e;cete avrgu,rion badi,santej avgora,sate kai. pi,ete a;neu avrguri,ou kai. timh/j oi;nou kai. ste,ar

Come to the water, you that thirst, hurry, you who have no money, Buy and drink without money, and without cost, wine and meat; and again in vv. 2 and 3, passim:

9 Cf. SKEHAN –DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 576-580. 186 Silvana Manfredi

avkou,sate, mouÅÅÅ prose,cete toi/j wvti,oij u`mw/n kai. evpakolouqh,sate tai/j o`doi/j mou evpakou,sate, mou kai. zh,setai evn avgaqoi/j h` yuch. u`mw/n.

Listen to me… incline your ears and follow my ways, Hearken to me, and your soul shall live in prosperity.

Words which recall, allusively, Sir 51:24-25:

ti, e;ti u`sterei/te evn tou,toij kai. ai` yucai. u`mw/n diyw/si sfo,dra

Why are you still in need of these things While your souls are very thirsty?

h;noixa to. sto,ma mou kai. evla,lhsa

I opened my mouth and spoke.

By contrast, these words refer again to Am 8:11:

ivdou. h`me,rai e;rcontai le,gei ku,rioj kai. evxapostelw/ limo.n evpi. th.n gh/n ouv limo.n a;rtou ouvde. di,yan u[datoj avlla. limo.n tou/ avkou/sai lo,gon kuri,ou.

Behold, the days come, says the Lord, that I will send forth a famine on the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but a famine of hearing the word of the Lord.

It is also necessary to say, however, that the terms observed recall not the person of the prophet but those invited by wisdom as personified in Prov 9:3-6, and, above all, in Sir 24:19-22:

prose,lqete pro,j me oi` evpiqumou/nte,j mou kai. avpo. tw/n genhma,twn mou evmplh,sqhte to. ga.r mnhmo,suno,n mou u`pe.r to. me,li gluku, kai. h` klhronomi,a mou u`pe.r me,litoj khri,on oi` evsqi,onte,j me e;ti peina,sousin kai. oi` pi,nonte,j me e;ti diyh,sousin o` u`pakou,wn mou ouvk aivscunqh,setai kai. oi` evrgazo,menoi evn evmoi. ouvc a`marth,sousin.

Come to me, you who desire me, and eat your fill of my produce. For the remembrance of me is sweeter than honey, and to possess me sweeter than the honeycomb. Those who eat me will hunger for more, and those who drink me will thirst for more. Whoever obeys me will not be put to shame.

Sir 51, then, performs a hermeneutical operation on the preceding statements in Chapter 24 and also on the patrimony inherited from Prov 9:3-6: what before was affirmed of personified wisdom who offers her gifts now The true sage or the Servant of the Lord (Sir 51:13-30 Gr) 187 becomes offered by him who has already received wisdom within himself and holds it out to whoever wishes to discover it. He finds fertile ground for this in the experience of the prophets, but it is ground revisited according to the new perspectives of the sapiential reflection.

5.3 Contacts with the Book of Jeremiah

Taking a bird’s eye view of Sirach, we perceive many allusions to the book of Jeremiah which could be the starting point for a monograph, in imitation of that already carried out by Beentjes on Isaiah.10 Here, we shall limit ourselves simply to giving a few hints and only with reference to our text, postponing a more complete analysis to another time and place. However, the closeness of Sir 33:15-19 with 51:13-30 and the repeating of some data which we have already observed permits us to take up some suggestions for producing some correspondences and drawing some conclusions. In Sir 33:16, we read:

kavgw. e;scatoj hvgru,pnhsa w`j kalamw,menoj ovpi,sw trughtw/n

I was watchful to the last, like a gleaner after the grape-gatherers.

The unceasing search for wisdom is expressed with the image of the gleaners behind the grape-gatherers. This expression has the merit of re-presenting the temporal axis which is found in 51:13-30. The use of this metaphor is surprising, surprising because it is found in the oracles of Jeremiah. Jer 6:9 says:

o[ti ta,de le,gei ku,rioj kalama/sqe kalama/sqe w`j a;mpelon ta. kata,loipa tou/ Israhl evpistre,yate w`j o` trugw/n evpi. to.n ka,rtallon auvtou/

For thus says the Lord, Glean, glean as a vine the remnant of Israel: turn back as a grape-gatherer to his basket.

However, in the prophetic oracle, the image of the gleaner expresses an idea of divine judgement that is definitive and without appeal. This idea is completely absent from the text of Ben Sira who by contrast makes use of it to speak of the solicitous and vigilant care of the sage.

10 BEENTJES, Relations, 155-159. 188 Silvana Manfredi

Jer 6:10 brings us back to the “speaking-hearing” dynamic which articulates the master-pupil relationship in general and in Sir 51:25:

pro.j ti,na lalh,sw kai. diamartu,rwmai kai. avkou,setai ivdou. avperi,tmhta ta. w=ta auvtw/n kai. ouv du,nantai avkou,ein ivdou. to. r`h/ma kuri,ou evge,neto auvtoi/j eivj ovneidismo,n ouv mh. boulhqw/sin auvto. avkou/sai.

To whom shall I speak, and testify, that he may hearken to me? Behold, your ears are uncircumcised, and they shall not be able to hear: behold, the word of the Lord is become to them a reproach, they will not desire to hear it.

In Sir 51:25:

h;noixa to. sto,ma mou kai. evla,lhsa.

I opened my mouth and I said.

But once again, what is presented in the prophetic ministry with characteristics of rejection, heaviness and judgement is transformed in the existence of the sage into quiet positiveness and a task open to success. Other expressions also in Sir 51:13-30 lead in the same direction, recall- ing in their own way some of the more famous speeches of Jeremiah the prophet. First of all, the initial v. 13 is itself a clear echo of Jer 1:6.7:

e;ti w'n new,teroj

for I am a child.

Not in the sense of objection to the word of revelation of God in the prophetic text, but, on the contrary, of radical availability for the search for wisdom. Again, Sir 51:21 says:

kai. h` koili,a mou evtara,cqh tou/ evkzhth/sai auvth,n

My bowels were stirred to seek her; an expression semantically close to that present in Jer 4:19:

th.n koili,an mou th.n koili,an mou avlgw/ kai. ta. aivsqhth,ria th/j kardi,aj mou maima,ssei h` yuch, mou spara,ssetai h` kardi,a mou ouv siwph,somai o[ti fwnh.n sa,lpiggoj h;kousen h` yuch, mou kraugh.n pole,mou.

I am pained in my bowels, my bowels, and the organs of my heart; my soul is in great commotion, my heart is torn: I will not be silent, for my soul has heard the sound of a trumpet, the cry of war. The true sage or the Servant of the Lord (Sir 51:13-30 Gr) 189

The tenor of the content is, however, wholly different: while the prophet expresses the paroxysmal suffering of his whole being before the obstinate rejection of his word by the people and the imminent divine punishment of destruction, the sage takes hold of this lexicographical and semantic heritage to signify the complete and visceral dedication to wisdom. Again, in Jer 5:3 we find:

ouvk hvqe,lhsan de,xasqai paidei,an

They did not wish to receive correction; the prophet intending with these words to denounce the blindness of those who should have had a good opportunity to interpret events as wise teaching on the meaning of history guided by God and did not wish to understand. Instead, in Sir 51:16 the sage has welcomed wisdom:

kai. evdexa,mhn kai. pollh.n eu-ron evmautw/| paidei,an

…I received her, and found for myself much instruction; and can then exhort his disciples, in their turn, to welcome instruction, in 51:26b:

evpidexa,sqw h` yuch. u`mw/n paidei,an

let your soul receive instruction.

In Jer 2:20 is present the image of the “yoke” to express the demands to which it is necessary to submit oneself, the relationship of personified Israel to the Lord:

o[ti avpV aivw/noj sune,triyaj to.n zugo,n sou die,spasaj tou.j desmou,j sou kai. ei=paj ouv douleu,sw.

From of old, you have broken your yoke, you have burst your bonds And have said: “I will not serve”.

Similarly, in Jer 5:5 we find the same image with the same semantic value:

poreu,somai pro.j tou.j a`drou.j kai. lalh,sw auvtoi/j o[ti auvtoi. evpe,gnwsan o`do.n kuri,ou kai. kri,sin qeou/ kai. ivdou. o`moqumado.n sune,triyan zugo,n die,rrhxan desmou,j

I will go to the great men, and will speak to them; for they have known the way of the Lord, and the judgment of God: but, behold, with one consent they have broken the yoke, they have burst the bonds. 190 Silvana Manfredi

Also with regard to the presentation of obedience to the Law as a “yoke”, the prophet’s words serve only to denounce the lack of fulfilment, while in Sirach the tone is deliberately positive and favourable, capable of bringing about great advantages in the future. In Jer 5:7 we find a very strong rebuke expressed with the term oi;koj associated with pornw/n:

w;mnuon evn toi/j ouvk ou=sin qeoi/j kai. evco,rtasa auvtou,j kai. evmoicw/nto kai. evn oi;koij pornw/n kate,luon

They have sworn by them that are no gods: and I fed them to the full, and they committed adultery, and lodged in harlots’ houses.

It is striking that this text of Jeremiah has some familiarity with the expression of Sirach:

kai. auvli,sqhte evn oi;kw| paidei,aj

Lodge in the house of instruction which implies an opposition “instruction” – “prostitution”, certainly not something new as far as the sapiential matrix is concerned, and sees fulfilled in the life of the sage as positive what the prophet denounced in the conduct of the inhabitants of Jerusalem as negative. Again, the image of the hands stretched out in prayer, which already recall Isaiah, is presented in a tragic way in Jer 4:31:

fwnh. qugatro.j Siwn evkluqh,setai kai. parh,sei ta.j cei/raj auvth/j

the cry of the daughter of Zion who has failed and presents her hands; in which the prophet stigmatises the uselessness of the supplicatory attitude of Jerusalem personified who hopes thus to avoid the slaughter of her sons. Totally different and wholly positive – as has already been observed in connection with the link with Isa 1:15 – is the readoption of the image on the part of Sirach. But also Jer 17:22b-23 offers the cue for a correspondence which requires interpretation:

ouvk h;kousan kai. ouvk e;klinan to. ou=j auvtw/n kai. evsklh,runan to.n tra,chlon auvtw/n u`pe.r tou.j pate,raj auvtw/n tou/ mh. avkou/sai, mou kai. tou/ mh. de,xasqai paidei,an

But they hearkened not, and inclined not their ear, but stiffened their neck more than their fathers, so as not to hear me, and not to receive correction. The true sage or the Servant of the Lord (Sir 51:13-30 Gr) 191

Here are “to incline the ear” in the negative, ouvk e;klinan to. ou=j auvtw/n, the use of “neck”, again evoking a negative idea, in this case the hardening, evsklh,runan to.n tra,chlon auvtw/n, and, again, “to receive instruction”, mh. de,xasqai paidei,an, always as something that has not happened. Similarly, in connection with the lack of respect for the law on the liberation of slaves, in Jer 41(34):14b:

ouvk h;kousa,n mou kai. ouvk e;klinan to. ou=j auvtw/n

But they do not hearken to me and they do not incline their ears.

Again, Jer 42(35):15 e 51(44):5 present the same expression as recapitulation of the lack of attention to the prophets sent by God:

kai. ouvk h;kousa,n mou kai. ouvk e;klinan to. ou=j auvtw/n avpostre,yai avpo. tw/n kakw/n auvtw/n

and they did not hearken to me and they did not incline their ears to be converted from their evil ways.

All these links can be considered as allusions. In fact, the sacred author makes use of some significant terms to recall other passages of Scripture on which his education has been nourished, which, used in such a different way, open the road to new interpretations. In fact, in the prophetic oracles, all these images and expressions which Ben Sira uses have a totally different value. What is addressed to the people in the prophetic words as a denunciation of their non-fulfilment of the correct way of walking with the Lord, becomes now, in the sapiential presentation, positively realised in the life of the sage who precisely in this way can become the master of others.

5.4 Allusions to the Third Servant Song (Isa 50:4-9)

But, as we look at the particular details of our pericope, another observation strikes us. Among all the passages of the so-called Servant Songs of Deutero-Isa- iah it is the third which attracts the attention: Isa 50:4-9. It cannot be denied that here there are mixed together elements that are shared with Sir 51:13-30. Basically, in the Isaiah pericope the subject is the Lord. The activity of the Servant is not equal to that expounded in the concluding chapter of Sir- ach. Even if v. 22, the last of the section when the scribe describes himself, is concluded by focusing the attention on the gift of the Lord, e;dwken ku,rioj glw/ssa,n moi misqo,n mou, nevertheless the whole of the preceding materi- 192 Silvana Manfredi al emphasises the central role of the will in the search for and reception of wisdom. For the Servant:

ku,rioj di,dwsi,n moi glw/ssan paidei,aj tou/ gnw/nai evn kairw/| h`ni,ka dei/ eivpei/n lo,gon

The Lord gives me a tongue of instruction, to know when it is fit to speak a word; and because of this the Lord:

e;qhke,n moi prwi, prose,qhke,n moi wvti,on avkou,ein

has appointed for me early, he has given me an ear to hear (Isa 50:4).

The wise scribe:

e;klina ovli,gon to. ou=j mou kai. evdexa,mhn kai. pollh.n eu-ron evmautw/| paidei,an

I inclined my ear a little and received her, and I found for myself much instruction (Sir 51:16).

The Servant:

h` paidei,a kuri,ou avnoi,gei mou ta. w=ta

The instruction has opened my ears (Isa 50:5),

kai. e;gnwn o[ti ouv mh. aivscunqw/

and I know that I shall not be ashamed (Isa 50:7).

In consequence of his loving and diligent search for the blessing of wisdom, the sage states:

ouv mh. aivscunqw/

I will not be ashamed (v. 18b), and this too will be the destiny of those who, like him, decide to give a welcome to wisdom:

mh. aivscunqei,hte

you will not be ashamed (v. 29b).

The Servant challenges his enemies: The true sage or the Servant of the Lord (Sir 51:13-30 Gr) 193

ti,j o` krino,meno,j moi evggisa,tw moi

Who is he who judges me? Let him draw near to me (Isa 50:8).

The sage invites his pupils to draw near to him:

evggi,sate pro,j me avpai,deutoi

Draw near to me, you who are untaught (v. 23a).

Undeniable the link between the two passages, but also profoundly different the adaptation of the material through the sapiential reflection. For now, a kind of match, servant-sage can be established. Both locate their personal activity as a gift of the Lord. Both are concerned with instruction. Both have to do with speaking. Both adopt an attitude of listening. Both have the certainty that their attitude and their behaviour will obtain for them the absence of any form of dishonourable shame. Both convey an exhortation to draw near to them, but the one as a kind of challenge, the other as the better and profitable attitude. The differences are great, above all where the exemplification of the role to perform in obedience to the Lord is concerned . Sirach is completely lacking in any reference to any kind of personal suffering that has to be faced and undergone.

6. Conclusions

According to the literary presentation of the Greek text, Sir 51:13-30 is set as a grand recapitulation of the most important themes of the whole of the book of Sirach. In particular, our interest is concentrated on the person of the sage and on the modality of the personal search for wisdom. There appear in a grand synthesis the theological veins which belong to the theological heritage of Israel: the cult, the Law, prophecy, taken up again and actualised in the experience of the scribe who becomes both master and transmitter of wisdom, offering himself as the direct heir of the ancient prophets. Above all, we are struck by the links with the prophets and in particular with Jeremiah and the Third Servant Song of Isaiah. Indeed, our author recalls much that is in Jeremiah and there is a Jewish tradition which would like to make of him a son of Jeremiah.11 From Jeremiah he takes up again the mention of youth. From Jeremiah he assumes different oracular formu-

11 DAN, Ben Sira; YASSIF, The Tales of Ben Sira. 194 Silvana Manfredi lae which contain fierce rebukes of the people. But now, the sage transforms everything into a positive key. The heavy, laborious and miserable features that marked the existence of men called to the prophetic ministry becomes instead a joyful and tranquil experience in the life of the sage who for this reason can become the mediator of wisdom. That which the people of Israel was not capable of living and making its own in the historical existence in which it was called to witness to the faith – or better, had realised in a way that was exactly contrary to the demands of God – now reaches fulfilment in the perfect attitude of the sage and of those who follow him and so make him into a transmitter of knowledge and prayer/union with the Lord. It must be asked whether the particular allusions to the Third Servant Song of Isaiah do not go in the same direction. Among all the Servant Songs, the third is that which, without shadow of doubt, in the LXX, lends itself to an individual interpretation.12 On the basis of the references which we have observed, we could speculate that the scribe had the same aim as Jeremiah, a prophet whose vicissitudes and personal sufferings were far from being forgotten and who had become the mediator/intercessor par excellence in the popular imagination (cf. 2 Macc 15:13-16). This could be the reason why the scribe, who makes frequent references to the literary forms of Jeremiah, recalls him also in the personal experience of dedication to the Lord. Elements of suffering are passed over, whether those of the prophet Jeremiah or of the Servant of the Lord because they are no longer relevant to the new times and, therefore, to the new form of motivation. By now the sage has no reason to suffer for the Lord and his labour is small though filled with the abundance of the gift of instruction, that is, of wisdom. The suffering demeanour of the prophet is transformed and transfig- ured into an equilibrium of peace and harmony which, in prayerful communication with the Lord, pervades the person who searches for wisdom and opens himself with faith to the gift of God. Thus our wise scribe seems to be setting out for and knowing how to direct his pupils to that highway which the Christ-Wisdom of God will point to in fullness: “Therefore every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old“ (Mt 13:52).

12 Cf. GRELOT, I Canti del Servo del Signore, 43-46 and 92-95. The true sage or the Servant of the Lord (Sir 51:13-30 Gr) 195

Bibliography

BACKHAUS, F. J., Qohelet und Sirach: BN 69 (1993), 32-55. BEENTJES, P. C., Jesus Sirach en Tenach, Nieuwegein 1981. BEENTJES, P. C., Relations between Ben Sira and the Book of Isaiah. Some Methodi- cal Observations, in: VERMEYLEN, J. (ed.), The Book of Isaiah (BEThL 81), Leu- ven 1989, 155-159. DAN, Y., Ben Sira [Alphabet], in: EJ VI, 548-550. GILBERT, M., Siracide, in: DBS XII, 1389-1437. GILBERT, M., «Venez à mon école» (Si 51,13-30), in: FISCHER, I. – RAPP, U. – SCHILLER, J. (eds.), Auf den Spuren der schriftgelehrten Weisen. Festschrift Johannes Mar- böck anlässlich seiner Emeritierung (BZAW 331), Berlin – New York 2003, 283- 290. GRELOT, P., I Canti del Servo del Signore. Dalla lettura critica all’ermeneutica (CSB 9), Bologna 1983. MINISSALE, A., La versione greca del Siracide. Confronto con il testo ebraico alla luce dell’attività midrascica e del metodo targumico (AnBib 133), Roma 1995. MULDER, O.,Three Psalms or Two Prayers in Sirach 51? The End of Ben Sira’s Book of Wisdom, in: EGGER WENZEL, R. – CORLEY, J. (eds.), Prayer from Tobit to Qum- ran (DCLY 2004), Berlin – New York 2004, 171-201. MURAOKA, T., Sir. 51,13-30: An Erotic Hymn to Wisdom?: JSJ 10 (1979), 166-178. SNAITH, J. G., Biblical Quotations in the Hebrew of Ecclesiasticus: JTSt 18 (1967), 1-12. SKEHAN,P.W.–DI LELLA, A. A., The Wisdom of Ben Sira. A New Translation with Notes, Introduction, and Commentary (AncB 39), New York 1987. YASSIF, E., The Tales of Ben Sira in the Middle Ages. A Critical Text and Literary Study (in Hebrew), Jerusalem 1984.

A common background of Ben Sira and the Psalter. The concept of hrAT in Sir 32:14–33:3 and the Torah Psalms

JAN LIESEN

The occurrence of many psalm-like texts as well as prayers in the Wisdom of Ben Sira together with many hymnic elements in its language make it plausible that there is some connection between the Psalter and Ben Sira. The relationship between the Wisdom of Ben Sira and the Psalter has been investigated in various ways. Theoretically such a relationship could be understood as a dependency in either direction, in fact however, it is usually understood either as a dependency of the Jerusalemite sage on the Psalter or as a sharing a common background. The former approach recently has been followed by e.g. Marböck,1 who investigated especially the relationship of Sir with the beginning of the Psalter, Ps 1, and by Zenger who described in detail the many points of contact between Sir and finale of the Psalter, Pss 146-150.2 Others too have investigated a possible influence from various Psalms on the Wisdom of Ben Sira.3 The search for a common background was initiated by Jansen who ascribed an important role to Ben Sira in the composition of late non-canonical psalms, and this line of thought was carried on more recently by e.g. Reitemeyer,4 who sees the canonical Psalter as a kind of “new Torah” and who suspects that Ben Sira is to be found in the vicinity of the redactors of the Psalter; also Spieckermann5 came to a similar conclusion. The present contribution is to be situated in this search for a common background of the Psalter and Ben Sira. For this purpose the use of the concept of Torah in a selected text of Ben Sira, Sir 32:14–33:3, is compared with certain Psalms of which the content is focal- ized in Torah (and a series of its synonyms).

1 MARBÖCK, Sir 15,9f. 2 ZENGER, “Durch den Mund eines Weisen werde das Loblied gesprochen” (Sir 15,10). 3 E.g. on Ps 104 and Sir, see: HOSSFELD, Schöpfungsfrömmigkeit in Ps 104. 4 REITEMEYER, Weisheitslehre als Gotteslob, 139; see also e.g. 256: “Wer die neue Tora im Gottes- lob des Psalters aufsagt, ahmt jede Situation nach, in der die Tora am Sinai offenbart wurde – macht dieses Geschehen in gewisser Weise ‘reproduzierbar’, bejaht also in der Tora die ihr zu Grund liegende Schöpfung und Gott. Das hat theologischen Grund darin, dass die am Sinai offenbarte Tora letztlich in der weisheitlichen Ordnung der Schöpfung gründet”. 5 SPIEKERMANN, Hymnen im Psalter, esp. 152-155: “Das verwirrend bunt erscheinende Tra- ditionsensemble im Psalter erfährt durch die genannten Sirachtexte eine Plausibilisierung im Umkreis des Jerusalemer Tempels – nicht erst für das 2. Jh., sondern ungefähr ab dem 4. Jh” (p. 155). 198 Jan Liesen

1. Torah in the Psalter

The word hrwt occurs 36 times in the Psalter and 26 of those occurrences are in Ps 119 alone; other typical Torah-psalms are Pss 1.19.78. Psalm 1 is commonly considered as a kind of late introduction to the Psalter, by which the redactor(s) wanted to give a Torah-colour to the entire Psalter.6 By means of a macarism Ps 1 praises those who want to make the torah the centre of their life. The hw'hy> tr'AT is here not seen primarily as a body of juridical texts, but rather as the perfect expression of God’s will and providence, and Ps 1 wants to induce the reader of the Psalter to obedience and confidence. In the Psalter however, the meaning of torah cannot be established so unequivocally; its semantic spectrum oscillates between two poles. On the one hand, torah can mean “law”, understood not necessarily as the Mosaic Law but rather as the divine guide for life,7 and on the other hand it can mean “instruction”, understood as divine revelation including its historical manifestation.8 In Ps 1 torah appears as something desirable which a person should constantly appropriate in his or her way of life because God-given happiness depends just on this. This outlook on torah not only implies its normative character, but it also seems to imply that torah exists in some written form (Deut 17:19), even when its precise contents remain vague.9 Ps 19 dedicates a well-constructed strophe10 to the torah, Ps 19:8-11, in which it is understood not as a series of commandments ordering or forbidding something, but rather as a life-enhancing revelation of the divine will. Torah is not about obedience but it intends to bring about a personal relationship between God and a human being. In fulfilling the torah a person achieves

6 CERESKO, Psalmists and Sages, 209: “a spirituality of the Torah has been inserted into the framework of the Psalter as a whole, and is one of the foremost guidelines of interpretation of the book, a real key to its understanding. One example of the redactional activity that has given this slant to the Psalter is the placing of Psalms 1 and 119, called ‘torah psalms’ because of their emphasis on ‘torah’ or ‘law, instruction’, at pivotal points in the collection” (with reference to: DE PINTO, The Torah and the Psalms, 174). 7 Cf. MAYS, The Place of the Torah-psalms, 11: “Those who were at work in the final shaping and arrangement of the Psalter were completely committed to the torah as the divinely willed way of life”. 8 Cf. e.g. KRAUS, Theologie der Psalmen, 202: “hrwth ist nicht das ‘das Gesetz’, sondern ‘die Weisung’, die gnädige Willensäußerung Jahwes, die dem Menschen begegnet und ihm einen Weg absteckt, der weder zur Rechten noch zur Linken verlassen werden soll”. 9 GARCÍA LÓPEZ, hrwt, 619: “Über deren Inhalt [sc. d. Torah] sind aber nur vage Aussagen zu machen. Man könnte vermuten, daß es sich hier um den Pent. handelt oder um einen größeren Teil at.lichen Schriften. ‘In seiner Eigenschaft als Proömium zum Psalter allerd- ings schließt der Begriff hrwt auf jeden Fall, und zwar sogar in erster Linie, die Schriftrolle der Psalmen in sich’ (H.-J. Kraus, BK XV/15, 136)”. 10 ALONSO SCHÖKEL, Treinta salmos, 98: “una regularidad casi exasperante”. A common background of Ben Sira and the Psalter 199 his or her true destiny.11 Ps 119 is an complex literary composition in which torah is used along with a series of synonyms (tWd[e, ~ydiWQPi, hw'c.mi, hr'm.ai, jp'v.mi, qAx, rb'd', xr;a{, $r,d,). Apart from a short introduction, Ps 119 is a prayer of the most personal kind: “I” and “me” occur in it more than 240 times. With regard to the meaning of torah (always employed in singular!) it is remarkable that not a single pentateuchal law is referred to. Whybray has given a useful description of the characteristics of torah in Ps 119.12 First, it can be deduced from a number of verbs of which torah is the direct object, that it is understood as a written document, for it is e.g. “recounted” (Ps 119:13, rPesi), guidance is “sought from” it (Ps 119:45.94, vr'D'), and it is “meditated upon” (Ps 119:15.23.48.78.99, x:yfi). Secondly, another set of expressions portray torah as something which the psalmist is not, or not yet enough, familiar with but which is of great importance to him; e.g. he “waits for” it (Ps 119:43.81.114, lx;yI) and “longs for” it (Ps 119:40.131.174, baey' ba;T'). A third aspect of torah is encountered in the frequent request of the psalmist that God should ‘teach’ him (Ps 119:12.26.64.66.68.108.124.135.171, dM;li; 119:27.34. 73.125.130.144.169, !ybih]): it appears, however, that he is not after superficial or material knowledge but looking for a deeper understanding of something with which he is already familiar. The vocabulary used in these requests speaks of a wisdom piety; the psalmist wants to understand the “way” (Ps 119:27, $ra' WJh;), and what comes from his mouth is specified in Ps 78:2 as a lv'm' and as tAdyxi, both typical wisdom genres. According to Ps 78:4 the contents of this torah uttered by the psalmist are the glorious deeds of the Lord and the wonders that He has done. In Ps 78:5 the psalmist starts to describe these wonders. It turns out that the Lord gave a “torah in Israel”, an expression which is strictly parallel with an “tWd[e in Jacob”, and concerning this torah the Lord ordered the ancestors to teach them (~['ydIAhl., litt. “to make known”)

11 Cf. GARCÍA LÓPEZ, hrwt, 620. 12 WHYBRAY, Psalm 119, esp. 34-36. 13 Ibid., 36. 200 Jan Liesen to their children. In other words, the hr'AT of the psalmist consists herein: that the hr'AT of the Lord is an instruction to be passed on from parents to children (according to Deut 4:9). The reason why this instruction should be passed on by parents to their children is that their offspring might not forget and keep the commandments (Ps 78:7 tAc.mi), for the people’s only appropriate response to God’s saving deeds is to “walk” according to God’s torah (Ps 78:10). In summary: on the basis of the so-called Torah Psalms and wisdom Psalms it can be said that in the Psalter torah is understood as “instruction” in a broad sense, ranging from the torah of God that consists in the Penta- teuch, and that becomes then the object of intensive study, to the torah of a human teacher, who is involved in instructing people in the torah of God’s glorious saving deeds.

2. Torah in the Wisdom of Ben Sira

In the Hebrew fragments of Ben Sira the word hr'AT occurs 12 times, 9 of which are rendered with no,moj (twice it is translated with evlemo,jÈ and once with fo,boj); and interestingly 6 occurrences of torah are in the pericope of Sir 32:14–33:6 (32:15.17.18.24; 33:2.3; the others are found in Sir 15:1; 41:4.8; 42:2; 45:5; 49:4). Ben Sira’s most famous verse about torah is Sir 24:23. Even when it is not available in Hebrew, both the Greek and Syriac versions leave little doubt as to what the Jerusalemite sage considered here to be the content of no,moj / aswmn. For Ben Sira the no,moj commanded by Moses is “the book of the covenant of the Most High God” and as such it is the perfect embodiment of divine wisdom. This bi,bloj / arps consists of the Pen- tateuch, as can be argued with the well-known tripartite reference to scripture in the autobiographically styled description of the wise scribe in Sir 38:34cd–39:1. The wise scribe is known for his devotion to the no,moj u`yi,stou / ayjd\ aswm, the wisdom of all the ancients, and the prophecies. Even when the formation of the canon is not yet complete at this point, the “law of the Most High” / “law of life” in Sir 38:34d evidently corresponds to the Pentateuch, the books of Moses. For a more systematic evaluation of the extension of the term torah in Ben Sira, the passage of Sir 32:14–33:6 seems suitable, not only because it mentions torah six times, but also because here it is used predominantly in an absolute way.14 The general understanding, however, of this text, is problematic. Sir 32:14–33:6 e.g. has been labelled as “a loosely connected set of

14 Torah is used indefinitely in 15:1; 32:15.17.18.24; 33:2 and definitely in 33:3; 41:4.8; 42:2.5; 49:4. A common background of Ben Sira and the Psalter 201 sayings on being deliberate in one’s judgments”.15 There is a lack of agreement on the general meaning, which is reflected in the various delimita- tions proposed for the pericope. Nearly all commentators agree on Sir 32:14 as a beginning but e.g. Peters sees the end in Sir 33:3, Smend, Mack and Minissale in Sir 33:6, Skehan – Di Lella in Sir 33:18 (finding an inclusion on the basis of rs'Wm in 32:14a and 33:18b), and Segal in Sir 33:27. For the purpose of better understanding Ben Sira’s use of torah the problem of delimitation is not so relevant, since all occurrences of this term are here within a section about which all agree that it constitutes a (sub)unity, even when there is little agreement on its meaning.16 The text critical situation, however, offers a more serious problem. Of about 1550 extant verses or fragments of verses only 18 verses are found in three different manuscripts. Most of the pericope that we want to take under examination is among these 18 verses. Sir 32:14–33:6 is found in Ms B, E and F and, in fact, Bm contains so much text that it almost deserves to be reckoned as a fourth manuscript; furthermore, there are also at least 6 extra verses in the Hebrew manuscripts in comparison with the (older) Greek version. Minissale17 and Beentjes18 have studied all these textual data in detail and their analyses have been used for the following reconstruction.

rs'Wm xQ;yI lae vrEAD 32:14 (One) who searches for God accepts discipline hn<[}m; gyFiy: WhrEx]v;m.W and he who arises early to seek Him receives an answer. hN"q,ypiy> hr"AH vrEAD 32:15 (One) who searches for TORAH obtains it. HB' vqeW"yI H;leh.l;t.miW but a madman is ensnared by it. jP'v.mi !ybiy" yyy arEy> 32:16 (One) who fears the LORD understands judgment ayciAy @v,N and (even) from twilight19 he will produce directions. txok;At hJ,y: sm;x; vyai 32:17 A violent person perverts corrections hr"AH %vom.yI AKr.c' rx;a;w> and according to his need he stretches [lit. pulls] TORAH.

15 MACK, Sirach. Annotations, 1580. SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 397 gives as heading “The Providence of God” and notes: “There is little else that gives unity to the section, which contains miscellaneous aphorisms and comments about the conduct of the pious (=wise) Jew and the sinful (=foolish) one”. 16 I tend to go with Smend and Minissale, without, however, implying that there is no connection with the hymn on the duality of creation, since there is a marked opposition in 32:14–33:3[6] between the one who studies (the) torah and the sinner. For the purpose of this investigation 33:4-6 need not be considered. 17 MINISSALE, La versione greca, 78-89. 18 BEENTJES, The Hebrew Texts. 19 For the figurative meaning of “obscurity” MINISSALE, La versione greca, 81, refers to Jer 13:16 which is not convincing (describing the impending devastation by the Babylonians the prophet speaks of darkness, twilight, gloom and deep darkness as images of primor- dial chaos) and to HALAT, 690, which mentions only “(allgemein) Dunkel”. 202 Jan Liesen

lk,fe hS,k;y> aOl ~k'x' vyai 32:18 A wise person does not conceal insight hr'AT xQ;yI aOl #lew> dzE an arrogant person and scorner does not accept TORAH. rb'D" l[;p.Ti la; hc'[e aOlB. 32:19 Without counsel do not do (any)thing @C'q;t.Ti la; ^yf,[}m; rx;a;;w> and (thus) after your deeds you will not enrage20 yourself. %leTe la; tvoq.Am %r and you will not stumble over (a stumbling-) block21 twice. @t,x'mi %raob.W 32:22 but on your paths be warned. ^v,p.n: rAmv. ^yf,[}m;-lk'B. 32:23 In all your doings watch yourself (: be careful) hw"c.mi rmeAv hz< hf,A[ yKi for (the one) who does this observes the commandment. Avp.n: rmeAv hr"AT rceAn 32:24 (One) who keeps (the) TORAH watches himself (: is careful) vAbyE aOl yyyB. x;jeAbW and (one) who trusts in the LORD will not be ashamed. [r" [G:p.yI aOl yyy arEy> 33:1 (One) who fears the LORD will not encounter evil jl;m.nIw> bv'w: yWSynIb. ~ai yKi except in trial, but he will turn around23 and be saved. hr"At anEAf ~K;x.y< aOl 33:2 (One) who hates (the) TORAH will not become wise ynIAa hr'['S.mik. jjeAmt.miw> but he will be shaken as a fleet by storm-wind. rb'D" !ybiy" !Abn: vyai 33:3 An intelligent person will discern (any)thing24 hn"m'a/n< ~yrIWak. Atr"tow> and his TORAH is secure (believeable) as the Urim.

On the basis of the presence of imperatives in Sir 32:19-23 and participles and/or indicatives in Sir 32:14-18 and 32:24–33:3 we divide this pericope in three strophes of 5 – 4 – 4 verses. In both the first and the third strophe hr"AT

20 For the meaning of “to enrage oneself” see Isa 8:21 (the only occurrence of the hithpael of %f[ in Biblical Hebrew); BEENTJES, The Hebrew Texts, 58, suggests “to grieve, to have regrets” following the Greek metame,lomai. 21 Lit. “blow”, but see Prov 3:23 and esp. Isa 8:14 where @g

25 See DCH II, 473-474. 26 In Sir 32–33 torah is mostly grammatically indefinite; on account of this fact I prefer to 204 Jan Liesen

In Sir 32:16-18 torah is employed to elaborate a contrast between a God- fearing and wise person on the one hand and a violent and arrogant scorner on the other hand. Their respective character is demonstrated in a chiasm (vv. 16-17) in which jP'v.mi equals torah. The God-fearing wise person understands (and practises: practice makes perfect!) judgment (pentateuchal law) to such an extent that he or she is able to produce clear guidelines (for others) even when bodily eyes cannot discern anything. A violent and arrogant scorner distorts torah to fit his own need and heeds no reproofs (from others). In this chiasm torah is understood as pentateuchal law providing moral guidelines for human beings. The fact that torah can be distorted seems to indicate that it exists in some fixed (literary) form, i.e. as a book that can be studied. The first strophe finishes with a summary. Sir 32:18a summarizes 32:16: the God-fearer is a wise person who is able to provide instructions from what he himself has understood of the pentateuchal law; Sir 32:18b summarizes 32:17: the violent person is arrogant and a scorner who will not apply pentateuchal law, let alone accept corrections from others (cf. Ps 1). In the second strophe the centre (32:20-22) is dominated by imagery of the “road”, “path” and “walking”, “stumbling”, all of which are typical wisdom expressions for one’s moral choices and way of life. The verses before and after the road imagery (32:19.23) express the same reality in terms of “doing”, “deeds” and “working”, and, in fact, constitute a thematic inclusion. “Without counsel don’t …” corresponds with “observing (the)27 commandment”; hc'[e and hw"c.mi both are synonyms for torah (cf. Ps 1:1-2 where avoiding the council [and thus the counsel] of the wicked is synonymous with meditating the torah, cf. also Pss 107:11; 119:24; hw"c.mi is a synonym for torah in Pss 19:9; 119:96). Furthermore, the expression “do (any)thing” seems to correspond with “in all your doings”.28 The fact that the first strophe ended with a remark about not hiding insight and accepting torah, combined with the fact that Ben Sira switches here from third to second person (except for the final semicolon), suggests that he himself is this “God-fearing” (32:16) “wise person” (32:18a) who is now giving directions and not hiding his insight, and who is asking his readership not to be arrogant and to accept his torah! This understanding

read “instruction” in 32:15a. This reading is corroborated by the fact that the verbal form xQ;yI (he accepts) constitutes a small inclusion for the first strophe and parallels hr'AT with rs'Wm (discipline). 27 Curiously, “commandment” is grammatically indefinite. The combination of rm;v' with hw"c.mi occurs 28 times in Biblical Hebrew and only twice “commandment” is grammatically indefinite, viz. in Prov 19:16 and Qoh 8:5, both of which are content-wise parallels for Sir 32:23. 28 Perhaps the inclusion can even be widened to include also: “not enraging yourself” – “watch yourself”. A common background of Ben Sira and the Psalter 205 of the shift from third to second person is corroborated by an analysis of the last strophe (see also 33:18-19). The third strophe is connected to the foregoing strophe through a link- word: “watching yourself” (32:23a). Completely in line with the first strophe, which spoke of searching (the) torah (32:15a) and understanding judgment (a synonym for torah; 32:16a), this link-word is now connected with “keeping (the) torah” (cf. Ps 119:34). Aperson, who keeps (the) torah, watches himself and “(the one) who does this observes (the) commandment” (33:23b). (The) commandment stands for divine instructions as recorded in pentateuchal law; keeping it, therefore, is really putting one’s trust in the Lord. This trust in the Lord (and His torah) is not put to shame; however, this does not mean that one will not encounter evil, because that may and indeed will happen (cf. 2:1-6; 51:1-12), but when that happens, it is a trial from which a God-fearing and careful person will be saved. In stark contrast with the God-fearing person there is the one who hates (the) torah and will not become wise, but who instead will be shaken.29 This contrast determines the meaning of torah in 33:2 as a divine instruction, which is an essential part of a personal relationship with God. The third strophe finished with surprise: torah is used with a possessive pronoun that refers to an intelligent person. What an intelligent person is able to discern in a given matter is as dependable as the ’ûrîm! In other words: God cannot be consulted like a book, but you can consult a wise person instead, because he is as dependable as the divine oracle. With the descriptions of the first strophe the reader can fill in the presumption, viz. that such an intelligent person has diligently searched God’s torah and therefore now understands judgment, and will not hide his insight and, in fact, will be able to produce secure guidelines and counsel. In Sir 32:14–33:3 torah covers a wide spectrum of meaning. The first meaning of torah is: divine instruction, consisting in the Pentateuch, and as such it can be searched and taken as a guideline for one’s way of life. The second meaning of torah is: the human instructions which a wisdom teacher has gathered through his diligent study and putting into practice of the divine torah. These human instructions of the wise and intelligent teacher are so much in line with the divine instruction of the pentateuchal laws that they are as dependable as the ’ûrîm. Compared with the concept of torah in the Psalms the congruency is evident: like the psalmist (in Ps 78:1) also Ben Sira speaks of (his) human torah and links it with the divine instruction of the Pentateuch. Does this mean that Ben Sira took his inspiration from the Psalter or do both the Psalter and Ben Sira draw upon some common other source? In

29 The rare hithpolel participle (only in Isa 24:19) is reminiscent of the rare hithpalpel participle in 32:15b (only in Prov 26:18). 206 Jan Liesen the above there is no conclusive proof for either possibility. The (combination of some) expressions in all three strophes of Sir 32:14–33:3, however, suggest(s) that Isa 8:11-21 may have been a text from which Ben Sira drew some inspiration (see overview).30

vr:d" to search for, consult Sir 32:14a.15a Isa 8:192 hr"AT instruction, law Sir 32:15.17.18.24; 33:2.3 Isa 8:16.20 @C'q;t.hi to enrage o.s. Sir 32:19b Isa 8:21 %r

The appearance of so much vocabulary of this text of Isaiah in this particular point of Ben Sira’s work is no coincidence. Isa 8:16-18 is one of the classic texts to which reference is made in order to speak of a “school” or “guild” of prophets. In Isa 8:16 the prophet speaks of his disciples and of binding his torah on them! That seems to be the magnet which drew Ben Sira’s attention towards this passage, for he too is in the business of instructing disciples and inculcating in them a way of life based on torah.31 In fact, in his personal testimony in Sir 24:30-34 he connects his own life with the book of the Covenant of the Most High God, the law of Moses, and states that he too will pour out his teaching like prophecy (Sir 24:33). Like the prophets of old Ben Sira has disciples and passes on to them his torah. Sir 32:14–33:3 is another text in the book of the Jerusalemite sage in which we can detect some reference to his personal situation as teacher. One is reminded of the grandson’s prologue: “So my grandfather Jesus, who had devoted himself especially to the reading of the Law and the Prophets and the other books of our ancestors, and had acquired considerable proficiency in them, was himself also led to write something pertaining to instruction and wisdom, so that by becoming familiar also with his book those who love learning might make even greater progress in living according to the law”.32 In conclusion: is there a common background for Ben Sira and the Psalter? What we have found is that in Sir 32:14 – 33:3 and in the so-called Torah Psalms torah is used to designate both divine instruction and the teaching of a human teacher. This however, by itself does not prove a common background. The presence of much unique vocabulary from Isa 8,

30 In Isa 8:16-18 the prophet speaks of his teaching (torah), which will be preserved among his disciples, while Israel remains disobedient (cf. Isa 30:8-11; 30:9 torah). For the allusion to Prov 19:26 in Sir 32:23 see BEENTJES, The Hebrew Texts, 61. 31 This particular use of Scripture, which is neither a quotation nor a simple allusion, but in which one OT text dominates an entire passage, is rather typical of Ben Sira; it has been coined as “structural use of Scripture” by PATTE, Early Jewish Hermeneutic, 171; see also BEENTJES, Jesus Sirach en Tenach, 180-181. 32 In fact, the expression “life in accordance to the law” occurs twice in the prologue: h` evnno,mou bi,oj / evnno,mwj bioteu,ein. A common background of Ben Sira and the Psalter 207 where the same use of torah occurs in the context of the disciples of the prophet, makes it likely that we are dealing with a structural use of Scrip- ture. By this particular style the Jerusalemite sage indicates that he sees himself as someone like the prophets of old. Even when the prophets have died long ago Ben Sira still shares their view of the world. It has been argued e.g. that the shift from the temple to the Pentateuch as the central religious institution or authority is marked by the new designation “Judaism” replac- ing the term “Israel”.33 Since no such new designation occurs in Ben Sira and since the book in fact culminates in the glorification of Simon the High Priest and his service at the temple in Jerusalem it follows that for the Jerusalemite sage the torah is still something that has to be formulated and passed on, albeit not only by the priest and the prophet, but also by the wise scribe in a vr'd.mi tyBe (Sir 51:23). Ben Sira is still very much “temple-oriented” (Sir 24:10-11) and ”Israel-minded” (Sir 24:8).

33 STEGEMANN, The Institutions of Israel, esp. 156-161. 208 Jan Liesen

Bibliography

ALONSO SCHÖKEL, L., Treinta salmos: poesía y oración, Valencia 1981. BEENTJES, P. C., Jesus Sirach en Tenach, Nieuwegein 1981. BEENTJES, P. C., The Hebrew Texts of Ben Sira 32[35]:16–33[36]:2 in: MURAOKA, T. (ed.), Sirach, Scrolls and Sages. Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Ben Sira & the Mishna held at Leiden University, 15-17 December 1997 (STDJ 32), Leiden 1999, 53-67. CERESKO, A. R., Psalmists and Sages. Studies in Old Testament Poetry and Religion (ITS, Supplements 2), Bangalore 1994. DE PINTO, B., The Torah and the Psalms: JBL 86 (1967), 154-174. GARCÍA LÓPEZ, F., hrwt in: ThWAT VIII, 597-637. HOSSFELD, F.-L., Schöpfungsfrömmigkeit in Ps 104 und bei Jesus Sirach, in: FISCHER, I. – RAPP U. – SCHILLER J. (eds.), Auf den Spuren der schriftgelehrten Weisen. Festschrift Johannes Marböckanlässlich seiner Emeritierung (BZAW 331), Berlin – New York 2003, 129-138. KRAUS, H.-J., Theologie der Psalmen (BK XV/3), Neukirchen – Vluyn 1979. MACK, B. L., Sirach. Annotations, in: The HarperCollins Study Bible. New Revised Standard Version, New York 1993, 1530-1616. MAYS, J. L., The Place of the Torah-psalms in the Psalter: JBL 106 (1987), 3-12. MARBÖCK, J., Sir 15,9f. – Ansätze zu einer Theologie des Gotteslobes bei Jesus Sir- ach, in: SEYBOLD, I. (ed.), ~yyx rwqm Meqor hajjim. FS G. Molin, Graz 1983, 267-276. MINISSALE, A., La versione greca del Siracide. Confronto con il testo ebraico alla luce dell’attività midrascica e del metodo targumico (AnBib 133), Roma 1995. PATTE, D., Early Jewish Hermeneutic in Palestina (SBL.DS 22), Missoula 1975. REITEMEYER, M., Weisheitslehre als Gotteslob. Psalmentheologie im Buch Jesus Sir- ach (BBB 127), Berlin – Wien 2000. SKEHAN, P. W. – DI LELLA, A. A., The Wisdom of Ben Sira. A New Translation with Notes, Introduction, and Commentary (AncB 39), New York 1987. SPIEKERMANN, H., Hymnen im Psalter. Ihre Funktion und ihre Verfasser, in: ZENGER, E. (ed.), Ritual und Poesie. Formen und Orte religiöser Dichtung im Alten Ori- ent, im Judentum und im Christentum (HBS 36), Freiburg 2002, 135-161. STEGEMANN, H., The Institutions of Israel, in: DIMANT, D. – RAPPAPORT, U. (eds.), The Dead Sea Scrolls. Forty Years of Research (STDJ 10), Leiden 1992, 156-185. WHYBRAY, R. N., Psalm 119. Profile of a Psalmist in: BARRÉ, M. L. (ed.), Wisdom, You Are My Sister. FS R. E. Murphy (CBQ.MS 29), Washington, DC 1997, 31-43. ZENGER, E., “Durch den Mund eines Weisen werde das Loblied gesprochen” (Sir 15,10) – Weisheitstheologie im Finale des Psalters Ps 146-150, in: FISCHER, I. – RAPP U. – SCHILLER J. (eds.), Auf den Spuren der schriftgelehrten Weisen, 139-155. The interpretation of the Wisdom tradition of the Torah within Ben Sira

FRIEDRICH VINCENZ REITERER

How can one treat topics of the book of Ben Sira? It can be done in three ways: One can investigate Ben Sira from the background of a) its Bible, b) the intellectual history in its time, c) its world view and sense of life found in its theology? The title of this essay already gives in outline the approach to be taken. After this preliminary decision, further methodical questions are to be clarified.

a) In order to treat the topic – “The Interpretation of the wisdom tradition of the Torah within Ben Sira” – one can select a few central references to be considered. This is the most chosen methodical beginning. With this decision however it is not certain that one represents the Biblical author in the sense, he had wanted it. This is because some references which have a greater importance on close inspection than one sees at first can remain unconsidered. It is certain that the most important places must be treated.

b) Otherwise I have to collect all of the materials and present them. One can be guided by the statement, “daß der Autor im Gesamt seines Werkes nur sehr selten vom Gesetz spricht, was nach dem überschwänglichen Lob in 24,23 umso mehr ins Gewicht fällt“.1 However I can follow this statement only with restrictions, because I registered 35 quotations, in which Ben Sira expressly hrwt / no,moj mentioned. Naturally according to the number of references this topic occurs more rarely than topics such as the fear of God, wisdom or creation. But the typical kind of the siracidic argumentation connects several of the different fields very skilfully. That means that one would have to represent a large multiplicity of aspects – with the systematic treatment of all references including topics like the fear of God, wisdom or creation and that is not possible in a small article. One loses the overview because of the amount of material. Finally one must surely be concerned with the question of how Ben Sira combines the topics of the “fear of God”, “wisdom” or “creation” along with others.

1 MARBÖCK, Weisheit, 92. 210 Friedrich Vincenz Reiterer

It is undisputed that the law plays an important role in the book of Ben Sira. In order to examine this field, I have chosen the following topics. 1. Siracidic thinking contained within the preface. Upon examination, the following result is expected: the grandchild emphasizes the topics, which were the most important for his grandfather. This is the first result that we have. 2. Sira’s own ideas on world-organization and thought patterns. In this section one finds the central starting points, on basis of which Sira treats all other questions. 3. Sira and his ancestors – Respect for the tradition: in this section references are treated, which show, how Ben Sira feels obliged to follow his own Biblical tradition. 4. Sira and his Bible: in this section I examine, how far Ben Sira deviates with the topic “law” from his tradition or how far he follows it. 5. Conclusion.

1. Siracidic thinking: Information of the grandchild

In this chapter I want to show that in the eyes of the grandchild and the translator “the law” plays an outstanding role. I take the preface to the Greek translation very seriously. I recognize a deep seriousness in the starting words. Obviously the grandchild wanted to offer a concentrated introduction about the thinking of his grandfather. At the same time the grandchild presents those topics, which were located in the center of his ancestor’s considerations. There one can read that the grandfather, author of the wisdom book, was occupied very intensively with the writings of his ancestors: “My grandfather Jesus, who had devoted himself especially to the reading of the Law (no,moj) and the Prophets and the other books of our ancestors, and had acquired considerable proficiency in them, was himself also led to write something pertaining to instruction and wisdom, so that by becoming familiar also with his book those who love learning might make even greater progress in living according to the law (Sir prol. 14: dia.th/j evnno,moubiw,sewj)“.2 From here we can see that the grandchild observed with his grandfather that “the Law and the Prophets and the other books of our ancestors“ had been the basis for his remarks. It is clear from the parts of the Bible, in which (torâ, nebî’îm, ketûbîm) are mentioned that there is a high level of education and mental training (paidei,a) in Israel. Additionally, practical life was based on these parts of the Bible which

2 The translation: The Holy Bible. New Revised Standard Version, New York – Oxford 1989. The interpretation of the Wisdom tradition of the Torah within Ben Sira 211 the translator calls paidei,a and sofi,a: “Many great teachings have been given to us through the Law and the Prophets and the others that followed them, and for these we should praise Israel for instruction (paidei,a) and wisdom (sofi,a)“. The passivum divinum dedome,nwn points to the source, that both – paidei,a and sofi,a – have their origin in God: they are given gifts of him. The practical life basis is equivalent to: “living according to the law (dia. th/j evnno,mou biw,sewj)“ (Sir prol. 14). The prologue is a short comment on the work of Ben Sira. At the same time it is an interpretation of the grandfather by the grandchild. Ben Sira wanted to place the following basic statements in the centre: Knowledge – based on education, wisdom and law come from God. Educational knowledge, wisdom and law are linked internally with one another. No,moj is on the one hand the first written part of the revelation (Pentateuch), no,moj is on the other hand the general designation of the revealed will of God, which one can summarize as “tora, nebiim, ketubim [TaNaK]”.3 If one wants to follow the grandfather, then – the grandchild writes – he must strive (himself) intensively to acquire the entire revealed will of God and thereafter live according to the divine intention.The goal of the divine intention is achieved only in practical life. The grandchild understands his efforts as contribution that in the Dias- pora one can lead a life according to the comprehensive revealed will of God. “It seemed highly necessary that I should myself devote some dili- gence and labor to the translation of this book. During that time I have applied my skill day and night to complete and publish the book for those living abroad who wished to gain learning and are disposed to live according to the law (evnno,mwj bioteu,ein)”.

2. Sira’s own ideas on the system of the world and his pattern of thought

In this chapter I want to show that knowledge and understanding of the order in creation is the starting point to understand the Ben Sira’s type of argumentation. Ben Sira is deeply impressed by the sense and significance of the order in the entire creation. The teacher of wisdom concerns himself with this topic several times.

3 Recently MARBÖCK, Text und Überstzung, 106-107, emphasized the importantness of no,moj within the prolog: “Am häufigsten begegnender Wortstamm in allen 3 Teilen ist no,moj (1.8.14/24/36) als Ursprung bzw. Impuls (1.8.12) und Ziel (14.36) einer großen Bewegung von den Überlieferungen Israels zur Weiterführung im Buch des Großvaters und zu dessen Übersetzung durch den Enkel in Ägypten, von der Tradition bis in die Gegenwart”. 212 Friedrich Vincenz Reiterer

2.1 Mental modesty4 as a condition (3:17-31)

If someone wants to be successful in considering the order in creation, he must bring along indispensable conditions: the most central is modesty. The magnitude of God is overwhelming. Only a person who puts himself in the right position will have deep insights. “The greater you are, the more you must humble yourself ($Xpn lypXt !k: Ms C,5 tapei,nou seauto,n); so you will find favour in the sight of the Lord. For great is the might of the Lord; but by the humble he is glorified” (Sir 3:18.20). Whoever is modest receives the magnificent gift from God to investigate what God has miraculously made in creation. “For great is the might of the Lord; but by the humble he is glorified. […] Reflect (!nwbth; dianoou/) upon what you have been commanded“ (Sir 3:20.22a). The choice of the Verb !nwbth shows that Sira means rational and responsible mental activity. The natural environment is the miracle of the creation in Sira’s eyes. Now it is necessary to investigate creation.

2.2 The miracles of creation (Sir 42:15-25)

The miracles of creation are so various that they cannot even be counted by God’s holy ones (Sir 42:17). God is absolutely sovereign, he controls everything, he does not need anybody to instruct him (Sir 42:18a-d.21d). God oversees everything: “No thought escapes him (al lkX wynpm rd[n: Mas; ouv parh/lqen auvto.n pa/n diano,hma)“6 (Sir 42:20a). Ben Sira connects this capa- bility of God with his wisdom (sofi,a; [...] mkx):7 the wisdom is the first of the immaterial creations of God and was established first.8 “He has set (!kt, evko,smhsen) in order the splendors of his wisdom” (42:21a). Creation occured through the word (rmab Mas, rmwab Ms B, evn lo,goij, htlmb; 42:15). The result of the creation is a meaningful entireness locked in itself, it does not need further additions in order to make it work: “How desirable are all his works, and how sparkling they are to see! All these things live and remain forever; each creature is preserved to meet a particular need. All things come in pairs, one opposite the other, and he has made

4 Cf. the section “Das Niedrigkeitsmotiv im Sirachbuch“ in WITTE, Vom Leiden zur Lehre, 195-198. 5 Cf. Ms A in 3:18a: ~lw[tlwdg lkm $Xpn j[m; cf. Syr: Kcpn r[Za aml[b Brd tyad Lkb. 6 The terminological proximity between Gr Sir 3:22a dianoe,omai and 42:20a diano,hma is noteworthy. 7 Precisely in this place, the Hebrew text is preserved only fragmentgarily, but the remain- der of the words which has preserved and the Greek and Syriac authorities show that hmkx stands in this place both in Mas and Ms B; cf. atmkj. 8 Cf. REITERER, Die immateriellen Ebenen. The interpretation of the Wisdom tradition of the Torah within Ben Sira 213 nothing incomplete (kai. ouvk evpoi,hsen ouvde.n evllei/pon, tyalFb ˜ whnm dj arb alw). Each supplements the virtues of the other. Who could ever tire of seeing his glory?“ (Sir 42:22-25).

2.3 Creation and law (18:1-14)

The reference above connects God’s creation with his wisdom and stresses the perfection of his work. Each element in this creation has its unmistak- able and inexchangeable place. Sira treats also the size and sense of the creation in 18:1-14. Again the author is fascinated by the overwhelming and incomprehensible completeness of the divine work: “Who can measure his majestic power? And who can fully recount his mercies? It is not possible to diminish or increase them (ouvk e;stin evlattw/sai ouvde. prosqei/nai), nor is it possible to fathom the wonders of the Lord“ (Sir 18:5-6). As in 41:15-25 Sira differentiates between the fields for humans and the rest of creation. He asks which role humans have in the entire creation, whereby Sira places the objective condition of the existence of humans as part of creation beside those to the ethical conditions of humans: “What are human beings, and of what use9 are they (ti, h` crh/sij auvtou/)? What is good in them, and what is evil?“(Sir 18:8). Here one can ask whether Ben Sira means the objective basis for the ethical conditions or concrete manifestations of ethical behaviour?: ti, to. avgaqo.n auvtou/ kai. ti, to. kako.n auvtou/ and ˜whtwcyb anmw ˜whtwbf Nmw. The ethical dimension prompts the question concerning the link between act and consequence. The author emphasises the immense difference between the universal divine will of salvation and the small contribution of human goodness: “The compassion of human beings (e;leoj avnqrw,pou; acnrbd amJR¨ ) is for their neighbours, but the compassion of the Lord is for every living thing10 (e;leoj de. kuri,ou evpi. pa/san sa,rka) (Sir 18,13a.b)”. Due to the soteriological aspect one can ask, what human beings must do in order to come into the sphere of the love of God. There is a clear answer: “He rebukes and trains and teaches them, and turns them back, as a shepherd his flock. He has compassion (evlea/|) on those who accept his discipline (paidei,an) and who are eager for his precepts (evpi. ta. kri,mata auvtou/)” (Sir 18,13c.d-14). Now Ben Sira takes up the topic, which concerns us also, without using the terms no,moj / hrwt explicitly. The parallelism shows that a close relation-

9 One can ask the question whether Ben Sira would not like to see more strongly the accent emphasized, which one shows with “utility” or “benefit”. 10 The Gr and Syr translations are more precisely shown, if one does not write living thing, but human being. 214 Friedrich Vincenz Reiterer ship between these expressions is given. The use in pairs of the Greek words paidei,a and kri,ma is also given in Ezra 7:26; Hab 1:12; Sir 38:33d. In Ezra 7:26; Prov 6:23; Wis 2:12; Sir 39:8 paidei,a and no,moj are parallel. In closely connected thoughts kri,ma and no,moj are placed in Lev 26:46; Deut 4:8; 1 Kgs 2:3; 2 Kgs 17:34.37; 2 Chr 33:8; Ezra 7:10.26; Neh 8:18; 9:13.29; 10:30; Ps 88:31; Sir 42:2; 45:5.17; Hab 1:4. In 1 Kgs 2:3 one reads “the law of Moses” and in Neh 10:30 stands: “God’s law”. In the prologue treated above we saw that two different meanings of no,moj flow into each other: on the one hand no,moj as designation of a part of the Bible and on the other hand no,moj as God’s will used as the basis for practical life. In Sir 18:14 a further thought is added: the individual commandments. The basis of the following argument is that Ben Sira selects poetic expressions very consciously. Therefore one has to be aware that the statements about God in 18:1.2a and 18:14 (the beginning and the end of the literary unit) are connected to theological information:

He who lives forever created the whole universe; the Lord alone is just (dikaiwqh,setai)“ (18:1.2a) and

He has compassion on those who accept his discipline and who are eager for his precepts (18:14).

The providential care, love of God and the justice of God (e;leoj[18:13b.14a]; dikaio,w [18:2a]) appear here along with the creation manifestations of the divine will of salvation. Creation and the revelation of the will of God are connected in no,moj. Everyone can see them in concrete education goals (paidei,a) – these are mental and spiritual goods – and in concrete instructions (kri,ma), how someone should live – these are legal and practical goods. This connection is regarded as an indication of the justice of God. In plain language: Whoever wants to live according to the will of God, has universal, clear rules to follow, which are probably not only meant for Israel. God’s work, which reacts to the behavior of humans, is not coinci- dental or incalculable, but has its rules. These rules point to the loving providential care (e;leoj) of God. Each human can know the rules and behave accordingly. A further important thought was not mentioned up to now. Initially God in 18:1a is referred to as one, “who lives forever (o` zw/n eivj to.n aivw/na)”. The last words in 18:14b are “his precepts (ta. kri,mata auvtou/)”. Since Ben Sira, when considering details has the whole picture always in mind, one remembers automatically the law of life (no,moj zwh/j; vgl. Sir 17:11; 45:5). As maintained in the preface, living according to God’s precepts has its roots in no,moj (Sir prol. 14: dia. th/j evnno,mou biw,sewj; Sir prol. 36: evnno,mwj The interpretation of the Wisdom tradition of the Torah within Ben Sira 215 bioteu,ein). These cross connections show that God, who lives forever, in his concrete instructions offers the basis that hrwt / no,moj, makes life possible. One can see this concretely that human beings can lead a life according to the law, better: he/she arranges his/her life within the law (= I tried to imitate the Greek word formation e;nnomoj)

2.4 The effort towards wisdom (51:13-30)

With deep passion and cordial intimacy the wisdom teacher describes the way in which he acquired wisdom. He is almost drunk from the abundance, which he has been given. He is grateful to his teacher who led him to wisdom: “to him who gives wisdom I will give glory (tw/| dido,nti moi sofi,an dw,sw do,xan; Mas: ydwh !ta ydmlml; Ms B: hadwh !ta ydmlmlw)”. It is not clear whether God11 or another teacher is meant here. Ben Sira knows himself to be merged into a tradition. He owes his successful search for the wisdom of his tradition, which gives figurative like realistically a fulfilled and successful life: “and through me you will acquire silver and gold (kai. polu.n cruso.n kth,sasqe evn auvth/|; similarly Ms B: yb wnqt bhzw @skw” (51:28b). According to Gr, wisdom is not a gift, which one receives without one’s own effort. The disciple has himself to strive for wisdom. Sira struggles for it, as in a war he fights for it: diamema,cistai h` yuch, mou evn auvth/| (Sir 51:19a).12 Wherein now does the violent effort lie? What does the wisdom teacher do, so that one sees that he strives violently? Kai. evn poih,sei no,mou dihkribasa,mhn (NJB: I have been scrupulous in keeping the Law) (Sir 51:19b). Sira keeps the law with great care. Here one sees a close link between wisdom and law. Law is to be understood in the multiple sense: Law is God’s revealed will written down. Law is that to which I align the practice of life. Law is thus the abundance and sum of individual instructions, which stand or could stand in texts of the revealed will of God. Anyhow it is clear for the Greek author and the traditor of 51:19b that concrete fulfilment of the law leads to the acquisition of wisdom. Here the spirituality of the Gr becomes clear. Without doubt the important texts concerning wisdom 1:1-10; 51:13-30 link to the whole book. Wisdom comes from God (pa/sa sofi,a para. kuri,ou; Yh a[rm Mrq Nm am[j Lk), thus Sir 1:1 begins.13 It is the important topic at the beginning. Sofi,a does

11 SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 577. 12 NJB: “I have been scrupulous in keeping the Law”; NRSV: “my soul grappled with wisdom”. 13 Cf. in the present volume the essay of P. C. Beentjes. 216 Friedrich Vincenz Reiterer not remain however with God; cf. Sir 24:1-22,14 particularly vv. 8-11. God planned wisdom for humans: “he poured her out upon all his works, upon all the living according to his gift; he lavished her upon those (a) who love him (toi/j avgapw/sin auvto,n)” (Sir 1:9b.10a-b). In Syr (b) we find in 1:10b: “who esteam / ‘fear’ him”, (Yhwljd| Lkl hygsawO ). Therefore those who take God seriously acquire wisdom. Only recently Egger Wenzel15 stated that fo,boj qeou/ with Sira includes no aspects of fear. It is another way of expressing respect for God, which shows itself as affectionately delivering to the admired God. With this background it is understandable that the tradition splits up already from the outset into two directions: God gives wisdom to those who (a) love God, or those, who (b) take God very seriously. Sir 51:20.26 affirmed that Sira’s efforts were successful in attaining wisdom. In the same way the efforts of the disciples will be successful: “I directed my soul to her, and through purification I found her. I gained understanding with her from the first, therefore I will not be forsaken“ (Sir 51:20) and “put your neck under the yoke, and let your souls receive instruction; it is to be found close by“ (Sir 51:26). Whoever attains wisdom, has proved himself efficient in life according to no,moj (Sir 51:19b Gr). As this was the case with the author, this will also be the case with those, who fulfill the same conditions. Thus life according to the no,moj will be the way to acquire wisdom. One can describe wisdom as a special form of the presence of God. I would like to try a comparison with human beings: Human beings have “extremities”, which he needs for physical activity. God also has “extremities”, such as wisdom or the word (cf. Sir 42:15c), with which He wants to be active within creation. The no,moj as the rule of life prepares humans so that God can be active.

2.5 Résumé

Now I tried to understand the sayings of Ben Sira on the basis of important elements of siracidic thought and come thereby to interesting conclusions. When one adopts a modest attitude one can see that God arranged creation in wonderful co-existence. He achieves this order through his knowledge and wisdom. He also gave wisdom to humans. Wisdom is however no unconditional gift. In order to attain it, humans have to have the right attitude to God. It is through love and the respectful way in which one responds to God. In order to receive God’s gift, one needs to behave correctly. The behav-

14 Cf. MARBÖCK, Structure and Redaction, 61-79.77f. 15 EGGER-WENZEL, Better Faith. The interpretation of the Wisdom tradition of the Torah within Ben Sira 217 iour has a basis, i.e. no,moj. Ben Sira establishes close internal references between divine creation,16 the different dimensions of wisdom,17 the love of God for humans, the fear of God and the law.

3. Sira values his ancestors – respect for the tradition

In this chapter I want to show that Ben Sira is conscious that he stands in a tradition.

3.1 Observation of the ancestors – God’s wisdom and the ranking in creation (Sir 33:7-19)

I maintained above that one can see God’s work in the internal order of the cosmos: this statement is valid for the inanimate world, this applies to human beings. Sira chooses the yearly cycle from the inanimate cosmos as an example of God’s effectiveness. Actually each day is bright because on every day the same sun shines. But each day does not have the same meaning. As one could see in Gen 1:14, the year is structured by the “seasons (holy days)”. The seasons are attributed to God’s will. Therefore Ben Sira ascertains: “By the Lord’s wisdom they were distinguished, and he appointed the different seasons and festivals (evn gnw,sei kuri,ou diecwri,sqhsan kai. hvlloi,wsen kairou.j kai. e`orta,j); some of them he exalted and hallowed, and some of them he made ordinary days” (Sir 33:8-9). Again: the practical knowledge of God and his wisdom caused the differentiation. Also for human beings one may maintain that humans are not to be differentiated as human beings according to their external appearance. “All human beings come from the ground, and humankind was created (rcwn; evkti,sqh) out of the dust. In the fullness of his knowledge (evn plh,qei evpisth,mhj; ahlad htmkjb Mrb) the Lord distinguished them and appointed their different ways” (Sir 33:10.11). Again God helps to find the practical knowledge of the internal structuring. Obviously the same ability of God is meant

16 In the book of the Wisdom (Wis 13:5) one will read later: “For from the greatness and beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of their Creator” (evk ga.r mege,qouj kai. kallonh/j ktisma,twn avnalo,gwj o` genesiourgo.j auvtw/n qewrei/tai). 17 Particularly it is to be pointed out that it is stressed several times that wisdom was created by God, so that one keeps the central role of creation in view; cf. Sir 1:9; 24:3.8. On this basis one can learn, what wisdom means: Wisdom is seen (a) as created and is at the same time as a pre-created element, (b) as structure of God’s creation and (c) as the ability and the talent of human beings to recognize and check up deep thought and important connections and to make results in practical life. 218 Friedrich Vincenz Reiterer in 33:8 and 33:11. The words are: gnw/sij and evpisth,mh. Such examples prove that the alternate use of words with similar meanings may not be overesti- mated. Ben Sira’s poetic style is shown in the variations used. The alternate use of expressions with a similar meaning is therefore only with restriction a theological differentiation. Knowledge about the order in creation is great, which one sees in its arrangement and ranking, but Ben Sira knows he is not the first who deals with it. He sees himself almost as a descendant of those who had deep insights before him: “Now I was the last to keep vigil; I was like a gleaner following the grape-pickers; by the blessing of the Lord I arrived first, and like a grape-picker I filled my wine press. Consider that I have not laboured for myself alone, but for all who seek instruction (toi/j zhtou/sin paidei,an)” (Sir 33:16-18). He does not want to offer something new, but to offer his acquired knowledge and his acquired education to the people of his time.

3.2 The wisdom of the ancestors (Sir 38:34c.d; 39:1)

In 33:16-18 we find a personal confession of Ben Sira; but in the well-known section concerning the scribe – with regard to content similarly – he argues neutrally. “He seeks out the wisdom of all the ancients“ (sofi,an pa,ntwn avr- cai,wn evkzhth,sei; Sir 39:1a). If one asks now where the source for this wisdom is to be found, which the scribe wants to investigate, then one discov- ers the following: Ben Sira emphasizes the contribution of all vocations necessary for a society. If humans want to succeed well in their chosen occu- pations they are unable to diversify into other areas important for social life: “They do not attain eminence in the public assembly. They do not sit in the judge’s seat, nor do they understand the decisions of the courts; they cannot expound discipline or judgment (paidei,an kai. kri,ma), and they are not found among the rulers. But they maintain the fabric of the world, and their concern is for the exercise of their trade” (Sir 38:33.34ab). Ben Sira compares such work to that of the scribe. He is the actual representative of knowledge necessary for society: “How different the one who devotes himself to the study of the law of the Most High (evn no,mw| u`yi,stou)!” (Sir 38:34cd). Syr inserts 38:34c a reference to the respect of God: ahlal Ljdml. Instead of no,moj u`yi,stou Syr says, ayjd| aswmn “law of life”. Two conclusions follow from this: – Ben Sira considers it ideal when a scribe immerses himself in the tradition. There one sees a parallel: As well as God arranged the inanimate and human creation so the tradition of Israel has it’s internal order. – The basis on which a scribe draws his wisdom, is the law of the Most The interpretation of the Wisdom tradition of the Torah within Ben Sira 219

High. Here the written revelation is meant, in which we find the guidlines for human behaviour, which is arranged according to the will of God. Whether here we think only about the Pentateuch remains open.

4. Ben Sira and his Bible

In this chapter I want to examine how Ben Sira deals with significant elements of his Bible.

4.1 The law of the Most High.18 A new interpretation of the tradition

With the statement that the law comes from God (Sir 38:34d), Sira touches a broad stream of protocanonical statements. There are many references for the word connections ~yhil{a/ tr;AT (Josh 24:26; Neh 8:8.18; 10:29.30; Ps 37:31; Isa 1:10; Hos 4:6) and hw'hy>-tr;AT (2 Kgs 10:31; 1 Chr 16:40; 22:12; 2 Chr 12:1; 14:3; 31:3-4; 34:14; 35:26; Ezra 7:10; Ps 1:2; 19:8; 119:1; Am 2:4) and once ~h,yhel{a/ hw'hy> tr;AT (Neh 9:3). It is however remarkable that none of the references is translated with no,moj (qeou/) u`yi,stou. The word connection qeo,j u[yistoj goes back in the LXX on !Ayl.[, lae. In the protocanonical Old Testament hr'AT is never linked with !Ayl.[, (lae). Ben Sira deviates when using the phrase no,moj (qeou/) u`yi,stou from the usual mode of expression both in the Hebrew and in the Greek Bible. It is obviously a self-coinage, which Sira uses several times: 9:15; 19:17; 23:23; 39:1; 41:8; 42:2; 44:20; 49:4. Unfortunately only a few references, which one reads in Gr no,moj (qeou/) u`yi,stou, are given in the Hebrew version. One can only refer to !wyl[ trwt (Sir 41:8; 42:2; 49:4); cf. also !wyl[ twcm19 (Sir 44:20). The few examples show that one can say that the basic phrase was !wyl[ hrwt.20 The translation in the LXX of the name hwhy with ku,rioj also points to this. This precaution cannot have been obligatory in Palestine such as is the case in later texts, which more or less originate from the same time as Ben Sira. I assume that the use of !wyl[ in place of hwhy was knowingly used by Ben Sira to fulfil a theological intention. Appropriately Kaiser says that Sira

18 Cf. HAYWARD, El Elyon. 19 The observations above show that within different words of the cognate field the choice of an expression is not decisive. The selection offers a different aspect, not a fundamen- tally new topic. Consequently: hwcm is in individual cases a stylistic variant to hrwt. Per- haps the reason lies in the fact that one began to avoid the name of God, i.e. hwhy. 20 According to 44:20a hwcm could have been the starting point. That is unusual. 220 Friedrich Vincenz Reiterer intends to keep to the fundamental separation between God and the world.21 In this sense !wyl[ / u`yi,stoj points to the siracidic conception of God and is one of the principles in his faith. God is and remains absolutely the most high one. More than in the wisdom and in the creation God goes by means of his (written) hrwt into the valleys of human beings. Humans can keep the hrwt or not. He can even revolt against hrwt. Human being is able “to deal with God” insofar he is present in his law. Inspite of the potential “manoeuverability” by humans, the Deity of God is not affected in any way by human behaviour: the name !wyl[/ u`yi,stoj emphasizes God’s sovereign superiority. To understand the connection to his own tradition we can summarise: Ben Sira deals with the central topic freely. He cannot be understood as a liberal or loose theologian. The reason of the change seems to lie in the intentions found within his chosen terminology. In contrast to the philosophi- cally wide-spread liberalism and relativeness of the importance of the faith Ben Sira places the significance of God into the centre. This God is superi- or to all human considerations and actions, as the creator is in contrast to his creation; cf. Sir 33:10: “All human beings come from the ground (avpo. evda,fouj), and humankind was created (evkti,sqh) out of the dust (kai. evk gh/j)”, and Sir 18:7: “When human beings have finished (suntele,sh|), they are just beginning (a;rcetai), and when they stopp (pau,shtai), they are still per- plexed (avporhqh,setai)”. Because man is limited, he cannot discover the meaning of life by himself.

4.2 The transmission of the hrwt

Ben Sira does not tread new ground at all when he writes that hrwt / no,moj are passed on by Moses.

4.2.1 The transmission of hrwt by Moses

The criteria are various, as Moses is described as a mediator of the hrwt in the protocanonical Bible. Moses wrote down the hrwt (cf. Deut 31:9), he put it autoritatively like God (cf. Deut 4:44), one can say, that he ordered, instructed her (cf. Num 31:21; Deut 33:4). In the end one can speak of hv,mo tr;AT (Josh 8:31.32; 23:6; 1 Kgs 2:3; 2 Kgs 14:6; 23:25; 2 Chr 23:18; 30:16; Ezra 7:6; Neh 8:1; Dan 9:11.13), because it was brought by Moses (hv,mo-dy:B., Lev 26:46; 2 Chr 33:8; 2 Chr 34:14; Neh 8:14; 10:30). The transmission by Moses is how-

21 KAISER, Reichtum, 15: “(an) der fundamentalen Trennung zwischen Gott und Welt (ist) unbedingt festzuhalten“. The interpretation of the Wisdom tradition of the Torah within Ben Sira 221 ever only possible, because he had a special and uniquely close relationship to God. He is considered as the servant of JHWH (hw'hy>-db,[, hv,mo, Jos 22:5; yDIb.[; hv,mo, Jos 1:7; 2 Kgs 21:8), as the servant of Elohim (~yhil{a/h'-db,[,, Neh 10:30; Dan 9:11; ) or simply as a man of God (~yhil{a/h'-vyai hv,mo, 2 Chr 30:16; Ezra 3:2). Moses is treated relatively briefly in the praise of the great ancestors (Sir 45:1-5).22 Sira connects some central topics with Moses: God let miracles take place through him, God elected Moses because of his modesty (cf. also above 2.1), God revealed himself to Moses and entrusted the commandments to him. “He allowed him to hear his voice, and led him into the dark cloud, and gave him the commandments (hwcm / evntola,j) face to face, the law of life (~yyx trwt / no,mon zwh/j) and knowledge (hnwbtw/ kai. evpisth,mhj), so that he might teach Jacob the covenant (wyqx / diaqh,khn), and Israel his decrees (wyjpXmw / kri,mata)” (Sir 45:5). The revealing procedure exists in a personal experience and in the fact, that Moses received from God the ~yyx trwt (no,moj zwh/j).23 Now some remarks on the quotation: – in the term hwcm the aspect of obligation to God’s revealed will is contained. Human beings are called to respond to the revelation of God by leading a life pleasing to Him. – God’s revealed will is also called hrwt. Thus God is shown as a teacher24 (cf. hry, to teach). – One specifies more exactly the hrwt now: First it is more closely defined by means of ~yyx. The hrwt obtain the life. One can understand this in two ways: (a) the hrwt is even the source of life, or (b) the hrwt achieves the goal, that whoever keeps hrwt receives life. If the hrwt can be understood as the source of life, then what Deut 30:20 says of JHWH, is attributed to her: “^ym,y" %r,aow> ^yY

22 WITTE, “Mose, sein Andenken sei zum Segen”. 23 Cf. REITERER, Neue Akzente. 24 There are no patterns for these formulations. About the combination of hr"AT, hw"c.mi, ~yYIx; %r,d,, rs'Wm, tAxk.AT and rs'Wm cf. Prov 6:20.22 (the teaching of the parents). In Prov 13:14 we read, that the ~k'x' tr;AT is a fountain of life ~yYIx; rAqm.. 222 Friedrich Vincenz Reiterer

The syntagm hnwbtw ~yyx trwt realize themselves concretely in the individual commandments, which Moses teaches his people (45:5ef).25 Moses is therefore a teacher of his people used by God, who has to inform them about necessary single rules. These rules lead to knowledge and abundant life.

4.2.2. The transmission of hrwt by Aaron

Ben Sira is occupied in more detail with Aaron than with Moses (45:6-22). He describes his clothes, his external appearance and his obligations in the cult, carefully. In the description Ben Sira mentions rather unexpectedly that God lent the authority to Aaron over hrwt: “In his commandments (wytwcm / evn evntolai/j) he gave him authority (whlyXmyw / evxousi,an) and statutes (qwxb / evn diaqh,kaij) and judgments (jpXmw / krima,twn), to teach (dmlyw / dida,xai) Jacob the testimonies (qx / ta. martu,ria), and to enlighten ( - / fwti,sai) Israel with his law (jpXm / evn no,mw|)” (Sir 45:17). He stresses more strongly than in connection with Moses that Aaron and his descendants were equipped with authority, in order to instruct the people about wisdom. We see here that the priests in Ben Sira’s eyes play an important role in the transmission of the divine revelation and take over Moses’ task. It is noticeable that Ben Sira does not use the term hrwt here. I ask whether this fact suggests that in the comprehensive sense only Moses can be named as an intermediary of the divine hrwt. Then do the priests pass on the many differentiated single commandments.

4.2.3 The law which Moses gave us (Sir 24:23)

In Sir 24:2326 we read: “All this is the book of the covenant of the Most High God, the law which Moses commanded us as an inheritance for the congregations of Jacob (tau/ta pa,nta bi,bloj diaqh,khj qeou/ u`yi,stou no,mon o]n evnetei,lato h`mi/n Mwush/j klhronomi,an sunagwgai/j Iakwb”. Some discuss, whether the tricolon is original in Gr, or whether one must separate bi,bloj

25 Cf. REITERER, Neue Akzente 1.1. 26 For the very frequently treated chapter some reference works are to be indicated in alphabetical order: BLENKINSOPP, Wisdom and Law, 130-158; CONTI, Origine divina della Sapien- za; GILBERT, L’éloge de la sagesse; GÖTTSBERGER, Die göttliche Weisheit, 18-47; JOLLEY, The Function of Torah, 125-150; LANG, Frau Weisheit, 152-154; MURPHY, Wisdom Literature, 103-106; PIÉ Y NINOT, La palabra de Dios, 147-191; RICKENBACHER, Weisheitsperikopen, 111-172; ROGERS, Wisdom and Creation; SANDERS, On Ben Sira 24, 73-78; SCHIMANOWSKI, Weisheit und Messias, 38-61; SCHÜNGEL-STRAUMANN, Die göttliche Weisheit; SEGALLA, La sapienza e la Legge, 38-44; SHEPPARD, Wisdom as a Hermeneutical Construct, 19-71; SKEHAN, Structures in Poems on Wisdom; WIED, Der Auferstehungsglaube, 161-168; 309-339. The interpretation of the Wisdom tradition of the Torah within Ben Sira 223 diaqh,khj qeou/ u`yi,stou for formal reasons as the later parenthesis.27 There is no time here to discuss the question extensively. My observations show that nowadays we don’t make literarcritical operations with the earlier optimism and we don’t take liberties with the transmitted text.28 The problem of the parenthesis is not crucial for the treatment of the present question about the meaning of hrwt. According to Sir 24:23 it is clear that Moses instructed no,moj. The phraseology contains a frequently expressed thought: the verb evnte,llomai translates almost regularly29 the word hwc. It is completely alike whether JHWH, Moses or another subject – it occurs rarely – gives the instruction (cf. Deut 32:46; 33:4; Josh 1:7; 8:31; 22:5; 2 Kgs 14:6; 17:13.34; 21:8 (twice); 2 Chr 16:40; 25:4; 33:8; Neh 8:1.14; 9:14; Ps 78:5; Mal 3:22; also Jer 32:23). In connection with technical terms of the legal terminology also an ingenious translator, such as the grandchild is, cannot deviate from the fixed mode of expression. The different formulations, with which Moses orders hrwt (hwc; Deut 33:4; Jos 1:7; 8:31; 22:5) or God expresses the obligation (hwc) and nevertheless we read hv,mo-tr;AT or dy:B. hv,mo (2 Kgs 14:6; 2 Chr 25:4; 33:8; Neh 8:1.14; 9:14; Mal 3:22), refer to a very close combination of JHWH and Moses in the context of hrwt. In 2 Kgs 14:6 the internal connection is formulated clearly: hw"hy> hW"ci-rv,a] hv,mo-tr;AT rp,seB. bWtK', “according to what is written in the book of the law of Moses, where / which the Lord commanded …”. Sira means a written version, which is called hv,mo-tr;AT rp,se (Jos 8:31; 23:6; 2 Kgs 14:6; Neh 8:1; cf. Deut 31:24; 2 Chr 34:14). Due to this observation the singular30 formulation in the Bible, bi,bloj diaqh,khj – if not anyhow original here – is a correct interpretation.31 It is unclear whether no,moj means a special part of the Bible, as occurs in the prologue of Ben Sira. As titles hr"AT can be understood in 2 Chr 2:4: hv,mo rp,seB. hr"ATB.. bWtK' (“written in the tora, [this is] in the Book of Moses”).

27 So ZENNER, Zwei Weisheitslieder, 554; PETERS, Das Buch Jesus Sirach, 203; MIDDENDORP, Die Stellung, 59 and 90; RICKENBACHER, Weisheitsperikopen, 124 and 127;MARBÖCK, Gesetz und Weisheit, 8 (= Gottes Weisheit, 59). 28 Cf. REITERER, Gott, 138. 29 For the translation of hwc in Num 19:2; 31:21 the verb sunta,ssw is selected. 30 The uniqueness of formulation calls for caution if one looks for the starting point; it seems, with a bit of difficulty, possible that e.g. an assumption from Bar 3-4 was made, if there is no similar formulation. 31 Correctly Marböck says that the remaining Sirazidic diaqh,kh-references do not mean a written law; cf. MARBÖCK, Die «Geschichte Israels» (= Gottes Weisheit, 103-123). 224 Friedrich Vincenz Reiterer

4.2.4 Wisdom and law – Gifts for Israel

Sir 24:23 begins with tau/ta pa,nta. These words presuppose a preceding context. In Sir 24:1-22 wisdom speaks of itself, about its relationship to God as its creator, of its presence in inanimate objects, about God’s instruction to settle down in Israel: “Then the Creator of all things gave me a command, and my Creator chose the place for my tent. He said, ‘Make your dwelling in Jacob, and in Israel receive your inheritance’” (Sir 24:8). The author refers a second time to the relation to Israel and especially to Jerusalem: “Thus in the beloved city he gave me a resting place, and in Jerusalem was my domain. I took root in an honoured people, in the portion of the Lord, his heritage” (Sir 24:11-12). Sirach looks back with the keyword inheritance (Sir 24:8: kataklhronome,w / inheritance; 24:12: klhronomi,a / heritage) into the past and forward into the future: the inheritance was passed on by an ancestor. The inheritance has also a future aspect, since the inheritance comes only then to the goal if it is continued to give again to someone.32 This aspect is important for Ben Sira, since it becomes clear that what happened once with Moses has concrete importance for Ben Sira’s time. With the word inheritance one thinks also of a gift. For the inheritance actually the receiver of the inheritance did nothing, he can deal with it only later, if he got it from the testator. The evenly stated thoughts are summarized by means of tau/ta pa,nta and delivered in the “book of the covenant of the Most High God, the law (no,moj) that Moses commanded us as an inheritance for the congregations of Jacob” (Sir 24:23). This book appears therefore as a model collection of examples planned by God. As a valuable inheritance it is a material, from which one can learn and which one has to retain for future generations. Therefore God’s will (no,moj) passed on by Moses has such importance because it contains the sofi,a / wisdom: “It overflows, like the Pishon, with wisdom, and like the Tigris at the time of the first fruits” (Sir 24:25). I see the comparison with the splendid rivers Pishon33 and Eufrat as a reference to the abundance and the impossibility of such a river drying up. It certainly brings fruits (the time of the first fruits). Sira’s listeners should learn from it, that God offers abundance in theoretical, as well as practical knowledge to those who listen to His word. The water is a reference to the liquid necessary for life. In the same way that water is necessary for life, so too is wisdom found in no,moj (o]n evnetei,lato h`mi/n Mwush/j) necessary. Although one can read in examinations of this passage that an identi-

32 GILBERT, La sapienza si offre. 33 The symbol works, independently of whether someone knows, which river it concerns. The interpretation of the Wisdom tradition of the Torah within Ben Sira 225 fication was made here by sofi,a and no,moj,34 I see an important difference. Because of wisdom the law becomes the law of life. With which the next topic is mentioned.

4.3 The law of the life – Perspectives for the future

For a long time before Ben Sira connected wisdom and life to a topic these two spheres were combined in a general sense within the book of proverbs.35

4.3.1 The law of life in Sir 17:1136

Besides the already treated reference Sir 45:5 (cf. above 4.2.1.) one reads in Sir 17:11-14 about the law of life: “He bestowed (prosti,qhmi) knowledge (evpisth,mh) upon them, and allotted (klhrodote,w) to them the law of life (no,mon zwh/j). He established with them an eternal covenant, and showed them his judgments (ta. kri,mata). Their eyes saw his glorious majesty, and their ears heard the glory of his voice. And he said to them, ‘Beware of all unrighteousness’. And he gave commandment (evnetei,lato; cf. hwc) to each of them concerning his neighbour”. The mental abilities and the law of life are gifts of God, as the verb klhrodote,w shows. The following keywords summarize the whole procedures. They mean concretely: The “eternal covenant” alludes to the covenant in Gen 17, through which God is bound to his people. God assures descendants. God demands that the people be circumcised as an indication of belonging to God’s community. God gives his people rules (ta. kri,mata). I pointed out already that with trwt concrete rules (ta. kri,mata) for everyday life are given. At this point when one speaks of commandments the question arises of whether the Deca- logue is meant here. Rightfully Di Lella says this in his comment.37 The glorious majesty refers to special theophanies, as one sees described in Exod 19:16-19 and 24:16-17. “The glory of the Lord (hw"hy>-dAbK.) settled on Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days; and on the seventh day he called to Moses out of the midst of the cloud. Now the appearance of the glory of the

34 Cf. MARBÖCK, Gottes Weisheit, 90; WITTE, Vom Leiden Zur Lehre, 195: “Obwohl in der Identifikation der hm'k.x' mit der hr'AT gipfelnde Weisheitsschrift des Ben Sira (vgl. 17,11ff; 24,23; 45,5; u.ö) eine den Proverbien vergleichbare optimistische Anthropologie enthält, deren Ethik auf die Erlangung der Gottesfurch ausgerichtet ist, begegnen doch vereinzelt Aussagen, die das Niedrigkeitsmotiv führen und sich auf der Linie von Ps 143,2 mit der Niedrigkeitsredaktion berühren“; KAISER, Covenant and Law, 237. 35 Cf. REITERER, Akzente 3.1.6; 3.2.4 and 3.2.5. 36 Cf. ibid., 1.2.2. 37 SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 282. 226 Friedrich Vincenz Reiterer

Lord (hw"hy> dAbK. haer>m;W) was like a devouring fire on the top of the mountain in the sight of the people of Israel (laer'f.yI ynEB. ynEy[el.)”. “Moses would speak and God would answer him in thunder (lAqb. WNn<[]y: ~yhil{a/h'w>)” (Exod 19:19). Di Lella writes that in Sir 17:6 a summary of the two different parts of the Decalogue is made in a way that can be noticed: “‘Beware of all unrighteousness’ is a summary of all the negative commandments, … especially the prohibitions against idolatry, false worship, and work on the sabbat, about which the first part of the Ten Commandments … is concerned. The ‘precepts about [our] neigbours’ (v. 14b) refer to the second part of the Decalogue”.38 The basic rules of life before God and the most important rules among fellow men therefore are no,moj zwh/j.

4.3.2 The fulfilment of the law (Sir 34:8)

Ben Sira rejects all kinds of dreams, speculations and other dubious attempts to affect life with manipulations in 34:1-8. I see these words directed against apocalyptic speculations or esoteric doctrines. Through only one sentence Ben Sira disproves temptations of the speculators and dreamers: “Without such deceptions (a;neu yeu,douj) the law (no,moj) will be fulfilled (suntelesqh,setai), and wisdom (sofi,a) is made perfect (telei,wsij) in truthful lips“ (Sir 34:8). Ben Sira strives obviously for truth and honesty. Too easily humans are mislead by deceitful words. With the hint at wisdom and law the author again rejects speculations. He maintains that both law and wisdom are complete. Again Ben Sira’s ideas are contained in the two important keywords: God’s commandments form an objective basis, which one should acknowledge and practice. If one does this, one does not need obscure speculations. Success lies in wisdom. It is the companion planned by God for his people. It is the internal principle of the plan of God and can therefore not fail, but will surely be fulfilled. In practical life law and wisdom prove their worth: “All wisdom (pa/sa sofi,a) is the fear of the Lord (fo,boj kuri,ou), and in all wisdom (evn pa,sh| sofi,a|) there is the fulfilment (poi,hsij) of the law (no,mou)” (Sir 19:20). Whoever is not modest enough to acknowledge God lacks the basis for a correct understanding of wisdom and the law. With these cross connections we arrive again at the beginning point of our investigation. In Sir 34:8 we find the fundamental problem, whether the rather sober and dry model of the wisdom teacher, or the mysteriously seeming and in this way fascinating world interpretation of the apocalyptic enthusiasts give a direction valid for the future? Only the revealing God is able to offer the realistic perspective for the future. He offers the future through wisdom, whose implementation takes place in an outstanding way via the law.

38 Ibid., 282-283. The interpretation of the Wisdom tradition of the Torah within Ben Sira 227

5. Conclusion

Ben Sira writes his book between 195 and 185 BC.39 He is in the middle of the radical change, which suffers still from the wounds of the many military conflicts between the Ptolemies and Seleucides. The influence of classical religious teachings breaks down. The temptation by the politically powerful (Greek economy, Greek ways of life and Greek philosophy, combined with an arduous promotion of simple religious elements to getting through the own power) and their politics are omnipresent. Here Ben Sira, an imaginative man, looks for a new homeland. For a long time he concerns himself with his own tradition. He recognizes that his own tradition – if one updates it and puts a new slant on it – contains unbelievable treasures and is stronger than all the other messages of salvation together; cf. “hidden wisdom and unseen treasure, of what value is either?” (Sir 20:30; 41:14). Ben Sira contrasts a basic draft of a conception which is based on his faith and worldview to the most central topics of the sense of human existence of his time. Ben Sira concerns himself with the central question about the meaning of faith and revelation for behaviour, everyday life and the meaning of life. He knows the different philosophies and leading trends of his time (Greek philosophy,40 aramaic41 and Egyptian42 wisdom teachings). He takes up elements which he considers positive in a subtle way, but does not follow their whole philosophy. Ben Sira obviously also knows the internal-Jewish apocalyptic conceptions,43 which presuppose a radical new beginning after a cruel turn of an era. In this conception God more or less works alone and humans are witnesses for the world changing spectacle. Ben Sira does not follow this thesis. He knows the “scepticism” within Judaism (Qohelet), he treats many similar topics, but mostly offers different solutions which are settled in the new tradition optimistically. Ben Sira sets against it his model: a deepened view of the activity of God, which is inspired by the internal order of creation with its perfection and beauty. Some theological components play a central role. It does not seem to correspond to the siracidic conception, if one tries to fix individual thoughts in some form of ranking system, except the existence and the action of God: God is superior to everything. Therefore the central elements should

39 Cf. KAISER, Reichtum 13. 40 Cf. MARTIN, Judentum und Hellenismus; BERGER, Die Gesetzesauslegung Jesu; HEGERMANN, Die Vorstellung, 26-47; 67-87; KAISER, Judentum und Hellenismus (= Der Mensch, 135-153); MIDDENDORP, Die Stellung; KIEWELER, Ben Sira zwischen Judentum und Hellenismus; WICKE-REUTER, Göttliche Providenz. 41 WEIGL, „Mein Neffe Achikar” (Tob 1,22). 42 SANDERS, Ben Sira and Demotic Wisdom; ID., Ben Sira’s Ethics; ID., On Ben Sira 24. 43 ARGALL, 1 Enoch and Sirach; MARBÖCK, Gottes Weisheit, 91; KAISER, Reichtum, 15. 228 Friedrich Vincenz Reiterer be considered equal: Creator and creation, wisdom, fear of God, law, teachings - education, love for God and humans, history of mankind, above all Israel, social behaviour, an arranged society, cult and priesthood, occupa- tion, behaviour within the private sector. Even if I do not wish to evaluate the components, the frequency in which they occur shows that in siracidic argumentation some play a more central role than the others, and some presuppose a functioning of the others: under the condition that the sphere of God and creation is to be separated, it follows: a) From God to humans: Creator and creation, Wisdom as God’s presence and at the same time his instrument for concrete working in His creation. It affects the constitutional structure of the cosmos and human existence in an exemplary way. The law as the gift which enables God’s plan to be realized through human behaviour. b) The central levels of the inanimate creation: the fact of creation of God and his wisdom lead to their synthesis in the meaningful and form- completed creation. c) On the human factor: Creation of limited humans and wisdom, the course of events, the bestowal of God to humans, particularly the election of Israel, modesty and fear of God. Fundamental correct human behaviour demands the adoption of a loving and reverential attitude towards God (“fear of God”), the human implementation of wisdom, which could be seen in the cosmos and in the human existence, the offer of God in revelation = Law, its arranging role, God’s written revelation, in particular the first books of the Bible and the commandments. There is an internal order: 1. wisdom, 2. creation, 3. law for human beings. I want to sum up the statements about the law: hrwt has theological44 (word of God and word about God) functions, because God reveals himself within it, how He, for example, works within human creation. hrwt has a soteriological function: the law would not have this ability by itself, but because it points in an exemplary way to human examples (history) and in single rules, how as human beings one can align himself to God’s plan. hrwt rules practical life in a formal way; hrwt is the practical rule for everyday life; hrwt is the written document for the instruction of contemporaries; hrwt is the written document for the passing on to future generations.

44 Cf. STUHLMACHER, Das Gesetz. The interpretation of the Wisdom tradition of the Torah within Ben Sira 229

Bibliography

ARGALL, R. A., 1 Enoch and Sirach: A Comparative Literary and Conceptual Analy- sis of the Themes of Revelation, Creation and Judgement (SBL 8), Atlanta, GA 1995. BERGER, K., Die Gesetzesauslegung Jesu. Ihr historischer Hintergrund im Judentum und im Alten Testament. Teil I. Markus und Parallelen (WMANT 40), Neukirchen 1972. BLENKINSOPP, J., Wisdom and Law in the Old Testament. The Ordering of Life in Israel and Early Judaism (Oxford Bible Series), New York 1983. CONTI, M., Origine divina della Sapienza e i suoi rapporti col mondo, coll’uomo e col popolo dell’alleanza (Sir 24,3-22), in: BATTAGLIA,V. (ed.), L’uomo e il mondo alla luce di Cristo, Vicenza 1986, 9-42. EGGER-WENZEL, R., Better Faith in God than Fear of God in Ben Sira in Relation to Job. A necessary adjustment in terminology and understanding (CBQ.MS 38), Washington 2004. GILBERT, M., L’éloge de la sagesse (Siracide 24): RTL 5 (1974), 326-348. GILBERT, M., La sapienza si offre come nutrimento (Sir 24,19-22): PSV 7 (1983), 51-60. GÖTTSBERGER, J., Die göttliche Weisheit als Persönlichkeit im Alten Testament (BZfr 9,1/2), Münster 1919. HAYWARD, R. C. T., El Elyon and the Divine Names in Ben Sira, in: EGGER-WENZEL, R. (ed.), Ben Sira’s God. Proceedings of the International Ben Sira Conference, Durham – Ushaw College 2001 (BZAW 321), Berlin – New York 2002, 180-198. HEGERMANN, H., Die Vorstellung vom Schöpfungsmittler im hellenistischen Juden- tum und Urchristentum (TU 82), Berlin 1961. JOLLEY, M. A., The Function of Torah in Sirach, Louisville 1993 [Diss.], repr. Ann Arbor, MI 1995. KAISER, O., Covenant and Law in Ben Sira, in: MAYES, A. D. H. – SALTERS, R. B. (eds.), Covenant as Content. FS E.W. Nicholson, Oxford 2003, 235-260. KAISER, O., Judentum und Hellenismus. Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach dem hellenistischen Einfluß auf Kohelet und Jesus Sirach: VuF 27 (1982), 68-86. Repr. in: ID., Der Mensch unter dem Schicksal. Studien zur Geschichte, Theologie und Gegen- wartsbedeutung der Weisheit (BZAW 161), Berlin 1985, 135-153. KIEWELER, H.-V., Ben Sira zwischen Judentum und Hellenismus. Eine kritische Auseinandersetzung mit Th. Middendorp (BEAT 30), Wien 1992. LANG, B., Frau Weisheit. Deutung einer biblischen Gestalt, Düsseldorf 1975. MARBÖCK, J., Weisheit im Wandel. Untersuchungen zur Weisheitstheologie bei Ben Sira. Mit Nachwort und Bibliographie zur Neuauflage (BZAW 272), Berlin – New York 1999. MARBÖCK, J., Text und Übersetzung. Horizonte einer Auslegung im Prolog zum griechischen Sirach, in: VONACH, A. – FISCHER, G. (eds.), Horizonte biblischer Texte. FS J.M. Oesch (OBO 196), Fribourg – Göttingen 2003, 99-116. MARBÖCK, Structure and Redaction History of the Book of Ben Sira. Review and Prospects, in: BEENTJES, P. C. (ed.), The Book of Ben Sira in Modern Research. Proceedings of the First International Ben Sira Conference 28-31 July 1996 Soesterberg, Netherlands (BZAW 255), Berlin – New York 1997, 61-79. 230 Friedrich Vincenz Reiterer

MARBÖCK, J., Gesetz und Weisheit. Zum Verständnis des Gesetzes bei Jesus Ben Sira: BZ 20 (1976), 1-21. Repr. in: ID., Gottes Weisheit unter uns. Zur Theologie des Buches Sirach (HBS 6), ed. FISCHER, I., Freiburg – Basel – Wien 1995, 52-72. MARBÖCK, Die «Geschichte Israels» als «Bundesgeschichte» nach dem Sirachbuch, in: ZENGER, E. (ed.), Der neue Bund im Alten. Studien zur Bundestheologie der beiden Testamente (QD 146), Freiburg – Basel – Wien 1993, 177-197. Repr. in: ID., Gottes Weisheit unter uns. Zur Theologie des Buches Sirach, 103-123. MARTIN, H., Judentum und Hellenismus (WUNT 10), Tübingen 19732. MIDDENDORP, TH., Die Stellung Jesu Ben Siras zwischen Judentum und Hellenismus, Leiden 1973. MURPHY, R. E., Wisdom Literature and Psalms. Interpreting Biblical Texts, Nashville 1983. PETERS, N., Das Buch Jesus Sirach oder Ecclesiasticus (EHAT 25), Münster 1913. PIÉ Y NINOT, S., La palabra de Dios en los Libros Sapienciales (CStP 17), Barcelona 1972. REITERER, F. V., Die immateriellen Ebenen der Schöpfung bei Ben Sira, in: CALDUCH- BENAGES, N. – VERMEYLEN, J. (eds.), Treasures of Wisdom. Studies in Ben Sira and the Book of Wisdom. FS M. Gilbert (BEThL 143), Leuven 1999, 91-127. REITERER, F. V., Neue Akzente in der Gesetzesvorstellung: ~yyx trwt bei Ben Sira, in: WITTE, M. (ed.), Gott und Mensch im Dialog. FS. O. Kaiser, Berlin – New York 2004, 851-871. REITERER, F. V., Gott, Vater und Herr meines Lebens, Eine poetisch-stilistische Analyse von Sir 22,27-23,6 als Verständnisgrundlage des Gebetes, in: EGGER-WENZEL, R. – CORLEY, J., Prayer from Tobit to Qumran (DCLY 2004), Berlin – New York 2004, 137-170. RICKENBACHER, O., Weisheitsperikopen bei Ben Sira (OBO 1), Freiburg – Göttingen 1973. ROGERS, J. F., Wisdom and Creation in Sirach 24: JNWSL 22/2 (1996), 141-156. SANDERS, J. TH., On Ben Sira 24 and Wisdom’s Mother Isis (PWCJS Division A 8), Jerusalem 1982. SANDERS, J. TH., Ben Sira and Demotic Wisdom (SBL.MS 28), Chico 1983. SANDERS, J. TH., Ben Sira’s Ethics of Caution: HUCA 50 (1979), 73-106. SCHIMANOWSKI, G., Weisheit und Messias. Die jüdischen Voraussetzungen der urchristlichen Präexistenzchristologie (WUNT 2/17), Tübingen 1985. SCHÜNGEL-STRAUMANN, H., Die göttliche Weisheit in Sprüche 8 und Sirach 24: BiHe 26/103 (1990), 150-153. SEGALLA, G., La sapienza e la Legge (Sir 24,1-23.25-34), in: PRATO, G. L. (ed.), Israele alla ricerca di identità tra il III sec. a.C. e il I sec. d.C. Atti del V convegno di studi veterotestamentari, Bressanone 7-9 settembre 1987 (RStB 1 [1989]), Bologna 1989, 13-65. SHEPPARD, G. T., Wisdom as a Hermeneutical Construct. A Study of the Sapiential- izing of the Old Testament (BZAW 151), Berlin – New York 1980. SKEHAN, P. W. – DI LELLA, A. A., The Wisdom of Ben Sira. A New Translation, with Notes, and Introduction (AncB 39), New York 1987. SKEHAN, P. W., Structures in Poems on Wisdom. Proverbs 8 and Sirach 24: CBQ 41 (1979), 365-379. STUHLMACHER, P., Das Gesetz als Thema biblischer Theologie: ZThK 75 (1978), 251-280. The interpretation of the Wisdom tradition of the Torah within Ben Sira 231

The Holy Bible. New Revised Standard Version, New York – Oxford 1989. WEIGL, M., „Mein Neffe Achikar” (Tob 1,22). Die aramäischen Achikar-Sprüche und das Alte Testament, Wien 1999. WICKE-REUTER, U., Göttliche Providenz und menschliche Verantwortung bei Ben Sira und in der frühen Stoa (BZAW 298), Berlin – New York 2000. WIED, G., Der Auferstehungsglaube des späten Israel in seiner Bedeutung für das Verhältnis von Apokalyptik und Weisheit, Bonn 1967. WITTE, M., Vom Leiden zur Lehre. Der dritte Redegang (Hiob 21-27) und die Redak- tionsgeschichte des Hiobbuches (BZAW 230), Berlin – New York 1994. WITTE, M., “Mose, sein Andenken sei zum Segen“ (Sir 45,1). Das Mosebild des Sir- achbuches: BN 107/108 (2001), 161-186. ZENNER, J. K., Zwei Weisheitslieder: ZKTh 21 (1897), 551-558.

Ben Sira’s doctrine on the discipline of the tongue. An intertextual and synchronic analysis

ALEXANDER A. DI LELLA

Introduction

Without control of the tongue it is impossible, according to Ben Sira, to live a disciplined life. Many sins and faults have their origin in the improper use of the tongue. Though the tongue may sing the praises of the Lord and express the sentiments of the heart in prayer and proclamation, it also can wreak havoc when it utters coarse talk, lies, and calumny, as well as when it calls on the name of the Lord in unnecessary or careless oaths. In the present study I shall examine three of Ben Sira’s principal poems on this subject: 5:9–6:1; 23:7-15; and 28:12-26. In emphasizing the intertextual, synchronic, and other literary features, I hope to show that all three poems approach the discipline of the tongue from related but different perspectives. Unfortunate- ly, only 5:9–6:1 is extant in Hebrew; for the other two compositions we must rely principally on the grandson’s Greek text and the other ancient versions. It is impossible to fully appreciate the teaching of Ben Sira unless we take into account its intertextual connections with the earlier biblical books on which he based much of what he wrote regarding the tongue, lips, and mouth that can be the instruments of life or death, of good or evil, of wisdom or folly. “Lying lips conceal hatred, / and the one who utters slander is a fool” (Prov 10:18, my translation). “A mild answer calms wrath, / but a harsh word stirs up anger. / The tongue of the wise pours out knowledge, / but the mouth of fools spurts forth folly” (Prov 15:1-2). “Death and life are in the power of the tongue; / those who make it a friend shall eat its fruit” (Prov 18:21). “He who guards his mouth and his tongue / keeps himself from trouble” (Prov 21:23). The pious Israelite accordingly said this prayer, “Set a guard, Lord, before my mouth, / a gatekeeper at my lips” (Ps 141:3).1 Accordingly, the psalmist prays, “I will watch my ways, / lest I sin

1 Translation of Psalm texts are taken from The Revised Psalms of the New American Bible. Translation of texts other than Sirach are taken, except where noted otherwise, from The New American Bible. All translations of Ben Sira and of the LXX are my own. Through- out this article I cite the chapter- and verse-numbers in Ben Sira as given in their proper order in the NRSV and in the revised forthcoming edition of the NAB as well as in ZIEGLER, Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach, the edition I used for Gr I and Gr II. For the Hebrew text I used the edition of SMEND, Die Weisheit, the best edition of the geniza Mss available at that time; for an evaluation of the older editions of Ben Sira, see DI LELLA, The Hebrew Text 234 Alexander A. Di Lella with my tongue; / I will set a curb on my mouth” (Ps 39:2). The prophetic literature also deplores sins of the tongue: “… It is your crimes / that separate you from your God, / It is your sins that make him hide his face / so that he will not hear you. / For your hands are stained with blood, / your fingers with guilt; / Your lips speak falsehood, / and your tongue utters deceit” (Isa 59:2-3). The righteous, who keep watch over their tongue, lips, and mouth, make their own the words of the psalm, “May my lips pour forth your praise, / because you teach me your laws. / May my tongue sing of your promise, / for all your commands are just” (Ps 119:171-172). But, as Ben Sira notes, “Unseemly is praise on a sinner’s lips, / for it is not accorded to him by God” (15:9). Lips, mouth, and tongue can bring forth wisdom or folly. In the perspective of Israel’s wisdom writers, only the righteous are capable of speaking words of wisdom. Fools lack not only good sense but also moral integrity for which they must bear the consequences. “The mouth of the just yields wisdom, / but the perverse tongue will be cut off” (Prov 10:31). “A fool’s chatter is like a load on a journey, / but there is charm to be found upon the lips of the wise” (Sir 21:16). “The fool’s mouth is his ruin; / his lips are a snare to his life” (Prov 18:7). Since fools are enemies of the righteous, the psalmist beseeches the Lord (Ps 5:9-10): “Guide me in your justice because of my foes;/ make straight your way before me. / For there is no sincerity in their mouths;/ their hearts are corrupt. / Their throats are open graves;/ on their tongues are subtle lies”. Liars are to be avoided. “Lord, deliver me from lying lips, / from treacherous tongues” (Ps 120:2). “Those who tell lies to one another / speak with deceiving lips and a double heart. / May the Lord cut off all deceiving lips, / and every boastful tongue, / those who say, ‘By our tongues we prevail; / when our lips speak, who can lord it over us?’”(Ps 12:3-5). The phrase “double heart” (blw bl) finds its echo in Ben Sira who chastises those who tread “the double path”, du,o tri,bouj (2:12), as well as the one he calls “the Master of Two-tongues (~ytv l[b)” in 5:14a.d; 6:1c.

of Sirach, 18. For the Syriac [= Syr], I consulted the facsimile of CERIANI, Translatio Syra Pescitto, as well as DE LAGARDE, Libri Veteris Testamenti apocryphi Syriace; and for the Latin [= Lat], I employed Biblia Sacra iuxta Latinam vulgatam versionem. For the concordance work of the MT, LXX, and Vulgate, I used the elegant and powerful Macintosh computer program called Scholar’s Collection-3 CD-ROM with Accordance 5.3; also available from The GRAMCORD Institute. For the concordance of the Hebrew text of Ben Sira, I used BARTHÉLEMY – RICKENBACHER (eds.), Konkordanz. Ben Sira’s doctrine on the discipline of the tongue 235

1. Ben Sira 5:9–6:1

In an earlier study, I have given the text-critical analysis, translation, strophic structure, and intertextual exegesis of 5,9–6,1, a discrete poem in which Ben Sira gives advice about the proper use of the tongue as well as exhortations condemning duplicity in speech.2 I shall summarize the key points I have made there. The full poem is extant in Cairo geniza Ms A; Cairo Ms C has only 5:9-13. The text below on which I base my translation essentially is from Ms A except for 5:9 which is from Ms C that gives a better reading (cf. Addenda, notes 36-42).

I lybX lkl $lt law xwr lkl hrwz yht la 9 $rbd yhy dxaw $t[d l[ $wms hyh 10 ~gtp bXh xwr $rab !yzahl rhmm hyh 11 $yp l[ $dy ~yX !ya ~aw $[r hn[ $ta Xy ~a 12

*** wtlpm ~da !wXlw ajwb dyb !wlqw dwbk 13

***

II [r lgrt la $nwXlbw ~ytX l[b arqt la 14 ~ytX l[b l[ h[r hprxw tvb harbn bng l[ yk anwX yht la bhwa txtw 6:1 txXt la hbrhw j[m 15 ~ytX l[b [r vya !k Xyrwt !wlqw hprx [r ~X

I 9 Do not winnow in every wind, and do not walk in every path. 10 Be steadfast regarding your knowledge, and let your speech be consistent. 11 Be swift to hear, but slow to give answer. 12 If you are able, answer your neighbor; but if not, place your hand over your mouth! *** 13 Honor and dishonor through speaking! And a person’s tongue is his downfall. ***

2 DI LELLA, Use and Abuse. While my article was in press, there appeared the study by OKOYE, Speech in Ben Sira, “a revised version of the thesis submitted… at the Pontificia Studiorum Universitas, A S. Thoma Aquinas in Rome” (p. viii). Curiously, even though 5,9–6,1 is extant in the original Hebrew on which I based my study, Okoyedid his research on Gr I as his “basic text which, in spite of its corruption, portrays approximately the original work of Ben Sira” (p. 10). The operative word in that sentence is the adverb “approximately”. 236 Alexander A. Di Lella

II 14 Do not be called “the Master of Two-tongues”, and with your tongue do not slander a neighbor. Because for the thief shame was created; and sore disgrace, for “the Master of Two-tongues”. 15 In little or in much, do not act corruptly; 6:1 and instead of a friend, do not become an enemy. A bad name, disgrace, and dishonor you will inherit. Thus is the wicked person, “the Master of Two-tongues”.

2. Commentary with intertextual analysis

First Strophe (5:9-12). The basic theme of this poem is articulated not at the beginning, as one would expect, but rather exactly in the seven words of the middle bicolon (5:13) of the nine bicola in the seventy-eight-word Hebrew composition. This bicolon, which summarizes Ben Sira’s thoughts in the first strophe, divides the poem into two almost equal halves, with 34 words in the first half (5:9-12), which urges the proper use of speech that brings a person honor, dwbk, and 37 words in the second half (5:14–6:1), which warns against abuses of the tongue that bring a person disgrace or dishon- or, !wlq. Indeed, as Ben Sira observes so astutely (5:13a): “Honor and dishonor through speaking”! The choice of the vocabulary dwbk and !wlq Ben Sira derived from such texts as Isa 22:18; Hos 4:7; Hab 2:16; and Prov 3:35, the only passages in the MT that contain this formulaic word pair. These three prophetic texts deal with abuses by men in authority: in Isaiah, Shebna, the self-seeking master of the palace; in Hosea, the priests guilty of dereliction of duty; and in Habakkuk, those who degraded the oppressed. Ben Sira’s most likely immediate source, however, was Prov 3:35: “The wise will inherit honor (dwbk), / but stubborn fools (inherit) dishonor (!wlq)” (my translation). LXX Prov 3:35 employs the words do/xa and avtimi/a, respectively, for the Hebrew word pair. The grandson translates this noun pair in 5:13a by the same Greek nouns. This Greek pair recurs in 29:6 (a text not extant in Hebrew), in which Ben Sira warns against making loans without proper caution: “If [the borrower] can pay, his lender will recover barely half, / will consider that a wind- fall. / If he cannot pay, the lender is cheated of his money/ and acquires an enemy at no extra charge;/ With curses and insults the borrower will pay him back,/ and instead of glory [do,xa] will repay him with dishonor [avtimi,a]”. This passage reminds the student once again that dishonor can come through speaking. Ben Sira’s advice in 5:12 is sound in every age and time: “If you are able, answer your neighbor; / but if not, place your hand over your mouth”! In Ben Sira’s doctrine on the discipline of the tongue 237 such a case, “Silence is golden”, as the old proverb says.3 The theme (5:13) of this poem and of the first strophe probably comes from Prov 18,21: “Death and life are in the power of the tongue;/ and those who love it shall eat its fruit” (my translation). Jesus expresses a similar idea in Mt 12:37: “By your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned”. On the uses and abuses of the tongue the Letter of James also has a long section in 3:2-10, which clearly harks back to Sir 5:9–6:1.

Second Strophe (5:14–6:1). Here Ben Sira deplores the evils of ~yxX l[b, “the Master of two tongues”, literally, “Master of two (tongues understood)”. This expression recurs in the opening colon (5:14a) and closing colon (6:1c), thus forming a forceful rhetorical inclusio, and a third time in 5:14d. Ben Sira must have coined this phrase, for it never occurs in the MT. The grandson, curiously, translates the first of the three occurrences with the noun yi,quroj, “the whisperer, slanderer, the gossip”, a noun that appears only one other time in the canonical LXX, in Sir 28:13, a verse in which the word di,glwssoj, “the double-tongued”, also recurs: “Cursed be the gossip and the double-tongued, / for they destroy many who were at peace”; this text we shall examine below in the poem in 28:12-26. In the other two instances of ~ytX l[b (5:14d and 6:1c) the grandson employs di,glwssoj, a word that is found outside of the grandson’s Greek only in LXX Prov 11:13a: avnh.r di,glwssoj avpokalu,ptei boula,j, “The double-tongued man reveals plans (or secrets)”. Ben Sira may have coined the phrase ~ytX l[b on the basis of the word di,glwssoj in the LXX of this Proverbs text. The grandson’s use of yi,quroj instead of di,glwssoj in 5:14a may have been deliberate, for the rest of the second strophe deals with slander and its evil effects about which Ben Sira has much to say in 28:12-26. Indeed, the slanderer is a thief for whom “shame was created” (5:14c). The reason is that the slanderer robs others of their reputation–a heinous crime, for reputation or good name is one’s most cherished possession. Prov 22:1 states this idea succinctly: “A good name is more desirable than great riches, / and high esteem, than gold and silver”. Ben Sira rephrases the same truth in 41:12-13: “Have respect for your name, for it will stand by you / more than thousands of precious treasures. / The good things of life last a number of days, / but a good name, for days without number”. But instead of a good name, “the wicked person, the Master of Two Tongues” inherits “a bad name, disgrace, and dishonor” (6:1bc).4 Ben Sira will have more to say about the evils of the slanderer in 28:13-16, discussed below.

3 OKOYE, Speech in Ben Sira, 151-163, discusses 20:1-8 on silence and its relationship to 5:12b. 4 Ibid., 81-88, shows the connection between kardi,a and glw/ssa in Ben Sira and the rest of the OT. But it should be noted that Okoye’s analysis is, as I mentioned above, based primarily on the grandson’s Greek even when the Hebrew text is extant. 238 Alexander A. Di Lella

3. Ben Sira 23:7-15

The discrete poem in 23:7-15 forms part of a longer unit on the need for self- control from destructive sins, 22:27–23:27 the first strophe of which (22:27- 23:1a.c) provides the theme and summary of the poem in 23:7-15:

22:27 ti,j dw,sei evpi. sto,ma mou fulakh.n kai. evpi. tw/n ceile,wn mou sfragi/da panou/rgon i[na mh. pe,sw avpV auvtw/n5 kai. hv glw/ssa, mou avpole,sh| me 23:1a ku,rie pa,ter kai. de,spota zwh/j mou6, 1c mh. avfh/|j me pesei/n evn auvtoi/j

22:27 Who will set a guard over my mouth, and an effective seal upon my lips, That I may not fall through them, and my tongue may not destroy me? 23:1a Lord, Father and Master of my life, 1c do not let me fall because of them!

By way of an exegetically significant inclusio, the first word in 23:7-15 is the noun paidei,an (23:7a), and the last word, is the verb paideuqh/| (23:15b); these words clearly indicate the limits of our poem. The poem seems to divide into two discrete strophes. In the first strophe (23:7-11) Ben Sira warns against some of the serious sins of the mouth, especially swearing and calling on the Lord’s name without good reason. The second strophe (23:12-15) deals with two major problems: the crime of blasphemy, which is speech that is punishable by death (23:12); and coarse and abusive language (23:13-15).

I 7 paidei,an sto/matoj7 avkou,sate° te,kna° kai. o` fula,sswn ouv mh. a`lw/| evn toi/j cei,lesin auvtou/ (8) katalhfqh,setai a`martwlo,j°

kai. loi,doroj kai. u`perh,fanoj skandalisqh,sontai evn auvtoi/jÅ8 9 o[rkw| mh. evqi,sh|j to. sto,ma sou evpi. matai,w|9

5 So Gr Mss V 46 as well as Lat and Syr. The remaining Gr Mss have the singular. 6 Gr adds here, mh. evgkatali,ph|j me evn boulh/| auvtw/n, a colon that should be located in 4a, where it appears in Syr and Lat. Hence, I omit kai, in 23:1c: so B-S* O-V 46 679. 7 Gr Ms 705 and some versions dependent on Gr add mou, also found in Syr; this reading means “the instruction of my mouth”, which seems to make little sense in the context. MSS 248-l-157 add alhqinou, “(concerning) the true mouth”. 8 For this colon Syr reads, “and the fool stumbles by his mouth”. 248 9 These two words come from MSS L´- and is probably original, for it is a clear reference to Exod 20:7 and Deut 5:11. Ben Sira’s doctrine on the discipline of the tongue 239

kai. ovnomasi,a| tou/ a`gi,ou mh. suneqisqh/|j·10 10 w[sper ga.r oivke,thj evxetazo,menoj evndelecw/j avpo. mw,lwpoj ouvk evlattwqh,seta° ou[twj kai. o` ovmnu,wn kai. ovnoma,zwn to. o;noma kuri,ou11 dia. panto.j avpo. a`marti,aj ouv mh. kaqarisqh/|Å 11 avnh.r polu,orkoj plhsqh,setai avnomi,aj° kai. ouvk avposth,setai a,po. tou/ oi;kou auvtou/ ma,stix· eva.n plhmmelh,sh|° avmarti,a auvtou/ evp vauvtw/|° ka'n u`peri,dh|° h[marten dissw/j· kai. eiv dia. kenh/j w;mosen° ouv dikaiwqh,setai° plhsqh,setai ga.r evpagwgw/n o` oi=koj auvtou/Å

II 12 e;stin le,xij avntiparabeblhme,nh qana,tw|° mh. eu`reqh,tw evn klhronomi,a| Iakwb· avpo. ga.r euvsebw/n tau/ta pa,nta avposth,setai° kai. evn avmarti,aij ouvk evgkulisqh,sontaiÅ 13 avpaideusi,an avsurh/ mh. suneqi,sh|j to. sto,ma sou· e;stin ga.r evn auvth/| lo,goj a`marti,ajÅ 14 mnh,sqhti patro.j kai. mhtro,j sou° avna. me,son ga.r megista,nwn sunedreu,eij° me,pote evpila,qh| evnw,pion auvtw/n kai. tw/| evqismw/| sou mwranqh/|j kai. qelh,seij eiv mh. evgennh,qhj kai. th.n h`me,ran tou/ toketou/ sou katara,sh|Å 15 a;nqrwpoj suneqizo,menoj lo,goij ovneidismou/ evn pa,saij tai/j h`me,raij auvtou/ ouv mh. paideuqh/|Å12

I 7 Listen, O children, to instruction concerning the mouth, for whoever keeps it will not be ensnared. Through his lips (8)the sinner is caught; by them the reviler and the arrogant are tripped up. 9 Do not accustom your mouth to oaths in vain, or make a habit of naming the Holy One. 10 For just as a servant that is constantly being questioned will not be without bruises, So one who swears and names the name of the Lord continually will never be purged from sin. 11 A man of many oaths will be filled with iniquity, and the scourge will not depart from his house. If he swears in error, his sin remains on him; and if he disregards it, he sins doubly.

10 For this colon Syr reads, “and you will not be seated among the judges”– a reference to a court of law for one who swears falsely; see Lev 5:22-23. c 11 These 3 words are in Mss A S b and some other witnesses – a clear allusion to Lev 24:16: ovnoma,zwn de. to. o;noma kuri,ou. 12 For this verse Syr reads: “For the man who learns idle words / will not learn wisdom all the days of his life; / nor does the man receive instruction / who acts impurely in the shame of his flesh”. 240 Alexander A. Di Lella

If he swears without reason, he cannot be justified, for his house will be filled with calamities.

II 12 There is a manner of speech that is comparable to death; may it never be found in the heritage of Jacob. For all such things will be far from the godly, And they do not wallow in sins. 13 Do not accustom your mouth to coarse stupidity, for in it there is sinful speech. 14 Remember your father and mother when13 you sit among the mighty, Lest you forget yourself in their presence and act foolishly through your bad habits. You will then wish you had never been born and will curse the day of your birth. 15 The person who is accustomed to using abusive language will never become disciplined all his days.

4. Commentary with intertextual analysis

First Strophe (23:7-11). In the opening verse of the first strophe (23:7) Ben Sira articulates his thesis: one who keeps watch over his mouth “will not be ensnared” whereas “the sinner is caught” and “the reviler and the arrogant are tripped up” by their lips. The first phrase paidei,an sto,matoj of the poem (23:7a) recurs nowhere else in the LXX. The noun paidei,a, “instruction, discipline, training”, recurs a total of 31 times in the grandson’s Greek, starting in 1:27a and concluding in the last chapter, 51:28a.14 This noun usually translates rswm, a noun that recurs often in other biblical books as well (e.g., twice in the Psalms, 4 times in Isaiah; 8 times in Jeremiah, and 30 times in Proverbs). I understand the word sto,matoj as an objective genitive; hence, the translation, “instruction concerning the mouth”. The vocative plural te,kna in Ben Sira recurs only two other times (3:1a and 41:14a); the reason for the plural is not clear.15 Ben Sira insists repeatedly that “instruction, or discipline”, in general, is essential if one wishes to acquire wisdom. Near the beginning of his book

13 The Greek conjunction ga,r, “for, because”, is probably a mistranslation of the original particle yk, here best translated as “when”; so OESTERLEY, The Wisdom, 154. 14 In LXX Proverbs, Ben Sira’s favorite sourcebook, the noun recurs 26 times. 15 In the rest of the LXX, this vocative plural occurs 7 other times (Tob 10:11 [only in Gr I]; 1 Macc 2:50.64; Bar 4:19.21.25.27) – evidence that suggests it may be a late biblical usage. The usual form in Ben Sira (17 times) is the vocative singular, te,knon (starting with 2:1a and ending at 40:28a). Ben Sira’s doctrine on the discipline of the tongue 241 he states emphatically, “For fear of the Lord is wisdom and discipline” (1:27a). He also states, “Son, from your youth choose discipline, / and with gray hair you will still find wisdom” (6:18). This text is a clear allusion to Lam 3:27, “It is good for a man to bear / the yoke from his youth”; and to Job 12:11-12, “Does not the ear judge words / as the mouth tastes food? / So with old age is wisdom / and with length of days understanding”. Ben Sira develops this idea more fully later in his book, in 25:3-6: “What you have not gathered in your youth, / how will you find in your old age? / How attractive is sound judgment in the gray-haired, / and for the elderly to possess good counsel. / How attractive is wisdom in the aged, / and understanding and counsel in the venerable”! The meaning of 23:7b is that the person who accepts “instruction concerning the mouth” “will not be ensnared” by inappropriate or sinful words that can come out of his mouth–the theme of the first strophe, which then provides instances of such misuse of the tongue (see also Jas 3:5-10). The lips cause many a sinner to be caught, and “by them the reviler and the arrogant are tripped up” or stumble (23:8), an idea Ben Sira derived from Prov 6:2: “You have been snared by the utterance of your lips, / caught by the words of your mouth”. Ben Sira expresses this thought in a different way in 20:18: “A slip on the floor is better than a slip of the tongue; / in like manner the downfall of the wicked will come quickly”. The saying in 20:18a may have its origin in the proverb attributed to Zeno of Citium, the Stoic (335-263 BC): “Better to slip with the foot than with the tongue”.16 In 23:9a, Ben Sira warns against the habit of swearing “in vain”, evpi. matai,w|, a clear allusion, as mentioned in the textual note above, to LXX Exod 20:7 and Deut 5:11, part of the Decalogue. One should not get into “a habit of naming the Holy One” (23:9b). The “Holy One” is one of God’s titles Ben Sira employs also in 4:14; 43:10; and 48:20. This title is often found elsewhere in the OT, with most occurrences in Isaiah,17 but also in other prophets,18 as well as in Bar 4:22.27; Job 6:10; Prov 9:10; 30:3; Pss 22:4; 71:22; 78:41; 89:19; 106:15; and 2 Macc 14:36. The title, however, recurs rarely in the earlier biblical books; in fact, only in 1 Sam 2:2 and 2 Kgs 19:22. The expression in 23:10a, “the (household) servant [or slave] that is constantly being questioned” may have unpleasant, even harsh overtones, for the verb evxeta,zw means “to examine well or closely; scrutinize”, but also “to question, examine by torture”, which is perhaps the sense implied here because of the phrase, “[he] will not be without bruises” (23:10b). See LXX

16 Quoted by DIOGENES LAËRTIUS, Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers, vii 26 (third century of our era). 17 Isa 1:4; 5:19.24; 10:17.20; 12:6; 17:7; 29:19.23; 30:11-12.15; 31:1; 37:23; 40:25; 41:14.16.20; 43:3.14-15; 45:11; 47:4; 48:17; 49:7; 54:5; 55:5; 57:15; 60:9.14. 18 Jer 50:29; 51:5; Ezek 39:7; Hos 11:9; 12:1; Hab 3:3. 242 Alexander A. Di Lella

Deut 19:18 and LXX Esth 12:3.19 In like manner, the one in the habit of swearing “and names the name of the Lord”, kai. ovnoma,zwn to. o;noma kuri,ou, clearly alludes (see textual note) to LXX Lev 24:16, which gives a severe sentence to the perpetrator: ovnoma,zwn de. to. o;noma kuri,ou qana,tw| qanatou,sqw, “Let the one who names the name of the Lord die the death”. Ben Sira rephrases the punishment: “[he] will never be purged from sin”, avpo. a`marti,aj ouv mh. kaqarisqh/| (23:10d), a text that clearly derives from the LXX of Exod 20:7 and Deut 5:11: ouv ga.r mh. kaqari,sh| ku,rioj to.n lamba,nonta to. o;noma auvtou/ evpi. matai,w|, “For the Lord shall never purge the one who takes his name in vain” (see Sir 23:9a above). The adjective poluo,rkoj, “of many oaths” (23:11a), recurs only one other time in the entire LXX, in Sir 27:14: lalia. poluo,rkou avnorqw,sei tri,caj / kai. hv ma,ch auvtw/n evmfragmo.j wvti,wn, “Their oath-filled talk makes the hair stand on end,/ and their fights make one stop one’s ears”. The context of this passage makes it clear that Ben Sira again deplores the misuse of speech, for in 27:13a he writes: dih,ghsij mwrw/n proso,cqisma, “the conversation of fools is offensive”. The rare expression plhsqh,setai avnomi,aj, “will be filled with iniquity”, apparently refers back to LXX Lev 19:29: hv gh/ plhsqh,setai avnomi,aj, “the land will be filled with iniquity”; as well as to LXX Ezek 8:17: dio,ti e;plhsan th.n gh/n avnomi,aj, “for they filled the land with iniquity”; and Ezek 28:16: avpo. plh,qouj th/j evmpori,aj sou e;plhsaj ta. tami,eia, sou avnomi,aj, “from the vastness of your trade you have filled your storehouses with iniquity”. In the LXX no other occurrences of the verb pi/mplhmi in conjunction with the singular noun avnomi,a recur. The expression ouvk avposth,setai avpo. tou/ oi;kou auvtou/ ma,stix, “the scourge [that is, of divine chastisement] will not depart from their house” (23:11b) seems to address the complaint found in LXX Job 21:9, which describes the homes of the wicked who seem to prosper: oiv oi=koi auvtw/n euvqhnou/sinÃ fo,boj de. ouvdamou/Ã / ma,stix de. para. kuri,ou ouvk e;stin evpV auvtoi/j, “their houses are prosperous, but fear is nowhere, / and the scourge from the Lord is not on them”. Nowhere else in the LXX do the nouns ma,stix and oi;koj recur in the same sentence. The thought of 23:11b probably harks back also to LXX 2 Sam 12:10, giving the words that the prophet Nathan addressed to David after his adultery with Bathsheba and his murder of her husband Uriah: nuvn ouvk avposth,setai r`omfai,a evk tou/ oi;kou sou, “Now the sword will not depart from your house”. In 23:11c, the verb plhmmele,w properly means “to make a false note in music”, but is used chiefly in its metaphorical sense, “to offend, to err, to commit sin, to trespass”.20 Syr renders the thought accurately with a verb and noun phrase: “if he swears in error”,

19 However, in Sir 11:7; 13:11; and 18:20, the verb simply means “to question, examine”. 20 LIDDELL – SCOTT – JONES – MCKENZIE,AGreek-English Lexicon; and LUST – EYNIKEL – HAUS- PIE (eds.), Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint. Ben Sira’s doctrine on the discipline of the tongue 243 the meaning I employ in my translation. Ben Sira warns that even if one swears by mistake, presumably without adequate cause, he nevertheless is guilty of sin (23:11c), an admonition made more explicit in 23:11e: “If he swears without reason (dia. kenh/j, literally, in vain], he cannot be justified” (see Lev 5:4). Then if a person disregards his oath, he commits sin “doubly” (23:11d): the first sin is his swearing without reason; the second sin is the failure to fulfill his rash oath. Such irresponsible swearing will result in that person’s house being “filled with calamities” (23:11f). But the one who honors his oath is among those who may abide in the Lord’s “tent” and dwell on his “holy hill” (Ps 15:1); the reason is that “what he has sworn he does not change, even to his hurt” (Ps 15:4, my translation). Second Strophe (23:12-15). Ben Sira begins this strophe by deploring the most heinous sin that the tongue could possibly utter: blasphemy, a crime that was punishable by death (Lev 24:11-16; 1 Kgs 21:10.13; Mt 26:65-66; Jn 10:33). Ben Sira viewed blasphemy with such total horror that he does not even mention the word but rather employs indirect language to describe it: “a manner of speech comparable to death” (23:12a). He prays that blasphemy may “never be found in the heritage [klhronomi,a|] of Jacob” (23:12b). Normally, “the heritage of Jacob” refers to the Promised Land, as in Isa 58:13-14 where the faithful who observe the Sabbath meticulously will be fed “with the heritage of Jacob, your father, for the mouth of the Lord has spoken”. But here the reference is certainly to the people; in fact, the wording of 23:12b seems to depend on LXX Deut 32:9: kai. evgenh,qh meri.j kuri,ou lao.j auvtou/ IakwbÃ scoi,nisma klhronomi,aj auvtou/ Israhl, “and the Lord’s portion is his people Jacob, the allotment of his heritage is Israel”. Blasphemous words will never be found on the lips of the “godly”, euvsebw/n, a term that refers to those who fear the Lord and who “do not wallow in sins” (23:12cd), in sharp contrast to those who speak words of blasphemy (23:12a). The rare verb evgkulisqh,sontai, future passive 3rd masculine plural of evgkuli,w, “to wallow” (23:12d), recurs only two other times in the LXX: Prov 7:18 and Sir 37:3. The even rarer noun from the root of this verb, kulismo,j, a hapax in the NT with no occurrences in the LXX, occurs in 2 Pt 2:22: u-j lousame,nh eivj kulismo.n borbo,rou, “A bathed sow returns to wallowing in the mire”. In 11:17 Ben Sira describes the destiny and life of the godly: do,sij kuri,ou parame,nei euvsebe,sinÃ kai. hv euvdoki,a auvtou/ eivj to.n aivw/na euvodwqh,setai, “The gift of the Lord remains with the godly;/ and his favor brings success forever”. The word euvsebh,j recurs a total of 13 other times in the grandson’s Greek (11:7.22; 12:2.4; 13:17; 16:13; 27:11.29; 28:22; 33:14; 37:12; 39:27; 43:33). Ben Sira states in 11:22a: euvlogi,a kuri,ou evn misqw/| euvsebou/j, “The blessing of the Lord is the reward of the godly”. In 11:17 and 11:22, the grandson’s use of euvsebh,j renders the original qydc, the term that applies to the faithful person in the OT. Ben Sira explains later why the godly would never 244 Alexander A. Di Lella be guilty of any blasphemy: dih,ghsij euvsebou/j dia. panto.j sofi,aÃ ov de. a;frwn w`j selh,nh avlloiou/tai, “The conversation of the godly is always wisdom,/ but the fool changes like the moon” (27:11). And in 43:33, he connects “the godly” with “wisdom” once again: pa,nta ga.r evpoi,hsen ov ku,rioj / kai. toi/j euvsebe,sin e;dwken sofi,an, “For the Lord has made all things, / and to the godly he has given wisdom”. Now Ben Sira mentions another abuse of the tongue that one must avoid at all costs. He urges his students not to accustom their mouths to “course (or gross, foul) stupidity”, avpaideusi,an avsurh/ (23:13a), a caustic phrase that recurs nowhere else in the LXX, the adjective avsurh/j being a hapax in the LXX and the noun avpaideusi,a recurring only in the grandson’s Greek (4:25 and 23:13). The reason why such stupidity, which refers not to abusive language per se but rather implies foul and impure talk,21 must be avoided is that it is “sinful speech” (23:13b), which the wise should turn away from. For as Ben Sira explains elsewhere (20:13): ov sofo.j evn lo,goij (the reading of most Mss) e`auto.n prosfilh/ poih,seiÃ / ca,ritej de. mwrw/n evkcuqh,sontai, “The wise person makes himself beloved by his words,/ but the courtesies of fools are wasted”. Ben Sira provides motivation why the student should avoid all forms of foul language: mnh,sqhti patro.j kai. mhtro,j sou, “Remember your father and your mother” (23:14a), an aphorism that Ben Sira himself apparently coined, for it is found nowhere else in the OT (or even in the NT).22 The point made here is that when a person is seated “among the mighty”, megista,nwn (23:14b), he may inadvertently slip into vile language, forgetting that he is in the presence of important people (23:14c) and has acted foolishly “through [his] bad habits” (23:14d). The grandson’s use of the rare verb mwrai,nw, “to act foolishly” (only four other occurrences in the LXX), calls to mind LXX 2 Sam 24:10 where David repents of his sin in numbering the people and begs the Lord to forgive him: o[ti evmwra,nqhn sfo,dra, “for I have acted very foolishly”. Earlier in his book Ben Sira writes about the deference the wise must show before those in authority (4:7): prosfilh, sunagwgh/| seauto.n poi,ei / kai. megista/ni tapei,nou th.n kefalh,n sou, “Make yourself beloved to the assembly; / and to the mighty bow your head”. But if a person forgets himself and uses vile language, he will wish he had never been born and he will even curse the day of his birth (23:14ef). This bicolon contains clear allusions to Job 3:3: avpo,loito hv hvme,ra evn h-| evgennh,qhn, “May the day perish on which I was born”; and more

21 So OESTERLEY, The Wisdom, 153-154. 22 However, in a negative statement the expression occurs in the apocryphal 1 Ezra 4:21: kai. meta. th/j gunaiko.j avfi,hsi th.n yuch.n kai. ou;te to.n pate,ra me,mnhtai ou;te th.n mhte,ra ou;te th.n cw,ran, “With his wife he ends his life, and he does not remember his father or his mother or his country”. Ben Sira’s doctrine on the discipline of the tongue 245 especially to Jer 20:14: evpikata,ratoj hv hvme,ra evn h-| evte,cqhn, “Cursed be the day on which I was born”. In the final bicolon of this poem Ben Sira summarizes his teaching on the evils of improper language. In 23:15a, he employs the verb suneqi,zw, “to accustom”, for the third time in this brief composition (23:9a.13a); in all cases this verb is followed by a form of speech that must be avoided: oaths in v. 9a; coarse stupidity in v. 13a; and here in v. 15a, lo,goij ovneidismou/, “abusive language”, in general (literally, “words of reproach”). This verb appears in only these three places, and nowhere else in the LXX. The threefold repetition of the verb serves as a superlative to emphasize why one should never acquire the habit of such talk. The explanation Ben Sira gives is that a person with this habit “will never become disciplined”, ouv mh. paideuqh/|. This verb, which recurs a total of 14 times in the grandson’s Greek, is the last word of the poem, and it forms an inclusio, as I noted above, with the very first word, paidei,an (23:7a), “instruction, discipline, training”, a key word in the book.

5. Ben Sira 28:12-26

In studying this rather long poem, I shall emphasize only the intertextual and synchronic relationships to the earlier biblical books and to Ben Sira’s other sayings about the discipline of the tongue.23 The poem divides naturally into two strophes: vv. 12-16 and 17-26. The first strophe deals with “the gossip (literally, the whisperer)”, yi,quroj, and “the double tongued”, di,glwssoj, as well as with the worst of this group “the third tongue”, glw/ssa tri,th. The second strophe warns against various evils of the tongue and urges precautions that the wise should take.

I 12 eva.n fush,sh|j eivj spinqh/ra° evkkah,setai° kai. eva.n ptu,sh|j evpV auvto,n° sbesqh,setai· kai. avmfo,tera evk tou/ sto,mato,j sou evxeleu,setaiÅ24 13 yi,quron kai. di,glwsson katara,sasqe·25 pollou.j ga.r eivrhneu,ontaj avpw,lesenÅ

23 For a detailed analysis of the poem see LINDER, Lingua tripla. In my opinion, the poem begins in 28,12; see SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 360 and 365. 24 Some Gr Mss (B 253 L and others) read evkporeu,etai, the same verb used in the additional material given in LXX Prov 3:16. This is a tricolon, which is rare in Ben Sira. SMEND, Die Weisheit, 252, writes, however, that a verse of three cola is “unheard of” (unerhört) in Ben Sira, and adds that the first two cola should be read as one colon; but such a colon would be too long to be original. 25 For the imperative, Lat and Syr have the participle, “Cursed”, which I use too. 246 Alexander A. Di Lella

14 glw/ssa tri,th26 pollou.j evsa,leusen kai. die,sthsen auvtou.j avpo. e;qnouj eivj e;qnoj kai. po,leij ovcura.j kaqei/len kai. oivki,aj megista,nwn kate,streyenÅ 15 glw/ssa tri,th gunai/kaj avndrei,aj evxe,balen kai. evste,rhsen auvta.j tw/n po,nwn auvtw/nÅ 16 o` prose,cwn auvth|/ ouv mh. eu[rh| avna,pausin ouvde. kataskhnw,sei meqV h`suci,ajÅ

II 17 plhgh. ma,stigoj poiei/ mw,lwpa° plhgh. de. glw,sshj sugkla,sei ovsta/Å 18 polloi. e;pesan evn sto,mati macai,raj° kai. ouvc w`j oi` peptwko,tej dia. glw/ssan° 19 maka,rioj o` skepasqei.j avpV auvth/j o]j ouv dih/lqen evn tw/| qumw/| auvth/j° o]j ouvc ei[lkusen to.n zugo.n auvth/j kai. evn toi/j desmoi/j auvth/j ouvk evde,qh· 20 o` ga.r zugo.j auvth/j zugo.j sidhrou/j° kai. oi` desmoi. auvth/j desmoi. ca,lkeioi· 21 qa,natoj ponhro.j o` qa,natoj auvth/j° kai. lusitelh.j ma/llon o` a[|dhj auvth/jÅ 22 ouv mh. krath,sh| euvsebw/n° kai. evn th/| flogi. auvth/j ouv kah,sontaiÅ 23 oi` katalei,pontej ku,rion evmpesou/ntai eivj auvth,n° kai. evn auvtoi/j evkkah,setai kai. ouv mh. sbesqh/|· evpapostalh,setai auvtoi/j w`j le,wn kai. w`j pa,rdalij lumanei/tai auvtou,jÅ 24a ivde. [Rahlfs; Ziegler i;de] peri,fraxon to. kth/ma, sou avka,nqaij27 25b kai. tw/| sto,mati, sou poi,hson qu,ran kai. moclo,nÅ 24b to. avrgu,rio,n sou kai. to. crusi,on kata,dhson 25a kai. toi/j lo,goij sou poi,hson zugo.n kai. staqmo,nÅ 26 pro,sece mh,pwj ovli,sqh|j evn auvth/|° mh. pe,sh|j kate,nanti evnedreu,ontojÅ

I 12 If you blow upon a spark, it turns into flame, if you spit on it, it dies out; yet both come out of your mouth! 13 Cursed be the gossip and the double-tongued, for they destroy many who were at peace. 14 The third tongue has shaken many, and has scattered them from people to people. It has destroyed strong cities, and has overthrown the houses of the great. 15 The third tongue has cast out virtuous women, and robbed them of their toil.

26 Here and in v. 15a L (also 157 in v. 15a) 547c 755 Sa read dissh,. 27 Ziegler, in his critical edition, established the correct order of these cola, the order found in the Lat. Ben Sira’s doctrine on the discipline of the tongue 247

16 He who heeds it will find no rest, nor will he dwell quietly.

II 17 A blow from a whip raises a welt, but a blow from the tongue will break bones. 18 Many have fallen by the edge of the sword, but not as many as by the tongue. 19 Happy the one who is sheltered from it, and has not endured its wrath; Who has not borne its yoke nor been bound with its chains. 20 For its yoke is an iron yoke, and its chains are bronze chains; 21 The death it inflicts is an evil death; even the netherworld is preferable to it. 22 It will have no power over the godly, nor will they be burned in its flame. 23 But those who forsake the Lord will fall into it, as it burns among them unquenchably; It will be sent out against them like a lion, and like a leopard, it will tear them to pieces. 24a Look, fence in your property with thorns, 25b but make a door and a bolt for your mouth. 24b Bind up your silver and gold, 25a but for your words make a balance and a weight. 26 Take care lest you slip by it [your tongue], lest you fall victim to one lying in ambush.

6. Commentary with intertextual analysis

First Strophe (28:12-16). Right at the beginning of this strophe (28:12) Ben Sira employs a graphic image to contrast the extremes that can emerge from the mouth: “If you blow upon a spark, it turns into flame, / if you spit on it, it dies out; / yet both come out of your mouth”! In 5:13a, the central verse of our first poem above, Ben Sira expresses this idea more directly: “Honor and dishonor through speaking”! Now he pronounces his harshest words, declaring cursed “the gossip and the double-tongued” (28:13a); the reason is that “they destroy many who were at peace” (28:13b); in 28:9b, he also deplores the behavior of the one “who sows discord among those who were at peace”. Presumably, Ben Sira is referring here to the peace and tranquility of the home and family that the gossip wantonly destroys. In 19:5-12, he has a whole section, employing graphic images and strong language on the evils of gossip:

Whoever gloats over evil will be destroyed, and whoever repeats gossip has no sense. 248 Alexander A. Di Lella

Never repeat gossip, and no one will reproach you. Tell nothing to friend or foe; and unless it would be a sin for you, do not reveal a thing. For someone may have heard you and watched you, and in time come to hate you. Let anything you hear die with you; never fear, it will not make you burst! Having heard something, the fool is in labor, like a woman giving birth to a child. Like an arrow stuck in a person’s thigh, so is gossip inside a fool.

Ben Sira’s severest indictment, however, is directed at “the third tongue”, glw/ssa tri,th (28:14a.15a), which is so called because its owner (the third tongue) spreads slander in order to create mischief about the one being slandered (the first tongue), with the one who believes the slander (the second tongue) in order to drive apart two friends.28 Ben Sira coined the expression, which appears nowhere else in the LXX, for the Syr (translated like the grandson’s Greek from the original Hebrew) also has the phrase, as of course does the Lat.29 It is probable that in 28:14 Ben Sira describes in a general manner the deplorable evils that the third tongue can cause. Aparticularly heinous effect of slander, however, is specified in 28:15a: “The third tongue has cast out virtuous women”, a clear reference to the divorce of an innocent and faithful wife, the kind of woman Ben Sira describes in 26:1-4: “Happy is the husband of a good wife; / the number of his days will be doubled. / A loyal wife brings joy to her husband, / and he will complete his years in peace. / A good wife is a generous gift / bestowed upon him who fears the Lord. / Whether rich or poor, his heart is content, / and a smile is ever on his face”. Because of divorce the third tongue has robbed the innocent wife “of their toil”, probably a reference to “the acceptance, praise, and gratitude, which the virtuous woman has a right to enjoy because she has been a good wife and mother; cf. Prov 31:10-31”.30 Ben Sira spells out the further evil effects of the third tongue: “He who heeds it (o` prose,cwn auvth/|) will find no rest, / nor will he dwell (ouvde. kataskhnw,sei) quietly” (28:16). This verse calls to mind the grandson’s version of 4:15b where the same two verbs recur: o` prose,cwn auvth/| kataskhnw,sei pepoiqw,j, “He who heeds her [Lady Wisdom] will dwell secure”. The con-

28 See SPICQ, L’Ecclésiastique, 707. 29 Rabbinical literature employs the Aramaic expression yatylt !wvyl for the tongue of the slanderer; OESTERLEY, The Wisdom, 181, writes, “Arachin 15b (Talmud Babli): ‘The third tongue kills three,’ viz. the slanderer, the slandered, and he who believes the slander; on the last of these see v. 16 below”. 30 So SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 365. Ben Sira’s doctrine on the discipline of the tongue 249 trast in meaning between these two verses is striking. Heeding Lady Wis- dom brings one security whereas heeding slander brings one the reverse of security.31 Indeed, the one who heeds the slander, or the third one “killed” by the slander, is another victim of the sin.32 Because he listened to the slanderer he is restless and ill at ease, not at all sure whether or not to believe the slander. This verse describes rather graphically the state of mind of the husband whose innocent wife has been slandered.33 Second Strophe (28:17-26). This strophe describes the damage that the unrestrained tongue is capable of. The blow of a whip causes only “a welt” (mw,lwpa). Far worse is “a blow from the tongue”, for it “will break bones” (28:17). The thought comes from Prov 25:15b, “a soft tongue will break bones” (my translation). The Japanese have a similar proverb: “The tongue is more to be feared than the sword”. Prov 15:4 shows the good or baneful effects of the tongue: “A soothing tongue is a tree of life, but a perverse one crushes the spirit”. These texts give the lie to the children’s jingle when they are taunted: “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me”. The wording of 28:19a, maka,rioj o` skepasqei.j avpV auvth/j, “Happy the one who is sheltered from it (the tongue)”, probably derives from LXX Ps 31 (30):21b: skepa,seij auvtou.j evn skhnh/| avpo. avntilogi,aj glwssw/n, “You shelter them under your tent from the contention of tongues”. Regarding the tongue’s “wrath”, qumo,j (28:19b), Ben Sira writes in 28:10cd: “The greater a person’s strength, the sterner his wrath(qumo,j), / the greater his wealth, the greater his anger”. The colorful expression (28:19c), “Who has not borne its (the tongue’s) yoke”, o` ouvc ei[lkusen to.n zugo.n auvth/j, derives from LXX Deut 21:3: h[tij ouvc ei[lkusen zugo,n, “[the heifer] that has not borne the yoke”. The tongue’s troublesome and heavy “yoke” is an “iron yoke” (28:20a), an image borrowed from Jer 28:14; and its “chains” are “bronze chains” (28:20b), desmoi. ca,lkeioi, an expression found elsewhere only in 1 Ezra 1:38: “[Nebuchadnezzar] bound him [Jehoiakim] with a bronze chain (calkei,w| desmw/|) and took him away to Babylon”. The death the slandering tongue causes is an “evil death”, for it destroys peace and serenity; and the underworld that alone can release its victims is “preferable (lusitelh,j, a hapax in the LXX) to it” (28:21). Ben Sira engages in wishful thinking when he asserts that the wicked tongue will have no power over “the godly, nor will they be burned in its flame” (28:22). In fact, the godly are also the victims of slander, as he states about the innocent wife in 28:15a. The image of the tongue being like a fire appears also in Jas 3:5-6. In 28:23ab Ben Sira writes that “those who forsake the Lord” will become a target of the

31 See OKOYE, Speech in Ben Sira, 149. 32 As noted by OESTERLEY, The Wisdom, 182. 33 SHAKESPEARE describes this tragic situation eloquently: “… Back-wounding calumny / The whitest virtue strikes. What king so strong / Can tie the gall up in the slanderous tongue” (“Measure for Measure”, III, ii, 186-188). 250 Alexander A. Di Lella wagging tongue and be burnt by it, for the ungodly provide ample fuel for the fires of slander. The phrase katalipei,n (to.n) ku,rion, “to forsake the Lord”, recurs elsewhere only in Josh 24:16 and 2 Chr 28:6. As animals in a context of destruction, “the lion” and “the leopard” (28:23cd) appear together also in Jer 5:6. By way of conclusion Ben Sira summarizes the ways to discipline the tongue. The graphic images suggest the great care one must employ. Fencing in property “with thorns” (28:24a) serves the same purpose as barbed wire does today: it keeps wild animals out. And just as every house must have “a door and a bolt” so, too, should the mouth (28:25b) if one is to avoid sin; see also 22:27 (cited above) and Pss 39:2, “I said, ‘I will watch my ways, lest I sin with my tongue; I will set a curb on my mouth’”, and 141:3, “Set a guard, Lord, before my mouth, a gatekeeper at my lips”. Then Ben Sira employs a mixed metaphor to urge utmost caution in guarding your tongue: as carefully as you take the necessary precautions by binding up your “silver and gold” (an image found in the story of 2 Kgs 5:23), so should you “make a balance and a weight (staqmo,j)” with which to weigh “your words” (28:24b-25a). The grandson uses the second noun also in 16:25a, evkfanw/ evn staqmw/| paidei,an, “I shall manifest instruction by weight”; and in 26:15b, ouvk e;stin staqmo.j pa/j a;xioj evgkratou/j yuch/j, “No weight can weigh the chastity (of the modest wife)”. Now Ben Sira makes his final appeal: “Take care lest you slip” [ovli,sqh|j] with your tongue (28:26a). Similar sayings using the same verb recur in the macarisms of 14:1a, maka,rioj avnh,rÃ o[j ouvk wvli,sqhsen evn sto,mati auvtou/, “Happy the man who does not slip with his mouth”; and 25:8b, maka,riojÅÅÅ o[j evn glw,ssh| ouvk wvli,sqhsen, “Happy … the one who does not slip with his tongue”. Such care will prevent you from falling before one who lies in wait (28:26b), i.e., your adversary. Latin adds an interesting flourish to this verse: et sit casus tuus insanabilis in mortem, “and your case will become incurable unto death”.

7. Conclusion

It is not surprising that Ben Sira, being a wisdom writer, offers his students many reflections and exhortations regarding the tongue. In fact, no other book of the Old Testament presents as much material as Ben Sira does on the use and abuse of the tongue or lips or mouth or palate (all organs of speech).34 As we have seen, Ben Sira’s comments and observations clearly reflect the older biblical works, in particular Proverbs, his favorite book. His poem in 5:9–6:1 provides a summary doctrine about the potential of the tongue for good or for evil. Then in 23:7-15, Ben Sira explains in detail why one must keep watch over the tongue at all times if one hopes to attain wisdom by living an exam-

34 See also 4:23-24; 14:1; 18:15-19; 19:5-17; 20:18-20; 25:8; 28:12-26. Ben Sira’s doctrine on the discipline of the tongue 251 ined life, the only life worth living according to Socrates as well as Israel’s wisdom writers. Finally, the poem in 28:12-26 excoriates especially the gossiper, the double-tongued, and the meddlesome third tongue. Much of what Ben Sira writes about the discipline of the tongue is reflected in the aphorism of Publilius Syrus: “Speech is a mirror of the soul; as a man speaks, so is he”.35

Addenda

36lybX lkl $lt law xwr lkl hrwz yht la 9 $rbd yhy dxaw 37$t[d l[ $wms hyh 10 38~gtp bXh xwr $rab !yzahl rhmm hyh 11 39$yp l[ $dy ~yX !ya ~aw [r hn[ $ta Xy ~a 12

*** 40 wtlpm ~da !wXlw ajwb dyb !wlqw dwbk 13

***

[r lgrt la $nwXlbw ~ytX l[b arqt la 14 41~ytX l[b l[ h[r hprxw tXb harbn bng l[ yk anwX yht la bhwa txtw 6:1 txXt la hbrhw j[m 15 42~ytX l[b [r Xya !k Xyrwt !wlqw hprx [r ~X

35 Moral Sayings, 1073 (1st century BC). 36 Reading Ms C; Ms A has tlwbv $rd hnwpw xwr lkl hrwz hyht la. Ms C is obviously the basis of Gr. In the second colon Syr follows the verb in Ms A in which the last two words are corrupt. Curiously, the Gr Mss (except 575) repeat at the end of the verse the text of 6:1c; Lat. has similar addition. 37 Ms C has $rbd. 38 Ms C has hnwkn hn[t hn[ $rabw hbwj h[wmXb !wkn hyh. 39 Reading the second colon as in Ms C and Syr (a reading reflected also in the Sahiditic), as in Judg 18:19 and Job 21:5; see also Mic 7:16 and Job 40:4 (Job 29:9 has @k in the expression instead of dy). Most Gr Mss have e;stw; Codex C, e;stai. Like the reading hpl dy in Prov 30:32, Ms A has no verb here. 40 In the first colon of Ms A had the peculiar reading dwyb instead of the correct dyb of Ms C. As the last word of the bicolon Ms C has wjylpm, a peculiar reading that has no support in any of the version. 41 Reading l[ h[r hrpxw with Gr and Syr; Ms A reads wh[r hprx, an impossible combination in this context, and then omits l[. 42 In 6:1b Gr has a causal clause, o;noma ga.r ponero,nÅÅÅ, thus balancing the causal clause in 5:14cd; Syr makes 6:1bc a negative purpose clause. In Ms A hprx is found after Xyrwt; following the Gr word order, I have placed the noun after [r in 6:1b. So also SMEND, Die Weisheit, 53. 252 Alexander A. Di Lella

Bibliography

BARTHÉLEMY, D. – RICKENBACHER, O. (eds.), Konkordanz zum hebräischen Sirach mit syrisch-hebräischem Index, Göttingen 1973. Biblia Sacra iuxta Latinam vulgatam versionem, XII. Sapientia Salomonis, Liber Hiesu filii Sirach, Rome 1964. CERIANI, A. M. (ed.), Translatio Syra Pescitto Veteris Testamenti ex codice Ambrosiano sec. fere VI photolithographice edita, I-II, Milan 1876-1883. DE LAGARDE, P. A., Libri Veteris Testamenti apocryphi Syriace, Leipzig – London 1861. DI LELLA, A. A., The Hebrew Text of Sirach. A Text-Critical and Historical Study (Studies Classical Literature 1), London – The Hague – Paris 1966. DI LELLA, A. A., Use and Abuse of the Tongue: Ben Sira 5,9-6,1, in: DIESEL, A. A. ET AL. (eds.), “Jedes Ding hat seine Zeit …”. Studien zur israelitischen und altori- entalischen Weisheit. Festschrift D. Michel (BZAW 241), Berlin – New York 1996, 33-48. DIOGENES LAËRTIUS, Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers, London 1891. LIDDELL, H. G. – SCOTT, R. – JONES, H. ST. – MCKENZIE, R., A Greek-English Lexicon, Oxford 1953. LINDER, A., Lingua tripla, giogo ferreo e l’oro della parola: Studio esegetico di Sir 28,13-26 in parallelo con testi sapienziali egiziani, Diss. Pontificia Università S. Tommaso D’Aquino, Rome 2001. LUST, J. – EYNIKEL, E. – HAUSPIE, K. (eds.), Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint, revised edition, Stuttgart 2003. OESTERLEY, W. O. E., The Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach or Ecclesiasticus, Cam- bridge 1912. OKOYE, J. I., Speech in Ben Sira with special reference to 5,9-6,1, Frankfurt a.M. 1995. PUBLILIUS SYRUS, Moral Sayings, Cleveland – Boston 1856. Scholar’s Collection-3 CD-ROM with Accordance 5.3, Altamonte Springs, FL 2002 (= The GRAMCORD Institute, Vancouver, WA). SHAKESPEARE, W., Measure for Measure, London 1969. SMEND, R., Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach, hebräisch und deutsch, Berlin 1906. SPICQ, C., L’Ecclésiastique, in: PIROT, L. – CLAMER, A. (eds.), La Sainte Bible, VI, Paris 1951. SKEHAN, P. W. – DI LELLA, A. A., The Wisdom of Ben Sira. A New Translation with Notes, and Introduction (AncB 39), New York 1987. The New American Bible including the Revised New Testament, New York 1986. The Revised Psalms of the New American Bible, New York 1991. ZIEGLER, J., Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach (Septuaginta. Vetus Testamentum Graecum XII/2), Göttingen 1965. The metaphor of “falling”: hermeneutic key to the Book of Sirach

ANTONINO MINISSALE

1. Introduction

The study of metaphors is useful to us for understanding not only the style but also the thought of an author. If we are concerned with an author of well defined identity, as is the case with Ben Sira more than in any other book of the Old Testament, the systematic study of a metaphor which runs through all his works will help us to fathom the nature of his personality and the particular sensibility in which his thought is soaked. The action of “falling” indicates first of all a physical fact concerning things or people. But when the idea of falling is used in a transferred sense or as a metaphor, we are introduced in a solid way into the ideal and imaginary world of an author and to the presuppositions of his language. Falling, understood in a metaphorical sense, refers us to the way in which the reality which surrounds us is perceived, to the sense of the mutability of all things and their possible instability, a basic datum of the experience which man has of himself and the world in which he lives. The concepts which can be referred to the semantic area of falling are diverse and take in various aspects such as : slipping, stumbling, stagger- ing, shaking, falling; to set a trap, to plot an ambush or to fall into a snare; and again, in the opposite sense, to find support or assistance. To trace the passages relevant to this semantic area, we begin with the Greek text, which is more complete, and we choose as our starting grid thirteen words which refer to five different roots. They are indicated in what follows together with a generic and conventional translation:

1) pi,ptw “to fall” (11x), ptw,sij “fall” (12x); evmpi,ptw “fall into” (9x), prospi,ptw “fall against” (1x); avnti,ptwma “that which causes falling“ (2x); 2) prosko,ptw “to stumble” (4x), pro,skomma “obstacle, stumbling block” (5x), avpro,skopoj “without obstacles” (1x); 3) ovlisqa,nw “to slip” (7x), ovli,sqhma “tumble” (1x); 4) skandali,zw “to trap, to cause to fall” (3x), ska,ndalon “trap” (2x); 5) ptai,w “to be hindered” (2x).

To be more exhaustive, the enquiry must also take account of the Hebrew vocabulary to cover those passages in which the translator does not employ the Greek words indicated above. We are talking about lpn “to fall”, lvk and 254 Antonino Minissale lqt “to stumble”, jwm “to stagger”, vqy “trap”, v[r “to shake”, with their cog- nates, the substantives xp “snare”, tvr “net”, hdwcm “trap”, the antonyms ![v “to be supported” and ![vm “support”. By means of all these terms, both Greek and Hebrew, we have put together seventy two passages of the Book of Sirach which will be the object of our analysis, In the most general way, it should be specified right from the start that “falling” presents a double aspect which can be summed up in two ways in which we commonly speak: to fall into error and to fall into disgrace. In “to fall into error” or into any kind of improper or thoughtless behaviour, what is emphasised is an action for which the individual is responsible in an active sense. On the other hand, in “to fall into disgrace”, what is highlighted is an unpleasant situation which the person undergoes in a passive sense and which falls on his shoulders without his wishing it. In traditional sapiential thought and especially in Ben Sira, it is held that the evil which a man undergoes is the result of a wrong first committed by him. To fall into disgrace, therefore is the result of falling into error.1 A man is the cause of his own disgrace and of his own misfortune, as also of his well being and tranquillity. But given the sententious character of Sirach’s statements, it is not immediately clear whether the “falling” regards the mistaken deed in itself or the consequences of it which have to be borne. In our basic exposition we shall proceed by order of theme which, in fact, offers us a significant sample of the contents of the Book of Sirach in which the most diverse aspects of life and of the corresponding moral conduct are tackled. The passages which were singled out by means of the catalogue of Greek and Hebrew words which we have presented, can be arranged according to these thematic areas: 1) the tongue; 2) woman; 3) enemies; 4) rich and poor; 5) vices and virtues; 6) behaviour at table; 7) God and the theological triad, wisdom, law and the fear of God. Finally we shall consider the cases in which Gr introduces the metaphor presumably because of some aversion to what has been said by Hb (8). After a final table (9), we shall propose in conclusion an hypothesis for the global interpretation of the thought of Ben Sira (10).

1 This is the principal mark of the connection which the ancients perceived between an action and its consequence (Der Tun-Ergehen-Zusammenhang), illustrated with much sub- tlety by VON RAD, Weisheit in Israel, 165-181 (“Ursachen und Wirkungen”), who also highlights how the sages, despite the schematic nature of this concept, were aware of the ambi- guity (“Mehrdeutigkeit”, p. 165) of the phenomena. The metaphor of “falling”: hermeneutic key to the Book of Sirach 255

2. The tongue

There are fourteen passages2 which turn on the theme of the tongue, especially its abuse. We shall review them beginning with this impassioned question with which the “Prayer for the Discipline of the Passions” contained in 22:27–23:6 opens: [1]3 “Who will set a guard upon my tongue / and upon my lips a seal suited to all necessities (panou/rgon) in order that I do not fall (pi,ptw) and that my tongue may not destroy me (avpo,llumi)” (22:27 Gr). Ben Sira is aware of the widespread nature of this grave defect because he observes: [2] “Many have fallen (pi,ptw) by the edge of the sword, but not so many as have fallen (pi,ptw) because of the tongue” (28:18 Gr).The misuse of the tongue is deeply corrosive of the reputation of man in society: [3] “Glory and dishonour (are) in the hand of the one who speaks, and the tongue of a man (is that which) makes him fall (hlpm)“4 (5:13 Hb) – “Glory and dishonour (are) in (the way of) speaking, and the tongue of a man (is) for him (the cause of) falling (ptw/sij)” (5:13 Gr). A disorder- ly use of the tongue is so serious that it is set in direct relationship with abandoning the Lord. Here the compound evmpi,ptw is employed with eivj, in the sense that the “falling on” the tongue ruins its good use, as if crush- ing it. There follows a kind of retaliation because it burns the one responsible in so far as it destroys him socially: [4] “Those who abandon the Lord will fall (evmpi,ptw) on it (= the tongue), and (it) will burn them and not be extinguished“ (28:23 Gr). According to the logic of the image, when we find slipping and falling as a pair, the fall is preceded by the “slip”, always in the same order: [5] “The slip (ovlisqa,nw) (caused) by the ground (is) preferable to that (caused) by the tongue, so the fall (ptw/sij) of the wicked will occur speedily” (20:18 Gr); “Beware lest you slip (ovlisqa,nw) with it (= the tongue) lest you fall (pi,ptw) before him who lies in wait” (28:26 Gr). But the slip can be evoked on its own and, in this case, it is intended to attenuate the gravity of behaviour which is nonetheless reprehensible: [7] “A person may slip (ovlisqa,nw) but not (moved) by the mind, and who has not sinned with his tongue?” (19:16 Gr); [8] “He who is presumptuous (dunato,j) with his tongue is known from afar, but he who reflects knows that (he can) slip (ovlisqa,nw)” (21:7 Gr); “Blessed is he who lives with an intelligent wife and who has not slipped (ovlisqa,nw) with his tongue” (25:8 Gr).

2 The Hebrew text (= Hb), the Marginal readings of Ms B (Ms Bm), and the text of Ben Sira Scroll from Masada (Mas), are found in the edition of BEN HAYYIM (ed.), The Book of Ben Sira. The Greek version (= Gr), in the edition of ZIEGLER, Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach. 3 The numbers in square brackets, at the beginning of the passages analysed, indicate the progressive order in which they are placed in my study. 4 Retaining wtlpm (Ms A) against wjylpm, “saves him” (Ms C). 256 Antonino Minissale

The incautious use of the tongue turns out to be particularly risky in front of one’s enemies or, at any rate, people who cannot be trusted: [10] “So my mistakes will not be multiplied and my sins will not abound, I shall not fall (pi,ptw) before my adversaries, and my enemy will not rejoice over me” (23:3 Gr); [11] “The sinner will be entangled with his lips, and the envi- ous and the proud will find a trap (skandali,zw, pass.) in them” (23:8 Gr); “In your presence his mouth is all sweetness, and he admires your words, but later he will twist his mouth and will find a trap (ska,ndalon) in your (own) words” to throw them back against you (27:23 Gr). The admonition [13] “Do not go to law with a great man lest you fall (lpn)5 into his hand (= into his power)” (8:1 Hb), is specified in the translation with recourse to the compound verb: “Do not go to law with a powerful man lest you fall (sheer) into (evmpi,ptw eivj) his hands” (8:1 Gr). We have a more innovative example for Gr in connection with sadness: [14] “Blessed is the man whose mouth has not given him (cause for) sadness (wbc), and ‘has not brought’ on him ‘affliction’6 in his heart” (14:1 Hb) – “Blessed is the man who has not slipped (ovlisqa,nw) with his mouth and who is not afflicted by the punishment for his sin (a`marti,a)” (14:1 Gr). In the fourteen passages examined, we have met these five terms from the starting grid: ovlisqa,nw (6x), pi,ptw (5x), ptw/sij (2x), evmpi,ptw (2x), skandali,zw (1x), ska,ndalon (1x) but the sum of their occurrences is seventeen because a term can be used more than once. In the passages which are given in Hebrew, we twice meet the root lpn, translated by ptw/sij for the substantive hlpm (5: 13) [3], and by evmpi,ptw for the verbal form (8:1) [13]. Gr avoids the repetition of the same concept. The first time he has recourse to our metaphor with ovlisqa,nw. Then he adds the notion of sin and so accentuates the paraenetic value of the sentence. Just as here, so also in all the other cases, the “falling” regards the action of the wrong use of the tongue, not its consequence. Nine of the fourteen passages considered occur within a literary unity devoted to the theme of the tongue: “The Good Use of the Tongue” (5:9–6:1), “Caution with the Tongue” (19:4-17), “Inappropriate and Lying Speech” (20:18-26), “Dis- cipline of the Tongue” (23:7-15), “Speaking Falsely” (27:22-29), “Errors in Speech” (28:8-26).7

5 lwpt is to be preferred to bwvt, “return” recorded in the duplicate of Ms A itself. 6 hba is corrected to abh and !yd to !wd (cf. SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 252). 7 The titles and pericope divisions, are taken from MINISSALE, Siracide. I have used RSV as a basis but translated from the Italian where there is a significant difference. The metaphor of “falling”: hermeneutic key to the Book of Sirach 257

3. The woman

On several occasions, Ben Sira returns to the theme of the woman, considered under various aspects, but always from the typically masculine point of view of his school. The six passages in which the metaphor of “falling” occurs are found within the units which concern the “Dangerous Women” (9:1-9), “The Treacherous Wife” (25:13-26) and “The Choice of a Wife” (36:26 -31). The traditional theme of the strange woman (Prov 2:16; 5:3.20; 7:5; 22:14; 23:27) is taken up again by Ben Sira in the widest acceptation of this term, which can be interpreted as referring to the woman who is not one’s own wife, and is, therefore, an outsider, or to the woman who prostitutes herself and can be also ethnically foreign; to this latter figure, the courte- san8 whom we meet in the specification given by Gr comes closest: [15] “Do not approach a strange woman (hrz hva) lest you fall (lpn) into her traps (hdwcm)” (9:3 Hb)9 – “Do not approach a woman who is a prostitute (e`tairi,zomai)10 lest you fall (evmpi,ptw) into her snares (pagi,j)” (9:3 Gr). But even a normal young virgin puts Ben Sira on his guard for his pupils: [16] “Do not think too much about a virgin lest you be entrapped (– fqy Ni) in penalties on her account” (9:5 Hb) – “Do not look intently at a virgin lest you be entrapped (skandali,zw pass.) in penalties on her account” (9:5 Gr). Thus the married woman is also taken into consideration. In front of her, one must be aware of the tragic consequences which can derive from a drunken moment (wine: v. 9b) which causes loss of self-control: [17] “... lest you cause you heart to turn (hjn Hi) to her and you (later) have to turn (hjn Q) in blood to the ditch (txv)” (9:9cd Hb) – “... lest your soul be turned (evkkli,nw) to her and you slip (ovlisqa,nw) with your blood into destruction (9: 9cd Gr); here it is Gr who introduces our metaphor, so avoiding the repetition of the same verb which occurs in Hb. In fact, the sage/master is anxious to emphasise not so much the probable malice of the woman as the responsibility of the man: [18] “Do not fall (lpn) before a woman’s beauty and do not desire her for what she possesses” (25:21 Hb)11 – “Do not fall (prospi,ptw) for a woman’s beauty and do not desire a woman”(25:21 Gr); this warning is accentuated by Gr with the use of the compound verb,12 and

8 The feminine substantive e`tai,ra is translated by BDAG. 9 So the first distich of the duplicate of Ms A. 10 LUST – EYNIKEL – HAUSPIE (eds.), Greek-English Lexicon, 183, translate this verb with “to be a courtesan”; WAGNER, Die Septuaginta, 207, points out that it is “certainly less suspect and more delicate“ (“der unverfänglichere und feinere Ausdruck”) in so far as it is not porneu,w, the cognate of which po,rnh “prostitute” is used in v. 6. 11 Textual lacuna in Ms A, thus reconstructed by LÉVI, The Hebrew Text; SEGAL, Sefer ben- Sira’ hashalem, and VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico. 12 This is the only time that prospi,ptw occurs in Sirach. 258 Antonino Minissale further with the repeated mention of the woman who is thus brought more into focus, leaving out what she possesses and so emphasising her danger as a person. In the second pericope devoted to the woman, there is a one-sided observation on the misfortune of a man who lives in a matrimonial situation which does not make him happy: [19] “The woman who does not make her husband happy is the cause of drooping hands and stumbling (!wlvk) knees” (25:23 Hb); Gr simplifies by interpreting the metaphor: Drooping hands and weak (paralu,w) knees (are caused) by the woman who does not make her husband happy (25:23 Gr). But in the end, in the context of the pericope 36:26-31, the importance of the successful choice of a wife is praised because with her the husband does not experience the fall but its opposite, the support which fortifies against the fall: [20] “He who acquires his wife gets his best possession; (she is) ‘help’13 and fortification and pillar of support (![vm)” (36:29 Hb) – “He who acquires a wife begins (the accumulation) of her property: (he has) a help close by14 and a pillar (on which to have) rest (avna,pausij)” (36:29 Gr [v. 24 in Rahlfs]: thus the positive aspect is stressed). In the six passages considered, all present in both Hb and Gr, we should note the double specification employed by Gr who translates with evmpi,ptw for falling into the snares of the strange woman (9:3) and with the stronger prospi,ptw for the attraction that a beautiful virgin can exercise on the man who meets her (25:21). We come across two new verbs relating to the semantic zone of “to fall”: vqy (skandali,zw) and hjn (ovlisqa,nw) and again two antonymic substantives !wlvk (25:23) and ![vm (25:29). This time, by contrast with what we have observed in the topic of the tongue, the metaphor of “falling” indicates more directly the consequence of an error committed with the tongue, except for the case of “falling” when it is occasioned by the beauty of a virgin (25:21).

4. Enemies

In Ben Sira, social relationships are pervaded with an attitude so cautious as easily to become suspicious. We have already seen how, inspired by pedagogic concerns directed towards men, this is the attitude with which he deals with the subject of the woman. Now we find it again in the variegat- ed survey of relationships with everyone else. Thus the ten passages in question can be brought together under the label of “enemies”. While Ben Sira

13 With Ms B (rz[), against Ms Bm and Ms C (ry[). 14 “A help close by”: the translation by bohqo.n kata. auvto.n is influenced by Gen 2:18 LXX which interprets thus the Hebrew wdgnk rz[ “a help (which may be) as if in front of him”. The metaphor of “falling”: hermeneutic key to the Book of Sirach 259 believes, on the one hand, in the importance of friendship, he shows himself, on the other hand, very anxious about the risks which it involves.15 Therefore, it is necessary to take account of false friends in time so as not to trust them naïvely: [21] “As long as ‘you’ stand on your feet, he will not be seen, but if “you” stagger (fwm) he will not stay” (12:15 Hb)16 – “He will stay with you for an hour, but if you stagger (ekkli,nw), he does not hang around” (12:15 Gr). By contrast, the true friend knows how to be a strong support in time of need: [22] “His heart (is in accord with) your heart and if you stumble (lvk), ‘he will sympathise with you’”17 (37:12cd Hb) – “His soul (is) as your soul and if you stumble (ptai,w), he will sympathise with you” (37:12cd Gr). In the face of personal enemies, Ben Sira wishes to be able to see them fall into disgrace: [23] “With nine thoughts I have gladdened my heart, and the tenth I shall tell with my tongue: a man rejoicing in his children who lives to see the fall (ptw/sij) of his enemies” (25:7 Gr). In the final appendix, the sage author raises a song of thanksgiving to the Lord for having actually escaped a mortal danger: [24] “You have helped me according to the abundance of your mercy (to free me) from the trap (vqwm) of those who lie in ambush on the rock ([ls)18 and from the hand of those who make an attempt on my life; you have saved me from many tribulations” (51:3 Hb) – “You have been my help and you have saved me according to the multitude of your mercy and (the greatness) of your name, from the snares (bro,coj) prepared (to make me their) food (brw/ma), from the hand of those who lay in ambush for my life, from the many tribulations which I have had” (51:3 Gr). His own enemies are described as ungodly and for them there is awaited with gladness a kind of misfortune analogous to that which had struck the godly undeservedly, provoking in their adversaries a satisfaction which reveals their knavery: [25] “Those who rejoice in the fall (ptw/sij) of the godly will be caught in a snare (pagi,j), and pain will consume them before their death” (27:29 Gr). Into this framework there fits well what is said in the following sentence, lacking in Gr: [26] “If you stumble (lvk), it is a lasting joy and if you die, (it is) a curse ” (41:9 Hb). Shortly before, having recognised the worth of the physician and his skill, Ben Sira does not succeed in restrain- ing the resentment which opposes him to the sinner, whom he wishes to have to have recourse to the physician. The enemy is thus understood as having been struck with a deserved malady: [27] “He who sins before his

15 CORLEY, Ben Sira’s Teaching, especially 45-50 and 214-217. 16 With the second distich of Ms A, but correcting dm[ to dm[t and jwmn to jwmt (cf. SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 245). 17 Variant $b rk[y (Ms Bm), against $yla [ygy “he will come close to you” (Ms B). 18 SEGAL, Sefer ben-Sira’ hashalem, 354. 260 Antonino Minissale

Maker, may he be delivered into the hands19 of the physician” (38:15 Hb); Gr explains in his usual language: “He who sins before Him who has made him, let him fall into (evmpi,ptw eivj) the hands of the physician” (38:15 Gr). Finally, relationships with others are viewed also in their political perspective, where it is important to know how to maintain one’s own independence and detachment in the face of superior powers: [28] “Do not seek to become a governor (lvwm) if you do not have the strength to make inso- lence cease, lest you be frightened of a powerful man (bydn) and a blow ([cb)20 is inflicted on your integrity” (7:6cd Hb); Gr interprets: “Do not seek to become a judge (krith,j) if you do not have the strength to extirpate injus- tices lest you show yourself timid in the presence of a powerful man (duna,sthj) and place a trap (ska,ndalon) in (the way of) your integrity” (7:6cd Gr). But it is also necessary to steer clear of a sentence to one’s own harm: [29] “Keep away from him who has the power to kill and (so) you will not incur the fear of death, and if you do come near to him, do not incur any guilt lest he take away your life: know that you are walking among snares (xp) and the you are passing over a net (tvr)” (9:13 Hb); Gr changes the second metaphor, passing from the net which causes one to fall to the battlements from which one can fall: “know that you are walking in the midst of snares (pagi,j) and that you are passing along the battlements (e;palxij) of the city”(9:13 Gr). But it is equally necessary, according to Gr, to maintain the independence of one’s own conscience in the face of a populist temptation: [30] “Do not offend against the multitude of the city and do not make yourself fall (kataba,llw) (too much) in favour of the people” (7:7 Gr); in Hb there is a more neutral attitude: “Do not become ungodly in the meeting at the gate,21 and do not cause yourself to fall (lpn Hi) (by offending) in the assembly“ (7:7 Hb). The new terms included in the theme of “falling” refer to the instruments which cause a fall; xp (pagi,j) and tvr (transformed in Gr into evpa,lxeij po,lewj), both in 9:13 [29]. Given the external nature of the danger in the passages here considered à propos of the enemies, the metaphor of “falling” refers to “falling into disgrace” as a consequence of a previous mistake.

19 With Ms Bm (ydy l[ rgwtsy) followed by SMEND, Die Weisheit, 342, and PETERS, Das Buch, 314, against ynpl rbgty (Ms B) preferred by SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 443. 20 Here [cb is not being used in the ordinary sense of “unjust gain” but as the equivalent of [cp “guilt, injuries, shame”; so ELWOLDE, Developments in Hebrew Vocabulary, 31, and already LÉVI, The Hebrew Text, 78 (“fault, blemish, discredit”) . 21 r[v is being read instead of la yr[v, expansion due to a dittography with the following law (cf. SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 198). The metaphor of “falling”: hermeneutic key to the Book of Sirach 261

5. Rich and poor

Even if Ben Sira enjoys a prestigious social position which involves close collaboration with the well-to-do classes of the Jerusalem of his day,22 he is critical of the rich and shows himself sensitive in dealing with the dignity and the hardships of the poor. From this point of view, there are five passages which we can now examine, equally attested in Hb and Gr. When one is invited to dinner by a rich man, one must avoid showing excessive familiarity with him and at the same time must act in a way that will inspire respect: [31] “Do not get (too) close (brq Htp) lest you be pushed back, and do not hang back (too much) lest you be despised (anft)”(13:10 Hb); Gr is more precise: “Do not fall(by throwing yourself forward) (evmpi,ptw) lest you be despised, do not stand too far back lest you be forgotten (evpilanqa,nw) (Gr reads hfnt)” (13:10 Gr). The good sense which characterises Ben Sira causes him to observe with regret that when the rich man finds himself in need, he easily finds help by contrast with the poor man: [32] “The rich man (who) staggers23 (jwm) is assisted by his friend whereas the poor man (who) staggers (jwmn) is passed on from friend to friend” (13:21 Hb); Gr makes clear: “The rich man who has (just) been shaken (saleu,w, pass,) is assisted by his friends, whereas the poor man who falls (pi,ptw) is despised even more by his friends”(13:21 Gr: repeats the preceding expression “by his friends”).

22 That is emphasised many times, but in a critical sense, by WISHMEYER, Die Kultur, 50: “So, the principal interest of Sirach is in favour of the upper classes of society. It was from here that he recruited his pupils. It is here that he himself is quite at home” (“Dabei gilt Sir- achs Hautinteresse den Oberschichten. Hierher rekrutieren seine Schüler. Hier ist er selb- st beheimatet”). According to Wischmeyer, this social location explains the conservative and, for his time, largely irrelevant stamp of the teaching of Ben Sira: “The fundamental- ly conservative and aristocratic understanding of society in Ben Sira is clear right from the start” (“Das konservativ – aristokratische Grundverständnis der sozialen Welt bei Jesus Sirach ist also von Anfang an deutlich”, p. 52). “In fact, Ben Sira was teaching the sons of the upper class. Only these had the time to tackle the prolonged and ambitious education of Ben Sira and were able to afford (the cost of ) this education” (“Denn Sirach unterrichtete Söhne aus der Oberschicht. Nur diese hatten Zeit, sich der langwierigen und ansprchsvollen Erziehung Sirachs auszusetzen und konnten sich diese Bildung leis- ten”, p. 298). “The ideal of this formation was that of cultivating the spirit in private, something which, despite the pedagogic work of Ben Sira, must have remained the ideal of the more elderly, who could not and did not wish to undertake political action and would have also been hardly suitable for this, if we take account of their mentality formed unilaterally by the national culture of Israel” (“Es war das Bildungsideal der privaten Kultivierung der Seele, das trotz aller pädagogischen Bemühung Sirachs immer das Ideal älterer Männer bleiben mußte, die nicht mehr direkt in das politische Geschehen ein- greifen konnten oder wollten und aufgrund ihrer einseitigen Prägung durch die nationale Kultur Israels auch nur sehr begrenzt dazu fähig gewesen wären”, p. 299). 23 Correcting jwm (Ms A) to jwmn, in parallel with the following jwmn, and $msm (Ms A) to $smn (Gr sthri,zetai). 262 Antonino Minissale

The poor man not only finds no help but, with cynicism, he is made to do everything that will worsen his state of hardship: [33] “The poor man speaks. They say: Who is he? If he stumbles (lqt),24 they even push him down to the ground (@dh)” (13:23 Hb); Gr equivalently: “The poor man speaks and they say: Who is he? If he stumbles (prosko,ptw), they push him even to the ground (prosanatre,pw)” (13:23 Gr). This last word provides a nice alliteration with the previous prosko,ptw. In dealings with the poor, not only is sensitivity to his need recommend- ed but also the certainty is nourished that good done to him will find its reward in the eventuality that the benefactor find himself in need in his turn: “He who does good will find it (afterwards) in his ways, and when he staggers (jwm) he will find a support (![vm)” (3:31 Hb); Gr interprets: [34] ”He who repays the favours (avntapodidou.j25 ca,ritaj) (received by God, showing himself later to be generous with the needy) is remembered also afterwards and in the time of (his) fall (ptw/sij), (in need) he will find a support (sth,rigma)” (3:31 Gr). In the sequel, a return is made to the same theme with other words: [35] “And the generosity (of a man towards his neighbour) will never falter (jwm)26 and (his) righteousness (hqdc) (manifested in the help given to the poor) will endure for ever” (40:17 Hb); Gr interprets: “Generosity (is) like a garden (para,deisoj: then also in v. 27 with Hb !d[) (rich) in blessings (evn euvlogi,aij) and almsgiving (e`lehmosu,nh) endures for ever” (40:17 Gr). We observe in conclusion that in the five passages considered the metaphor of “falling”, referring to ascertainable social conditions, indicates the “falling into misfortune”.

6. Vices and virtues

The sapiential tradition commonly describes the moral life in a simplified way counterposing the virtues and vices. It also presents a contrast between the wise/righteous and the fool/ungodly. Throughout the Book of Sirach,

24 The verb lqt, which is not attested in the Old Testament, originates from Aramaic and is present in the Mishnah; so SEGAL, Sefer ben-Sira’ hashalem, 86, who considers it, like JASTROW, A Dictionary of the Targumim, 1691, equivalent to the Hebrew lvk. In fact, it translates lvk in Mal 2:8 but vqy in Deut 7:25; 12:30 (cf. DALMAN,Aramäisch – neuhebräisches Handwörter- buch, 447). lqt is attested at Qumran (cf. BEENTJES, The Hebrew Texts, 58) and occurs in Sir 13:23 [33]; 15:12 [54]; 32:20 [46], while in 31:7 [53] we have the cognate hlqt. 25 The subject understood could be either God or man, as is noted in FRITZSCHE, Die Weisheit Jesus Sirach’s, 27, who did not know the Hebrew, from which the second opinion already preferred by this author has been confirmed. 26 With Ms B (jwmy 3rd masc.), while Mas has trkt (fem.) “she will (not) be destroyed”, despite the fact that the subject dsx is masculine. The metaphor of “falling”: hermeneutic key to the Book of Sirach 263 the largest part (1:1–42:14) puts forward teachings which explain how to conduct oneself wisely and in harmony with the Law, animated by the fear of God, in the most diverse circumstances of life. From this perspective too, the metaphor of “falling” provides us with a little sample of the whole book. We shall examine here eleven passages of which two are not found in Hb but only in Gr (1:22; 1:30). At the most intimate level, before even speaking of virtues, the author talks of sentiments, for example the sentiment of hope: [36] “Blessed is he whose desire (vpn) does not leave him unsatisfied and whose hope (tlxwt) has not ceased (tbv)” (14:2 Hb); Gr interprets: “Blessed is he whose conscience does not reprove him and who has not fallen (pi,ptw) (away) from his hope” (14:2 Gr). This lack of hope seems to characterise old age: [37] “O death, how good is your decree for him who is without vigour and is lacking in strength, the man who stumbles (lvk) and bumps (fqy Ni) into everything, who is contrary and loses hope (hwqt)” (41:42 Hb) – “O death, how good is your decree for him who is in need and weakened in strength, advanced in years (evscatogh,rwj) and anxious (perispa,w) in everything and who is disheartened and has lost his patience (u`pomonh,)” (41:2 Gr). In addition to the loss of hope, sadness is also put down as a negative psychological condition: [38] “Do not give your soul to sadness27 and do not stumble (lvk) (absorbed) in your reflection” (30:21 Hb); Gr eliminates the metaphor because he interprets it: “Do not give your soul to sadness and do not afflict yourself (qli,bw) with your reflection (boulh,)” (30:21 Gr). But there are other, less excusable dispositions which are true and proper vices, such as anger and pride: [39] “Unrighteous anger cannot be justified; for a man’s excess of anger will be the cause of his fall (ptw/sij)” (1:22 Gr); [40] “Do not exalt yourself lest you fall (pi,ptw) and bring dishonour upon yourself” (1:30 Gr). This pride should also be opposed with vigour in the education of one’s son: [41] “Discipline your son and increase his yoke lest in his foolishness he exalt himself28 against you” (30:13 Hb); Gr introduces the metaphor, rendering the verse in a more direct manner: “Disci- pline your son and take pains with him lest you stumble (prosko,ptw)29 (by falling into disgrace) through his depravity” (30:13 Gr). In the specific historical context of Ben Sira, pride assumes a particular religious and cultural connotation in the sense that it can be the means of yielding to the intellectual seduction of Hellenism:30 “Because many are the

27 Reading !wd instead of !yd (Ms B) and preferring $tc[b (Ms Bm) to $nw[ “from your guilt” (Ms B). 28 Reading with Ms Bm l[ty (apocopated form of hl[ty, so Segal) in place of [lty (Ms B), judged “unintelligible” by SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 375. 29 According to SEGAL, Sefer ben-Sira’ hashalem, 184, the translator Gr would have read lqt, which has the same meaning. 30 Cf. SMEND, Die Weisheit, 31. 264 Antonino Minissale schemes of the sons of men and wicked imaginations have led them astray (h[t Hi)” (3:24 Hb); Gr interprets introducing the metaphor: “Their own presumption has deceived many and wicked illusions have made their thoughts slip (ovlisqa,nw)” (3:24 Gr). This benevolent and yielding tolerance towards the foreign culture will show itself to be harmful to themselves: “Do not be benevolent to your own harm and do not be shamed into (incurring) your own slipping (lwvkm)”31 (4:22 Hb); Gr keeps the metaphor and emphasises it: [43] “Do not be benevolent to your own harm and do not be shamed into (incurring) your own downfall (ptw/sij)” (4:22 Gr). Even in the historical commemoration of the past, the metaphor of stumbling flourish- es as the term fot deviation from the correct religious norm: [44] “Jeroboam... who sinned ands made Israel to sin and placed (in front of ) Ephraim a stumbling block (lwvkm)” (47:23ef); Gr interprets the metaphor by eliminating it: “made Israel to sin and instituted for Israel a way of sin (o`do.n a`marti,aj)”. In connection with the limping which in this characterisation of the old man can have an ironic connotation, the author speaks also of shame: [45] “(Do not be ashamed...) to chastise the idiot or the fool, and the limping (lvk) old man who is occupied with obscenity (twnz)“ (42:8 Hb); Gr interprets: “(to correct) the decrepit old man (evscatogh,rwj)32 who competes (with the young) in the act of fornication (pornei,a)” (42:8 Gr). And finally, in a general sense, the metaphor of “falling” is well suited to recommend the caution so dear to Ben Sira; [46] “Do not go on a path (full) of traps (vqwm) and do not stumble (lqt) into (the same) ‘obstacle’33 twice” (32:20 Hb); Gr adds another metaphor: “Do not go on a path (full) of traps (avnti,ptwma) and do not stumble on stony ground (evn liqw,desin)” (32:20 Gr). As in this case, so also in the other examples considered with regard to vices and virtues, we are dealing with personal attitudes which lead to “falling into error”.

7. Banquets and profits

The lures of vice are made concrete in a special way in the abuse of food and drink, in particular of wine, and in excessive searching after profit. We can illustrate this theme with seven passages, two of which we find only in Gr (29:19; 29:20). Dealing with “Moderation in Drinking and Eating”

31 Preferring in stich b $l lwvkml vwbt law (Ms C) to $ylwvkml lvkt law “and do not slide through your sliding” (Ms A). 32 With this same compound adjective, exclusive to Sirach, lvk has already been translated in 41:2 [37]; cf. WAGNER, Die Septuaginta, 206-207. 33 Preferring @gnb (Ms B) to $rdb “in the street” (Ms E) which is a repetition (MINISSALE, La versione greca, 80-81). This reading is also preferred by BEENTJES, The Hebrew Texts, 259. The metaphor of “falling”: hermeneutic key to the Book of Sirach 265

(31:12-30), Ben Sira finds the opportunity to advise against greediness in the context of a banquet to which one has been invited: [47] “Finish first for the sake of discipline, and do not be greedy lest you make yourself an object of revulsion (l[g)”34 (31:17 Hb); Gr is specific having recourse to the metaphor: “Finish first for the sake of discipline, and do not be greedy lest you stumble (prosko,ptw)” (31:17 Gr)”. This advice becomes more insistent for the wine: [48] “And also, as for wine, do not play mister big, because wine has made many stumble (lvk Hi)” (31:25 Hb) – “With wine do not play the big man because wine has ruined (avpo,llumi) many” (31:25 Gr: he interprets); [49] “Headache, bitterness and shame (is the result of) wine drunk in irritation and anger (s[k)” (31:29 Hb) – “Bitterness of soul (is the result of) much wine drunk in irritation and in what causes one to fall (avnti,ptwma)” (31:29 Gr; he adds the metaphor); [50] “The abundance of sparkling wine (is) a trap (vqwm) for the fool, it diminishes one’s strength and adds wounds” (31:30 Hb) – “Drunkenness increases the anger of the fool so as (to cause) a trap (pro,skomma) for him. It diminishes his strength and multiplies his wounds” (31:30 Gr). Just as greediness at table is unseemly, so one should disapprove, in a more general sense, of the avarice with which someone claims more than his fair share in the division of an inheritance which has to be shared with others; [51] “For the eye of the one who stumbles (lvk)35 his own share is small, but whoever takes the share of his companion loses his own“ (14:9 Hb); Gr interprets: “The eye of the one who is greedy (pleone,kthj) is not satisfied with his (own) share, but mean injustice withers (his) soul”(14:9 Gr). In the vast area of financial operations, particular attention is devoted the risks which are run by whoever gives guarantees, impelled by the illusion of a profit; but in any case, it is necessary to temper prudence with generosity: [52] “The sinner will fall into (evmpi,ptw eivj) making guarantees and he who follows profits will fall (evmpi,ptw) into (being dragged before) the courts. Be concerned with your neighbour according to your opportunity, but think of yourself lest you fall (evmpi,ptw)“ (29:19-20 Gr). Finally, Ben Sira warns against the lust for gold: [53] “Since it is a stumbling block (hlqt) for the idiot and every fool will be entangled by it (vqy Ni)” (31:7 Hb) – “It is a stumbling

34 Taking account of the duplicate provided by v. 16 in Ms B, that which corresponds to v. 16 should be chosen as stich of v. 17b in Hb, because nearer to Gr: l[jt !p j[t law. l[g ‘s being a relatively rare word (Lev 26:11.15.30.43.44; 2 Sam 1:21; Jer 14:19; Ezek 16:45; Job 21:10) and indecent in more than one sense, could have suggested to the translator recourse to prosko,ptw. 35 SMEND, Die Weisheit, 132, basing himself on Gr, would like to read as the Hebrew term corresponding to pleone,kthj (a word exclusive to Sirach, cf. WAGNER, Die Septuagin- ta, 270-271), [cwb, despite the fact that in Sirach it would have the meaning of “calum- niator” and not of “extortionist” (cf. supra, note 19). Therefore, it is better to keep lvk (Ms A). 266 Antonino Minissale block (pro,skomma) for those who are infatuated with it and every fool will be taken captive (a`li,skw) by it“ (31:7 Gr). If we wish to specify the sense of the metaphor in the passages examined, we can observe that here it is placed half way between a mistaken attitude and its extreme consequences, because it concerns actions which trig- ger off a negative and dangerous process seen in its totality.

8. God and the fear of the Lord

The metaphor of “falling” also occurs in various ways in the more narrowly religious discourse, since the human experience is always considered in the light of God. There are twelve passages which can be referred to here, seven present in Hb and Gr, five only in Gr. Firstly, confirms that the responsibility for evil must not be attributed to God, rather it derives from man: [54] “Do not say: He (= God) has made me stumble (lqt Hi), because he has no need36 of violent men (smx)” (15:12 Hb) – “Do not say: He has deceived me (plana,w); for he has no need of a man who is a sinner (a`martwlo,j)” (15:12 Gr: first he interprets, then he generalises). On the other hand, as far as the godly are concerned, it is stated that they enjoy a particular divine protection: [55] “The paths of the upright will be levelled just as for the strangers they will be cluttered up (with stones) (lls Htp)” (39:24 Hb) – “His (= God’s) paths (are) straight for the godly, just as (they are full of) stumbling blocks (pro,skomma) for the ungodly“ (39:24 Gr substitutes his more habitual metaphor for the one of the stones). Passing on to terminology not included in our starting grid, we recall how, on the level of nature, evoking the scenario of the theophanies, God’s action is perceived by Ben Sira as more direct and impressive: [56] “When he looks at them, even the peaks of the mountains and the foundations of the earth shake (v[r) with fear” (16:19 Hb) – “When he looks at them, even the mountains and the foundations of the earth are agitated (sussei,w) with fear“ (16:19 Gr). As for the personal relationship with God, it can be summarised in particular in the theme of the fear of the Lord,37 which is that which expresses faith in him in the most vital way: [57] “You who fear the Lord, wait for his mercy, and do not turn away lest you fall (pi,ptw)” (2:7 Gr). Immediately afterwards the metaphor is used again with another term to confirm the certainty of the divine reward: [58] “You who fear the Lord, trust in him

36 Reading $rwc (Ms A), confirmed by Ms Bm, against #px yl “(I do not receive) satisfaction” (Ms B). 37 Cf. HASPECKER, Gottesfurcht bei Jesus Sirach, 337-339. The metaphor of “falling”: hermeneutic key to the Book of Sirach 267 and his reward will not find any obstacle (ptai,w)” (2:8 Gr). Paradoxically, falling into the hands of the Lord, one finds in him a strong support which preserves one from falling: [59] “Let us fall (throwing ourselves) into (evmpi,ptw eivj) the hands of the Lord and not into the hands of men” (2:18 Gr); [60] “With the fear of the Lord there is no want and with him there is no need to search for (any other) support (![vm)” (40:26cd Hb) – “With the fear of the Lord there is no want and with him there is no need to search for (any other) help (boh,qeia)” (40:26cd Gr: he interprets the metaphor). This idea is still better condensed thus: “The eyes of the Lord (are) on those who love him: (he is) a defence of (strong) power and support (sth,rigma) of (great) force, shelter from the heat and shade from the midday (sun), guard from stumbling (pro,skomma) and help from falling (ptw/sij)”(34:19a-d Gr). But even concerning the way of return to the Lord, we can recall an aspect of our metaphor: [62] “Return to the Lord and abandon your sins, pray in (his) presence and diminish the stumbling block (pro,skomma)” (17:25 Gr). The forms of the relationship with God are shown by analogy with the relationship which the disciple must establish with wisdom: [63] “And he will rely (Hb: ![v Ni/Gr: sthri,zw, pass.) on her and will not stagger (Hb: jwm /Gr: kli,nw) and he will trust in her and not be disappointed” (15:4 Hb-Gr). Two opposite attitudes are evidenced in relationship to the Law: [64] “He who hates the law will not become wise, but will be beaten (jwm Htp) ‘like a ship in the storm’”38 (33:2 Hb) – “The wise man does not hate the Law, but he who is hypocritical about it (is) like a boat in a storm” (Gr interprets); [65] “He who seeks from the Law will draw (knowledge) from it, but he who is foolish (hlhl Htp) remains trapped (vqy Ni) by it” (32:15 Hb) – “He who seeks from the Law will be filled by it, but he who is hypocritical (u`pokri,nomai) will be trapped (skandali,zw, pass.) by it” (Gr). While he keeps the metaphor, Gr interprets the first, very rare, verb with a more common word.

9. Idiomatic and non-metaphorical use

The metaphor of “falling” is encountered also in some idiomatic expressions which in themselves have the same significance in Hb and Gr. First of all, this word is used with reference to fate because in this way there is evoked the procedure of drawing lots by which there is assigned to each his own share by making something like a dice fall: [66] “There is little evil to be compared with the evil of a woman: the lot of the sinner will fall (lpn

38 The final lacuna of Ms B is restored effecting a merging of Ms Bm and of Ms E, corrected according to Gr: h/yna hr[smk. 268 Antonino Minissale

/evpipi,ptw) on her” (25:19 Hb-Gr), in the sense that he who chooses her as his wife deceives himself to his own cost. Elsewhere it is observed that it is not wise to rely on any old counsellor who can seek his own advantage and not that of him who seek is seeking the advice: [67] “For he will take thought for himself (when he is asked): of what (advantage) will this fall to him?” (37:8cd Hb) – “For he will give advice to his own advantage, lest he cast (ba,llw) the lot (klh/roj) against you” (37:8cd Gr: he changes the verb because he adds the complement “lot”). The metaphor is used again in connection with the obligation which is undertaken when making a promise, according to the logic of the image which considers its realisation as a “establishing it” (~wq Hi) and the not keeping of it as the opposite movement: [68] “God has not gone back on his mercy and has not made (any of) his words fall (lpn Hi) to the ground (hxra)” (47:22 Hb) – “The Lord has not gone back on his mercy and has not caused any of his works to perish (diafqei,rw)” (47:22 Gr; he interprets). A last idiomatic use of falling is with reference to dying: [69] “The hint of a malady cheers up the doctor: (one is) king today and tomorrow he will fall (lpn) (dead)” (10:10 Hb); G interprets: “A grave malady causes the doctor to smile: and (one is) king today, and tomorrow he will die (teleuta,w)”(10:10 Gr). Only to indicate the rite of prostration is “falling” used in a non- metaphorical sense in the final description of the solemn liturgy of the temple: [70] “All flesh will hasten together and fall (lpn) on their faces to the earth (hxra)” (50:17 Hb) – “Then shall all people hasten and fall (pi,ptw) on their faces to the ground (evpi. th.n gh/n)” (50:17 Gr); [71] “(All) started again to fall (lpn) for the second time ‘to receive the blessing’39 from his (= God’s) presence” (50:21 H) – “(The assembly) repeated the prostration (prosku,nhsij) to receive the blessing of the Most High” (50:21 Gr: he interprets using a technical term).

10. Idiosyncrasies of the greek translator

After having reviewed all the cases in which the metaphor of “falling” occurs in Hb or Gr, there remain or special consideration six passages in which it seems that the greek translator deliberately transformed the text because of a temperamental or cultural aversion which led him avoid references to violence or nudity.

39 Text supplied by Gr for the lacuna in Ms B, according to SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 547-548 and 554. The metaphor of “falling”: hermeneutic key to the Book of Sirach 269

10.1 Violence

The metaphor of “falling” is a convenient stratagem to which the translator has recourse to avoid the embarrassment of literal translation. When Wisdom threatens: [72] “If he strays, I will abandon him and hand him over to his assailants (~yddvl)” (4:19 Hb), Gr modifies the violent expression and avoids the direct speech: “If he strays, it will abandon him and hand him over to his downfall (ptw/sij)” (4:19 Gr); [73] “Keep alert and be careful, and you will not go with violent men (smx yvna) (13:13 Hb); this description refers to the danger of plotting with the rich, and Gr modifies it, substituting mechanically with an unnatural and rather clumsy expression: “Keep alert and be careful lest you walk with your own downfall (ptw/sij)” (13:13 Gr), that is, running the risk of falling victim to their knavery. [74] “Do not feel yourself secure from robbery (@txm) on the road, but pay attention to your paths ($ytxra)” (32:21 Hb); here Gr not only avoids the violent idea of robbery, but also changes the key term of the second stich: “Do not rely on a road that seems to be without a trap (avpro,skopoj), but beware also of your children (avpo. tw/n te,knwn sou)” (32:21 Gr); it seems that “sons” are the result of a different reading of the passage from $ytxra to $tyrxa (lit. “your posterity”). The works undertaken under the rule of the High Priest Simon to render Jerusalem more secure had a double purpose: [75] “He concerned himself (to protect) his people from the plunderer (@txm) and fortified his city (as protection) from the enemy (rcm)” (50:4 Hb); Gr eliminates once again the reference to the violent image of the plunderers, which, moreover, could have seemed irreverent towards Jerusalem, and preferred to speak of the capitulation of the city in the face of the external assault of its enemies: “He concerned himself with his people (to protect them) from downfall (ptw/sij) and fortified the city with an urban enclosure (evn poliorkh,sei)” (50:4 Gr).

10.2 Nudity and eroticism

Our translator betrays a rather puritan character and has recourse to the preferred metaphor, on two occasions, with the purpose of avoiding any allusion to nudity: [76]: “Like a bird (predator) in a cage (is) the heart of the proud man; and like an a spy (lgrmkw) he will see your nudity (hwr[)” (11:30 Hb), if he is introduced naïvely into the intimacy of your house; Gr has understood the word in the sense of physical nudity but it indicates metaphori- cally the difficulties of the family which do not appear on the outside but which should remain hidden, and, therefore he uses the metaphor of falling, understood this time in a military sense; from here he also derives the new image of the sentinel: “Pernicious decoy in a cage, so (is) the heart of the proud man: and like a sentinel (kai. w`j o` kata,skopoj) he sees from on high 270 Antonino Minissale your downfall (ptw/sij)” (11:30 Gr). Also in the second case, the nudity is avoided because it is not understood in a metaphorical sense but in a physical one: [77] “He who does this will not become rich, and he who despises little things (that are lost) will be stripped completely (r[r[ Htp) (of all that he possesses)” (19:1 Hb); Gr modifies: “The worker who gets drunk will not become rich, and he who despises little things (that are lost) in a little (time) will fall (pi,ptw) (into ruin)” (19:1 Gr). The last case is more vague because it speaks of the passion which leads to calumny, namely pride, but Gr thinks of passion in the erotic sense: [78] “Do not fall (lpn) into the power of your passion (vpn) so that (it) expands (hb[tw)40 your (arrogant) energy on to yourself” (6:2 Hb); in Gr the metaphor of “falling” is abandoned and that of the bull introduced: thus a difference is produced to which is added a curious construction: “Do not exalt (evpai,rw) yourself in your own opinion so that your strength is not beaten down like (that of) a bull (i;na mh. diarpagh/ w`j tau/roj h` ivscu,j sou)” (6:2 Gr).41

11. Tabular balance-sheet

Taking up again the Greek words of our starting grid, we can now include the equivalents from the Hebrew text where they occur. To indicate the passage, the progressive numeration of our exposition is added in square brackets.

11.1 Starting from the Greek text

1) pi,ptw (11x): 1:30 [40]; 2:7 [57]; 13:21 [32] (jwm); 14:2 [36] (tbv); 19:1 [77] (r[r[); 22:27 [1]; 23:3 [10]; 28:18 [2].26 [6]; 50:17 [70] (lpn); ptw/sij (12x): 1:22 [39]; 3:31 [34] (jwm); 4:19 [72] (~yddv).22 [43] (lwvkm); 5:13 [3] (hlpm); 11:30 [76] (hwr[); 13:13 [73] (smx yvna); 20:18 [5]; 25:7 [23]; 27:29 [25]; 34:19 [61]; 50:4 [75] (@tx); evmpi,ptw (9x): 2:18 [59]; 8:1 [13] (lpn); 9:3 [15] (lpn); 13:10 [31] (brq); 28:23 [4]; 29:19-20 [52]; 38:15 [27] (rgs); evpipi,ptw (1x): 25:19 [66] (lpn);

40 hb[ occurs solely in Deut 32:15; 1 Kgs 12:10 / 1 Chr 10:10. Here we have a causative Piel (JOÜON – MURAOKA, A Grammar, 52d). 41 Gr, interpreting vpn not as desire but as “soul“, reads the rare hb[ (see the preceding note) as the Aramaic h[b “to search, to search for food, to graze, to destroy”, with the consequent addition of a new subject, “bull” (MINISSALE, La versione greca, 44). The metaphor of “falling”: hermeneutic key to the Book of Sirach 271

prospi,ptw (1x): 25:21 [18] (lpn); avnti,ptwma (2x): 31:29 [49] (s[k); 32:20 [46] (vqwm).

2) prosko,ptw (4x): 13:23 [33] (lqt); 30:13 [41] (hl[); 31:17 [47] (l[g); 32:20 [46] (lqt); pro,skomma (5x): 17:25 [62]; 31:7 [53] (hlqt).30 [50] (vqwm); 34:19 [61]; 39:24 [55] (lls); avpro,skopoj (1x): 32:21 [74] (@tx).

3) ovlisqa,nw (7x): 3:24 [42] (h[t); 9:9 [17] (hjn II); 14:1 [14] (bc[); 19:16 [7]; 21:7 [8]; 25:8 [9]; 28:26 [6]; ovli,sqhma (1x): 20:18 [5].

4) skandali,zw (3x): 9:5 [16] (vqy); 23:8 [11]; 32:15 [65] (vqy); ska,ndalon (2x): 7:6 [28] ([cb); 27:23 [12].

5) ptai,w (2x): 2:8 [58]; 37:12 [22] (lvk).

11.2 Starting from the Hebrew text42

* lpn (12x): pi,ptw (50:17), evmpi,ptw (8:1; 9:3), evpipi,ptw (25:19), prospi,ptw (25:21); 6:2 [78] (evpai,rw); 7:7 [30] (kataba,llw); 10:10 [69] (teleuta,w); 37:8 [67] (ba,llw); 47:22 [68] (diafqei,rw); 50:21 [71] (prosku,nhsij); - Hlpm: ptw/sij (5:13). * lvk (8x): ptai,w (37:12); 14:9 [51] (pleone,kthj); 30:21 [38] (qli,bw); 31:25 [48] (avpo,llumi); 41:2 [37] (evscatoge,rwj); 41:9 [26] (only Hb); 42:8 [45] (evscatoge,rwj); - !wlvk (2x): 13:23 [3] (prosanatre,pw); 25:23 [19] (paralu,w); - lwvkm (1x): 47:23 [44] (o`do.n a`marti,aj). * lqt (3x): prosko,ptw (13:23; 32:20); 15:12 [54] (plana,w); - Hlqt: pro,skomma (31:7). * jwm (7x): pi,ptw (13:12) ptw/sij (3:31); 12:15 [21] (evkkli,nw); 13:21 [32] (saleu,w); 15:4 [63] (kli,nw); 33:2 [64] (u`pokri,nomai); 40:17 [35] (evn euvlogi,aij). * vqy (5x): skandali,zw (9:5; 32:15); 31:7 [53] (avli,skw); 41:2 [37] (perispa,w); - vqwm (2x): avnti,ptwma (32:20); 31:30 [50] (pro,skomma); 51:3 [24] (bro,coj). * v[r (1x): 16:19 [56] (sussei,w). * ![v (1x): 15:4 [63] (sthri,zw); - ![vm (3x): 3:31 [34] (sth,rigma); 36:29 [20] (avna,pausij); 40:26 [60] (bohvteia). * jp (1x): 9:13 [29] (pagi,j). * tvr (1x): 9:13 [29] (e;palxij). * hdwcm (1x): 9:3 [15] (pagi,j).

42 The Greek terms underlined refer to the preceding list (cf. 11.1). 272 Antonino Minissale

11.3 The Greek translator

The metaphor of “falling” is very frequent in the Book of Sirach as appears from the seventy eight passages considered above. Of these, a good sixty two are attested in Hb as well as Gr. From the comparison which can be made in these cases between Hb and Gr, we are better able to describe the procedure of the translator when faced with his Hebrew Vorlage, distinguishing the cases in which (a) the metaphor is introduced by Gr from (b) those in which it is suppressed and, finally, (c) those in which it is (more or less) retained.

The metaphor is introduced by Gr

1) ptw/sij (4x): 4:19 [72] (~yddv); 11:30 [76] (hwr[); 13:13 [73] (smx yvna); 50:4 [75] (@tx); pi,ptw (2x): 14:2 [36] (tbv); 19:1 [77] (r[r[); evmpi,ptw (2x): 38:15 [27] (rgs); 13:10 [31] (brq); avnti,ptwma (1x): 31:29 [49] (s[k).

2) prosko,ptw (2x): 30:13 [41] (hl[); 31:17 [47] (l[g); pro,skomma (1x): 39:24 [55] (lls). avpro,skopoj (1x): 32:21 [74] (@tx).

3) ovlisqa,nw (3x): 3:24 [42] (h[t); 9:9 [17] (hjn II); 14:1 [14] (bc[).

4) ska,ndalon (2x): 7:6 [28] ([cb).

The word which is employed most is ptw/sij already marked by Ziegler as one of the favourite words (Lieblingswörter) of the Greek translator together with ovlisqa,nw.43

The metaphor is suppressed by Gr

There are slightly fewer cases (14) in which the metaphor is suppressed by the translator Gr, above all because he interprets: In these the text Hb presents theses characteristic terms:

* lpn (3x): 47:22 [68] (diafqei,rw); 10:10 [69] (teleuta,w); 6:2 [78] (evpai,rw); * lvk (5x): 14:9 [51] (pleone,kthj); 30:21 [38] (qli,bw); 31:25 [48] (avpo,llumi); 41:2 [37] (evscatoge,rwj); 42:8 [45] (evscatoge,rwj); - !wlvk (1x): 25:23 [19] (paralu,w); - lwvkm (1x): 47:23 [44] (o`do.n a`marti,aj); * lqt (1x): 15:12 [54] (plana,w); * jwm (2x): 33:2 [64] (u`pokri,nomai); 40:17 [35] (evn euvlogi,aij); * vqy (1x): 41:2 [37] (perispa,w); * ![vm (3x): 40:26 [60] (boh,teia).

43 ZIEGLER, Zum Wortschatz, 284. The metaphor of “falling”: hermeneutic key to the Book of Sirach 273

The metaphor is retained by G

In the majority of cases (20x), the metaphor is retained by the translator Gr who can also contribute some precisions:

1) lpn (6x): evmpi,ptw (2x): 8:1 [13]; 9:3 [15]; evpipi,ptw (1x): 25:19 [66]; prospi,ptw (1x): 25:21 [18]; ba,llw (1x): 37:8 [67]; kataba,llw (1x): 7:7 [30]; - hlpm: ptw/sij (5:13) [3] 2) vqy (2x): skandali,zw (2x): 9:5 [16]; 32:15; - vqwm (3x): 31:30 [50] (pro,skomma); 32:20 [46] (avnti,ptwma); 51:3 [24] (bro,coj); 3) jwm (2x): 12:15 [21] (ekkli,nw); 13:21 [32] (pi,ptw) 4) lqt (2x): 13:23 [33] (prosko,ptw); 32:20 [46] (prosko,ptw); - hlqt (1x) 31:7 [53] (pro,skomma); 5) lvk (1x): ptai,w: 37:12 [22]; - lwvkm (1x): 4:22 [43] (ptw/sij); 6) ![vm (1x): 36:29 [20] (avna,pausij); 7) xp (1x): 9:13 [29] (pagi,j).

12. Conclusion: “falling” in the theoretical vision of Ben Sira

It is said that Ben Sira is the man of tradition which, in his reflection, becomes unified, fused and actualised. We observe that in his work there come together the Law and the prophets, which are rethought and reformulated according to the model of sapiential sentences. We can, therefore, imagine Ben Sira as a man of balance and mediation who again puts forward for his time anchorage in the ancient tradition and its permanent validity, without, however closing his eyes to certain values of Hellenism which he succeeds in appropriating, assimilating and metabolising into the spiritual patrimony of his people.44 He thus takes up the past in a creative manner without crys- tallising it into a mummified and narrow re-edition which ignores the problems of its time. He is the man of the encounter between past and present, who is placed at the confluence of the different spiritual seams which run through the Old Testament and so becomes the emblematic representative of that Jerusalem which, at the turn of the third and second centuries BC, is the crossroads of different cultural experiences and multiple lifestyles. Located before these different intellectual impulses, he develops his own

44 This positive judgement on Ben Sira can still be given despite the mossagli criticism by Wishmeyer (cf. supra, note 21). 274 Antonino Minissale vision of reality in which, for the first time in sapiential thought, nature and history are connected with each other as are the individual ethic and the collective and national viewpoint of the more typical thought of ancient Israel. In this vision of the world which is searching for harmony and the overcoming of discord, the metaphor of “falling” takes on a strong symbolic and emblematic force which constitutes an important spyhole through which to penetrate into the heart of his thought and his personality. Through temperament and cultural formation, Ben Sira aspires to that world which is to be harmonious in the cosmological, historical and religious sense. “Falling” is that which breaks and compromises this harmony, because moral violations, the result of man’s ungodliness, damage the equilibrium of the world which is governed by the wisdom of God communicated to man through the Law. It would be facile to impute to Ben Sira a reactionary ideology as if he had retreated into a static vision of the world and was content to contemplate the order of things acquired once for all. He intends in some way to make up for the crisis of thought, expressed in a corrosive and irreverent way by Job and Qoheleth, by re-establishing the unity of the world which, with his two predecessors had become problematic, inhospitable and arbitrary. Thus he works out a theodicy that is logical and tranquil because he knows not to allow reason to overstep its limits, in such a way that, in pro- fessing the unity between faith and reason, he succeeds in giving to his own thought a profoundly serene and optimistic stamp which even holds in the face of death, though he has not arrived at the idea of a life after death. He succeeds in observing the present life with a certain rational detachment but postulates justice as its base and trusts in the possible attainment of tranquillity of spirit. For Ben Sira, God is the foundation of the beauty and harmony of the universe, the criterion which regulates the moral life of man, characterised by its freedom. From man he ascends to God and from God he descends to man, encompassing in this relationship, one that for him is obvious and natural, the complexity of the world and of history. In this vision of the world and of man, which is at the same time of a physical and spiritual nature, “falling“ becomes an event that is actually extremely traumatic strength, rock and support as is confirmed so many times in the Psalms.45

45 Cf. Ps 27:1-2: “The Lord is my light and my salvation, whom then shall I fear? The Lord is the strength of my life, of whom then shall I be afraid? When the wicked, even my enemies and my foes, come upon me to eat up my flesh, they will stumble and fall (wlpnw wlvk)”; Ps 118:13-14: “They thrust sore at me that I might fall (lpnl), but the Lord was my help. The Lord is my strength and my song, and he has been my salvation”; Ps 125:1: «He that puts his trust in the Lord shall be even as the Mount Zion: it does not stagger (jwmy), but stands fast for ever”. The metaphor of “falling”: hermeneutic key to the Book of Sirach 275

Bibliography

BEN HAYYIM, Z. (ed.), The Book of Ben Sira. Text, Concordance and an Analysis of the Vocabulary, Jerusalem 1973. BEENTJES, P., The Hebrew Texts of Ben Sira 32[35].16-33[6].2, in: MURAOKA, T. – ELWOLDE, J. F. (eds.), The Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls & Ben Sira. Proceed- ings of a Symposium held at Leiden University, 11-14 December 1995 (STDJ 26), Leiden – Boston – Köln 1997, 53-67. CORLEY, J., Ben Sira’s Teaching on Friendship (BJSt 316), Providence, RI 2002. DALMAN, G., Aramäisch – neuhebräisches Handwörterbuch zu Targum, Talmud und Midrasch, Hildesheim 1967. ELWOLDE, J. F., Developments in Hebrew Vocabulary between Bible and Mishnah, in: MURAOKA, T. – ELWOLDE, J. F. (eds.), The Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls & Ben Sira, 17-55. FRITZSCHE, O. F., Die Weisheit Jesus Sirach’s erklärt und übersetzt (Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zu den Apokryphen des Alten Testaments. V. Lief.), Leipzig 1859. HASPECKER, J., Gottesfurcht bei Jesus Sirach. Ihre religiöse Struktur und ihre liter- arische und doktrinäre Bedeutung (AnBib 30), Rom 1967. JASTROW, M., A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature, I-II, New York 1967 (19031). JOÜON, P. – MURAOKA, T., A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (SubBi 27), Roma 2006. LÉVI, I., The Hebrew Text of the Book of Ecclesiasticus (SSS III), Leiden 1969 (19041). LUST, J. – EYNIKEL, E. – HAUSPIE, K. (eds.), Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint. Revised Edition, Stuttgart 2003. MINISSALE, A., Siracide (Ecclesiastico) (Nuovissima Versione della Bibbia 23), Roma 1980. MINISSALE, A., La versione greca del Siracide. Confronto con il testo ebraico alla luce dell’attività midrascica e del metodo targumico (AnBib 133), Roma 1995. PETERS, N., Das Buch Jesus Sirach oder Ecclesiasticus (EHAT 25), Münster 1913. SEGAL, M. S., Sefer ben-Sira’ hashalem, Jerusalem 19723. SKEHAN, P. W. – DI LELLA, A. A., The Wisdom of Ben Sira. A New Translation, with Notes, Introduction, and Commentary (AncB 39), New York 1987. SMEND, R., Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach, Berlin 1906. VATTIONI, F., Ecclesiastico. Testo ebraico con apparato critico e versioni greca, latina e siriaca, Napoli 1968. VON RAD, G., Weisheit in Israel, Neukirchen – Vluyn 1970. WAGNER, C., Die Septuaginta – Hapaxlegomena im Buch Jesus Sirach. Untersuchun- gen zu Wortwahl und Wortbildung des textkritischen und übersetzungstech- nischen Aspekts (BZAW 282), Berlin – New York 1999. WISHMEYER, O., Die Kultur des Buches Jesus Sirach (BZNW 77), Berlin – New York 1995. ZIEGLER, J., Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach (Septuaginta. Vetus Testamentum Graecum XII/2), Göttingen 1965. ZIEGLER, J., Zum Wortschatz des griechischen Sirach, in: HEMPEL, J. – ROST, L. (eds.), Von Ugarit nach Qumran. Fs. O. Eißfeldt (BZAW 77), Berlin 1958, 274-287.

Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach

GIOVANNI RIZZI

It is beyond dispute that the direct textual transmission of the Peshitta (Pesh) and the Syro-Hexapla versions of Sirach are only documented in Christian manuscripts. Not only was the Syro-Hexapla version of Sirach unquestionably realized in a Christian environment and was passed down only in Christian manuscripts, but also Pesh Sirach, the first manuscripts (VI-VII centuries) of which are practically contemporary with the first version of the Syro-Hexapla (between 615-617 AD), is undoubtedly a Christian text as far as the direct textual tradition is concerned. The breadth of material and lack of space force us to limit investigation to the Syriac version of Pesh Sirach. Recent criticism has debated whether something more precise can be specified about Pesh Sirach’s Christian origins in the light of some of its internal characteristics, or if the Syriac version, also called linear, should be considered as a translation into Syriac originating in a Jewish context and placed in a Christian environment later. The internal characteristics, seen even more clearly by comparison with the Hebrew text of Sirach1 (HT), and taking into account the direct textual tradition of the Greek text, have been subject to minute analysis, studied in various interpretative and contextual frameworks. One piece of objective evidence is that, even though Sirach does not belong to books which “soil ones hands”, it has a secure indirect textual tradition in intertestamental and also partly Rabbinical Judaism. All this can legitimately lead one to hypothesize that at least the “linear” Syriac version, based on a Hebrew text, could have been originally produced in a Jewish background.

1 Before questions about the accuracy of the method and the merit of the analysis of the internal characteristics of Pesh Sirach, there were problems connected with the direct textual transmission of Sirach in the various versions such as the HT and in particular the objective archetype value of the HT material which has come down to us. However, although taking into account these limitations, one can accept the principle of comparison with the HT as a basis for speculative clarification of Pesh Sir according to one of the current lines of criticism. 278 Giovanni Rizzi

1. The direct textual tradition of Sirach

The transmission of the text of Sirach has had one of the most complicated histories of all biblical books. According to R. J. Owens, at least four versions can be indentified: the Hebrew text originally composed by Ben Sira (Hb I);2 a slightly inaccurate version in Greek made by Ben Sira’s grandson (Gr I);3 one or more secondary Hebrew texts containing various expanded readings (Hb II);4 and an expanded Greek text based more or less on Hb II (Gr II)5 reflecting also the Stoic school of Aristobulos in Alexandria.6 Part of current research seems to be directed towards the correction of the Hebrew text, following internal and external criteria, in this case based on comparison with the Greek and the Syriac.7 Along these lines, academics seem to agree that there were two textual forms of Sirach, one shorter and one longer, documented both in the direct textual tradition of the Hebrew and in the Greek.8 In fact the two Hebrew forms (Hb I and Hb II) can be found mixed together in the various manuscripts found at Qumran, Masada and in the Cairo geniza9 and there is debate as to whether all the readings in these manuscripts come from Hebrew models or if in some cases they could be secondary insertions retranslated into Hebrew from other versions.10 There are only around two thirds of the book remaining in Hebrew11 but not in a single manuscript nor in a single type of manuscript;12 the longest manuscript, the so-called B, from the geniza in Cairo, includes parts of 25 chapters.13 Many passages can be found in more than one manuscript. The Hebrew material is made up of 1056 distichs, mostly entire, whilst a further 8 distichs, which are not contained in Hebrew manuscripts from the direct textual tradition, come from Rabbinical quotations, forming altogether 1064

2 This is considered as a textual form rather than a text and closely follows the Hebrew text of Sirach cf. CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 37. 3 Cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 39. 4 This is a textual form of the Hebrew tradition which is later than Ben Sira’s grandson’s translation. (cf. CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 37). 5 Cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 39 with bibliography at note 1. This approach to textual problems, based on the work of KEARNS, Ecclesiasticus, 546-550, is shared by SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 55. 6 Cf. CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 37-38. 7 Cf. discussion in MINISSALE, La versione greca, 20-22. 8 Cf. CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 37. 9 A brief and reasoned description about the provenance of the Hebrew fragments of Sir- ach in the order in which they were discovered, can be found in VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico. 10 Cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 39. 11 A list of material relating to HTSir in the Hebrew manuscripts of Qumran, Masada and the Cairo geniza can be found in MINISSALE, La versione greca, 29-30. 12 Cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 40. 13 MINISSALE, La versione greca, 29. Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach 279 distichs of the Hebrew text (HT) with respect to the 1616 distiches present in the Greek text. Overall, 26 distichs in Hebrew have no correspondence in Greek, and the Ms B from the geniza in Cairo has a psalm of 16 verses inserted after HTSir 5:12, modelled on TMSal 136.14 The Greek text Gr I is represented in the main uncial manuscripts of LXX, and reflects the original HT version;15 Gr II seems to be the version of a recension of HT,16 which also takes into account Gr I17 and is reflected in Vetus Lati- na(VL), Peshitta (Pesh), Syro-Hexaplar (Syh), and in the quotations of Clement of Alessandria and John Chrystostom,18 in such a way that some of its readings can be found in the so-called Origenian and Lucianic19 manuscripts, but Gr II has never been represented in its own form.20 The Latin version certainly depends on the Greek, i.e. directly or indirectly from Gr II,21 but it appears that the archetype was not in good condition. Moreover the transmssion of the direct Latin textual tradition of Sirach appears to be confused: variations of direct and indirect textual transmission reflect the uncertainty of the conserved text.22 Jerome incorporated VL into VG without translating it again.23 On the whole the Greek version is the most important of the ancient versions from the original Hebrew: besides being officially accepted by the Church, it is the oldest and in many cases has conserved a form which represents the original HT better than the Hebrew fragments themselves.24 Without doubt the Coptic versions rely on the Greek. The Sahidic version is based on a text linked to the Greek uncials;25 the Ethiopic version is full of paraphrases aimed at explaining the sense of the Greek from which it is translated.26 The Armenian versions are more coherent. The first, besides omitting the “praise to the fathers” as found in the older Latin manuscripts, has various additions and omissions with respect to the Greek and appears to follow both the Greek and the Syriac whilst differing from both. The transla-

14 VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, XXI. 15 Cf. the classification of Greek codes in VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, XXIII. 16 Cf. the classification of Greek codes in VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, XXIII. 17 Cf. SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 55. 18 Cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, XXIV. 19 Cf. also SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 56. 20 Cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 40. 21 Cf. discussion about the works of Smend and De Bruyne in SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wis- dom of Ben Sira, 56. The latest treatment of this problem can be found in the critical edition of VLSirach edited by W. Thiele (cf. references in CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 38). 22 Cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, XXIV-XXV. 23 Cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 40. 24 Cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, XXIV-XXV. 25 Cf. ibid., XXVIII 26 Cf. ibid., XIX 280 Giovanni Rizzi tor seems to summarize and condense them. The second Armenian version follows the Greek but also conserves elements from the first Armenian version and has some omissions.27 The Arabic version relies on the Syriac but is full of paraphrases and appears to be influenced by the Greek.28

2. Syriac versions of Sirach

There are essentially two versions.29 The “linear” Syriac version or “simple” version, known also as Peshitta,30 seems to have been directly translated from a Hebrew text of Sirach, but some scholars maintain that 370 stichs are missing, that it is not particularly accurate, is full of paraphrases, and even the oldest manuscript of its direct textual tradition, dating from 7th century AD,31 contains numerous mistakes which are repeated in later manuscripts.32 The question has been asked whether the original Hebrew of Pesh Sirach had already mixed the two Hebrew recensions of Sirach.33 On the other hand, Pesh Sirach, deriving from the oldest Hebrew textual form, with occasional influences from the longer form, is not without passages which are preferable to the existing Hebrew manuscripts and to the Greek text.34 The Syh Sirach version was derived from a Greek manuscript which was closely related to cod. 253. Besides the excellence of many of its passages, however, there are also, the revisions of a corrector: 20 readings are marked with an asterisk.35 Its importance lies in the fact that it bears witness to the Origenian recension of the Greek version of Sirach36 and that it can be traced back to Hb II37 through Gr II.

27 Cf. ibid., XXVII-XXVII 28 Cf. ibid., XXVII 29 Of the Christo-Palestinian version of 4th-5th century AD, which is also known as Syro- Palestinian, (cf. RIZZI, Fenomeni ermeneutici, 234 note 7) there are only fragments of Sir 12:18; 13:3-4a.7 and 45:25–46:8, largely influenced by Pesh and the Lucianic recension (cf. CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 42). 30 According to ordinary pronunciation it should be “peshitto” but convention and conven- ience maintain the spelling found in the text. 31 British Museum Code(x) 12142. 32 Cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, XXVI. 33 SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 57. 34 Cf. CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 38. 35 Cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, XXVI. 36 Cf. Codex Syro-Hexapharis Ambrosianus. The text of Syh Sir is laid out in two columns: SyhSir 51 is missing, and it occupies half of the first column on the right from f. 80r to f. 96v; the prologue begins in f. 80 of the first column on the right and occupies two thirds of the column; the text of SyhSir 1:1 begins almost at the same height of the first column on the left. 37 Cf. CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 42. Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach 281

3. The characteristics of Pesh Sir: text and origin of this version

The current lack of a critical edition of Pesh Sirach, still under preliminary study at the Peshitta Institute in Leiden,38 leaves questions about the date and character of the original Syriac version wide open as well as questions about whether it has been significantly revised over successive centuries. On the other hand, publication of the manuscripts would not directly resolve all the problems outlined here and anticipated by contemporary criticism because the oldest manuscripts of Pesh Sir do not date back beyond the late 6th or 7th centuries AD. The British Museum Additional Ms 12141, identified in the Leiden material as Ms7h3, has been accessible for over a century in the P. A. de Lagarde39 edition. The Milan Ms B.21 manuscript of the Biblioteca Ambrosiana Infe- riore edited by A. Ceriani and identified in the Leiden material as Ms7a1, is now available in an edition edited by N. Calduch-Benages, J. Ferrer and J. Leisen, which is more practical and provided with both English and Span- ish translations of the Syriac text. In 1970, a fairly systematic hypothesis about the Pesh Sir version was formulated, based on a Hb II40-type textual form; the archetype may have been modified later with readings from the older Hb I; Pesh Sir would have however retained the exact sequence of chapters from the Hebrew model whilst chapters 30-36 are reversed in Gr I. In 1977 consideration of material relating to the Hebrew text of Sirach led to the hypothesis that a Christian Ebionite translator either from the 3rd century41 or the beginning of the 4th century, had been involved in the origins of Pesh Sir. The reticence towards, or rejection of, references to sacrifices, the priesthood and the monarchy, and prophetic quotations, vegetarian tendencies, poverty and the elimination of anthropomorphisms would have characterized the hermeneutic orientation of the first Syriac translator. Towards the end of the 4th century, another Christian, from the main Orthodox tradition, may have reviewed the translation, introducing changes concerning the personification of Wisdom, the person of Christ and a rather unfavourable attitude to Jewish law.42 Shortly afterwards, in 1981, another hypothesis was put forward which, whilst partly agreeing with the framework of the former, profoundly dif- fered from it. Whilst agreeing that the date of Pesh Sir is around 3rd–4th cen-

38 Cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 41. 39 Libri Veteris Testamenti Apocryphi siriace, London 1861. 40 Cf. RÜGER, Text und Textform, 112-115. 41 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 237-253. 42 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part II), 494-507. 282 Giovanni Rizzi turies, it was proposed that the origin was Jewish, from the Syriac-speaking Jews of the Edessa region, where the Jewish community can be traced back to 40 AD. However, Pesh Sir seems to have reached the Christian community before the middle of the 5th century AD where a reviser made important theological changes regarding life after death, the creation of wisdom, attitudes towards women, the authority of the “fathers” of Judaism and the practice of poverty.43 It can be seen that, with respect to the Hebrew fragments and the Greek revision, the internal characteristics of hermeneutic orientation in the Pesh Sir text are commonly acknowledged. Regarding the question of poverty, it is to be derived from a Christian background whilst the environment of the other elements is rather variable. Questions surrounding the origins of Pesh Sir waver between the idea of a Christian origin in two distinct stages, to a Jew- ish origin successively arriving in the Christian area, though in the latter case the movement is thought to have taken place towards the 5th century AD. A little later, in 1989, it was possible to propose a revision for the date and provenance of Pesh Sir. Material from the indirect textual tradition of the Syriac text, from the Demonstrations of Aphrahat written between 337 AD and 345 AD, seems to prove that the Syriac version of Sirach was already known in Mesopotamia around 300 AD and perhaps even before then, whilst it originated from a Christian from the common Orthodox tradition.44 The latest stage of the most recent studies (1999) seems to swing between recognition of a theological orientation in Pesh Sir with respect to rejection of sacrifices, a non-conformist attitude to the Judaic halakhah on the subject of Law and an emphasis on the value of prayer and poverty, and the more complex question regarding the origin of these and other peculiarities of Pesh Sir.45 The wider picture46 leads some scholars to postulate a Jewish origin for all the Old Testament Peshitta, including Sirach, to be dated around 300 AD in a background of non-Rabbinic Judaism of a more popular tendency, with the later passage of the Syriac version into the Christian environment.47 Nevertheless, one can make some precise affirmations about the status quaes- tionisparticularly with regard to the development of research in the sequence of works by M. M. Winter, R. J. Owens, and M. P. Weitzman.

43 Cf. NELSON, The Syriac Version, 132. 44 Cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, , 74-75; another bibliography can be found in CALDUCH- BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 40 note 9. 45 In the posthumously published work by WEITZMAN, The Syriac Version (the author died in 1998), 219, the Ebionite traits of Pesh Sir, as considered by M. M. Winter, are not mentioned as such but seem to fit into the theory that they arise from a form of Judaism which is neither Mishnic nor Rabbinical (about the position of M. P. Weitzman cf. also CALDUCH- BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 41). 46 Cf. bibliography in CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 41. 47 As ibid., 41. Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach 283

4. The hermeneutical context accompanying the transmission of Pesh Sir

Unlike the text of the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach is well-documented regarding its indirect textual tradition in the Jewish environment; starting from its place in the sapiential traditions of the Ancient Near East echoing motifs already known from earlier works, such as Ahiqar48 or the Egyptian scribal literature,49 Sirach has much in common with Tobias, the Enochian cycle, Psalms of Solomon50 and obviously, the Qumran literature.51 The Tal- mudic tradition does not advise reading it (cf. bSanh 100b; jSanh 28a) so Sirach is counted among the books which are “not Holy Scripture” (Tos. Yad 2,13) and never figured in the list of books belonging to the Miqraot,52 except in bBer 48a where it is cited at least once with the phrase “it is written” which is typical for Miqraot53 books. In any case, Talmudic, Targumic and Midrashic literature, the Hebrew Liturgy itself and medieval Jewish writers quote passages and attribute them to Ben Sira or appear to show traces of his influence.54 In Christian traditions, obviously, as well as direct textual tradition, the indirect textual tradition is also well documented. In the New Testament, though indicating neither the author nor the book,55 Sirach is cited in Mt,56 Luke,57 in Heb58 and Jas;59 the same is true for Sir 4:31 cited in the Didache 4,5 and in the Letters of Barnabas 19,9. Although the Christian traditions of the Patristic epoch in Greek and Latin argued about the canonicity of the book, even when they denied it a place in the canon they quoted Sirach with the introductory formula used for canonical books.60 Ancient Christian traditions in Greek and Latin have important corrob- orations in the indirect textual traditions in Syriac. In particular, where it quotes in Syriac the text of Sirach, the Demonstrations of Aphrahat provide

48 Cf. a catalogue of points in common between the two works in NAU, Histoire et sagesse, 60-64 (cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, XXX and notes 75, 76). 49 Cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, XXX note 77. 50 Cf. ibid., XXX notes 77, 78, 79. 51 Cf. ibid., XXXII note 86 has a bibliography on the subject. 52 Cf. rabbinical quotations and critical literature ibid., XXXI. 53 CAVALLETTI (ed.), Il Trattato delle Benedizioni, 319-320. 54 Cf. specific bibliography already seen in VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, XXXI-XXXII. 55 Cf. ibid., XXXI with specific bibliography. 56 Mt 6:14 = Sir 28:2; Mt 6:19 = Sir 29:12; Mt 16:27 = Sir 32:24. 57 Lk 1:17 = Sir 48:10; Lk 10:7 = Sir 29:24; Lk 12:15ff = cf. Sir 31:3. 58 Heb 2:2 = Sir 25:3 59 Cf. bibliography in VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, XXXII note 87. 60 Cf. examination and discussion of material from the indirect textual tradition of Sirach in Christian literature from the Patristic era in Greek and Latin in VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, XXXIII-XL. 284 Giovanni Rizzi evidence of Pesh Sirach before the 7th century manuscripts, the earliest evidence of the direct textual tradition of Pesh Sirach. The body of Demonstrations, parts of which can be precisely dated, 337 AD (Dem 1-10), 344 AD (Dem 11-22) and 345 AD (Dem 23) precedes the Liber Graduum and most probably also the works of Ephraim.61 Research into Syr- iac quotations of Sirach in Demonstrations is reviewed by R. J. Owen who finds it lacking and requests an examination of the conclusions reached.62 Of Strothman’s work, Owen points out how superficial the study of Ephraim’s corpus was, and also that of the Liber Graduum, so much so that he cannot confirm the affirmation about the absence of any recognisable quotations from Sirach,63 whilst his treatment of material from Aphrahat is insuf- ficient, omitting various important passages. As regards material studied by Winter, Owen emphasizes that Winter’s list of quotations of Pesh Sir in Demonstrations of Aphrahat is incomplete64 as well as being erroneous.65

5. Quotations of Pesh Sir in Demonstrations of Aphrahat as christian hermeneutic in the syriac text

The Demonstrations of Aphrahat should be seen as theological essays in which the literary genre of biblical quotations, including Pesh Sir, is contex- tualized. They can be introduced by the formula “as is written” or “as is stated”, but only rarely is there a citation of the title of the biblical book, from which they are taken. Often there is no introductory formula so that the quotation becomes an integral part of the theological reasoning of Aphra- hat, rather than an isolated entry in the manner of pesher, whilst still being proof of the biblical text. Aphrahat uses his quotations casually, almost unconsciously. Just as with the 250 Pentateuch quotations, the “Persian Sage” quotes Pesh Sir from memory, although not always accurately. Para- phrases are sometimes used or shortened quotations, or allusions which more or less conform to the actual biblical text. Often there are lectiones con- flatae – two or more similar texts, where paraphrases, conflatio and brief ref-

61 Cf. bibliography and discussion in OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 48 note 21; for the Syr- iac mss of the Demonstrations, cf. ibid., 48 note 22. 62 Cf. both parts of Winter’s study, and STROTHMAN, Jesus-Sirach-Zitate. 63 Cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 49 note 24. 64 PeshSir 1:6.7 in Dem. 14,35; PeshSir 29:18 in Dem. 20,7; PeshSir 32(35):10c in Dem. 20,4; PeshSir 44:14 in Dem. 14,45; PeshSir 44:17 in Dem. 13,5; PeshSir 44:20 in Dem. 12,3; Pesh- Sir 45:1 in Dem. 23,19; PeshSir 45:23 in Dem. 23,4; PeshSir 48:3.4 in Dem. 4,2 (WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac [Part II], 506). 65 PeshSir 28:18 belongs to Dem. 22,7 and not to Dem. 20,7; PeshSir 44:20 cannot be found in Dem. 12,3 (cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 49 note 23). Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach 285 erences make it difficult to identify the material in question:66 Altogether there are around ten quotations, (PeshSir 1:6.20a; PeshSir 29:11.12.18; Pesh- Sir 32:12; PeshSir 44:17; PeshSir 45:1.2.3; PeshSir 48:3)67 for which Aphrahat agrees with most or even all the manuscripts of Pesh Sir, never diverging completely from them and in three cases agreeing, contrary to all the other versions or significant readings. Where Aphrahat does diverge from the manuscripts of Pesh Sir (cf. Ps 32:12), he agrees with the marginal reading of Ms B Sir 32:12, although the gloss could also derive from the Syriac. Aphrahat is never in accordance with any other witness against Pesh Sir, which remains his fundamental reference point.68 Aphrahat therefore knew the Book of Sirach and seems to consider it to be part of the Holy Scriptures, quoting it in the same way as other OT and NT texts. Quoting it from memory, he mixes readings with other texts from the Scriptures but his text is essentially that found in the manuscripts of Pesh Sir between 6th-8th centuries AD and also later. It can be seen, in some cases, however, that Aphrahat was not around at the beginning of the developmental history of Pesh Sir. Quotations from the biblical book can be found in Demonstrations starting with the oldest part, 337 AD, up to the most recent, 345 AD. Given the familiarity of Aphrahat with the Syriac biblical text, it seems reasonable to postulate that Pesh Sir was in circulation in Mesopotamia before 337 AD meaning that the basic Syriac text with its Christian characteristics could go back to 300 AD or perhaps even earlier.69

6. Internal examination of Pesh Sir

It is acknowledged that Pesh Sir70 diverges notably from HT Sirach and Greek and Latin versions. As far as quantity goes, Pesh Sir adds 74 lines but

66 The quotations identified are: PeshSir 1:6 (cf. 16:20), in Dem. 14,35; PeshSir 1:20a + 29:11- 12 in Dem. 20,4; PeshSir 29:18 in Dem. 22,7; PeshSir 32(35):12 in Dem. 20,4 (twice contigu- ously); the presence of conflatio PeshSir 37:26 + PeshSir 41:13 + PeshSir 29:11-12 in Dem. 20,4 is discussed; PeshSir 44:17 in Dem. 13,5; PeshSir 44:17 is reflected in Dem. 23,14; Pesh- Sir 45:1 in Dem. 23,19; PeshSir 45:23 in Dem. 14,15 (twice at a short distance); PeshSir 45:23 + PeshEzek 22:30 +PeshPs 106:23 in Dem. 23,4.5; PeshSir 48:3 in Dem. 4,12 (cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 50-72). 67 Depending on the case, there can be convergences or divergences in the Mss of Pesh and also in HT-LXX-Syh-VL Sir (cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 73-74). 68 There does not appear to be a clear reference point for the quotations of Aphrahat among the direct textual transmission manuscripts of Pesh Sir (cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 74). 69 Cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 75. 70 There is currently available a new edition of the Peshitta Sirach in the Ambrosian codex 286 Giovanni Rizzi omits 193 and a half compared to the Gr I with 1616 lines. Compared to HT Sirach, Pesh Sir adds 40 and a half lines but leaves out 169 and a half. Like the HT version, there is a lack of rigour and faithfulness in Pesh Sir due to comments, paraphrases, fanciful translations, summaries, abbreviations of various hemistichs into single ones, additions and developments which diminish its value.71 The relationship to Gr II, a small part of which is present in HT,72 is more complex. Where Pesh Sir and Gr II are comparable, the Syriac text contains 19 lines of Gr II but omits 47; Pesh Sir adds a line in PeshSir 26:26. Of the Gr II material, 43 and a half lines are conserved in VL Sira plus 2 words in VLSir 1:9a of which there is no trace in Pesh Sir. The problem is even more complex as far as the nature of Pesh Sir is concerned because where it has material in common with HT or LXX Sir, there are differences in formulation and meaning. There is a tendency to attribute these discrepancies to an paraphrasing or a free rendition by the Syriac translator who did not understand the sense of the Hebrew. For some scholars, some of these differences are undoubtedly due to a poor understanding of Hebrew, but others think these differences were deliberate in a significant number of cases. If there were originally two versions of the HT Sir, successive textual transmission would have led to the usual display of partial confusion or amalgamation of the two textual forms so that Pesh Sir, in some cases, has faithfully translated a Hebrew form, before the textual forms were mixed up, whilst the Greek translated from the mixed form (cf. HTSir 4:30a). Fol- lowing this line of research it should be possible to gather a considerable number of differences between HT Sir and Gr. However there is another way to identify the peculiarities of Pesh Sir. They could be considered as desired changes to the text in the course of its translation, attributable to the theological choices of the translator. This would be normal in ancient traditions and can be seen in the Aramaic paraphrases of the Hebrew texts of the Bible and in Jerome’s Latin version from “Hebraica veritas”.73

originally edited by A. Ceriani. This new edition is by CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba (cf. review of I. Carbajosa: EstB 61 [2003] 133-136). 71 Cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 40-41. 72 Cf. PeshSir 3:25 (one line); PeshSir 11:15.16 (two lines); PeshSir 16:15.16 (two lines); Pesh- Sir 30:12d (half a line) and PeshSir 30:20c (half a line). 73 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 237-238. Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach 287

7. Interpretative character of Pesh Sir

If the translation of Pesh Sir is considered as the worst in the Syriac Bible,74 alongside the many linguistic errors due to various reasons75 there is also a series of changes which the translator seems to have introduced on purpose for theological reasons. Some are of Jewish origin, others of Christian origin thus showing a Midrashic tendency in the translators and revisors, hence making them real interpreters of the Biblical text. Without going into the relationships between the literary genres of Peshitta and the Targum, it is sufficient to recall the classification, proposed or assumed by various scholars, of three types of specific characteristics in Pesh Sir: the substitution, attenuation or elimination of the anthropomorphic expressions of HT or LXX; the biblical quotations reformulated in Pesh; the amplification of a text with parenthetical elements aimed at making it more comprehensible.76 Regarding the anthropomorphisms, in PeshSir 11:21 the syntagm “the word of the Lord” substitutes for the corresponding “the eyes of the Lord” in LXXSir 11:12c (HTSir 11:12 “the eye of the Lord”), eliminating the entire phrase “they looked upon him” (LXXSir 11:12; to the singular in HTSir 11:12). In PeshSir 39:28 “they calm the spirit of the Creator“ reformulates HT-LXX Sir 39:28 “the winds calm the anger of their Creator”; in PeshSir 42:18 “because nothing is hidden from God” reformulates HT77-LXXSir 42:18 “God saw the signs of the age”; in PeshSir 45:2 “he made him (= Moses) great in blessings” greatly reformulates HTSir 45:2 “and made him man of God and strengthened him in greatness” and LXXSir 45:2 “he made him (= Moses) equal in the glory of the saints»; PeshSir 47:20 and PeshSir 48:10 eliminate the syntagm corresponding to “the wrath of God” in HT-LXXSir 47:20 and in HT-LXXSir 48:10. In the quotation of MTMal 3:24, HT-LXXSir 48:10 reprises “to convert the hearts of the fathers towards the sons” and adds “and to re-establish the tribes of Israel”; PeshSir 48:10 reformulates “to lead the sons to the fathers”and changes “to convert the tribes of Jacob“.78 In HT-LXXSir 49:6.7 the quotation of MTJer 1:10 is recalled with the following reformulation: “by means of Jeremiah (6); in fact they were tormenting him yet he had been consecrated79 prophet from the womb80 to uproot, lay bare and destroy, in order to build, plant and restore (7)”; in fact, the reformulation of Pesh-

74 Cf. SMEND, Die Weisheit, CXXXVII. 75 Cf. CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 48. 76 Cf. ibid., 48-51. 77 The text is mutilated in precisely this syntagm. (cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, 229) 78 Cf. the translation by WEITZMAN, The Syriac Version, 244. 79 LXX, literally “sanctified”. 80 LXX, literally “in the womb”; for HT-LXX meaning “of his mother”. 288 Giovanni Rizzi

Sir 49:6-7 completely contracts the text: “to the days of Jeremiah (6), who had been prophet from the womb of his mother (7)”. The formulation of HTSir 49:9 “and also (Ezekiel) made mention of Job, who was steadfast in the ways of justice” recalls MTEzek14:14. In turn, PeshSir 49:9 reformulates: “and also (Ezekiel) said of Job that his ways were ones of justice”. In place of LXXSir 1:22-27, after PeshSir 1:20, the Syriac proposes the largest gloss81 of the whole book, predominantly relative to eschatology82

PeshSir 1:20 Its (=wisdom) roots are eternal life And length of days its flower .

PeshSir 1:*1 Blessed is the man who meditates on it Because it is better for him than all treasures. *2 Blessed is the man who seeks it And attends to its commandments *3 It will prepare an eternal crown for him and eternal victory among the saints. *4 He will rejoice in it and it will rejoice in him and will not abandon him for ever and ever *5 The angels of God will rejoice in it and will tell all the praises of the Lord *6 The whole of this book is full of life; blessed is the man who will listen and fulfil it. *7 Listen to me, you who fear God and pay attention and consider my words. *8 Who is he who longs to inherit life and eternal gain and great happiness? *9 Listen to all my words and fulfil them and you will be written in the books of life *10 Love the fear of the Lord and fix your heart in him and do not fear. *11 Search and do not turn back and you will find life for your spirit. *12 And when you search, (be) like a hero and a champion.

By means of original Midrashic activity, the translator, has undoubtedly developed the language and message of Sirach relative to the relationship between wisdom (PeshSir 1:*1a) and fear of the Lord (PeshSir 1:*10a) or fear of God (PeshSir 1:*7a), the book to observe (PeshSir 1:*6a.b), observance of the Law (PeshSir 1:*9a), listening to the wise man (PeshSir 1:*7b), advantages for the

81 PeshSir ignores LXXSir 1:21 and in place of LXXSir 1:22-27 proposes the section 1:*1-*12 (without attestation elsewhere, identified as having Essene affinity, cf. GILBERT, L’addition de Siracide 1,21, 318) to then link up with PeshSir 1:27 (cf. 7a1), corresponding – even if not altogether completely – to LXXSir 1:28 (ZIEGLER, Sapientia Iesu filii Sirach, 132). 82 Concerning eschatology in Pesh Sir cf. also bibliography in CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 48 note 29. Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach 289 diligent disciple (PeshSir 1:*8). The translator resorts to the same didactic style of Sirach using macarisms (PeshSir 1:*1a.*2a.*6b), imperatives (PeshSir 1:*7a.b.*9a.*10a.b.*11a), setting out moral teachings about listening (PeshSir 1:*7a.*9a), adding a specific form of eschatological midrash haggadah, equally designed to teach in the style of Sirach. In particular, the eschatological theme is formulated through the language of the eternal crown (PeshSir 1:*3a) and the glory of the saints (PeshSir 1:*3b), rejoicing forever with wisdom (PeshSir 1:*4a.b), the angels of God (PeshSir 1:*5a), inheriting life (PeshSir 1:*8a), eternal gain and great happiness (PeshSir 1:*8b), inscription in the books of life (PeshSir 1:*9b), finding life for the spirit (PeshSir 1:*11b).83 On the other hand, the exuberant development of the eschatological theme in the section of PeshSir 1:*1-*12 has already been introduced in a specific modification of the formulation of PeshSir 1:20a where, instead of the reading in LXXSir 1:20a “the root of wisdom is to fear the Lord”, the Syriac version is “its (= wisdom) roots are in eternal life”. The expression Ml[d ay|J is absent in LXXSir 1:20 but it is exactly parallel to the Greek makrohme,reusij (“length of days”), rendered in Syriac with the equivalent syntagm atmwyd| argwn. If, as is likely, LXXSir 1:20 is the most faithful rendition of the lost HT, the Syriac interpretation “eternal life” has an important cue in “length of days” in opening the successive eschatological development.

8. Specificity of Pesh Sir in continuous sequences of verses

The specific characteristics of Pesh Sir, whose hermeneutic phenomena are due to a reformulation by its Syriac translator, emerge both in circumscribed passages and in sequences of contiguous verses. In the case of sequences of contiguous verses, besides the usual range of peculiarity in Syriac relative to omissions, additions, reformulations, philological choices, Midrashic undertakings with respect to the Hebrew or Greek, grammatical and syntactical elements also contribute to outline a trend in the Syriac version, not only as to the “translational” stylistic characteristics from one language to another but also relative to the contents of the Syriac version or reformulation. However, it seems that definitive proof can rarely be had about the religious persuasion of the translator, outside the context of the direct textual transmission of the text, in such a way that the translation clearly shows a precise religious persuasion, with well-defined theological orientation, differing from that of the Syriac Christians transmitted in the text. If one takes the three sequences of PeshSir 35:1-11; PeshSir 45:8-15 and

83 Cf. CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 50-51. 290 Giovanni Rizzi

PeshSir 50:19-22 as sample material for this type of investigation, only Pesh- Sir 35:11 shows, in a convincing way, the adoption of a gospel passage with reformulation partly similar to PeshLk 6:34-35. The remaining material specific to Pesh could, at first sight, be understood as being due to different theological orientations, Jewish and Christian, and indeed this has been the case amongst the critics which have studied it. However, before methodi- cally setting out the analyses, it is important to begin with the undisputed fact that the text has been transmitted in a Christian environment and, as such, adopted and understood. Only in the face of overwhelming evidence, and not just hypothetical supposition, should one dismiss that which is the best documented hypothesis up to now: that Pesh Sir was translated in a Christian environment. The task of identifying and describing with a certain precision any possible Christian tendency, in the Syriac Christian tradition, to which the Pesh Sir version, or part of it, belongs, is far more complicated and here too the findings are just vague indications. In this case it is also better to start from the most obvious hypothesis i.e. that the specific characteristics of Pesh Sir reflect the most common Syriac Christianity current at the time it was translated. According to the oldest attestations of its indirect textual tradition, Pesh Sir is reflected in the same ecclesiastical tradition as Aphrahat, for example. The history of research into the internal characteristics of Pesh Sir seem to demonstrate that moving away from a similar fundamental context has not achieved convincing results. It seems likely that the study of the indirect textual tradition of Pesh Sir, possibly integrated with a study of the indirect textual tradition of Syh Sir, could help to clarify the hermeneutic and theological characteristics of Pesh Sir.

8.1 PeshSir 35:1-11

On the whole, even in the absence of a corresponding HT, comparison of PeshSir 35:1-11 and LXXSir 37:1-10, allows us to highlight a tendency to emphasize the ritual halakhah in the Greek and an opposing tendency to drastically reduce the presence of the ritual halakhah in the Syriac, replac- ing it mostly with observance of the law, alms-giving, giving to the poor and prayer. But this does not just concern adjustments to small textual segments or isolated lemmata. When LXXSir 37:5 recapitulates the halakhic pre- scription of the preceding context LXXSir 37:1-6 with pa,nta ga.r tau/ta (“in fact all these things”) explaining the strict connection (ca,rin) to the evntolh/j (commandment), it is precisely at this point that PeshSir 35:5 rigorously suppresses any possible reference to the preceding prescriptions and their connection to the divine command; for the Syriac to observe the commandment means to achieve what is good. Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach 291

Independently of whether Pesh Sirach and LXXSirach have or have not derived from the same Hebrew text,84 the nature of the two versions differs in an unyielding way. When it is possible to follow HT-LXX-Pesh Sir in synopsis as in the section which follows the preceding one, although this does not necessarily always mean that the HT noted there is the same as that presupposed by both LXX and Pesh, the nature of the Greek version and the Syriac version show tendencies similar to those noted above.85

HTSir86 35:9 ~ynp rah $yX[m lkb 87rX[m Xdqh !wXXbw and in all your works show a radiant face and with joy sanctify your tithes

LXXSir 37:11 evn pa,sh| do,sei i`la,rwson to. pro,swpo,n sou kai. evn euvfrosu,nh| a`gi,ason deka,thn and in every gift show a cheerful face and happily give your tithe

PeshSir 35:11 Kypa\ Nyhn\ Nwhn\ Ktbhwm\ lkb Kl [rp; ald Nml pzwa atwdJbw and in all your gifts let your face be radiant and with joy give to him who cannot repay you.

LXXSir 37:11 coincides almost completely with HTSir 35:9 except for the first two words of the first hemistich where in Hebrew the plural is used rather than the singular in Greek. The first hemistich of PeshSir 35:11 coincides with that of HTSir 35:9 whilst the second hemistich of PeshSir 35:11 omits the halakhah to sanctify with joy the tenth of HTSir 35:9b in favour of the invitation to lend to those who cannot repay: critics88 emphasize that the theme in Syriac is similar to PeshLc 6:34-35 also because of the use of Syriac verbs pzy (“lend”) and [rp (“refund”).

HTSir 35:10 89dy 90tgXhbw !y[ bwjb $l 91wtntmk 92wl !t give to him as he has given to you with goodness of eye and generosity of hand.

84 Considered likely by WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 240. 85 Cf. ibid. 86 Cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, 185. 87 Cf: variations in Ms Bm “your tithe”, “your works”. 88 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 240. 89 In the margin of Ms B gloss ahw ~a yk twlwmg l[b ymw !wybal !twn yyy hwlm (“lend to the Lord who gives to the poor; and who is the lord of recompense if not Him?”). 90 Ms Bmgloss Xygh[k]bw tgXh[k]bw. 91 Ms Bm wttmk (does not change the meaning). 92 Ms Bm lal (“to God”). 292 Giovanni Rizzi

LXXSir 37:12 do.j u`yi,stw| kata. th.n do,sin auvtou/ kai. evn avgaqw/| o`fqalmw/| kaqV eu[rema ceiro,j Give to the Most High as he has given to you And with good eye as your hand has found93

PeshSir 35:10 anksml bh atbF any{bw Ktbhwmb {yztt alw and with a good eye give to the poor and do not worry about your gifts.

The differences between HTSir 35:10 and LXXSir 37:12 do not lie in the content of the expressions: LXXSir 37:12 “to the Most High” seems to be closer to the marginal variant of Sir 35:10 (Ms B) “to God”, whilst LXXSir 37:12b seems to resort to the translational technique of using the adjective in Greek (“and with good eye”) rather than the Hebrew genitive in HTSir 35:10 (“and with goodness of eye”). LXXSir 37:12 (“according to what your hand has found”) is an interpretation relative to unplanned generosity in HTSir 35:10 (“and with generosity of hand”). PeshSir 35:10 is completely different. It might be thought that Pesh was based on a different HT from that noted in the recorded variants; moreover the sequence of verses in the immediate context of HT-PeshSir 35:10-11 does coincide, and it is reasonable to think that the hermeneutic operation was radical; similar to the development of LXXSir 37:12, PeshSir 35:10 too renders the qualitative genitive of the Hebrew as an adjective “with good eye gives”; the destination of the action is no longer God but “to the poor” which would seem to approach the marginal gloss of Sir 35:10 (Ms B) “lend to the Lord who gives to the poor”, even if in PeshSir 35:10 all references to God or the Lord have disappeared. The last part of PeshSir 35:10 “and do not worry about your gifts” remains without any textual comparison in the context of PeshSir 35:10. The sequence of HTSir 35:11-12 does not have anything corresponding in Pesh Sir, PeshSir 35:12 being absent from the Ambrosian codex, whilst PeshSir 35:11 corresponds to HTSir 35:9.

HTSir 35:11 $l 94byXy ~yt[bXw awh twmwlXt hwla yk In fact God is the one who repays and he will repay you seven times as much

LXXSir 37:13 o[ti Ku,rioj avntapodidou,j evstin kai. evptapla,sia avntapodw,ei soi In fact the Lord is the one who continues to repay and he will repay you seven times as much.

93 Literally, “how much it found unexpectedly” (cf. LUST – EYNIKEL – HAUSPIE [eds.], Greek- English Lexicon, 188b-189a). 94 In Ms Bm there is the variation ~lXy (does not change the meaning). Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach 293

In the immediate context of PeshSir 35, the theme of recompense seems to have been absorbed into the formulation of PeshSir 35:11b “and with joy gives to him who cannot repay you”.

8.2 PeshSir 45:8-15

The Syriac text of the Peshitta corresponding to HTSir 45:9-15 is almost completely missing from the Ambrosian codex, producing the sequence Pesh- Sir 45:8-15. The missing part concerns the description of the liturgical vestments of Aaron, mentioning double daily sacrifice. The only common element of this sequence remains PeshSir 45:15

HTSir 45:15 Xdqh !mXb whxXmyw wdy ta hXm alm[yw] ~ymX ymyk w[rzlw ~lw[ tyrb wl yhtw wmXb wm[ ta $rblw wl !hklw trXl and Moses filled his hand and anointed it with holy oil and there was for him an eternal pact like the days of Heaven95 to be servant and priest for him and to bless his people in his name

LXXSir 45:15 evplh,rwsen Mwush/j ta.j cei/raj kai. e;crisen auvto.n evn evlai,w| a`gi,w| evgenh,qh auvtw|/ eivj diaqh,khn aivw/noj kai. evn tw/| spe,rmati auvtou/ evn h`me,raij ouvranou/ leitourgei/n auvtw/| a=ma kai. i`erateu,ein kai. euvlogei/n to.n lao.n auvtou/ evn tw/| ovno,mati Moses filled his hands and anointed him with holy oil and eternal covenant 96came to him and his descendants97 in the days of Heaven98 to serve him and together to execute the office of the priesthood and bless his people in the name

PeshSir 45:15 hdya acwm yhwl[ Msw acdwqd ajcm hjcmw Ml[d amyql hl twhw aymcd atmwy| Kya h[rzlw hmcb hm[l wkrbmlw wcmcml

95 Cf. translation by MINISSALE, La versione greca, 214. 96 The Hebrew tyrb is rendered with the Greek diaqh,kh in HT-LXXSir 41:19; HT-LXXSir 44:12.20.22; HT-LXXSir 45:15.24.25. 97 The diaqh,kh – tyrb as a divine commitment-promise (cf. HT-LXXSir 44:22) can be found in relation to the divine “pact (= promissory pact)” with Phineas also in HTSir 45:24; his characteristic is his real persistence, at the time of the writing of Sirach, given that he could not avail Phineas’ descendants (cf. MINISSALE, La versione greca, 114-115). 98 Cf. translation by MINISSALE, La versione greca, 214. 294 Giovanni Rizzi

and Moses put his hand on his hand and anointed him with holy oil and there was for him an eternal pact and for his descendants in the days of Heaven to serve and bless his people in his name

The translations of LXXSir 45:15a “and filled... his hands” presumes a reading in the singular of HTSir 45:15 with collective value, rather than as a technical expression for the ritual of sacerdotal consecration. The passage of LXXSir 45:15cd “and eternal covenant came to him and his descendants in the days of heaven” in so far as its is a translation of HTSir 45:15, contextu- ally emphasizes the involvement of the descendants of Phineas in the “eternal pact”;99 the formulation of LXXSir 45:15d “in the days of heaven” is more generic with respect to that of HT;100 the rendition of HTSir 45:1f is more technical “in his name”, in LXXSir 45:15f “in the name”. The Syriac version of PeshSir 45:15 is completely faithful to HTSir 45:15 except for one point: in the last stich the Syriac does not translate the Hebrew wl !hklw dropping the explicit mention of sacerdotal service.101 LXXSir 45:5, on the other hand, gives a specific emphasis “and together to execute the office of the priesthood”.

8.3 PeshSir 50:19-22

HTSir 50:19 ~wxr ynpl hlptb #rah ~[ lk wnryw wyla [ygh wyjpXmw xbzm trXl wtwlk d[ and all the people of the earth cried102 in prayer in front of the Merciful One until he completed his service at the altar and his ritual disposition (and they) besought him103

LXX 50:19 kai. evdh,qh o` lao.j kuri,ou u`yi,stou e[n proseuch/| kate,nanti evleh,monoj e[wj suntelesqh/|j ko,smoj kuri,ou kai. th.n leitourgi,an auvtou/ evtelei,wsan and the people of God Most High104 besought105 him in prayer in front of the Merciful One

99 Cf. translation by MINISSALE, La versione greca, 214 about the cases of interpenetration of the different generations (cf also HT-LXXSir 44:11ab.22a.23de) 100 Cf. MINISSALE, La versione greca, 177. 101 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 243. 102 Cf. MINISSALE, La versione greca, 187. 103 Meaning “to God”; cf. MINISSALE, La versione greca, 203. 104 The Greek presupposes the HT !wyl[ la (cf. cases in HT-LXX Sir discussed by MINISSALE, La versione greca, 212) 105 Cf. MINISSALE, La versione greca,187. Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach 295

until the worship of the Lord was completed and they had finished his106 service

PeshSir 50:22 ahlal a[rad am[ wjbcw and the people of the Earth prayed to God

The modification of LXXSir 50:19 “and the people of God Most High besought him” with respect to HTSir 50:19 “and the people of the earth cried” is part of a wide range of cases in LXX Sirach in which one expression is exchanged for another that is more specific.107 With the “people of God Most High” in reality LXXSir 50:19 renders the technical expression of HTSir 50:19 “people of the earth” as distinguished from the priests.108 The Midrashic rendition of LXXSir 50:19 “until the worship of the Lord is complete and they had finished his service”, with regard to HTSir 50:19 “until he completed his service at the altar and his ritual dispositions (and they) besought him”, belongs to those thematic interpretative phenomena with which, even in LXXSir 50, it is emphasized that the altar, although holy, is below God.109 In PeshSir 50:22 only a trace remains of the first stich of HTSir 50:19 “the people of the earth”. Rather than the divine title “the Merciful One” there is the simpler “God”, and the theme of prayer “they pray” in place of the more passionate Hebrew formulation “they cried”. Any reference to the halakhah of the ritual dispositions about service at the altar is completely missing, whilst present in HT-LXXSir 50:19.

HTSir 50:20 larXy lhq lk l[ wydy aXnw dry za rapth yyy ~Xbw wyjpXb yyy tkrbw then he lowered110 and raised his hands111 on the congregation of Israel and the blessing of the Lord (was) on his lips and he rejoiced in the name of the Lord

LXXSir 50:20 to,te kataba.j evph/ren cei/raj auvtou/ evpi. pa,san evkklhsi,an ui`w/n Israhl dou/nai euvlogi,an kuri,ou evk ceile,wn auvtou/ kai. evn ovno,mati auvtou/ kauch,sasqai then having lowered (them) he raised112 his hands over the congregation of the children of Israel

106 Cf. ibid., 203. 107 Cf. ibid., 185-188. 108 Cf. ibid., 222. 109 Cf. also LXXSir 50:11c.14 in the discussion found in MINISSALE, La versione greca, 203. 110 Cf. discussion on HTSir 50:19. 111 Cf. MINISSALE, La versione greca, 253. 112 Cf. ibid. 296 Giovanni Rizzi

to give the blessing of the Lord from his lips and rejoice in his name.

The translation of LXXSir 50:20 in the part corresponding to the first stich of HTSir 50:20 represents a change of construction but without any real change to the meaning. The introduction of the parataxis in the description of the movement with which the high priest lowers and raises his hands over the assembly and the characteristic rendition of the Hebrew “Israel“ with the Greek “children of Israel”113 is intended to provide greater clarification.114 Moreover, the rendition, slightly more paraphrased in LXXSir 50:20 with respect to the second stich of HTSir 50:20, introduces, with the gloss “to give“, the explanation of the priestly action by which the people were blessed, but the Greek tradition also highlights the parallelism between rejoicing in the name of the Lord and giving the blessing. The complete absence of the part corresponding to HTSir 50:20 in the actual sequence of the Ambrosian codex for PeshSir 50:17.22 does not only regard the ritual halakhah of the priestly blessing but introduces what M. M. Winter calls “the hostility towards the priesthood” by the Ebionite translator.115

HTSir 50:21 wynpm l... tynX lpnl wnXyw and they turned116 to prostrate themselves a second time... in front of him

LXXSir 50:21 kai. evdeute,rwsan evn proskunh,sei evpide,xasqai th.n euvlogi,an para. u`yi,stou and they turned117 a second time in prostration to receive the blessing from the Most High

Although HTSir 50:21 is mutilated, it is quite likely that LXXSir 50:21 reflects its original reading. In any case the clarification in Greek of “Most High” can be noted with respect to the Hebrew pronominal suffix in “before him”. Even in this case, the entire verse, concerning the ritual of priestly blessing, is absent from the formulation of PeshSir 50:22

HTSir 50:22 larXy yhla yyy ta an wkrb ht[ #rab twX[l alpmh wnwcrk whX[yw ~xrm ~da ldgmh now therefore bless the Lord, God of Israel who does wondrous things on earth

113 Cf. also HT-LXXSir 47:2b and HT-LXXSir 50:20b (ibid., 222). 114 Cf. ibid., 255. 115 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 242. 116 Cf. discussion on HTSir 50:19. 117 Cf. discussion on LXXSir 50:19. Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach 297

and makes man grow from the womb118 and deals with him according to his will119

LXXSir 50:22 kai. nu/n euvlogh,sate tw/| qew/| pa,ntwn tw/| mega,la poiou/nti pa,nth| to.n u`you/nta h`me,raj h`mw/n evk mh,traj kai. poiou/nta meqV h`mw/n kata. to. e;leoj auvtou/ and now bless the God of all who does great things everywhere who exalts120 our days from the womb and who acts with us according to his mercy

PeshSir 50:22 a[rab atcyrp| db[d Nwhmad asrk Nm acnynb| arbd hnybx Kya Nwhl rbdmw who does121 wondrous things on earth who creates122 men from the womb of their mother and who leads123 them according to his will.

With respect to the formulation of HTSir 50:22, that of LXXSir 50:22 clari- fies the tendency to specify divine epithets according to context.124 The Hebrew “Lord, God of Israel” is transformed into the more universal formula of the Greek, “the God of all”, so as to invite not only Israel but everyone to bless the Lord and extend even indirectly the range of the priestly blessing. With respect to the Hebrew formulation, LXXSir 50:22 introduces in the last two stichs125 some changes of a Midrashic nature in order to highlight man’s personal freedom.126 These changes are also communicated through the change of construction of the verb “to bless”, firstly construed

118 Cf. MINISSALE, La versione greca, 208. 119 Cf. ibid. 120 The Greek verb corresponding to “to bless” was firstly construed with the dative (“the God of all”) and then with the accusative (“who exalts ... and who acts”). 121 CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 266-267, translate a perfect in the Syriac version in Spanish and English; WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 242, renders it with the present, reading the participle. 122 CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 266-267, translate the Syr- iac perfect in Spanish whilst in the English translation they turn to the periphrastic formulation “(who) has been guiding”; whereas WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 242, renders it with the present, reading the participle. 123 CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 266-267, translate a perfect in Syriac both in English and Spanish; WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 242, renders it with the present, reading the participle. 124 Cf. numerous examples in HT-LXX Sirach in the treatment by MINISSALE, La versione greca, 212. 125 Cf. ZIEGLER, Sapientia Iesu filii Sirach. 126 Cf. also in the cases of HT-LXXSir 3:28b, HT-LXXSir 33:13 and HT-LXXSir 41:9b in the treatment by MINISSALE, La versione greca, 208. 298 Giovanni Rizzi with the dative (LXXSir 50:22ab) and then with the accusative (LXXSir 50:22cd). In place of the Hebrew “makes man grow from the womb” the Greek says “from our days in the womb”, and in place of the Hebrew “and deals with him according to his will” the Greek says “and acts with us according to his mercy”. The formulation PeshSir 50:22 in the part corresponding to the last three stichs of the Greek, reflects HTSir 50:22 with some differences; a simplified and non-literal rendition in “who does wondrous things on the earth”, the gloss “of their mother“ and the interpretations of the divine act “who creates ... and who leads them”.

9. Theory about the ebionite christian origin of Pesh Sir

The Ebionites seem to have been at the origin of the Syriac version of Pesh Sir. Later, a non-sectarian but Orthodox Christian school may have revised certain points relative to wisdom, Christological hermeneutics and a hostile attitude to Judaic law.127 Overall, M. M. Winter’s research formulates the theory that, as well as the PeshSir 35:1-13 sequence, there are around 42 texts in which the distinctive traits of Ebionite theology can be found. Their theological heredity seems to be present in Pseudo-Clementine literature and is discussed by Epiphanius in his Panarion.128 The reformulation in the Syriac version, with respect to the Hebrew of Sirach, clearly shows ideas which had already been assimilated into literature, such as the reluctance to speak about sacrifices, hostility towards the priesthood and the monarchy, reluctance to quote scriptural prophets, preference for poverty, vegetarian tendencies.129 The Demonstrations of Aphrahat, for example, through the quotation of PeshSir 35:10c in 20,4, reveals that Pesh Sir existed in its Ebionite form130 at the beginning of the 4th century. Apart from this material, there is other material which reveals an origin in a non-sectarian Christian tradition, in this sense orthodox131 accord-

127 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part II). 128 Cf. patristic sources and general notes on modern bibliography on the Ebionites in WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 251-252; ID., The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part II), 494. 129 For the presence of these characteristic traits of Ebionite theology, cf. bibliographical directions in WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 252. 130 Two quotations from Pesh Sir appear in the Liber Graduum, cf. PeshSir 2:1 in Disc. 19,3 and PeshSir 38:4 in Disc. 7,18. Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part II), 506 note 12. 131 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part II), 494. Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach 299 ing to the terminology used by M. M. Winter. This material in Syriac, when it varies from HT and Gr I, is very different from the specific characteristics of Gr II. This translator’s Syriac version goes back to a stage of the tradition which has influenced all the direct textual traditions of Pesh Sir.132 It is likely, then, that Pesh Sir had been translated for the first time from Hebrew to Syriac not later than the first part of 4th century in an Ebionite background, whilst a non-sectarian Christian reviser may have revised the existing Syriac version giving it the definitive form of Pesh Sir in the latter part of 4th century.133

10. Theory about traces of an ebionite translator of Pesh Sir

The material I have assembled may be an indicator of an overall tendency which would make it difficult to talk of random phenomena although these could, in some cases, be open to a different interpretation. M. M. Winter plainly admits that his arguments cannot go beyond probability, but the theory about the Ebionite origin of the Syriac version seems reasonable.134 Ebionite interest in a book like Sirach, which they did not regard as canonical whilst accepting the Pentateuch, would be due to the merit that the book of Sirach attributes to poverty.135 M. M. Winter is also aware that the general trend of Syriac reformulations of Sirach correspond to a more general orientation in Judaism at the beginning of the Christian era, in particular not giving emphasis to material sacrifices in the Temple and attributing greater importance to a more spiritualized cult. Nevertheless, he claims that the idea that these reformulations of Pesh Sir could be due to some Judaic group is only theoretically possible. In fact he maintains that hostility towards sacrifices in the Temple is a characteristic trait of the Essene editors who have expressed what remains of the Gr II. On the other hand, as the Syriac version of Sirach cannot date back to before 3rd century AD, it impossible to speculate on such a late Essene survival. Moreover, M. M. Winter considers it unlikely that a Syriac translator of a Jewish background would be concerned with a book if it had not been amongst those taken into consideration by the academy of Jamnia, especially when one considers that Sirach was obtaining greater acceptance in the Christian churches.136

132 Cf. ibid., 505. 133 Cf. ibid., 507. 134 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 253. 135 Cf. ibid., 252. 136 Cf. ibid., 253. 300 Giovanni Rizzi

Where the Hebrew in Sirach has been lost, the sequences parallel to LXXSir 37:1-10 and PeshSir 35:1-8 show how in the Syriac text there is occasionally a mention of the Law, or the elimination of an anthropomorphism, or a very explicit evocation of the NT.137 In PeshSir 7:31 the Syriac translator has omitted a mention which he may have thought too praiseworthy of sacrifice, with respect to the formulation in HT-LXXSir 7:31. A similar tendency appears in PeshSir 14:11 with respect to HT-LXXSir 14:11 and in Pesh- Sir 38:11 with respect to HT-LXXSir 38:11. In the case of PeshSir 45:21 the deliberate omission of the Syriac text with respect to HT138-LXXSir 45:21 would suggest a vegetarian tendency in the Ebionites who had never accepted the idea of eating sacrifices. The decidedly abbreviated reformulation of PeshSir 50:19.22 can been understood in the sense of an Ebionite origin of at least some parts of the Syriac version of Sirach, with respect to HT139-LXXSir 50:19-22, due to the concepts on sacrifice and the importance of the priesthood and priestly blessing, which the Ebionite would have been unable to accept. As to this latter aspect, in the Syriac translation of the part of Sirach commonly known as “Praise of the Fathers”, there would be well and true hostility towards the priesthood – a distinctive trait of Ebionite theology – to the point where, in PeshSir 45:7, the mention of the eternal pact with Phineas is eliminated with respect to the formulation of HT-LXXSir 45:7. The drastic reduction we see in PeshSir 45:8.15 with respect to HT140-LXXSir 45:9-14 concerning clerical vestments and sacrifice would therefore be radical and consistent as would the reduction of the priestly services of Aaron in PeshSir 45:15. In LXXSir 50:24 the Greek translator has omitted the mention of Simon and the pact with Phineas because, after the fall of Simon’s priestly family such a mention would have sounded like bitter irony. On the contrary, the fact that PeshSir 50:24 has retained the reference to Simon, but eliminated that to the pact with Phineas, seems to show the hostility of the Syriac translator towards the high priesthood and towards the traditions connected to MTNum 25:23 in an age in which the circumstances surrounding the disgrace of Simon’s family would have been much more distant in time.141 The reformulation of PeshSir 19:1 with respect to HT142-LXXSir 19:1 seems to be due to the vegetarianism of the Ebionites. Yet again, the ten-

137 Cf. ibid., 238-240 (LXXSir 37:1 cf. PeshSir 35:1b; LXXSir 37:3-4 cf. PeshSir 35:2; LXXSir 37:5 cf. PeshSir 35:3; LXXSir 37:6 cf. PeshSir 35:4; LXXSir 37:7 cf. PeshSir 35:5; LXXSir 37:8 cf. PeshSir 35:6; LXXSir 37:9 cf. PeshSir 35:7; LXXSir 37:10 cf. PeshSir 35:8). 138 The HT is mutilated, cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, 247. 139 The HT is rather mutilated, cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, 273.275. 140 The HT is mutilated, cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, 247. 141 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 243-244. 142 The HT is slightly mutilated, cf. however the reconstruction in VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, 95. Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach 301 dencies of the Ebionites arise from a certain hostility towards the monarchy, shown in the omissions of the reformulation of PeshSir 45:3 with respect to HT143-LXXSir 45:3. On the other hand, the Syriac translator shows special attention to poverty144 in numerous passages compared with the Hebrew. Among these in some cases the differences between the Syriac and Hebrew-Greek are very visible or else HT is too deficient. For PeshSir 29:28 the corresponding Hebrew is missing, but, with respect to LXXSir 29:28, the Syriac adds “give generously to the poor and with what you have in your hand feed him and if he is naked, clothe him, because your flesh covers you and you are lending to God; and He will repay you seven times”. In Pesh- Sir 35:1, HTSir 35:1 is only partly present and the mutilated part145 cannot be reconstructed. With respect to HT-LXXSir 38:21, which are quite similar to each another, PeshSir 38:21 is rather different: “and do not trust in wealth because there is no hope in it; just as a bird in the sky flies and lands, so is wealth for men; is delights one and punishes another”. The reformulation of PeshSir 40:8 “with all men their worry is with them and wealth takes away their sleep”,146 synthesizes and completely transforms the text of HT147-LXXSir 40:8. The gloss of PeshSir 49:12, “those who in their poverty erected an altar”, is significant with respect to HT148-LXXSir 49:12. The characteristic of Pesh Sir of reformulating a text so as to eliminate or at least attenuate the anthropomorphisms149 present in the Hebrew and Greek is as well known in various environments of Judaism as in Judaeo- Christian ones and possibly Ebionite.150 The third category of distinctiveness in Pesh Sir with respect to the Greek and Hebrew comes from the modifications introduced in Syriac where Sir- ach cites other biblical passages or alludes to them in some way: of around 60 cases, among quotations and allusions,151 only three can be recognized as true textual quotations: from MTMal 3:24; MTJer 1:10 and MTEzek 14:14. The reformulation of the quotation of MTMal 3:24 in PeshSir 48:10c, “to

143 For the textual documentation of HT cf. the reconstructions in VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, 243. 144 PeshSir 11:14.18.19 cf. HT-LXXSir 11:14.18.19; PeshSir 13:20 cf. HT-LXXSir 13:20; PeshSir 40:28 cf. HT-LXXSir 40:28; PeshSir 45:6 cf. HT-LXXSir 45:6; the quotation of HT-LXX-Pesh- Sir 37:4 in WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 246-247 does not correspond to any critical edition. 145 Cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, 169. 146 For the translation see CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 247; VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, 247, translates “makes their years unstable”. 147 The HT is very lacking: it is completely mutilated in HTSir 40:8 but can be reconstructed for the missing parts of HTSir 40:9. Cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, 215. 148 For the mutilated part of HTSir 49:12 cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, 269. 149 Cf. PeshSir 11:12c.21c; 35:6b.8.13; 39:28d; 42:18; 45:2a. 150 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 249. 151 Cf. MIDDENDORP, Die Stellung, 35ff. 302 Giovanni Rizzi lead the children towards the fathers”, may also depend on a previous version of the Syriac translation of the prophet or on its reformulation in the Greek text of the Syriac in Lk 1:17. In the case of the abbreviated reformulation of MTJer 1:10 in PeshSir 49:67 one finds a certain reluctance in the Syriac translator152 to translate the quotation of Jeremiah exactly. The same phenomenon seems to be at the origin of the reformulation of MTEzek 14:14 in PeshSir 49:9 and belongs to Ebionite theology which accepted as prophets only Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and Joshua excluding figures such as Solomon, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, i.e. specifically the scriptural prophets.153

11. Theory about traces of a non-sectarian christian translator in Pesh Sir

Traces of this translator can be found in passages where the Syriac reformulation, with respect to the Hebrew and/or Greek texts, has deleted references which are favourable to Jewish law – a tendency which would have been impossible in a Jew or even Judaeo-Christian or an Ebionite.154 Some passages in the Syriac version belong to this group with respect to the Hebrew and Greek,155 whilst in other cases the suppression of references to the Law in the Syriac version is only comparable with the Greek text.156 Thus a translator or reviser who did not belong to a sectarian environment would have done a comprehensive job.157 This tendency is even more evident in a group of texts which have reformulations in Syriac with Christological references or references to John “the Baptizer”. In PeshSir 18:13 of which there is no Hebrew text, with respect to the Greek there is the reformulation “and leads them as a good shepherd looks after his flock”; in particular the gloss of the adjective “good” in front of shepherd depends upon John 10:11. In spite of having included the quotation of MTMal 3:24 in PeshSir 48:10 in the environment of casuistry relating to an Ebionite translator, M. M. Winter uses the same passage to emphasize that the reformulation in PeshSir 48:10 refers to John “the baptizer”: Lk 1:17, which is alluded to in PeshSir 48:10, is understood by Luke with ref-

152 Cf. discussion in WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I), 250-251. 153 Cf. ibid., 251. 154 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part II), 494. 155 Cf. PeshSir 35:4.15.17.24; 36:2.3. 156 Cf. PeshSir 9:15b (HT completely different); in the following cases the HT has not been handed down to us: PeshSir 19:17b.20b; 28:6b; 29:11a; 31:8a; 38:34d; 39:8b. 157 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part II), 498. Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach 303 erence to John “Baptizer” whilst in PeshLk 1:19 the pael of rbs means “to evangelize”158 as in PeshSir 48:10.159 In the passage immediately next to PeshSir 48:11, faced with a HTSir 48:11 which is sketchy and which cannot be reconstructed at the moment,160 in comparison with the Greek, the Syr- iac reformulation repeats “Blessed is he who saw you and died, although he does not die, but will certainly live”. M. M. Winter would claim that a non-sectarian Christian would have wanted to emphasize that PeshSir 48:11 should be understood as if Christ had seen Elijah, so that the death of Christ could not have been definitive.161 This is an hermeneutic hypothesis which is difficult to apply to a non-sectarian Christian translator. Another group of texts refers to the consequences of the Arian controversy. In some passages of Pesh Sir there is a tendency to delete all mention of the creation of Wisdom, a personification prefiguring the second person of the Trinity, in so far as it might give support to the Arian heresy about the creation of the Son as the work of the Father. Such a tendency is apparent in the reformulation of PeshSir 1:4.9, comparable only with the Greek as the Hebrew is absent. On the other hand, for PeshSir 39:32 and PeshSir 42:20-21 where the Hebrew is still comparable although uncertain and a little lacking,162 the cancellation of the mention of the creation of Wisdom in Syriac is a very doubtful contextual philological interpretation.163

12. The most recent theory about the judaic origin of Pesh Sir before the christian revision

Aversion not only to sacrifice but also to the Law is clearly present in Pesh Sir, independently of the interpretative framework of the origins of these specific characteristics. In PeshSir 35, the recommendation of sacrifice is sys- tematically suppressed in favour of prayer and obedience to God’s will. Many other references which are favourable to sacrifice are surely deliberately omitted in PeshSir 7:31; PeshSir 14:11; PeshSir 38:11; PeshSir 45:21 and PeshSir 50:19.22. The promised “pact of Phineas” (PeshSir 50:24) and the account of Simon’s glorious priestly attraction (PeshSir 45:8.15) have also been dropped. Moreover, favourable references to the Law have been sub-

158 Cf. PeshLk 2:10; 3:18; PeshActs 8:12.35.40. 159 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part II), 499. 160 Cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, 263. 161 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part II), 500-501. 162 Cf. VATTIONI, Ecclesiastico, 229. 163 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part II), 502-504; critique concerning text and philology in OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 43-45. 304 Giovanni Rizzi stituted with “way” (PeshSir 35:24) or “word” (PeshSir 44:20) or modified differently (PeshSir 41:8) or even eliminated (PeshSir 35:16; 36:2-3).164 But the overall picture of the origin of all those peculiarities in PeshSir is no longer consistent in the eyes of the critics. The fact that sacrifice is supplanted by prayer is clearly established in PeshSir 35:8 and in the immediate following context charity is suggested as a substitute for sacrifice (PeshSir 35:9-10).165 M. P. Weitzman links this trend to a wider picture, characteristic of Pesh 1-2 Chronicles,166 but also present in Pesh Psalms167 Pesh Ezra168 and Pesh Nehemiah.169 Occasionally the Tar- gum Onkelos agrees with the Syriac as in PeshGen 30:8 and in PeshExod 38:8. Tg and Pesh agree on this point with respect to MT1 Sam 1:22. Such a widespread convergence on the subject obviously does not testify in favour of a specifically Ebionite origin about the value of prayer as a substitute for sacrifice in Pesh Sir, as M. M. Winter would have, but it would seem to give strength to M. P. Weitzman’s theory about the existence of a non-observing Rabbinical Judaism at the origin of Pesh Sirach with spiritualist characteristics as mentioned even by Winter, although his conviction is that it is the specific peculiarities of Pesh Sir taken together which place single passages in an Ebionite origin. In this sense, while M. P. Weitzman also accepts the underlining of the theory of poverty in Pesh Sir according to the evidence gathered by M. M. Winter,170 emphasizing how PeshSir 37:4 also refers to the evanescent “wealth of the world” in accordance with similar expressions in Pesh1Chr 29:28,171 in this same context he is eager to recognize that poverty is rec- ommended in other movements, pointing out Qumran 1QH 10,22-30 or 1 Enoch 94:8 and for the NT, Mt 5:3. In the light of these precise specifica- tions, it can be understood how M. P. Weitzman substantially distances himself from the theory of an Ebionite origin for a first draft of PeshSir and seems to accept the criticisms of R. J. Owens, underlining how both concur, although in different ways and for different reasons, about the Christian origin of Pesh Sir.172 Without going into M. P. Weitzman’s theory about the initial Jewish

164 Cf. WEITZMAN, The Syriac Version, 219 note 40 cites the work of Winter (pp. 494-498). 165 Cf. WEITZMAN, The Syriac Version, 217 notes 31 and 32 cites the work of Winter (pp. 237- 253; 494-507). 166 Cf. WEITZMAN, The Syriac Version, 212-216. 167 Cf. PeshPs 37:7; 71:14 168 Cf. PeshEzra 6:21; 10:14. 169 Cf. PeshNeh 9:17 170 Cf. WEITZMAN, The Syriac Version, 226 note 49, cites the work of Winter (pp. 245-249). 171 Cf. also the discussion about the role of wealth in the sin of Uzziah according to Pesh2Chr 26:16 in WEITZMAN, The Syriac Version, 226 note 51. 172 Cf. ibid., 226. Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach 305 stage of the Syriac version of part of MT,173 followed by a successive Chris- tian stage which extended throughout the Christian OT, it must be said that he has to supply a very broad picture, made up of various suggestions about the origins of a large part of the Syriac Peshitta of the Old Testament against a background of non-rabbinical Judaism, i.e. of Jewish communities with a very informal attitude to halakhic observance which then moved on to Christianity. For Pesh Sir, one fairly similar theory had already been put forward by M. D. Nelson174 in which the first draft of Pesh Sir would have been made in a Syriac-speaking Jewish environment around Edessa between 3rd-4th centuries. It would then have been revised in a Christian background before the middle of the 5th century with important theological reformulations about faith in the hereafter, the creation of Wisdom, behaviour towards women, the authority of the fathers of Judaism and the practice of poverty.175

13. A jewish, ebionite or, more simply, christian context?

In fact, R. J. Owen points out that in PeshSir 35:1-13 there are absolutely no traces of any Ebionite origin. Not only is the reference of PeshSir 35:11 to PeshLk 6:34-35 simply Christian,176 given that there is nothing typically Ebionite in Luke’s gospel, but also the comparison between LXXSir 37:1-13 and PeshSir 35:1-13 does not work in the way M. M. Winter suggests. In reality, the Syriac seems to differ from the Greek and the Hebrew in two ways: by emphasizing the priority of morality over religious practice and spiritualizing the concept of sacrifice (PeshSir 35:8) and also following the model of LXXSir 37:2-4 highlighting moral observance as being equal or superior to religious practice (cf. PeshSir 35:2-4.7). Rather than deleting references to the sacrificial cult, PeshSir 35:2-4.8 mentions it again but the substitution of offerings and sacrifices at the Temple with alms-giving (cf. Pesh- Sir 35:9-13) is a Christian passage and not typically Ebionite.177 The suggested theory of an anti-Arian reformulation in some passages of Pesh Sir, which would eliminate or at least attenuate the original idea of HT and the biblical tradition about the creation of Wisdom, would require that the Syriac translator had intended these reformulations to be a theological argument about the divinity of Jesus Christ, rather than the more

173 Cf. ibid., 244-246. 174 NELSON, The Syriac Version, 132. 175 Cf. CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 40. 176 Cf. OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 60. 177 Cf. ibid., 63. 306 Giovanni Rizzi specifically Arian interpretation.178 However, in this sense, the validity of evidence concerning the reformulation of PeshSir 42:12a with respect to HT- LXXSir 42:12a comes down to a particular syntactical-grammatical Syriac reading and the scansion of the text,179 whilst in the case of PeshSir 39:32a it comes down to uncertainty in the reading of the text.180 PeshSir 1:4 “of all these things, wisdom is greater and faith is stronger than all the preceding things” is a reformulation with respect to LXXSir 1:4.181 Within the context, the nature of Wisdom is the same as the things mentioned as belonging to creation, although PeshSir 1:4a no longer has the formulation of LXXSir 1:4a “before all, wisdom was shaped”.182 Perhaps here in Syriac the more significant reformulation is “and faith183 is stronger than all the preceding things” with respect to LXXSir 1:4b “and the understanding of intelligence from eternity”; in fact, while in LXXSir 1:4b the second stich can be compared with the first, Pesh Sir 1:4b seems to have introduced the concept of atwnmyh| which can be translated as “faithfulness“184 or even “faith”.185 Not even the Syriac reformulation in PeshSir 1:9 “and186 investigated187 it (= Wisdom) and saw it and counted it and distributed it in all his works” compared with LXXSir 1:9 “and the Lord himself (Ku,rioj auvto,j) moulded it (e;ktisen auvth,n) and saw and counted it and lavished it on all his works”, with its substitution for the verb “to mould” with the divine action of “inves- tigates”, can be considered as an attempt to deny or attenuate the biblical concept of the creation of Wisdom by God. In reality, the Syriac reformulation puts itself into context with a rhetorical question from LXX-PeshSir 1:6 b-7 and with the profession of faith in God, sage par excellence, of LXX- PeshSir 1:8; in fact the reformulation of PeshSir 1:9 “and investigated it” seems to look to passages such as PeshJob28:27 with which it has in common the verbs expressing divine actions “investigate” (qdb) and “see” (azj).188 In reality it is impossible to show that there was an “anti-Arian Chris- tian revision“ in the reformulations of Pesh Sir, discussed above, because

178 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part II), 501-505. 179 Cf. discussion in OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 43-44. 180 Cf. ibid., 44-45. 181 The HT has not reached us. 182 Cf. discussion in OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 45. 183 The reading is from the Ambrosian manuscript (cf. 7a1); but atmkj conforms better to the parallel style in Greek (7h3, cf. CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 67). 184 Cf. WINTER, The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part II), 501. 185 Cf. CALDUCH-BENAGES – FERRER – LIESEN, La sabiduria del escriba, 66-67. 186 God is the subject implied here. 187 Or “examined”. 188 Cf. discussion in OWENS, The Early Syriac Text, 46-47. Christian interpretations in the syriac version of Sirach 307 such a revision would not have had any impact on the Christian communities which would have read in that book the formulations of PeshSir 24:8b “and he who made (yndb[d Nmw) me (= Wisdom)” and PeshSir 24:9 “before eternity (aml[ Mdq Nm) was created”, which reprises the terminology used in PeshProv 8:22.189

14. Conclusion

Although we have reviewed some essential traits from the most recent discussions about the specific characteristics of Pesh Sir through a sample of sections and passages of the Syriac version of Sirach, definitive or general conclusions cannot be drawn from this. All the same, it seems useful, from a methodological point of view, to have ascertained that the theories about the origins of Pesh Sir coming from a Jewish background are unconvincing as are current suggestions about an Ebionite Christian sectarian context. Even notions about a Christian revision following the Ebionite cannot be confirmed. In reality, many of those specific characteristics which suggested an Ebionite background as well as those which could have been attributed to a Jewish environment which did not observe the biblical and mishnico-rabbinic halakhah, seem to emerge from the more obvious framework of a Christianity of Syriac language and tradition, which was familiar with Judaism and its exegetic and haggadic traditions, and with its literary genres too, as were also Ephraim and Aphrahat. From the beginning of the 4th century AD, Pesh Sir has been witness to a reformulation which has been, at times a very markedly and, from my point of view, also explicitly Chris- tian treatment of the biblical text. The history of modern research into the specific characteristics of Pesh Sir has touched not only so-called “targumisms” but also tendencies in the halakhah and the haggadah including the eschatological themes. From the methodological point of view, it might have been more useful to give a general framework compatible with the hermeneutic and theological characteristics of Pesh Sir and to start with the more obvious and, up to now, best documented supposition that even this Syriac version of Sirach was created around the beginning of 4th century AD in a Christian background, in accordance, for example, with that shared by Aphrahat.

189 Cf. ibid., 47-48 with essential indications about the exegesis of LXX-PeshProv 8:22-30 in the Syriac-speaking Christian churches. 308 Giovanni Rizzi

Bibliography

CALDUCH-BENAGES, N. – FERRER, J. – LIESEN, J., La sabiduria del escriba / Wisdom of the Scribe. Ediciòn diplomatica de la version siriaca de Ben Sira segùn el Codice Ambrosiano, with Spanish and English translation (Biblioteca Midràsica 26), Estella 2003. CAVALLETTI, S. (ed.), Il Trattato delle Benedizioni del Talmud Babilonese, Milano 1992. Codex Syro-Hexapharis Ambrosianus photolithographice editus et adnotante A.M. Ceriani. Monumenta sacra et profana ex codicibus praesertim Bibliothecae Ambrosianae, Mediolani MDCCCLXXIV. GILBERT, M., L’addition de Siracide 1,21. Une enigma, in: COLLADO BERTOMEU, V. (ed.), Palabra, prodigio, poesia. In memoriam P. Luis Alonso Schökel, SJ. (AnBib 151), Roma 2003, 317-325. LUST, J. – EYNIKEL, E. – HAUSPIE, K. (eds.), Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint. Revised Edition, Stuttgart 2003. KEARNS, C., Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach: NCCHS (1969), 546-550. MIDDENDORP, TH., Die Stellung Jesus ben Siras zwischen Judentum und Hellenis- mus, Leiden 1973. MINISSALE, A., La versione greca del Siracide. Confronto con il testo ebraico alla luce dell’attività midrascica e del metodo targumico (AnBib 133), Roma 1995. NAU, F., Histoire et sagesse d’Ahiqar l’assyrien, Paris 1909. NELSON, M. D., The Syriac Version of the Wisdom of Ben Sira Compared to the Greek and Hebrew Materials (SBL.DS 107), Atalanta, GA 1988. OWENS, R. J., The Early Syriac Text of Ben Sira in the Demonstrations of Aphrahat: JSSt 34 (1989), 39-75. RIZZI, G., Fenomeni ermeneutici nella traduzione di Pesh Sapienza, in: BELLIA, G. – PASSARO, A. (eds.), Il Libro della Sapienza. Tradizione, redazione, teologia (Stu- dia Biblica 1), Roma 2004, 233-269. RÜGER, H.-P., Text und Textform im hebraischen Sirach. Untersuchungen zur Textgeshichte und Textkritik der hebraischen Sirachfragmente aus der Kairor- er Geniza (BZAW 112), Berlin 1970. SKEHAN, P. W. – DI LELLA, A. A., The Wisdom of Ben Sira. A New Translation with Notes, Introduction, and Commentary (AncB 39), New York 1987. SMEND, R., Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach, Berlin 1906. STROTHMANN, W., Jesus-Sirach-Zitate bei Aphraat, Ephraem und im Liber Graduum, in: FISCHER, R. H. (ed.), A Tribute to Arthur Voobus. Studies in Early Christian Lit- erature and Its Environments, Primarily in the Syrian East, Chicago 1977, 154-155. VATTIONI, F., Ecclesiastico. Testo ebraico con apparato critico e versioni greca, latina e siriaca, Napoli 1968. WEITZMAN, M. P., The Syriac Version of the Old Testament. An Introduction, Cam- bridge 1999. WINTER, M. M., Peshitta Institute Communication XII. The Origins of Ben Sira in Syriac (Part I): VT XXVII (1977), 237-253; (Part II): VT XXVII (1977), 494-507. ZIEGLER, J., Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach (Septuaginta. Vetus Testamentum Graecum XII/2), Göttingen 1965. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew

ROSARIO PISTONE

1. A fairly widespread teaching

The fate of the work of Ben Sira is one of those cases in which the result aimed at seem to have been achieved but certainly in a way rather different from that foreseen or desired by its author. Translated into Greek by his grandson, it was assured a such a circulation in the Alexandrian diaspora as to give rise to a complex and close-knit series of interactions among the later editions of the text in one or the other language. It was known and utilised at Qumran while an exemplar has been found among the remains of the rebels at Masada, kept with the other scrolls in the synagogue of the fortress. Similarly, centuries later, what remained of obsolete copies was placed reverently in the Cairo geniza and from there brought to light by the archaeologists. Learned masters and rabbis, meanwhile, in those collections which flowed together to form the Talmud made no light reference to it as to a work exquisitely Jewish, pervaded with love of Wis- dom finally identified with the Torah. However, the result of Ben Sira’s labours was not considered such as to defile the hands despite the fact that different generations of believers had drawn on it in great measure. To this day, the reasons for its exclusion from the Jewish canon escape us. Among so many explicit references to Sirach, the New Testament authors constitute no small quantity.

1.1 Links with the NT

The 27th edition of Nestle-Aland indicates in the apparatus1 at least 108 places in the NT where the text of Ben Sira turns out to be present by means of quotation or allusion. Of these, at least 24 are found in Matthew’s Gospel. The Bible de Jérusalem2 refers from Sirach to Matthew’s Gospel in 17 cases which are not in the work just mentioned. In at least two of these occurrences, the sapiential text is matched with two different Gospel citations.3 To these can be joined further Sir 31:8, which, in the Greek version, pro-

1 802-803. 2 French original, Paris 1984. From now on, BJ. 3 Sir 10:6 & Mt 5:21-24; 18:21-22; Sir 29:8-13 & Mt 6:19-21; 19:21. 310 Rosario Pistone nounces blessed the rich man who is without corruption while the Hebrew text speaks of “wealth”, mammon, a point of comparison with Mt 6:24 according to which wealth is in opposition to God: “You cannot serve God and mammon”4 (ouv du,nasqe qew/| douleu,ein kai. mamwna/|). Similarly, Sir 31:9, with its mention of the ekklesia which proclaims the elee¯mosynas of the rich man who is not corrupt can be held to allude to Mt 18:17.33, both for the mention of ekklesia, and for the adoption of the theme of mercy (cf. the verb evle,ew) with which the king forgives an enormous debt to a slave who is later punished for not having acted in the same way in his turn (v. 33: ouvk e;dei kai. se. evleh/sai to.n su,ndoulo,n sou( w`j kavgw. se. hvle,hsa). Again: Sir 33:12:

[...] some of them he blessed and exalted, and some of them he made holy and brought near to himself; but some of them he cursed and brought low, and he turned them out of their place

evx auvtw/n euvlo,ghsen kai. avnu,ywsen kai. evx auvtw/n h`gi,asen kai. pro.j auvto.n h;ggisen avpV auvtw/n kathra,sato kai. evtapei,nwsen kai. avne,streyen auvtou.j avpo. sta,sewj auvtw/n, even if referred to Lk 1:51-53 by BJ, it can easily evoke the images of eschatological judgement according to the Matthean formulation in 25:34.41:

Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you [...] depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels

deu/te oi` euvloghme,noi tou/ patro,j mou( klhronomh,sate th.n h`toimasme,nhn u`mi/n basilei,an [...] 41 poreu,esqe avpV evmou/ oi` kathrame,noi eivj to. pu/r to. aivw,nion to. h`toimasme,non tw/| diabo,lw| kai. toi/j avgge,loij auvtou/.

Beyond the clear links of vocabulary (euvlo,ghsen / euvloghme,noi; kathra,sato / kathrame,noi), the action of blessing and bringing near expressed by Ben Sira can be detected in Matthew’s commendation: “Inherit the kingdom...”, while the “turning out of their place” seems to be loosely fulfilled in the consignment to eternal fire. Ben Sira describes the divine action in the third person while in the Gospel the eschatological judge speaks in the first person. A careful reading which considers the point of contact between the two books, the citation or the allusions, must take into account also the intentional changes of the author. In the case of Matthew, the existence of parallel texts such as Luke and/or Mark can help us to understand possible allu- sive references or indirect quotations. It appears to me possible to take as an example Sir 4:10 which is adopted in Mt 5:48 // Lk 6:35:

4 For the Hebrew text, cf. BEENTJES, The Book of Ben Sira in Hebrew, 55. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 311

Sir 4:10: gi,nou ovrfanoi/j w`j path.r kai. avnti. avndro.j th/| mhtri. auvtw/n kai. e;sh| w`j ui`o.j u`yi,stou kai. avgaph,sei se ma/llon h' mh,thr sou Mt 5:48: e;sesqe ou=n u`mei/j te,leioi w`j o` path.r u`mw/n o` ouvra,nioj te,leio,j evstin Lk 6:35: [...] kai. e;sesqe ui`oi. u`yi,stou( o[ti auvto.j crhsto,j evstin evpi. tou.j avcari,stouj kai. ponhrou,j

Luke’s formulation, which speaks of “sons of the Most High” takes up that of Ben Sira explicitly; Matthew, on the other hand, has preferred to refer to “your heavenly Father”.5 Have we to conclude that there is no connection with the sapiential text? Or that the true link with Jewish precedent is to be attributed to Q on which Mt and Lk depend? To this last suggestion is to be opposed the fact that Matthew has a conspicuous number of references of his own to Sirach for which it would be excessive to exclude the direct compositional activity of the evangelist by referring everything to a further source of his own (M). From that there would result the colourless image of a gleaner less creative by far than Ben Sira himself. Rather, in this specific case, we must think of an adaptation by the evangelist who has already used the explicit formula “sons of God” in 5:9, taking it up again later, with a synonymous expression, “your Father who is in heaven”, in 5:16 and 5:45. Mt 5:48 merely extends this process. [Uyistoj is used only in the greeting to Jesus during his triumphal entry into Jerusalem where it appears within a (composite) quotation of Psalms 117:25-26 and 148:1 (aivnei/te auvto.n evn toi/j u`yi,stoij) and indicates, simply, heaven. It is probable that in this precise example (5:48) Matthew preferred to distance himself from the text of Ben Sira in respect of which the teaching of Jesus constitutes a radical surpassing at most levels. In the first place, the recipients of loving benevolence are no longer orphans and widows but enemies and persecutors. Secondly, the idea of comparison (“like sons of the Most High”, w`j ui`o.j u`yi,stou): the relationship with God is one of real filiation (“sons of your Father who is in heaven”: 5:45), while, for Ben Sira, the taking over of the function of paterfamilias for the disinherited, would have attracted the divine attention. The text of Mt 5:48 shows its literary proximity to Ben Sira by retaining the comparative w`j in connection with “perfection”: it is a question of being perfect like your heavenly Father.6 The Gospel saying

5 Luke employs a vocabulary not dissimilar from that of Ben Sira: avca,ristoj, which does not occur in Mt, turns up again as an adverb or in an adverbial phrase in Sir 18:18 and 29:25. In the form of a substantivised adjective in Sir 29:16; cf. also a;carij in 20:19. u[yistoj has a particularly high frequency in Ben Sira (more than 40 cases), where it turns out to be the term most used after ku,rioj for the divine name. 6 Of the nine cases in the NT in which u`,yistoj is referred to God, seven are to be found in the work of Lk. Almost certainly, Lk has kept u`,yistoj, adding crhsto,j to his text because more useful to his aim of multiple reference. As many hearers of pagan background as others of Jewish formation would have been able to grasp a reference to their culture of origin. Already DODD, The Bible and the Greeks, 12-13, observed that in the Hellenistic 312 Rosario Pistone broadens the understanding of the sage towards an unexpected commun- ion with God himself. Among the points of major contact between the two works, we should not neglect to note the invitation to take on the yoke, of wisdom or of Jesus himself, as a characteristic element of those who wish to obtain rest (Sir 6:18-37; 51:13-20 and Mt 11:28-30). That immediately imposes the necessity of examining within the first gospel the mode in which the reality of discipleship is presented7 and its connections with wisdom. Is the disciple of Jesus, perhaps, an aspiring sage who sees in him (alone) an excellent teacher? Will he too become a master in his turn? Is, therefore, the blessing which Ben Sira pronounces on those who search for wisdom relevant to him? Or is he also a prophet, a messenger, quite separately, of the secrets of God? Research can only be strongly stimulated to study these matter in depth.

period in the cities of the near East, the most important divine beings assumed the title of Zeus or Most High God. Such a procedure was not unprofitable for Judaism which maintained that the one unique Deity had come to be venerated under different names (cf. Letter of Aristes § 16). It happened to the extent that its frequency in the inscriptions of the Hellenistic period often makes it difficult to establish if we are faced with a Jew- ish or pagan text. A Jewish listener would have been able to hear in the third evangelist an echo of Ben Sira. Per crhsto,j with an ethical sense, cf. Rom 2:4 or Eph 4:32 (crhstoi,( eu;splagcnoi) where the aspect of reciprocal mercy is laid down on the model employed by God himself. The reference to the divine mercy appeared already in Ps 68:17; 108:21 (“...since crhsto,n is your mercy”), but it is said of God himself, in an absolute sense or linked with mercy, in Pss 24:8; 33:9; Wis 15:1; Na 1:7; Jer 40:11; Dan 3:89; 1 Pt 2:3. Cf. also the Psalms of Solomon 2,36; 5,2.12; 10,2.7; Matthew defines as crhsto,j the yoke which Jesus calls men to take on in 11:30. The self-definition as “meek and lowly of heart” is a direct explanation of it, perfectly understandable in the light of Sir 37:11 which, by contrast, warns against consulting those who are not endowed with mercy (avneleh,monoj) in connection with kindness (peri. crhstohqei,aj). 7 Different approaches try to see the background to Christian discipleship according to Matthew in the light of the contrast with the synagogue; DEUTSCH, Hidden Wisdom, 16- 18, considers the Matthean community as a more or less dissident Messianic group, similar to Qumran, and the circles recognisable in 1 Enoch or in the Psalms of Solomon, which, however, did not completely sever its links with Judaism as such. STANTON, A Gospel for a New People, 85-107 and 146-168, makes of it a group with sectarian characteristics opposed to both the cultic and family environment. SALDARINI, Matthew’s Christian-Jew- ish Community, 1-10 and 107-123 perceives a deviant group within Judaism; he does not change tack in his later The Gospel of Matthew and Jewish-Christian Conflict. CARTER, Households and Discipleship, and Matthew 4:18-22, insists on the marginal and ambiva- lent aspect of the link with Jesus: on the one hand, it is separated form social bonds and, on the other, is continues to share in the current socio-economic structures (within its own group; here, 58-61), but by now definitively separated from the Judaism of the synagogue. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 313

1.2 The disciple between wisdom and prophecy

For many years now, scholars have directed their attention to the shape of the teaching of Jesus and of the group of disciples which came to be con- stituted around him as also to the different ways in which the evangelists crystallise and transmit, together with the words of the master, the self- understanding of the community within which and for which their writings came to life. For Matthew’s Gospel the existence of a kind of scribal school has been hypothesised, a group of specialists, that is, in the torah and wisdom of Israel, as it could have existed in the period straddling the first and second centuries AD. Fully sharing in the Jewish culture, it would have left abundant traces in the first canonical gospel. The chief characteristics of Matthean discipleship appear already in the first discourse of Jesus which opens with the most extensive series of beatitudes which can be found in either the New or the Old Testament (Mt 5:3-12). Further on, differently from what happens in Mark, the disciples understand Jesus’ speaking in parables. Not only are “the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven” (Mt 13:11) revealed to them but, at the end of the parables’ discourse, the master compares their statement of understanding to the image of the scribe who has become a disciple and of his changed hermeneutical perspective. The value of his treasure is now increased by the novelty of the teaching which he has received according to which he (re)structures the knowledge he already possessed (Mt 13:51-52). “Prophets, wise men and scribes” are defined by Jesus as those he has sent to Israel (23:34) in his apostrophe to the scribes and Pharisees. These latter are castigated, in their total, sevenfold, shutting out of the will of God and of the wisdom that leads to the kingdom, so hin- dering the access to it of those who would wish to enter (cf. Mt 23:13: Ouvai. de. u`mi/n( grammatei/j kai. Farisai/oi u`pokritai,( o[ti klei,ete th.n basilei,an tw/n ouvranw/n e;mprosqen tw/n avnqrw,pwn\ u`mei/j ga.r ouvk eivse,rcesqe ouvde. tou.j eivsercome,nouj avfi,ete eivselqei/n. Also Wis 6:20: evpiqumi,a a;ra sofi,aj avna,gei evpi. basilei,an). For those sent out by Jesus (avpestalme,nouj), the scribes and Pharisees of Israel, referred to summarily under the collective designation of “Jerusalem”, reserve the fate of death (cf. Mt 23:34.37). What is important to take on board here are the qualifications with which the disciples of Jesus are now presented: they are successors to the ancient prophets, they are the true wise men and scribes in contrast to the wicked.8 Their task will

8 Not a few authors have emphasised the particular Matthean presentation of the disciple in the form of a scribe or sage; I refer only to BURNETT, The Testament, à propos of Mt 23:34; SUGGS, Wisdom, 120-127; ORTON, The Understanding Scribe, above all, cap. 6. NAUCK, Salt as a Metaphor, reads Mt 5:13-15 in the light of rabbinic texts where “to be salted” corresponds to “to be wise”: “Jesus calls his disciples the real teachers, the true wise men in opposition to the Jewish wise men”; here, p. 177. For a survey on the role and functions 314 Rosario Pistone be that of “making disciples of all the nations, teaching them to observe” all that Jesus has commanded (Mt 28:19-20). Such a description could not lead us better into the sapiential environment. The preaching activity of the disciples of Jesus is profiled against a “mag- isterial” (dida,skontej, 28:19) and scribal background which the text also highlights with the use of the verb maqhteu,w in 28:19. The missionary man- date accounts for the existential shift required of future believers: it is not unlike that required of the scribe who becomes a disciple of the kingdom of heaven in Mt 13:52 and, at the same time, the “new”, drawn out from the scribe’s own treasure together with the “old”, has to do with the proclaimed message, that is, with the knowledge of the mysteries of the kingdom, with all that Jesus commanded. The Sermon on the Mount, addressed to the first (four) called as the “type” of the disciple, or to those who had already begun to follow Jesus,9 acquires additional light if confronted with the statements just recorded. Between Chapter 5, with its macarisms and the identification with the ancient prophets on account of the same fate (cf. 5:12), and Chapter 23 which describes them explicitly as prophets, wise men and scribes in the guise of those who have been “sent”, there is established a strong link of reciprocal reference. It is a question of the same characters, of the same sort of rejection, as Mt 23:29-31.35 confirms, where the wicked scribes and Pharisees bear witness against themselves in two complementary ways which allow of no equivocation: they separate themselves from their fathers who persecuted the prophets, erecting monuments to the victims, but they persecute the prophets sent by Jesus in the same way. It is from the generation of his listeners-adversaries that there will be required the blood of the prophets from Abel to Zechariah (cf. Mt 23:35-36). This announcement of clear eschatological flavour is particularly important because it is placed in a sequence which has already mentioned the disciples of Jesus, prophets, wise men and scribes in v. 34, while in vv. 35-36, the only category mentioned is that of prophets to which should be ascribed a clear resumptive and cumulative value: for Matthew, Christ-

of the Twelve in relation to their “little faith”(Mt 14:31-33 and 16:5-12), I refer to BROWN, The Disciples, 3-37. 9 “Jésus s’assied, indice d’une certaine intimité. Il eût fallu être debout pour parler à une foule. Nouvel indice, les disciples s’approchent comme pour former son auditoire. Les disciples ne sont pas seulement les quatres appelés (iv, 18-22) et n’a pas été encore question des Douze. Ce sont donc les disciples en general ...”: LAGRANGE, Évangile selon Saint Matthieu, 81-82; the italics are mine. Insofar as they are counterposed to the crowd, the disciples “represent the Church [...] stand for the faithful; they are transparent symbol of believers. So the sermon on the mount is spoken directly to Matthew’s Christian readers”. So DAVIES – ALLISON, The Gospel, 1, 425. Of different opinion, DUMAIS, Le Sermon sur la Montagne; WICK, Volkspredigt contra Gemeinderegel?. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 315 ian wise men and scribes are in a certain way interchangeable and iden- tifiable with prophets. There thus comes about a very strong redactional contact with the text of the beatitudes, the series of which ends with the affirmation: “for so men persecuted the prophets which were before you” (5:12). The text, however absorbs in prophecy the wise disposition which marks the scribe and sage. The conclusion of the parables discourse, again addressed solely to the disciples, has the progress of a piece of teaching the climax of which coincides with the presentation of the disciples in the guise of well-instructed scribes. The disciples, therefore, are at the same time prophets, proclaimed blessed, and wise men. If we join to this the final text of the gospel which extends the teaching activity of these scribe-prophets to the end of time and through all the nations, we obtain a sufficiently complete framework of the particular perception of discipleship enjoyed by Matthew, the scribe.10 Such a characterisation is not at all surprising and sinks its roots precisely in the self-presentation of Ben Sira,11 in whose opinion his own teaching assumes the path of prophecy (24:30-34):

30 kavgw. w`j diw/rux avpo. potamou/ kai. w`j u`dragwgo.j evxh/lqon eivj para,deison 31 ei=pa potiw/ mou to.n kh/pon kai. mequ,sw mou th.n prasia,n kai. ivdou. evge,neto, moi h` diw/rux eivj potamo,n kai. o` potamo,j mou evge,neto eivj qa,lassan 32 e;ti paidei,an w`j o;rqron fwtiw/ kai. evkfanw/ auvta. e[wj eivj makra,n 33 e;ti didaskali,an w`j profhtei,an evkcew/ kai. katalei,yw auvth.n eivj genea.j aivw,nwn i;dete o[ti ouvk evmoi. mo,nw| evkopi,asa avllV a[pasin toi/j evkzhtou/sin auvth,n

30 And I went forth like a canal from a river and like a water channel into a garden. 31 I said, “I will water my orchard and drench my garden plot”; and so, my stream became a river, and my river became a sea. 32 Again, “I will make instruction shine forth like the dawn, and I will make it shine afar”; 33 And again “I will pour out teaching like prophecy, and leave it to all eternal generations”. 34 Observe that I have not laboured for myself alone, but for all who seek instruction.

The image adopted is that of the stream which grows, transforming itself little by little into a river and finally even into the sea. Further on (33:16-19), the images change their semantic ambit: no longer do we have the water that irrigates and brings fertility but the world of agriculture at the moment of the harvest. The sage is compared to the one who follows in the wake of the grape-gatherers. He is one of the gleaners; he gathers what is left.

10 Cf. MINEAR, The Good News. 11 The texts in the first person are not exempt from difficulties as far as the link between the self-presentation of Ben Sira and the discourses of Wisdom personified are concerned ; cf. LIESEN, First-Person Passages. 316 Rosario Pistone

Notwithstanding this, he has filled his basket and gone on to lay down, as in Chapter 24, that his toil will be useful for many:

16 kavgw. e;scatoj hvgru,pnhsa w`j kalamw,menoj ovpi,sw trughtw/n 17 evn euvlogi,a| kuri,ou e;fqasa kai. w`j trugw/n evplh,rwsa lhno,n 18 katanoh,sate o[ti ouvk evmoi. mo,nw| evkopi,asa avlla. pa/sin toi/j zhtou/sin paidei,an

16 I was the last on watch; I was like one who gleans after the grape-gatherers. 17 By the blessing of the Lord I excelled, and like a grape-gatherer I filled my wine press. 18 Consider that I have not laboured for myself alone, but for all who seek instruction.

What Ben Sira gathers is Wisdom now identified with the Torah itself. What he pours out is a teaching, a vital distillation of the Torah, which assumes the very nature of prophecy. However, the conclusion of the book of Hosea already anticipated in sapiential terms the understanding of the prophetic discourse just put forward, with an arrangement which could recall very closely a maxim of wisdom thanks to its referring to the right ways of the Lord in which the righteous proceed smoothly while the ungodly wear themselves out:12

ti,j sofo.j kai. sunh,sei tau/ta h' suneto.j kai. evpignw,setai auvta, dio,ti euvqei/ai ai` o`doi. tou/ kuri,ou kai. di,kaioi poreu,sontai evn auvtai/j oi` de. avsebei/j avsqenh,sousin evn auvtai/j (Hos 14:10);

Who is wise, and will understand these things? or prudent, and will know them? for the ways of the Lord are straight, and the righteous shall walk in them: but the ungodly shall fall therein.

A text such as that of Sir 24:33 shows that the author intends his own teaching as prophecy, that is to say as endowed with the same characteristics as prophetic speech: inspired by God and for the benefit of the many.13 After all, it is typical of the wise man to gather the words of the Law as “an oracle worthy of faith” (Sir 33:3: a;nqrwpoj suneto.j evmpisteu,sei no,mw| kai. o`

12 Sofo,j translates here ~kx which in Hos 13:13 is rendered by fro,nimoj, while the unique occurrence of suneto,j, renders the equally unique occurrence of !Abn". Mt will take up fro,nimoj as one of his preferred adjectives, as if a background against which to project discipleship in its dimension of being realised in daily practice, referring it, together with pisto,j, to the watchful disciple, worthy of being set over the household by his master, to distribute to all what is necessary in expectation of the return of the Lord, (cf. Mt 24:45). It describes the watchful cunning of the serpent in Mt 10:16, which does not, however, harm the simplicity of the dove; the use in Mt 25:2.4.8.9 takes us back to watchfulness. It is used for shrewdness in Mt 7:24. Sofo,j, on the other hand, is referred to the disciples in 23:34, while in 11:25 it indicates the wise (of Israel) in contradistinction from the nhpi,oij. 13 SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 338. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 317 no,moj auvtw/| pisto.j w`j evrw,thma dh,lwn). In Ben Sira’s perspective, we can affirm a kind of functional equivalence between the Torah and prophecy, something which leaves a trace in the saying of Mt 11:13: “For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John (pa,ntej ga.r oi` profh/tai kai. o` no,moj e[wj VIwa,nnou evprofh,teusan)”.14 The inverted order prophets-Law, compared with the more usual “the Law and the prophets” (Lk 16:16; Mt 5:17; 22:40) can be explained precisely with reference to the expression of Sirach, who sees it, as a whole, as prophetic manifestation. So, on the other hand, Matthew had presented the Law in 5:18 as a prophetic corpus: “truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not a jot, not a tittle, will pass from the law until all is accomplished”. Mt 5:17 can be read from the same viewpoint: “Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them”. If, for Ben Sira, the Law has a prophetic import it is equally true that in 39:1 he understands the prophecies as a corpus now available for consul- tation and study, in the same way as the Law and the wisdom of the ancients:

On the other hand he who devotes himself to the study of the law of the Most High. Will seek out the wisdom of all the ancients, and will be concerned with prophecies.

Prophecy is one lot of information among others, one part of that heritage of knowledge which can be defined comprehensively as “wisdom”. For this reason, whoever devotes himself to acquiring it can later make it flow from himself like prophecy (Sir 24:32). In short, the sage who studies the prophecies could repeat their content in sapiential mode, that is, with the aim of guiding human action according to the divine will. Thus he will achieve the same aim as the prophet, and his teaching will be able to be described as prophecy. Matthew, even if his slant is not identical, seems to hold to a similar equivalence when he assigns to as many as receive a prophet or a righteous man, in their capacity as prophets and righteous men, the same reward as that reserved for these categories (cf. Mt 10:40-41: “Whoever welcomes a prophet because he is [eivj o;noma] a prophet will receive the reward

14 Cf. also Mt 5:17 and 22:40. GREEN, Matthew, Poet of the Beatitudes, 96, holds that, in all three cases, Mt would have inserted the reference to the Law in a text which spoke only of the prophets. In this way, he obtains for Mt 11:13 a text which, corresponding to the previous verse on the Bap- tist, would form a kind of strophe. However, despite the graphic treatment and the explanation on p. 97, it is difficult to comprehend the concentric structure of the verse about John. The unity of the poem reconstructed by Green is rudely disturbed by the introduction of Mt 11:13 with amen, as he himself recognises. Only by suppressing it (Green puts it in brackets) and by making the mention of the Law disappear, although it is present in the textual parallel in Lk 16:16, does he succeed in obtaining a text that is any way coherent, though purely hypothetical, which ended up being lost in the present redaction because of the Christological reflection of Mt who was responsible for the insertions in question. Cf. ibid., 97-98 and Appendix B, 300-305, particularly p. 303. 318 Rosario Pistone of a prophet, and he who receives a righteous man because he is [eivj o;noma] a righteous man will receive the reward of a righteous man”). At the same time, at the opening of the book, Ben Sira had stated that wisdom consists in the observing of the commandments:

Do you desire wisdom? Keep the commandments and the Lord will grant it to you (1:26).

The search for wisdom, then, moves along such coordinates: it is a studious activity in the wake of a tradition that was by now consolidated, and a daily practice in the life of the believer.

1.3 Wisdom sought and secrets revealed

We can well understand how and why, from this viewpoint, there is no room for possible revelations or mysteries or any other kind of esotericism:15 Sir 3:21-24:

21 calepw,tera, sou mh. zh,tei kai. ivscuro,tera, sou mh. evxe,taze 22 a] proseta,gh soi tau/ta dianoou/ ouv ga,r evsti,n soi crei,a tw/n kruptw/n 23 evn toi/j perissoi/j tw/n e;rgwn sou mh. perierga,zou plei,ona ga.r sune,sewj avnqrw,pwn u`pedei,cqh soi 24 pollou.j ga.r evpla,nhsen h` u`po,lhmyij auvtw/n kai. u`po,noia ponhra. wvli,sqhsen dianoi,aj auvtw/n

21 Seek not what is too difficult for you, nor investigate what is beyond your power. 22 Reflect upon what has been assigned to you, for you do not need what is hidden. 23 Do not meddle in what is beyond your tasks, for matters too great for human understanding have been shown you.24 For their hasty judgment has led many astray, and wrong opinion has caused their thoughts to slip.

In fact Ben Sira explains the content of revelation stating that it is the law handed over in the theophany of Sinai (Sir 45:5), itself now the object of interpretation by the wise (Sir 39:1.6-11), and, at the same time, Wisdom personified which comes forth from the mouth of the Most High (Sir 24:3). Wisdom being, therefore, the revealed Torah (Sir 24:22) is within the reach of man to be carried out and fulfilled. The evangelist Matthew would certainly have been able to subscribe to this last aspect which requires form the human being the fulfilment of the divine will. Inserting the proclamation of the Torah into the work of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount, he starts by making the well-known statement according to which not only one, not even the least, commandment of the Law is to pass away, but the complete fulfilment of the commandments16 becomes there the criterion for

15 Cf. in this regard CORLEY, Wisdom Versus Apocalyptic, 275ff. 16 Perhaps even in an extended sense; cf. Jas 2:10: “Whoever keeps the whole law but fails Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 319 determining the status of the believer in the kingdom: “[...] whoever does (the least commandments) and teaches them to men shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven” (Mt 5:19). However, Matthew would not have shared in the avoiding of revelation and of mysteries, and would certainly not have limited revelation to the understanding of the Torah. Beyond the statement of the parables discourse, according to which it is to the disciples and not to any old listeners that the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven are entrusted (Mt 13:11), so much so that they can be described as wise scribes (cf. Mt 13:52), it will be necessary to recall the eulogy of 11:25- 30 concerning the revelation to babes (nhpi,oi), and Mt 16:17, with the macarism for Peter who had been made the object of a revelation concerning the identity and mission of Jesus on the part of the Father. It was on him that Jesus founded his ekklesia. Thus we have located a reference to Ben Sira and at the same time a taking of distance owing to the fact that Jesus, and not the Torah, is the presence of God among his people. He is the Emmanuel (Mt 1:22-23; cf. 28:20: “I am with you until the end of time...”) and it is in his power to pronounce the heart of the Law, the real will of God, without referring to further mediation (cf. Mt 5:21-48).17 This explains the nearness and at the same time the distance of a saying which can be ascribed to Q, and perhaps more easily able to be linked with Ben Sira in the form transmitted by Luke rather than in that employed by Matthew. It is the matter of Wisdom’s being justified:

Sir 4:11: h` sofi,a ui`ou.j auvth/j avnu,ywsen kai. evpilamba,netai tw/n zhtou/ntwn auvth,n Mt 11:19: kai. evdikaiw,qh h` sofi,a avpo. tw/n e;rgwn auvth/j Lk 7:35: kai. evdikaiw,qh h` sofi,a avpo. pa,ntwn tw/n te,knwn auvth/j

Sir 4:11: Wisdom exalts her sons and gives help to those who seek her. Mt 11:19: ...yet wisdom is justified by her deeds. Lk 7:35: ... yet wisdom is justified by all her children.

The reading of the LXX differs somewhat from the Hebrew text which reads hynb hdml twmkx, setting up in the rest of the verse a play on words between “her sons” and “those who understand her” (hynb // ~ynybm), leaving it under-

in one point has become guilty of the whole of the Law”, but also Did 4,13; Barn 19,11. BETZ, The Sermon on the Mount, 187-188, perceives in the “least-light commandments” a form of irony: the observance of the commandments of Jesus, considered light by the Pharisees, makes one great in the kingdom of heaven, in contrast to the Pharisaic teaching on “heavy” observances, rejected by Jesus himself. 17 For an introduction to and discussion of the “antitheses” cf. DAVIES – ALLISON, The Gospel, 1, 505-509. RÖHSER, Jesus – der wahre ‘Schriftgelerhte’. 320 Rosario Pistone stood that only those who understand wisdom can be called her sons.18 Matthew’s formulation, “the works of wisdom” (11:19) should be read in the light of the expression “works of Christ” (11:2). What we have here is an echo in the form of an inclusion in the strength of which Jesus is that wisdom whose (his) very works justify, starting with the reponse given to the Baptist when the latter was astonished to see him presenting himself for baptism (cf. 3:15: “[...] Let it be so now: for thus it is fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness”), and passing through miracles performed (ai` plei/stai duna,meij), indicators of his messianic identity, notwithstanding which, however, the cities of the coast have refused to believe (cf. Mt 11:20-24). This last text cited immediately precedes the pericope of blessing the Father for the revelation to the “babes”. For the evangelist, “these things” that God reveals are “the works of Jesus”: that is to say the very works of wisdom, according to the link which we have thrown into relief. It is not improbable that the evangelist also retains the reference of Sir 3:19 to the wisdom which reveals the mysteries of God to the humble.19 We can gather, therefore, that the exaltation indicated by LXX Sir as care of wisdom for her sons must be recognised, at least in a certain way, in the action of the Father who reveals the identity of Jesus. Such a reading seems to be confirmed by the recurrence of ta. krupta,, the secrets, the hidden things, as well in the course of the brief poem of Ben Sira (Sir 4:18), as in the form of verb in Matthew’s text. In fact, in the first case, it is stated that wisdom will

18 SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 170-171. 19 The witness of the Hebrew and Greek Mss for Sir 3:19-20 is not univocal. For the relevant discussion, cf. again SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 158-159, in whose opinion, the reading of Gr II, Ms A and the Peshitta “he reveals his secrets to the humble” (wdws hlgy ~ywn[l), would not be original but would turn out to have depended on Am 3:7. However, it can be argued that Ben Sira is making a change of an interpretative type. If the mysteries revealed to man in cap. 3 have to do with the Law, and the sage is the one who applies himself to it with his study and his life, the making equivalent becomes immediately comprehensible: the term wdws, “secret” in the HT of Ben Sira, features again in Am 3:7, which, however, the LXX renders with paidei,a. The polysemy of this last term makes further links possible. Sir 1:27 states, for example, that wisdom and paidei,a consist in the fear of the Lord, while his euvdoki,a consists of fidelity and meekness: here paidei,a does not indicate the divine plan or mystery, but rather discipline and learning. Other prophetic texts, in the translation of the LXX, link humility with the observance of the Law, cf. Zeph 2:3: “Seek the Lord, all you humble of the land, who do his commands; seek righteousness, seek humility”. Humble / humility render the root wn[ / tapein* in the Greek text, which, however, omits “seek humility”. In short, both the prophet of Am 3:7 HT, and the humble man of Sir 3:19-20 Gr are made the object of the same revelation (wdws). The humble man, that is to say, he who lives according to the Law, is now the addressee of revelation. The contacts in vocabulary by means of the term paidei,a and the adaptation of themes, explain better why the Greek text of Sirach could come to an equivalence between prophet and humble man, without us being obliged to suppose a confusion between hlg and ldg (contra SKEHAN – DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 159). Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 321 reveal her secrets to whoever shows himself worthy of her trust, abandoning the one who does not follow her (Sir 4:17-18); in the second it is said that the Father has kept secret, hidden (e;kruyaj tau/ta) from the wise what he has revealed to babes (Mt 11:25), that is, to those who have believed in Jesus.20 The evangelical saying of wisdom being justified by her works or by her children (Mt 11:9 // Lk 7:35) can be read, therefore, as a repeat and re- elaboration of Sir 4:11-18 where the activity of wisdom who teaches her sons (Sir 4:11 Hb) or exalts them (LXX) culminates in the revelation of her secrets (Sir 4:18).

1.4 Further on secrets revealed or about the scribe-prophet

Like Ben Sira, Matthew too assigns to the scribes a big space in his community. In both cases we are concerned with spiritual guides but also with points of intellectual reference. In this, Matthew is inserted perfectly into the situation which precedes him: also in his times, the scribes are distinguished citizens (cf. Sir 38–39; Mt 23:1-7).21 The Christian scribes, however, are able to teach because they have understood the teaching of Jesus and have “become disciples of the kingdom of heaven”, that is to say they are in a state which allows the movement from new to old. We are not far from the truth if we think of a differentiation with regard to the existing scribal schools within whose tradition a master of wisdom is registered and becomes recognised. In Mt 13:51-52, the criterion appears to be the new state of affairs capable of re-reading and re-presenting the old (“‘Have you understood all this?’ They replied: ‘Yes’. He said to them: ‘Therefore , every scribe who is trained for the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old’”). If we do not encounter the old- new juxtaposition in Sirach, yet the sage is seen as one who formulates his own words after having enquired of the wisdom of the ancients (cf. Sir 18:29; 21:15; 24:30ff. etc.). And just as Ben Sira proposes his model of the wise man within a community, so Matthew sees him inserted in a not dissimilar context, as the image of the householder, responsible for catechesis, suggests.22

20 The identification of the nepioi poses some difficulties. In the LXX, although the literal sense of little one, babe is attested, there is no lack of examples, if limited to the Psalms, of an almost technical use,“the just”: Ps 18:8: “the Law of the Lord is perfect, it revives the soul; the testimony of the Lord is faithful and gives wisdom to the little ones (nh,pia; ytp); Ps 114:6: “The Lord preserves the simple (ta. nh,pia): I was humbled and he helped me”; Ps 118:130: “The revelation of your words gives light and understanding to the little ones (nhpi,ouj; ~yytp)”. The use could refer to the ~yytp of Qumran; cf. 1QpHab 12:4; 4QpNah 3-4; 3:5.7. 21 Cf. also JOSEPHUS, Ant. XX, 264. 22 Cf. GNILKA, Il vangelo di Matteo, 1, 742. Cf. also Mt 10:25.46 for the identification of the master of the house, the servants and their relationships. 322 Rosario Pistone

This characteristic form of teaching is projected on to the Twelve, por- trayed as the first repositories and tradents of a succession in which the missionary and didactic elements are closely linked with and referred to the authority of the risen Messiah (Mt 28:18-20: “Then, Jesus came and said to them: ‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And so, I am with you always, even to the end of the world’”). Ben Sira, on his part, wished to make his teaching shine as far as possible (evkfanw/ auvta. e[wj eivj makra,n, Sir 24:32), and to pour out his prophetic doctrine on all generations, for ever (“eternal generations”: didaskali,an w`j profhtei,an evkcew/ kai. katalei,yw auvth.n eivj genea.j aivw,nwn, Sir 24:33), with a temporal viewpoint, therefore, not too far from that of the evangelist, compared with whom, however, he lacks the eschatological expectation. In fact, the class or group of scribes of the first gospel are certainly thought of in contradistinction from the scribes of Israel, as appears from Mt 23:34ff. To this group and its activity, the text of Mt appears to assure a duration which will cease only with the change of the era (cf. 28:20), in perfect harmony with the divine plan. The parable of the wicked tenants, with its concluding prophecy of the kingdom given to others who will make it fruitful (Mt 21:43), is introduced as a reply to the “chief priests and elders of the people” (Mt 21:23), represented at the conclusion as the “chief priests and Pharisees” (Mt 21:45). The scribes are not mentioned here. They will appear, however, shortly afterwards, as the recipients of a very powerful rebuke. More than the universalistic announcement of the entry of the Gentiles into the blessing of Abraham, we can see in the saying about the kingdom given to others, the substitution for the ruling class of Israel by the Christian scribes, prophets and wise men. The importance of the scribe could not be better delineated.23 The first evangelist is, however, the bearer of a message with clear eschatological content. If a certain type of revelations and mysteries is held at a distance by Ben Sira, the Christian scribe does not do likewise. On his shoulders he has not only the statements of Sirach about the wisdom which reveals her mysteries, but a consolidated tradition of sages who are the bear- ers of mysteries. We speak, of course, of the authors of the books that go

23 Probably Matthew himself belonged to a school of scribes after their adhesion to Jesus; so DAVIES – ALLISON, The Gospel, 1, 240. Cf. also STENDHAL, The School of St. Matthew; ZUMSTEIN, La condition du croyant, 156-163; COPE, Matthew – A Scribe; BROWN – MEIER, Antioch and Rome, 59. For a presence of Christian scribes in Matthew’s community, cf. VAN TILBORG, The Jewish Leaders, 128-141; LUZ, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 1, 60- 61. GNILKA, Il vangelo di Matteo, 1, 740ff understands Mt 13:52 as a portrait of the Chris- tian scribe and even of the evangelist himself. For the employment of scribal techniques, cf. WILLS, Scribal Methods. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 323 under the name of Enoch (1, 2, 3 Enoch, as also 2 Baruch and 4 Ezra, who are presented as scribes in their turn.24 Characteristics similar to those of the scribe and the prophet simultaneously can be traced in Ben Sira’s presentation of Moses in the Praise of the Ancestors. The statement according to which God “showed him part of his glory... led him into the thick darkness and gave him the commandments face to face” (Sir 45:3.5), could well be matched with apocalyptic texts or the revelation of mysteries,25 while exquisitely scribal is the teaching activity to Jacob and Israel (Sir 45:5c: “to teach Jacob the covenant and Israel his judgements”). For Ben Sira, the root of Moses’ activity rests on the sanctifying action of God: “He made him glorious among the saints [...] he sanctified him through faithfulness and meekness; he chose him out of all mankind” (Sir 45:2.4; cf. 1:27).The action of sanctifying/consecrating can only recall, among others, the famous text of Jeremiah, consecrated from his mother’s womb, with a radical choice which touched his very origins, marking his entire existence. Similarly, Moses is separated out from all mankind. His prophetic charisma is noted starting from the Deuterono- mistic relecture which makes the liberator solemnly predict that a prophet will arise like him to whom heed must be paid (Deut 18:18). To recall these characteristics is not superfluous given the insistence of not a few scholars on a Wisdom Christology in Matthew.26 His interest in Moses, in the light of which many hold that there is elaborated a presentation of the Messiah-as-Moses,27 does not conflict with that of the Messiah- prophet or the Davidic Messiah.28 In the Jewish tradition Moses is simultaneously prophet and scribe.29 A possible point of contact with the figure of Moses, understood thus from the starting point of the eulogy of Ben Sira,

24 Cf. Ezra 7:11; 1 Enoch 12:3-4; 15, 1; 4 Ezra 14:1.5.26; T. Abr. B 11,3; 2 Enoch 64:5. 25 Cf. the Qumran Teacher of Righteousness, with relevant differences. For the emphasis on meditating on mysteries in order to obtain the eschatological reward, cf. PUECH, Apports des textes apocalyptiques. 26 Cf. GENCH, Wisdom in the Christology of Matthew, and the bibliography cited there. On the different aspects concerning Wisdom in the Synoptics, cf. the documented survey of WINTON, The Proverbs of Jesus, 13-29, above all pp. 20-27 on the sapiential Christology and the identity of Jesus as “sage”. DAVIES – ALLISON, The Gospel, 1, 272. 27 Ascribed by many scholars to the source Q even before the evangelist himself. For DEUTSCH, Lady Wisdom, 81, Matthew rereads the metaphor of Lady Wisdom, transferring its content to Jesus. 28 Already at Qumran, David is regarded as one who speaks under prophetic inspiration. a Cf. 11QPs 18. For HENGEL (The Charismatic Leader, 48), in whose opinion the sage Ben Sira expresses himself as a prophet, that could apply also in the case of Jesus without any difficulty, and one aspect would not disturb the other, rather “the reverse is true: each conditions the other, the unheard-of, revolutionary content of Jesus’ message sought the stamp and polish of an established form”. 29 For Moses, as scribe par excellence, cf. the still valid contribution of VERMES, Scripture and Tradition, 44-55. 324 Rosario Pistone can be established by the reference to “meekness”. Of the commander saved by the waters it is said that the sanctifying action of God consisted for him evn pi,stei kai. prau

30 Vit. Mos., 2, 279; cf. 1, 26. 31 The other occurrences of prau

1.5 Mysteries handed over and prophecies fulfilled: the treasure of wise scribes

A further link between Mt and Ben Sira can be signalled in connection with the already mentioned thirteenth chapter of the gospel on the parables. The three synoptics, each with its own details, relate the teaching of Jesus. The point that interests us here is the moment of explanation of the parables or why the master speaks in parables. In his prologue, Ben Sira’s grandson identifies a group of characters described as toi/j evkto.j, “the outsiders” (Sir prol. 5) to whom the sages can be useful with their work. In all probability, this term indicates those who are not in the permanent body of the school, while he is seeking to publi- cise a work presented as a reliable compendium of traditional wisdom. In Mk 4:11, with an almost identical expression, it is stated that, while to the disciples is given the mystery, “to those without, everything is in parables” (u`mi/n to. musth,rion de,dotai th/j basilei,aj tou/ qeou/\ evkei,noij toi/j e;xw evn parabolai/j ta. pa,nta gi,netai). Mt and Lk have the same text but with some significant variations:

Mt 13:11: u`mi/n de,dotai gnw/nai ta. musth,ria th/j basilei,aj tw/n ouvranw/n( evkei,noij de. ouv de,dotai Lk 8:10: u`mi/n de,dotai gnw/nai ta. musth,ria th/j basilei,aj tou/ qeou/( toi/j de. loipoi/j evn parabolai/j

Mt 13:11: To you it has been given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. Lk 8:10: To you it has been given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God, but for others they are in parables.

In Mt we do not read the expression “to those without”. Very probably because the scene does not foresee, at this point, as in Mk, a shift from out in the open to the enclosure of the house, away from the crowd. Mt distinguishes the disciples from the crowd carefully, as has been seen for the Sermon on the Mount, and it is only to these that Jesus now addresses himself. The disciples’ question in Mt sounds like an explanatory expansion of that in Mk: Jesus is asked, in fact, about his technique, why he addresses himself to the crowd in parables. The evangelist eliminates, therefore the toi/j e;xw of Mk, of which he preserves evkei,noij, “to them”. 326 Rosario Pistone

In favour of this reading is the testimony of the fact that the syntagma is already in use in the NT and in early Christianity to indicate those who do not belong to the Christian community.33 Although lacking the expression of the grandson-translator, it cannot be said that Mt is unaware of the sense of it which is taken up and expanded in the further transformation of the saying of Mark. The first canonical gospel, together with Lk, prefers to speak not of the “mystery given” (de,dotai) but of the “mysteries” which “it has been given to know” (de,dotai gnw/nai); the cognitive aspect turns out to be particularly congenial in what is profiled as a discourse for those who will have true wisdom and will be scribes of the kingdom, and a repetition will take place throughout the chapter with the use of suni,hmi (13:13.19.23.51 ).34 Only Mt puts on Jesus’ lips the Biblical text fulfilment formula, calling it explicitly prophecy. The same Jesus who indicates the fulfilment of prophecy in its negative aspect in “those” who do not accept his ministry, and illustrates positively the gift of wise understanding offered to the disciples, brings about thus the juncture of the two sides, wisdom and prophecy, formerly the personal property of their respective followers. In other words, in the understanding of the scribe- disciple there appears once more not only the knowledge of the mysteries but also the fulfilling of prophecy. He is now the place of rendezvous and will have to mediate for others the knowledge of it. Mysteries given to some and prophecy of misunderstanding and rejection fulfilled for the majority refer, in fact, now fully to the person and work of Jesus of whom the scribe-disciple will become the preacher. The juxtaposition between the two groups and the particular aspect of understanding, highlighted by Mt à propos of the parables, witness once more to a not insubstantial link with the sapiential text, putting the writing of Ben Sira at the beginning of a series of refrains which find a careful interpreter in the author of the first canonical gospel.

1.6 Revelation for the babes, invitation for all the weary

A text which certainly shows clear connections with Ben Sira is the saying of Jesus which invites all the weary to come to him, meek and humble of heart, and to take on his yoke. The passage shows itself to be particularly rich, whether for the understanding of the text of Matthew per se, or whether

33 So in 1 Thess 4:12; 1 Cor 5:12-13; Col 4:5; 2 Clem 13:1; similar expressions in 1 Thess 4:13; 5:6; 1 Tim 3:7. 34 For terms like “wise”and “to understand” used to indicate the addressees of apocalyptic revelations, cf. 4 Ezra 4:2.10.21-22; 5:22.34.39; 8:3; 13:53. 2 Ap Bar 46,5; CD VI,2-3; 11Q Psa XXVII,2-3. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 327 as witness to an interpretation which now unites with sapiential metaphors, such as that of the yoke and refreshment, movements of a prophetic and apocalyptic flavour. It is not possible here to traverse again the entire relevant bibliography. Sufficient to say that the reading of E. Norden serves as the foundation for a series of discussions in which the link or the dependence of the text of Matthew on the sapiential one is read or a strong similarity to it is indicated owing to a sharing of themes.35 Be that as it may, Ben Sira within the Jewish literature of the Second Temple records an invitation of the sage to accept the yoke of Wisdom, and, even if similar images are found also in other writings, only in Sir 51 and Mt 11:28-30 do we encounter the associated idea of refreshment. If the background to Matthew’s text assumes as its starting point Ben Sira but also the great line of mysteries revealed to the just in the light of 1 Enoch for example,36 it appears essential to understand the passage of Matthew as a description of Jesus in terms of wisdom incar- nate, and the refreshment promised as the very presence of Jesus among his own “even to the end of the era”.37

2. The blessing lost

In the attempt to investigate possible links between Ben Sira and Matthew, it is impossible to omit the discussion raised by the work of É. Puech on a mutilated manuscript from Qumran, 4Q525, in which it is possible to read a certain number of macarisms.38 The well-known expert, compares it to a text of Ben Sira, 14:20–15:1, and to the text of the beatitude of the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew. Starting from the series of macarisms of 4Q525, the number of which remains to be established, given the fragmentary char-

35 NORDEN, Agnostos Theos, 277-285 does not speak of the gospel’s dependence, but, divid- ing the Matthean text into kola and kommata, he thus expresses himself: “Die Komposi- tion dieser r`h/sij ist von besonderer Art: nicht eninger als dreimal wird in ihr die Adresse gewechselt” (p. 280). The text would be structured as “einem langen hymnenartigen Gebete (30 Verse)” (p. 281). DAVIES – ALLISON, The Gospel, 2, 292-293 and the bibliography cited, hold the poetic reconstruction to be unfounded for Matthew only because in Q, that is to say, in the Lukan parallel, the saying on revelation does not precede that of the yoke. DEUTSCH, Hidden Wisdom, 61-62.113-118.130.134, together with many other scholars, not only upholds the dependence of Matthew on Ben Sira, but, equally, highlights the elements of an apocalyptic nature. 36 BETZ, The Logion, 22. 37 DEUTSCH, Hidden Wisdom, 134. 38 PUECH, 4Q525 et les péricopes des Béatitudes; ID., The Collection; ID., Qumrân Grotte 4. XVIII. 328 Rosario Pistone acter of the manuscript, from the comparison with 1QH VI 13-16 and Sir 14:20ff., the eminent scholar asks himself if there exist series of beatitudes and rules which allow for the identification of a literary genre properly speaking. Compared with Mt 5:3-10 – which shows a clearer case of organisation in series and of the clearest Semitic foundation in the NT39 – the texts of Qumran and of Ben Sira confirm the existence of precise stylistic elements belonging to it, such as the subdivision into strophes, each formed out of a precise number of words; a total of eight macarisms, as the standard peculiar to the genre; the arrangement, at a different level, in corresponding blocks. It all forces us to conclude the existence of a precise literary genre, known to and punctiliously practised by the scribe-author,40 and, therefore, to question again the existence of an original, shorter, text of the beatitudes, conserved best in the Lukan parallel which Matthew would have amplified. The case would be rather that of an adaptation on the part of Luke for a Hellenistic audience “d’une composition d’allure et de con- tenu par trop sémitique”.41 Close to Ben Sira or to the fragment of Qumran, the Matthean text would be a Christian sapiential relecture which sees in the poor in spirit those who “are wating for salvation, practising the Law and welcoming the Messiah Wisdom of God and Interpreter of his Law, under the guidance of the Spir- it of God”.42 The reactions to such a reading are not lacking and cannot be discussed in this place.43 In the opinion of the present writer, Puech’s analysis deserves to be taken further in at least two regards: 1. given the recognised employment of the Greek version of the LXX,44

39 PUECH, 4Q525 et les péricopes des Béatitudes, 102. 40 Ibid. 41 Ibid., 105. 42 PUECH, The Collection, 366. No change from the work of 1991 (4Q525 et les péricopes des Béatitudes, 106), where it is laid down that the welcome of the Messiah on the part of the poor makes them privileged beneficiaries “de l’intervention eschatologique de Dieu inau- gurant le Royaume”. 43 Cf. CHARLESWORTH, The Qumran Beatitudes (4Q525); VAN CANGH, Béatitudes de Qumrân. 44 In an excellent study, BOISMARD, has shown that Mt follows the version of Theodotion when he quotes from the prophet Daniel, while in all the other cases he refers to the LXX, the text of which is faithfully reproduced in Mt 12:40 (= Jon 2:1), Mt 13:14-15 (= Isa 6:9-10) and Mt 21:16 (= Is 8:3); however, at other times, he intervenes to make it conform more to the MT (L’Ancien Testament grec dans l’évangile de Matthieu). Cf. also SCHMIDT, The Septuagintal Influence; MENKEN, The Greek Translation; ID., The Textual Form; ID., The Sources. GREEN, Matthew, Poet of the Beatitudes, 49-73, holds, on the other hand, that Mt reworks the text of the LXX to render it in verse, with particular attention to the multi- ples of 4 (pp. 72-73). However, he does not appear to be aware of the work of Boismard which he never cites. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 329 we need to verify the possible sharing of elements between the version of the text of Sir 14:20–15:1 LXX and the pericope of the beatitudes; 2. Since the presentation of the macarisms in Mt is not confined to the succession of the first eight (Mt 5:3-10) but continues with vv. 11-12, where there is explicit mention of the prophets, we must examine the significance of the link between these parts, which make up the complete text of the beatitudes in the canonical redaction, and the possible prophetic models. In other words: the text of the Matthean beatitudes, compared with that of Ben Sira, turns out to be overloaded through mention of the prophets. The gospel shows plenty of contacts form the stylistic point of view with the sapiential work. As for the content, however, the references to the prophetic literature have been known for some time, and the present study will point out a further one with Am 2:6-8.11-12.

2.1 What kind of method of reading?

The most recent studies on the composition of the Biblical texts have impelled one to speak of a Biblical rhetoric, different in part from the more easily known Graeco-Roman variety. What is studied from time to time in this discipline, still too young to be fully assessed, is the arrangement of the text which, from its units of least significance to the most extended ones, responds to recognisable rules of distribution and presentation.45 It is perfectly possible that a text presents different links and structures according to the different levels of organisation. The structures discovered are relevant to the level of analysis. This needed to be said in order to be clear that, if a first level of organisation of the text is that which provides a structure according to the number of words which make up each of its elements, it is also true that other levels can possess a different organisation.46 An arrangement of the text in concentric form, which does not change the placing of each of the elements in so far as they are attested in the major part of the manuscript tradition, does certainly not appear as strange or imposed from outside, nor can it be accused of subjectivism. It has there-

45 A must is MEYNET, L’Analyse Rhétorique; ID., E ora scrivete per voi questo cantico; I frutti dell’analisi retorica, 403-406. For the application of the method: ID., Il vangelo secondo Luca; BOVATI – MEYNET, Il libro del profeta Amos. Brief presentation of the method in MEYNET – POUZET – FAROUKY – SINNO, Rhétorique sémitique, 65-112. The problems inherent in the method and its relationship with the other Biblical disciplines are treated in the third part of the volume, pp. 276-308. 46 Cf. e.g. the analysis of Lk 11:1-54 on pages 207-244 of the work just cited. The structuring of the beatitudes according to eh number of words is discussed by GREEN, Matthew, Poet of the Beatitudes, 39-41. 330 Rosario Pistone fore the same value as belongs to figures of composition typical of Semitic rhetoric,47 which can be documented in the NT.48 I am, therefore, going to proceed into the middle of the analysis in proposing, first of all, a structure of the beatitudes in two parts, both concentric in arrangement: vv. 3-10 and 10-12. The scheme will serve as a model before passing to the analysis of the text of Ben Sira.

3 Maka,rioi oi` ptwcoi. tw/| pneu,mati o[ti auvtw/n evstin h` basilei,a tw/n ouvranw/n 4 maka,rioi oi` penqou/ntej o[ti auvtoi. paraklhqh,sontai 5 maka,rioi oi` praei/j o[ti auvtoi. KLHRONOMHSOUSIN THN GHN 6 maka,rioi oi` peinw/ntej kai. diyw/ntej th.n dikaiosu,nhn o[ti auvtoi. cortasqh,sontai 7 maka,rioi oi` evleh,monej o[ti auvtoi. evlehqh,sontai 8 maka,rioi oi` kaqaroi. th/| kardi,a| o[ti auvtoi. TON QEON OYONTAI 9 maka,rioi oi` eivrhnopoioi, o[ti auvtoi. ui`oi. qeou/ klhqh,sontai 10 maka,rioi oi` dediwgme,noi e[neken dikaiosu,nhj o[ti auvtw/n evstin h` basilei,a tw/n ouvranw/n

o[tan ovneidi,swsin u`ma/j kai DIWXWSIN 11 maka,rioi evste kai; ei;pwsin pa/n ponhro.n kaqV u`mw/n yeudo,menoi e[neken evmou/

12 cai,rete kai. avgallia/sqe o[ti o` misqo.j u`mw/n polu.j evn toi/j ouvranoi/j

ou[twj ga.r EDIWXAN tou.j profh,taj tou.j pro. u`mw/n

47 Cf. WELCH (ed.), Chiasmus; MEYNET – POUZET – FAROUKY – SINNO, Rhétorique sémitique, 65-81. For a purely exemplificative aim, cf. WATSON, Classical Hebrew Poetry, 114-159, and ID., Traditional Techniques. 48 LUND, Chiasmus in the New Testament, 240-261, had already shown with reference to the Sermon on the Mount the possibility of discovering a chiastic model of composition at multiple levels, both for the individual parts and for the discourse as a whole. For the beatitudes, he also proposed a diptych which arranges concentrically both the first part, formed by vv. 2-5; 6; 7-9; and the second, vv. 10-12. The correspondence in the final section of the discourse would be with 7:13-14 and 7:15-20, respectively. A model of concentric organisation seems to be profiled according to the analysis presented in SENIOR, What Are They saying, 28-29. More structured are the correspondences for the model (it too concentric but defined by Senior as chiastic) discovered by ELLIS, Matthew, 12. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 331

2.2 Concerning the beatitudes

The undoubted poetic worth of the text of the beatitudes must impel us to a more careful consideration of their sonorous formulation. The threefold division of the macarisms with the declaration of felicity (Maka,rioi...), the identification of a group or a special characteristic (“the poor in spirit, the meek, etc.”) and the reason behind the declaration of felicity (introduced by o[ti), is organised poetically by means of some elements that are undoubtedly set in relief. Both the identical repetitions of Maka,rioi and the introduction of the reason with o[ti press the attention on the connection existing between the various categories proclaimed to be blessed and the reasons adopted. However, from the literary point of view, the inclusion between verses 3 and 10 (ÅÅÅ o[ti auvtw/n evstin h` basilei,a tw/n ouvranw/n), the subsequent immediate echo, at vv. 4 and 9, between “shall be comfort- ed” and “shall be called” (paraklhqh,sontai and klhqh,sontai), together with the resulting alternation between verbs in the active or in the middle-passive, press us to consider the second part of the stichs as structuring features. The impulse towards such a direction is given by the undeniable inclusion with which the kingdom is attributed (vv. 3 and 10). The result is a concentric scheme. Verses 5 and 8 are the only two macarisms in which a verb with active form (or sense) is accompanied by a complement-object, which, in the specific case, could constitute a merism mentioning respectively immanence and transcendence (inherit the earth – see God). Verses 6 and 7 thus find themselves in central position, marked by the criterion of adequate correspondence between the first and the second part of the macarism. The felicity which can be recognised and/or wished for those who “hunger and thirst after righteousness” can, in fact, only consist of being filled (v. 6), while in v. 7, which renders the correspondence absolutely directly – the unique case in the entire poem –, it is indicated that the merciful are to be reckoned blessed because they, in their turn, will receive mercy. It seems to me that this creates a link between the first and second part of these macarisms which is stronger than that in any of the others. I note also that in these verses there is no question of the alternation of active and passive verbs such as occurs in the preceding and succeeding verses. Instead, we find two theological passives which, in a musical way, hold the attention of the hearer-reader on God. To him also refer the couple “righteousness- mercy“ which unite and keep together the two verses. This is a description of the mode of being of God. The evangelist could not indicate better the theological heart of the beatitudes. The second table of the macarisms also turns out to be a concentric structure. Its outer terms are set by the repetition of the verb “persecute” (diw,xwsin – evdi,wxan) while the centre of the text, although referring once again to God, to whom allusion is made by speaking of “reward in heaven” (o` misqo.jÅÅÅ 332 Rosario Pistone evn toi/j ouvranoi/j, v. 12ab), is distinguished by an introduction which, though taking up again the sense of the preceding declarations of felicity, appears closer to liturgical invitations or the introductions to oracles of salvation (Mt 5:12: cai,rete kai. avgallia/sqe,“Rejoice and be glad...”),49 thus making clear the identity of the one who makes the declarations. Between the two parts, the connection is assured by the repetition of the verb “persecute” and the preposition e[neken. Verses 11 and 12 set out to be the explanation of what goes before: those who were no more clearly identified than as those persecuted for the cause of righteousness become now the disciples persecuted for the sake of Jesus. This is sufficient to understand the second table of the beatitudes which is much shorter than the first as both summary and explanation of what precedes. According to the explicit will of the author, it is the function of the second part to unlock the enigma of the first part.

2.3 The links with Sir 14:20–15:1 LXX

What kind of arrangement of the text is presented in the Greek version of Sirach? It need cause no surprise that in this case too, it is possible to trace a structure in two blocks. In accordance with the terminology that has been elaborated, we shall call them passages,50 proceeding to a detailed analysis.

49 Despite the difficulties which it presents, Joel 2:23, with its encouragement to the sons of Zion to rejoice (cai,rete kai. euvfrai,nesqe), because the Lord has given them food for their vindication (dio,ti e;dwken u`mi/n ta. brw,mata eivj dikaiosu,nhn), can be matched with Mt 5:12 and 5:6. Also Ps 31:11 invites the just to rejoice and be glad, and the true of heart to shout for joy, while the following Ps 32:1 calls on the just to rejoice, stating that it becomes well the just to be thankful. Cf. Ps 67:4 and 69:5. Some further links in vocabulary justify a further reference to Tob 14:7, where it is stated that, in the eschatological time, finally there will rejoice “those who love God in justice and in truth” that is to say “showing mercy to brothers”. In Tob 14:11 evlehmosu,nh and dikaiosu,nh are placed on the same functional plane. For the pair rejoice-be glad, euvfrai,nw – avgallia,w, used mostly to summon the cosmic elements to exultation (1 Chr 16:31; Ps 47:12; 49:13; 95:1; 96:1; Isa 35:1), but also the nations (Ps 66:5) or Israel (Ps 149:2), cf. also Isa 61:10. 50 Cf. MEYNET, L’Analyse Rhétorique, 175-300, above all pp. 270-293. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 333

Sir 14:20–15:1 LXX

+ o[j evn sofi,a meleth,sei kai. + o[j evn sune,sei auvtou/ dialecqh,setai 20 Maka,rioj avnhvr 21 - o` dianoou,menoj ta.j o`dou.j auvth/j evn kardi,a| auvtou/ kai. - evn toi/j avpokru,foij auvth/j evnnohqh,setai

22 + e;xelqe ovpi,sw auvth/j w`j ivcneuth.j kai. evn tai/j o`doi/j auvth/j + evne,dreue

23 *o` paraku,ptwn : dia. tw/n quri,dwn auvth/j kai. : evpii. tw/n qurwma,twn auvth/j *avkroa,setai

24 - o` katalu,wn su,negguj tou/ oi;kou auvth/j kai. - ph,xei pa,ssalon evn toi/j toi,coij auvth/j

25 + sth,sei th.n skhnh.n auvtou/ kata. cei/raj auvth/j kai. + katalu,sei evn katalu,mati avgaqw/n

26 * qh,sei ta. te,kna auvtou/ - evn th|/ ske,ph| auvth/j kai. - u`po. tou.j kla,douj auvth/j * auvlisqh,setai

27 - skepasqh,setai : u`pV auvth/j avpo. kau,matoj kai. : evn th/| do,xh| auvth/j - katalu,sei

15, 1 + o` fobou,menoj ku,rion poih,sei auvto, kai. + o` evgkrath.j to. no,mou katalh,myetai auvth,n 334 Rosario Pistone

+ who on wisdom meditates and + with his intelligence reasons, 20 Blessed is the man - 21 he who reflects on her ways in his own mind also - her secrets will ponder

+ 22 PURSUE - after her like a hunter and - on her paths + LIE IN WAIT.

* 23He who peers = through her windows also = at her doors * will listen,

- 24 he who encamps near her house - will also fix his ten peg to her walls.

+ 25 he will pitch his tent near her And + he will lodge in a lodging place of bounty;

* 26 he will place his sons : under her shelter and : beneath her boughs * he will camp;

- 27 he will be sheltered : beneath her from the heat and : under her glory - he will dwell.

15:1 + He who fears the Lord will do this and + he who holds to the Law will obtain her Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 335

2.4 Description of the text

The text turns out to be composed of two passages of unequal size: 14:20-27 and 15:1. The first passages is subdivided into three parts organised concentrically according to a scheme a-b-a’ (14:20-22; 23-24; 25-27). The second passage is made up of a single part formed from two segments of two members each (15:1).

2.4.1 The three parts of the first passage: Sir 14:20-27

a) The first part: Sir 14:20-22

We should note in the first part a subdivision into two sections: vv. 20-21 and 22. The first section follows straight on from the declaration of felicity maka,rioj avnh,r on which depend the three relative clauses with o]j of vv. 20- 21. Two pairs of two-member segments (vv. 20ab and 21ab) are structured within the semantic field of the search for wisdom as reflection-meditation. For the structuring of these verses we can consider both the lexical and syn- tagmatic correspondence and the correspondence of content. In the first case, vv. 20a and 20b correspond not only through the presence of the pronoun o]j, but also through a certain conciseness in the formulation. Verses 21a and 21b, although not explicitly matching through the lack in 21b of o]j, make reference to something which belongs to wisdom: ta.j o`dou.j auvth/j – evn toi/j avpokru,foij auvth/j, while the second part of the two segments mentions the seat of man’s volition and cognition (evn kardi,a| auvtou – evnnohqh,setai), though adopting in the first case a substantive and in the second a verb which carries in its root the equivalent of nou/j. Another way of considering the correspondence between these segments would be to see a chiastic organisation of the following kind:

+ he who on wisdom MEDITATES and - he who WITH HIS INTELLIGENCE reasons,

- he who reflects on her ways IN HIS OWN MIND also + her secrets WILL PONDER

The chiasmus would be particularly evident for vv. 20b-21a which could be thus re-presented:

- he who WITH HIS INTELLIGENCE : reasons : he who reflects - on her ways IN HIS OWN HEART. 336 Rosario Pistone

However, if the two verbs belong to the same semantic field (diale,gomai, dianoe,w) and begin with the same preposition, and even if evn sune,sei auvtou/ of v. 20b would be read well with evn kardi,a| auvtou/ of v. 21a, certainly three elements oblige us to abandon this possibility in favour of the preceding structure, namely: the fact that v. 20b and v. 21a begin with a relative clause; v. 21a and v. 21b, like vv. 20a and 20b, are themselves united by a kai, which supplies the determination of two pairs of segments; vv. 21a and 21b are further brought together by a nominal syntagma with reference to wisdom: ta.j odou.j auvth/j and evn toi/j avpokru,foij auvth/j. Alliteration comes powerfully into play already in this first section; the massive presence of evn should be noted, the double repetition of o]j evn at v. 20, of o` alone at v. 21, the repetition of the long vowel in 22b, and the similarity between meleth,sei and sune,sei in 20a and 20b:

22 + e;xelqe ovpi,sw auvth/j w`j ivcneuth.j kai. evn tai/j o`doi/j auvth/j + evne,dreue

Verses 21-22 are unified by the repeat of auvth/j (very similar the sonority of ivcneuth,j, 22b), while dialecqh,setai (20b) and evnnohqh,setai (21b) have the same final syllables. In verses 20-21 we must again indicate the synonymous expressions evn sune,sei auvtou/ (20b) e evn kardi,a| auvtou (21a), while in 21-22, as noted it is the sound –thj (authj) which recurs:

22 + e;xelqe ovpi,sw auvth/j w`j ivcneuth.j kai. evn tai/j o`doi/j auvth/j + evne,dreue Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 337

The second section of the first part (v. 22) is formed of two segments, cor- related by kai, and arranged in chiastic form. At the two extremities, we find two verbs in the imperative (22a and 22d), while in central position and corresponding there are two expressions synonymous in flavour ovpi,sw auvth/j and evn tai/j o`doi/j auvth/j (22b e 22c).

b) The second part: vv. 23-24

Two verses correspond according to a parallelistic scheme a-b/a’-b’. The structure is dominated by the alternating of a relative clause with a verb in the future:

+ HE WHO PEERS through her windows also - at her doors WILL LISTEN

+ HE WHO ENCAMPS near her house also - WILL FIX his tent peg to her walls

The segments in question are all two-membred but they do not have the same internal arrangement. Verse 32 displays a chiastic structure with verbs at the extremities (vv. 23a and 23d) and the mention of the parts of the house at the centre (vv. 23b and 23c), while v. 24 is arranged in two segments in parallelism according to the scheme a-b/a’-b’:

v. 23 + he who peers - through her windows also - at her doors + he will listen

v. 24 + he who encamps : near her house also + he will fix his tent peg : to her walls.51

Also for the second part, the play on sound is evident: tw/n quri,dwn auvth/j, tw/n qurwma,twn auvth/j (vv. 23b and 23c); tou/ oi;kou auvth/j toi/j toi,coij auvth/j (vv. 24a and 24b); pe,xei pa,ssalon (24b, the sounds p and j ).52

51 Of course, such arrangements are not in contradiction among themselves since each corresponds to a precise level of analysis of the text. 52 Awareness of the play on sound is probably responsible for the textual variants for v. 24. 338 Rosario Pistone

c) The third part: vv. 25-27

Three sections, each composed of two sections each of two members inter- vene with a different internal structure to form this part. Verse 25 is bound to what precedes by taking up again terms from the semantic field of dwelling, now presented as a tent. The two segments 25a and 25b present two successive actions (to pitch a tent, to dwell) emphasising the result: the tent pitched near to Wisdom is not any old tent, but is reckoned “a lodging place of bounty”.

+ 25 he will pitch : his tent near her53 and + he will lodge : in a dwelling place of bounty

The action is thus shown in its being carried out (vv. 25a and 25b) and its successive effects (vv. 25c and 25d). The two following sections are brought together by the same structure in chiasmus, with the verbs at the extremities and two prepositional syntagmas at the centre, but also with an alternate play on prepositions between vv. 26-27: evn – u`po / u`po – evn.

* 26 he will place his sons : under her shelter and : beneath her boughs * he will camp;

- 27 he will be sheltered : beneath her from the heat and : under her glory he will dwell.

In harmony with what was undertaken in the first section, the semantic field remains that of the dwelling-tent, normally set in an agricultural environment. Thus is explained the image of the boughs of the tree (v. 26c), capable of offering shelter (vv. 26b; 27a) from the heat (v. 27b), an image which passes over from dwelling in the shade to living in glory in vv. 27b and 27c. With this last section, the first is taken up again explicitly (cf. the verb

A+ reads a present pe,ssei rather than the future, just as S*+ reads oikoij instead of toicoij, taking up the same term of the preceding segment. 53 For the reading “under her hands”. LIDDELL – SCOTT, Greek-English Lexicon, 1984, proposes “by her side”. Although able to recognise an idiomatic value to the expression we could always look for a link between the hands of wisdom in v. 25 and her branches in v. 26. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 339 katalu,w, vv. 25c and 27d). Between vv. 26 and 27 are signalled the reprise of skh,ph – skepasqh,setai. Also in this part, as in the preceding, we find a segment with strong alliteration between the verb and the object: at v. 24, we read pe,xein pa,ssalon,while at v. 25 we have katalu,sai evn katalu,mati, where the inflection of the dative makes the stress fall on the same vowel of both the verb and the substantive. Also, for the three sections which make up this part, the alliterative wordplay is rather evident. For v. 25, let us note the final syllable of the verbs and the repetition of kata-

25 + sth,sei th.n skhnh.n auvtou/ kata. cei/raj auvth/j kai. + katalu,sei evn katalu,mati avgaqw/n

Again, vv. 25-26 are brought together by the sonority of the first members of the respective first segments where we must not forget the less obvious skhnh,n – te,kna:

25 + sth,sei th.n skhnh.n auvtou/ 26 * qh,sei ta. te,kna auvtou54/

For its part, v. 26 is unified in sound around 26b and 26c:

- evn th/| ske,ph| auvth/j kai. - u`po. tou.j kla,douj auvth/j

In the course of reading, the final sigma of the article in v. 26c is read naturally with the kappa of kla,douj thus reproducing the repetition in sound of the previous ske,ph (but cf. also skhnh,n at v. 25). The verb auvlisqh,setai (v. 26d), which closes the section, takes on multiple sonorities:

1. auvlisqh,setai qh,sei ta. te,kna auvtou (v. 26a)

2. auvlisqh,setai auvth/j (vv. 26b e 26c)

3. auvlisqh,setai skepasqh,setai (v. 27a) the link in sound of the whole of v. 27 is given by the feminine genitive auvth/j (vv. 27b e 27c) and by kau,matoj (v. 27b) – katalu,sai (v. 27d).

54 Overall, we should not undervalue the similarities in sound among sthsei, qhsei, thn, as repetitions of the dental t. 340 Rosario Pistone

27 skepasqh,setai : u`pV auvth/j avpo. kau,matoj kai. : evn th/| do,xh| auvth/j katalu,sei

The scarlet thread of the verbal forms for the whole of this third part can be easily tracked down:

sth,sei (v. 25a) – qh,sei (v. 26a) auvlisqh,setai (v. 26d) – skepasqh,setai (v. 27a) katalu,sei (v. 25b) – katalu,sai (v. 27d)

25 + sth,sei th.n skhnh.n auvtou/ kata. cei/raj auvth/j kai. + katalu,sei evn katalu,mati avgaqw/n

26* qh,sei ta. te,kna auvtou/ - evn th|/ ske,ph| auvth/j kai; - u`po. tou.j kla,douj auvth/j * auvlisqh,setai

27- skepasqh,setai

: u`pV auvth/j avpo. kau,matoj kai. : evn th/| do,xh| auvth/j - katalu,sei

The passage 15:1, which is structured as the equivalent of what has been read so far, is made up of two two-membred segments constructed in parallelism; it will be observed that both 15:1a and 15:1b begin with a syntagma, verbal in the first case, nominal in the second (o` fobou/menoj ku,rion – o` evgkrath.j tou/ no,mou), while the second members of the two segments have their verb in the future (poih,sei auto, – katale,myetai auvth,n). A similar phenomenon distinguishes the second part (vv. 23-24) from the preceding passage. The sound repetition is found in this case between the last verb of v. 27 and of 15:1: katalu,sai – katale,myetai. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 341

2.5 About the structuring of the text

The Greek text of Sirach presents us, however, with a series of difficulties which cannot be ignored. In the first place it is not so clear that the translator would have wished to make a poem of beatitudes following on from the one initial maka,rioj. Certainly the two imperatives of v. 22 break the succession. The situation is, however, no more happy in the Hebrew text (= HT) conserved for us from the Cairo geniza.55 In Ms A of Cairo, v. 22 also presents a textual problem and a not dissimilar interruption in the sequence of participles with article. There, in fact, we read an infinitive with lamed: tacl. With an interesting textual reconstruction, Puech shows that the Greek imperative e;xelqe supposes again the reading of a Hebrew participle acy with scriptio defectiva. The addition of a waw mater lectionis, very similar in handwriting to a lamed, would have led a succeeding copyist to add a final taw, thus reaching the form of the infinitive.56 That does not alter the fact, however, that the Hebrew text presents a formal break in the succession of participles which follow in succession from v. 21 to v. 27 ( with the article in vv. 21-24). It cannot be excluded that the Greek translator would have noticed it and deliberately reproduced it.57 His poem, like that of the HT, envisages a bipartite structure where the second element is provided by 15:1 which is clearly and incontestably of summary value: everything that has been said in 14:20-27 is concentrated in 15:1 and, if in the first passage the author is preoccupied in showing attitudes (vv. 20-24) and results (vv. 25-27), 15:1a (“he who fears the Lord will do this”) and 15:1b (“he who hold to the Law will obtain her”) are organised in the same way. But again this does not say much with regard to the formal structure of the first passage. Do vv. 23-24 depend on the initial maka,rioj or do they rather introduce the following verses 25-27? In order to answer this question we must consider that overall in the text, it is only vv. 25-27 which express the reason for the beatitude; vice versa, vv. 20-24 express the macarism as such. To join vv. 23-24 to what follows

55 For the situation regarding the HT, cf. SKEHAN - DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 51- 62, above all pp. 57-60. 56 PUECH, 4Q525 et les péricopes des Béatitudes, 92. 57 The English translation of SKEHAN-DI LELLA interrupts the chain of relative clauses with two gerunds: 21 Who ponders her ways in his heart and pay attention to her paths, 22 Pursuing her like a scout and watching her entryways; 23 Who peeps through her window and listens at her doors... (The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 262). 342 Rosario Pistone would mean leaving separate what goes before. There would then be a formal declaration of felicity in vv. 20-22 without a following reason. This would not be unusual in the OT as in the NT but the structure of the poem would become less clear and balanced. Vice versa, if vv. 23-24 still depend on the opening maka,rioj, the text takes up again the declaration of felicity beyond the interruption of v. 22, while vv. 25-27 represent the reason for it. It is true that for such a reading there is absent any kind of declaratory conjunction such as o[ti or the like. Nev- ertheless, the grammatical form of the text is sufficiently clear in that it establishes a distinction between the verbal and syntactic forms of vv. 20-24 and those of vv. 25-27. Only in this last case do we find verbal forms in the future without the presence of relative clauses or participles. It would be rather difficult to make the verbal forms of vv. 25-27 depend grammatically on the initial maka,rioj avnh,r without the mediating presence of a pronoun. Such formal indications oblige us to conclude as follows: 1. the translator of Sirach understands the poem of macarisms in the HT as a unitary construction; 2. by contrast with the HT which he translates, where an almost continuous series of participles appears to emphasise only the declaration of felicity, in the poem of Sir LXX a good six segments (vv. 25-27) are dedicated to the reason for the felicity; 3. having rendered with an imperative the interruption in the HT caused by the lamed, the construction of vv. 23-24 with relative clauses not only goes back to the dependence on maka,rioj avnh,r of v. 20, but provides an arrangement of the text quite distinct from that which precedes and that which follows, an arrangement which, therefore, comes to occupy a central place within the first passage (14:20-27). The importance of this arrangement is set in relief by the fact that 15:1 – namely, the second passage – is constructed in exactly the same way:

art. + part. / common noun and verb in the future

As for a further distinction, it can be seen that the first part (vv. 20-22), grav- itates essentially around the semantic field of intellectual knowledge (vv. 20-21) which, however, necessitates direct action, an active search (v. 22): the elements of rest and of movement there appear to be well balanced. Similarly, in the concluding part (vv. 25-27), the element of quiet (to lodge, to camp, to be sheltered) appears together with aspects of precise activity (to pitch the tent, to place his sons). The semantic field has been transformed into that of a tent placed under a big tree. Again the central part (vv. 23-24) is concentrated on the force of inclining to listen (v. 23), camping and fixing a tent peg (v. 24). The semantic field is different again: doors, windows, walls, house, ten peg make us think of construction. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 343

2.6 A sound-map of the text

From the findings we have offered, it becomes clear that the Greek translator of Ben Sira wished to maintain a poetic tone in his work. The determining of what kind of poetry is in question is a task which has already secured some results.58 It cannot be denied that in our case a considerable role is played by the repetition of sounds. Paronomasia functions not only in terms of alliteration, more or less connected to the number of syllables and therefore of the stresses, but also under the form of hook words; at the same time, the care devoted to such things is strengthened by the taste for parallel constructions (in the broader sense of the term). At the different levels of the text (and, pertinently, of the analysis of the text), the structures presented above are clear. We must conclude from this that the Greek Sir- ach belongs within a sapiential current which has brought the scribal activity to a level of notable refinement. To succeed not only in the work of translation but also in obtaining for the target text a poetic value of not dissimilar import from that perceptible in the text of origin is a result of no mean significance.

+ o`j evn sofi,a meleth,sei kai. + oj` evn sune,sei auvtou/ dialecqh,setai 20 Maka,rioj avnh,r 21- o` dianoou,menoj ta.j o`dou.j auvth/j evn kardi,a| auvtou/ kai. - evn toi/j avpokru,foij auvth/j evnnohqh,setai

22+ e;xelqe - ovpi,sw auvth/j w`j ivcneuth.j kai. - evn tai/j o`doi/j auvth/j + evne,dreue

58 Cf. in the commentary by SKEHAN – DI LELLA the chapter “The Poetry of Ben Sira” (pp. 63-74), which appeared formerly in ErIs 16 (1982), 26*-33*, under the name of Di Lella. With a wealth of detail, the study of MINISSALE, La versione greca, 238-257, describes the translation techniques, with explicit reference to parallelism (pp. 238-240), to paronomasia (pp. 241-242) and to chiasmus (p. 243), indicating from time to time their adoption from the HT, their modification or their introduction on the part of the transator. Recently, on the poetry of the Hebrew text, cf. CORLEY, Ben Sira’s Teaching. For the possibility of reproducing in translation the wordplays of alliteration, assonance, rhyme and connected figures of composition such as chiasmus and inclusion, cf. again WATSON, Classical Hebrew Poetry, 200ff, taken up by GREEN, Matthew, Poet of the Beatitudes, 41ff. REYMOND, Innovations in Hebrew Poetry, reviews the rather widespread idea of a, not always felicitous, dependence of Hebrew Sirach on the parallelism typical of Proverbs. 344 Rosario Pistone

23 * o` paraku,ptwn : dia. tw/n quri,dwn auvth/j kai; : evpi. tw/n qurwma,twn auvth/j * avkroa,setai

24 - o` katalu,wn su,negguj tou/ oi;kou auvth/j kai. - ph,xei pa,ssalon evn toi/j toi,coij auvth/j

25 + sth,sei th.n skhnh.n auvtou / kata . cei/raj auvth/j kai. + katalu,sei evn katalu,mati avgaqw/n

26 * qh,sei ta. te,kna auvtou / - evn th |/ ske,ph| auvth/j kai. - u`po. tou.j kla,douj auvth/j * auvlisqh,setai

27 - skepasqh,setai : u`pV auvth/j avpo. kau,matoj kai. : evn th/| do,xh| auvth/j - katalu,sei

15:1 + o` fobou,menoj ku,rion poih,sei auvto, kai. + o` evgkrath.j tou/ no,mou katalh,myetai auvth,n

Such a prolonged examination of the text of Sir 14:20–15:1 LXX allows us to estimate whether the Matthean text of the Beatitudes does not present us with something similar. In the opinion of the present author, the response can only be affirmative. A study by Scott and Dean has traced the sound map of the whole of the Sermon on the Mount,59 drawing from that indications on the structure and the subdivision of the pericopes, as indeed for the whole structure of the Beatitudes. We shall leave aside this aspect in order to concentrate only on the identification of the sounds. According to Scott-Dean, the text of Mt 5:3-10 is structured by a series of sound repetitions in the following manner:60

59 For the presence of the phenomenon in Mt, cf. PUECH, 4Q525 et les péricopes des Béati- tudes, 98-99. For more complete coverage: SCOTT – DEAN, A Sound Map, 311-321 for the introduction to the criteria of reading and 322-324 for the application to the Matthean beatitudes. General summary, pp. 372-373. 60 The different kinds of print indicate: small capitals = initial auditory formula; Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 345

3 MAKARIOI, OI`ptwcoi. tw/| pneuvmati o[ti auvtw/n evstin H BASILEIA TWN OURANWN 4 MAKARIOI, OI ` penqou/ntej o[ti auvtoi. paraklhqh,sontai 5 MAKARIOI, OI` praei/j o[ti auvtoi. klhronomh,sousin th.n gh/n 6 MAKARIOI, OI`peinw/ntej kai. diyw/ntej th.n dikaiosu,nhn o[ti auvtoi. cortasqh,sontai 7 MAKARIOI, OI ` evleh,monej o[ti auvtoi. evlehqh,sontai 8 MAKARIOI, OI`kaqaroi. th/| kardi,a| o[ti auvtoi. to,n qeo.n o;yontai. 9 MAKARIOI, OI` eivrhnopoioi, o[ti auvtoi. ui`oi. qeou/ klhqh,sontai 10 MAKARIOI, OI` dediwgme,noi e[neken dikaiosu,nhj o[ti auvtw/n evstin H BASILEIA TWN OURANWN

11 MAKARIOI, OI` o[tan ovneidi,swsin u`ma/j kai. diw,xwsin kai. ei;pwsin pa/n ponhro.n kaqV u`mw/n yeudo,menoi e[neken evmou/ 12 cai,rete kai. avgallia/sqe o[ti o` misqo.j u`mw/n polu.j EN TOIS OURANOIS ou[twj ga.r evdi,wxan tou.j profh,taj tou.j pro . u`mw/n.

We will not accept uncritically the conclusions or the presuppositions of these two authors. However, it has to be admitted that the sounds indicated speak for themselves in the text. This compels us to a conclusion concerning Matthew’ style. If it is true that he is continuing a sapiential tradition,61 the traces of such a background are rendered more evident from the shared nature with such texts as, precisely, Sir LXX. In both cases, the taste for parallel constructions in various forms and the care taken with paronomasia turn out to be decisive, proved and undoubted. In this particular case, Matthew shares with Greek Sirach, in a poem of macarisms, a distribution in two parts, the second part of which is much shorter and recapitulates the text of the first; the concentric distribution of the material of the first part; the care taken over sound play. These are too many elements for us not to be led into speaking of true closeness.

underlined = indicators organising the model; outline = same sounds or words; doubly underlined = same sounds or words; capitals = synonyms. 61 Cf. COPE, Matthew – A Scribe; PUECH, 4Q525 et les péricopes des Béatitudes, 96. 346 Rosario Pistone

3. “So did they with the prophets who wee before you”

The other element suggested was that regarding the connections with a more ancient text among the prophetic writings, viz. Amos 2:6-12 (LXX):

Thus says the Lord; for three sins of Israel, and for four, I will not turn away from him; because they sell the righteous for silver, and the poor for sandals, 7 wherewith to tread on the dust of the earth, and they have smitten upon the heads of the poor, and have per- verted the way of the lowly: and a son and his father have gone into the same maid, that they might profane the name of their God. 8 And binding their clothes with cords they have made them curtains near the altar, and they have drunk wine gained by extortion in the house of their God. [...] 11 And I took of your sons for prophets, and of your young men for nazirites. Are not these things so, ye sons of Israel? says the Lord. 12 But you have given the nazirites wine to drink; and you commanded the prophets, saying, Prophesy not!

It is perfectly legitimate to enquire whether the gospel text shows indications of preference for the Hebrew form of the text or for the translation of the LXX. The answer is not simple. From the formal point of view, the HT exhibits a succession of offences which can be thought of as reciprocal forms of oppression and being oppressed, a feature which would be well in accord with the presentation in the gospel of eight conditions of blessedness linked with forms of true and specific oppression. In both texts, two complete series, of seven and of eight categories respectively, speak for themselves. However, the Greek text of Amos, even with its differences at vv. 7-8, does not wholly do away with the idea of a series of offences and, therefore, of the offended,62 while the transformation of mis- deeds into sins and the transformation of v. 8 give to the passage an exquisitely religious tone, much more evident than in the Hebrew text and a great deal nearer to that which for a long while the commentators have indicated as typical of the Matthean text of the macarisms.That said, we shall be able to understand better the hesitation in attributing closeness or literary derivation to this or that model. On the other hand, the reasons which allow the bringing together of the two texts of Amos, in the Hebrew and Greek forms, and Matthew are more than one. In the first place, both seem to revolve around two clearly distinguishable poles: on the one hand, the presentation of a group, which generically described as “poor”, comprehends in fact a wide gamut of situations: “the innocent, poor, indigent, wretched, the girl who has been violated, people forced to give their clothes as a pledge, the objects of extor-

62 The categories which can be identified seem to be reduced to six: the righteous, the labourers, the poor, the wretched, the girl who has been violated, those who have suf- fered extortion. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 347 tion” (Am 2:6-8). It is undeniable that the innocence proclaimed at the opening of the oracle (Am 2:6) is valid for the six following categories.63 At the other extreme, a kind of reciprocity in which the situation just described is exposed by the “prophets and nazirites”, the performing of whose mission is, however, hindered with (clearly perceptible) violence (Am 2:8-11). Sim- ilarly, in Mt 5:3-10 is found the list of a series of categories all in some way dependent on the first – the poor in spirit64 –, and, subsequently, a reference to the persecuted prophets (Mt 5:11-12). Also, in this case, the persecuted prophets end up by sharing the kind of oppression indicated in the preceding categories, as in Amos, without prejudice to the difference between the two texts, in the first of which account is taken of reality and an intervention in judgement is promised, while in Matthew the sentence of reward is already enunciated. In Amos, therefore, we should note that the typical mis- deed of Israel, multiple in its manifestations, has its beginning with the oppression of the poor (Am 2:6-7) and culminates in the rejection of the prophets (Am 12:11-12). The second reason is of a formal kind and concerns the taxis of the text.65 For both versions of the prophetic text (HT and LXX) we could demonstrate a structure that is concentric and bipartite. For Am 2:6-8, the centre would be found at v. 7c-d, which places in relief God’s mode of being, defined in terms of “holiness”, while for vv. 11-12, the centre would be the rhetorical question of v. 11 which expects a positive answer. The judicial import of the whole pericope results clearly from the context. Here it is important to keep in mind that the oracular formula of v. 11 recalls the attention to the one doing the declaring. It is not otherwise in Mt: 5:6-7 can be seen as the centre of a first part which has been condensed theologically into righteousness-mercy, attributes which tell of God’s mode of being. For Mt 5:11-12, v. 11e-f also brings back the attention to the speaker. The rest of the beatitudes (vv. 11-12) seems to favour a form of equation at the bottom of which the persecuted disciples correspond to the prophets. Jesus – on whose account they are persecuted – is on the same plane as God who sends the prophets. Put in other terms, both Am 2:11-12 and Mt 5:11-12 have in common the arrangement of the text in the scenario: sender, those sent, persecutors, with

63 I refer here to the HT. The fact that a good seven kinds of oppression can be counted is not absolutely decisive for the number of the Matthean beatitudes. 64 If I do not deceive myself, BETZ, The Sermon on the Mount, 111, seems to share the opinion of St. Ambrose – quoted in the opening of his Interpretation – according to whom the first beatitude appears in this position because in some way it generates all the virtues – a role which, for the Bishop of Milan, involves a structural vision of these same Matthean macarisms as flowing one into the other successively and progressively. More explicit in this regard is PUECH: “Ainsi apparaît-il que la première béatitude de Mt est de porteé générale et contient déjà les sept autres”: 4Q525 et les péricopes des Béatitudes, 104. 65 Cf. BOVATI – MEYNET, Il libro del profeta Amos, 81-103. Above all pp. 87 and 90. 348 Rosario Pistone the difference that in Amos there is a direct reference to the persecutors, while the persecuted prophets are only implied. In Mt, it is the persecutors who pass to the second level, leaving the field to the persecuted disciples- prophets. The equivalence, in the gospel text, between those invited (disciples = prophets) insinuates the correlative equivalence between the senders (Jesus-God). The third argument for similarity between the two texts is to be found in the judicial context. The theme of judgement, fundamental in the first gospel, is not absent from the formulation of the beatitudes. Indeed, the first great discourse of Jesus forms a kind of great thematic inclusion with the last (Mt 24–25), precisely with regard to judgement. Already within its own structure, however, the formulation of the macarisms can be seen as the coun- terpart, wholly positive, of the announcement of the terrible possibility of rejection “in that day” (Mt 7:23-24). The beatitudes are the sentence of blessing which awards the kingdom to someone, just as the end of the Sermon on the Mount signals the danger of being deprived of it. Both the discourses coincide because the same person assigns or excludes people from the same reality (the kingdom of heaven/of the Father). This essential emphasis having been made, the indisputable judicial tone of the eschatological discourse is set as the more immediate literary key for the first of the discourses, rendering the beatitudes understandable as a sentence of blessing. Still in connection with the thematic examination, it should be noted that the Sermon on the Mount does not omit to take up the theme of the Law (Mt 5:17-20), present in its turn also in Amos in the oracle against Judah which precedes that against Israel and where the accusation directed at the southern kingdom is that of having rejected the Law of the Lord (Am 2:1- 6). Thus the entire people of God, Israel and Judah, appears tagged with a broken relationship with the Law and with the oppression of power which culminates in the rejection of the prophets. Matthew goes his own way in presenting the surpassing of these elements in the judgement of the Mes- siah-Son of God: the poor in spirit, like the prophets are possessors of the kingdom, and the Law is presented in its radical truth for those who desire to fulfil the will of the Father. The thematic contacts, the same arrangement of the text of the beatitudes, too similar to that of Amos to speak of simple coincidence, press us to consider, at least on two different planes, the possible influences on the composition of the first gospel. Certainly there exists a series of characteristics which relate the gospel text to that of Sirach. It is not absolutely indispensable to hold that the greater contacts are with the HT; the LXX translation shows characteristics such as to lead us to hold that the relationship with it is the nearer one. So much, however, is not yet sufficient to establish a kind of sapiential literary genre for the beatitudes. The prophetic inspiration, in the content, is strongly recalled by the closeness to Amos in whose Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 349 text is highlighted a complete series of the marginalised who are faithful to God, on the one hand, and of rejected prophets on the other. At the risk of pedantry, it should be repeated that the Matthean text is on the same wave- length but with a basic difference: what in Amos can only be expressed in terms of a judgement which is being announced, in Mt, by contrast, has already taken place, at least inchoatively. We return thus to a form almost typical of the first gospel: the fulfilment of prophecy,66 which does not, however, take away completely the possibility of a further development of history (cf. Mt 28:28). On the formal level, the plays of alliteration, the taste for parallel constructions, etc. witness to a process of writing which, already present in the HT, is perceived and rendered in many ways by the Greek translators of the OT in almost all the books without clear distinctions of genre. We ought not to be surprised, therefore, that formal traits recognisable in the sapiential texts are likewise present in the prophetic ones. The lesson of Ben Sira, who has welded his sage’s lesson to prophecy in an original manner, furnishes us with a precious and incontestable way of understanding the scribe Matthew: the sapiential component can no longer be made absolute or counterposed or only juxtaposed to the prophetic one. As has been already said, Ben Sira, furnishes, even if not deliberately, to whoever comes after him the justification for placing the prophetic activity at the head of the broad understanding of the sages and the didactic service of the scribes (cf. Mt 23:34: “Behold, I am sending to you prophets, wise men and scribes...”), including there those revelations of mysteries from which he invites us to stand afar (Sir 3:22-24; cf. Mt 11:25ff).

4. Conclusion

The text of Ben Sira seems to have undergone the same fate as Moses:, the latter could only contemplate the promised land from a distance without entering it, the other shows the threefold division of the future canon, indicates the writing, the Book, as the making concrete of wisdom and the place of certain mediation, but he – or to be more accurate, his work – was not to be admitted there. In another way, just as Moses has those who read him still in the synagogues, so Ben Sira is still proclaimed in the ekklesia. Strange fate indeed! He can be claimed, with some justice, as the forerunner who in one way is largely unprecedented. He perceives himself, without fear of denials, as

66 In this connection and more generally for the presence of the prophets in the first gospel, cf. MANFREDI, “Il bambino e sua madre“. 350 Rosario Pistone the equal of the prophets and proclaims the wise man blessed. Matthew, the Christian scribe and disciple of the kingdom, can certainly be numbered in the long train of those who have learned from him, adhering to his teaching and developing its intuitions, even in other directions. The examples which we have seen show it with ample clarity: Matthew is the bearer of a heritage which guards with care the effort and the teaching of the sage, as well in the well constructed forms of speech as in the measured and persuasive words; and it is not far from the truth to affirm that Matthew shares with Ben Sira the necessity of joining in a situation which must be vitally open to the new, a heritage which has already been consolidated though it is still supple. The beatitude which the rabbi of Nazareth proclaims to his disciples at the beginning of his ministry is a word of wisdom to whoever has already set himself to follow Wisdom-Jesus, but it is also a prophetic word of judgement since it expresses a sentence of blessing in assigning the kingdom. If Ben Sira is able to promise a reward in the name of Wisdom, Jesus dispos- es of the reward of the heavenly Father. On the road indicated by Ben Sira, wisdom and prophecy turn out united here in an indissoluble way: those who follow Jesus, definitive Wisdom of God, become his preachers with their lives even before their words and are, therefore, compared to the ancient prophets with regard to their fate of rejection and persecution. Wisdom and prophecy, welded together by Sirach, find in the gospel exposition a confirmation and a fulfilment which the old sage could not have foreseen. From henceforth, prophets, wise men and scribes are not to be waiting for whoever answers their advertisement and frequents their school but are called to teach wisdom by being wise, that is to say with the prophecy of their own existence. Wisdom has thus revealed its mysteries to the humble: it is a question of possession of the kingdom, of the reciprocal link with the Father who hands over everything to the Son who, in turn, renders praise to the Father for the gift made to the babes, thus revealing the truly wise. The effort is, then, concluded and the yoke has become light. From now on refreshment will consist in enjoyment of the presence of the Emmanuel who remains with his own while they make disciples of all the nations telling of the wisdom and knowledge not of Jesus, Ben Eleazar, Ben Sira but of Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham, Son of God. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 351

Bibliography

BEENTJES, P. C., The Book of Ben Sira in Hebrew. A Text of All Extant Hebrew Manu- scripts and a Synopsis of All Parallel Hebrew Ben Sira Texts (VT.S 68), Leiden 1997. BETZ, H. D., The Sermon on the Mount, Minneapolis 1995. BETZ, H. D., The Logion of the Easy Yoke and of Rest (Mt 11.28-30): JBL 86 (1967), 10-24. BOISMARD, M.-É., L’Ancien Testament grec dans l’évangile de Matthieu: Septante ou Théodotion? in: KRASˇOVEC, J. (ed.), The Interpretation of the Bible, Sheffield 1998, 245-254. BOVATI, P. – MEYNET, R., Il libro del profeta Amos, Roma 1995. BROWN, J. K., The Disciples in Narrative perspective, Atlanta 2002. BROWN, R. E. – MEIER, J. P., Antioch and Rome, New York 1983. BURNETT, F. W., The Testament of Jesus Sophia, Washington 1979. CARTER, W., Households and Discipleship: AStudy of Matthew 19-20, Sheffield 1994. CARTER, W., Matthew 4:18-22 and Matthean Discipleship: An Audience-Oriented Perspective: CBQ 59 (1997), 58-75. CHARLESWORTH, J. H., The Qumran Beatitudes (4Q525) and the New Testament (Mt 5:3-11; Lk 6:20-26): RHPhR 80 (2000), 13-35. COPE, M. L., Matthew – A Scribe Trained for the Kingdom of Heaven, Washington 1976. CORLEY, J., Ben Sira’s Teaching on Friendship (BJSt 316), Providence, RI 2002. CORLEY, J., Wisdom versus Apocalyptic and Science in Sirach 1,1-10, in: GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ, F. (ed.), Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Biblical Tradition (BEThL 168), Leuven 2003, 269-285. DAVIES, W. D. – ALLISON, D. C., The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 3 voll., Edin- burgh 1988. DODD, C. H., The Bible and the Greeks, London 1964. DUMAIS, M., Le Sermon sur la Montagne, Paris 1995. DEUTSCH, C., Lady Wisdom, Jesus and the Sages, Valley Forge 1996. DEUTSCH, C., Hidden Wisdom and the Easy Yoke, Sheffield 1987. ELLIS, P. F., Matthew: His Mind and His Message, Collegeville 1974. GENCH, F. T., Wisdom in the Christology of Matthew, Lanham 1997. GNILKA, J., Il vangelo di Matteo, 2 voll., Brescia 1990. GREEN, H. B., Matthew, Poet of the Beatitudes, Sheffield 2001. HENGEL, M., The Charismatic Leader and His Followers, Edinburgh 1981. LAGRANGE, M.-J., Évangile selon Saint Matthieu, Paris 1927. LIDDELL, H. G. – SCOTT, R., Greek-English Lexicon, Oxford 1968. LIESEN, J., First-Person Passages in the Book of Ben Sira: PIBA 20 (1997), 24-47. LUND, N. W., Chiasmus in the New Testament, Chapel Hill 1942. LUZ, U., Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 3 voll., Zürich 1985-2002. MANFREDI, S., “Il bambino e sua madre“ (Mt 2,11.14-20). La luce dei profeti dell’An- tico Testamento su Matteo 1-2, in: MANFREDI, S. – PASSARO, A. (eds.), Abscondi- ta in lucem. Scritti in onore di Mons. Benedetto Rocco nel suo 70° compleanno, Caltanissetta 2000, 119-144 (Ho Theológos 2-3 [1998]). MENKEN, M. J. J., The Greek Translation of Hosea 11:1 in Matthew 2:15: Matthean or pre-Matthean?: FNT 12 (1999), 79-88. 352 Rosario Pistone

MENKEN, M. J. J., The Textual Form of the Quotation from Isaiah 7:14 in Matthew 1:23: NT 43 (2001), 144-160. MENKEN, M. J. J., The Sources of the Old Testament Quotation in Matthew: JBL 120 (2001), 451-468. MEYNET, R., L’Analyse Rhétorique. Une nouvelle méthode pour comprendre la Bible. Textes fondateurs et exposé systématique, Paris 1989. MEYNET, R., E ora scrivete per voi questo cantico. Introduzione pratica all’analisi retorica, Roma 1996. MEYNET, R., I frutti dell’analisi retorica per l’esegesi biblica: Greg 77 (1996), 403-406. MEYNET, R., Il vangelo secondo Luca, Roma 1994. MEYNET, R. – POUZET, L. – FAROUKY, N. – SINNO, A., Rhétorique sémitique. Textes de la bible et de la tradition musulmane, Paris 1998. MINEAR, P. S., The Good News According to Matthew, St. Louis 2000. MINISSALE, A., La versione greca del Siracide. Confronto con il testo ebraico alla luce dell’attività midrascica e del metodo targumico (AnBib 133), Roma 1995. NAUCK, W., Salt as a Metaphor for Instructions for Discipleship: StTh 6 (1952), 165- 178. NORDEN, E., Agnostos Theos: Untersuchungen zur Fomengeschichte Religiöser Rede, Darmstadt 1971. ORTON, D. E., The Understanding Scribe. Matthew and the Apocalyptic Ideal, Sheffield 1989. PUECH, É., Qumrân Grotte 4. XVIII . Textes Hébreux (4Q521-528, 4Q576-579) (DJD XXV), Oxford 1997. PUECH, É., Apports des textes apocalyptiques et sapientiels de Qumrân à l’eschatologie du judaïsme ancien, in: GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ, F. (ed.), Wisdom and Apoc- alypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Biblical Tradition, 133-170. PUECH, É., 4Q525 et les péricopes des Béatitudes en Ben Sira et Matthieu: RB 98 (1991) 80-106. PUECH, É., The Collection of Beatitudes in Hebrew and in Greek (4Q525 1-4 and Matthew 5,3-12), in: MANNS, F. – ALLIATA, E. (eds.), Early Christianity in Con- text (SBF.CMa 38) Jerusalem 1993, 353-368. REYMOND, E. D., Innovations in Hebrew Poetry: Parallelism and the Poems of Sir- ach, Atlanta 2004. RÖHSER, G., Jesus – der wahre ‘Schriftgelerhte’. Ein Beitrag zum Problem der ‘Torahverschäfrung’ in der Antithesen der Bergpredigt: ZNW 86 (1995), 20-33. SALDARINI, A. J., Matthew’s Christian-Jewish Community, Chicago 1994. SALDARINI, A., The Gospel of Matthew and Jewish-Christian Conflict, in: BALCH, D. L. (ed.), Social History of the Matthean Community: Cross-Disciplinary Approaches, Minneapolis 1991, 38-61. SCHMIDT, D. D., The Septuagintal Influence in Shaping the Passion Narratives: with Special Attention to Matthew: Forum 1 (1998), 95-118. SCOTT, B. B. – DEAN, M. E., A Sound Map of the Sermon on the Mount, in: BAUER, D. R. – POWELL, M.A. (eds.), Treasures New and Old, Atlanta 1996, 311-378. SENIOR, D., What Are They saying About Matthew?, New York 1996. SKEHAN, P. W. – DI LELLA, A. A., The Wisdom of Ben Sira. A New Translation whith Notes, Introduction, and Commentary (AncB 39), New York 1987. Blessing of the sage, prophecy of the scribe: from Ben Sira to Matthew 353

STANTON, G., A Gospel for a New People. Studies in Matthew, Edinburgh 1992. STENDHAL, K., The School of St. Matthew and its Use of the Old Testament, Philadel- phia 1968. SUGGS, M. J., Wisdom, Christology and Law in Matthew’s Gospel, Cambridge 1970. VAN CANGH, J. M., Béatitudes de Qumrân et béatitudes évangeliques: Anteriorié de Matthieu sur Luc, in: GARCÍA MARTÍNEZ, F. (ed.), Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Biblical Tradition, 413-425. VAN TILBORG, S. The Jewish Leaders in Matthew, Leiden 1972. VERMES, G., Scripture and Tradition in Judaism, Leiden 1961. WATSON, W. G. E., Classical Hebrew Poetry, Sheffield 1984. WATSON, W. G. E., Traditional Techniques in Hebrew Poetry, Sheffield 1994. WELCH, J. W. (ed.), Chiasmus in Antiquity, Hildesheim 1981. WICK, P., Volkspredigt contra Gemeinderegel? Matthäus 5-7 im Vergleich zu Matthäus 18: KuI 13 (1998), 138-153. WILLS, L. M., Scribal Methods in Matthew and Mishnah Abot: CBQ 63 (2001), 241- 257. WINTON, A. P. The Proverbs of Jesus, Sheffield 1990. ZUMSTEIN, J., La condition du croyant dans l’Évangile de Matthieu, Göttingen 1977.

Sirach, or the metamorphosis of the sage

ANGELO PASSARO – GIUSEPPE BELLIA

Recent research on Sirach regards one things as certain: whatever the tan- gled and fascinating problems which revolve around the work of Ben Sira, a rigorous and structural study must begin with the book, with its apparently disorganised and disputed process of becoming literature. It has to be said, in fact, that after so many centuries, the Hebrew text of Sirach, which has been recovered to an incomplete extent, still does not meet with a consensus among the majority of specialists. Not infrequently, in order to unloose the textual knots of the Hebrew, translators have recourse to the versions in Greek or Syriac, even if we should not undervalue the hypothesis of A. A. Di Lella that it is possible that there may have been some Hebrew retroversions based on the Syriac translation. In this connection, we do well to remember that even the Peshitta does not translate literarily but, like Gr I, in the manner of the midrashim and targumim, with many additions and omissions. The Vetus Latina itself, on the other hand, is not of great assistance because it often presents a text nearer to the Hebrew than to the Greek texts. We are faced, then, with a textual, historical and theological state of affairs, not without its fascination but hardly straightforward in its development. In its complexity, it seems to discourage all research and render every expectation vain. Is access to the authentic thought of Ben Sira debarred for ever, or are we faced with the suggestive witness of the interior journey of a conscientious believing scribe in a period of change already marked by the imminent religious and political convulsions of the Maccabean era?

1. The text as a sign of the interior journey of the scribe

The discovery of the texts in Hebrew has begun to sketch out a promising scenario, authorising a fairly optimistic response, even of not a few reservations remain. Meanwhile, beyond the differences concerning the exact name of Ben Sira, we can learn not a few things about the author and about his work. We know that the author was a layman, teacher of wisdom in Jerusalem, a man of conciliatory disposition and broad views who charged himself with reinforcing the faith of the younger generation in the tradition which he saw shaken by the beginning of Hellenistic fashion. His theological reflection displays itself as serious and full of hope, focused on a few essential principles, wishing to give some kind of response to the assumed 356 Angelo Passaro – Giuseppe Bellia challenge to traditional wisdom and taking a position of distance from the first claims of nascent apocalyptic. As authentic sage, he sees in the fear of the Lord the foundation and the way of access to that Wisdom which finds in the Torah its highest and most attractive expression and which alone can show to the believer the full sovereignty of the action of God in the history of his people, even if it is not always evident. As true Israelite, he places in prayer the site of formation and of exercise of that discernment which is the property of the man who practises wisdom by praising the Lord (cf. Sir 15:9-10), thus realising the primary vocation of man (cf. Sir 17:9-10.27-28). As far as the writing is concerned, the most certain date revolves around the first quarter of the second century, between 200 and 175 BC, before the turbulent period of Antiochus IV, therefore. More difficult to pinpoint is the actual composition of the work. The targumic method employed by the grandson to adapt a copy of his grandfather’s text for his own time justifies the apologies of the prologue for the quality of a work which, probably, had needed a second edition, whether by reason of the book’s success or whether because of the pressing development of theological reflection. However, it is more sensible to think of a reediting, obviously not conducted according to our editorial models but produced by a slow and progressive filing down of the text of Ben Sira, carried out by a multiplicity of hands over several periods of time. It is a question of evidently deliberate changes to both the Hebrew text and the Greek manuscripts, which probably make the book interact with the eschatological sentiment. It seems that they can be dated within a broad space of time which ranges from the years preceding the Roman conquest to the destruction of the Temple. As for the authors of the additions and retouches supplied to bring the text up to date with the progress of the eschatological viewpoint, it is thought that the developments hale from the Essene environment which stemmed from Dan 12:1-3 and 2 Mac 7; for the late correctors who insert explanations of a philosophical kind, always Jewish but now more Greek than Biblical, reference can be made to the school of Aristobulus. Finally, in order to complete the picture, we need to recall that the translation of the Latin Church transmits to us witnesses still unknown while the Peshitta, which knows an enlarged Hebrew text inserts notes pervaded with Christian reflections. It is just so many rewritings of the text that place in the foreground the still unresolved question of the structure of the book which now only a few claim not to have been planned by the author. The search for possible structural models has shown itself to be of great use. The author of Ben Sira could have found these in the sapiential works of his own tradition, such as Proverbs and Job, or of the contemporary cultures such as the prototype of Papyrus Insinger, the poetry of Theognis or even the pre-Maccabean sections of 1 Enoch. If we pay attention to the characteristics of style and the thematic affinity, especially with reference to the opening and closing parts Sirach, or the metamorphosis of the sage 357 of these writings, the passages of Ben Sira which are vested with a special structural importance emerge; from these is confirmed the scheme which divides the book into eight parts (1:1–50:24), that is, without the appendix and without the prologue of the grandson in the Greek version. A more detailed study show the internal poetic coherence of the work where each section begins with a passage on wisdom and is articulated by the presence of mot crochets and of repetitions which perform a precise connecting function among the parts. In particular, the delimitation of the various passages is marked by recurrent stylistic devices such as the non-alphabetical acrostic, inclusion, opening/closing rhymes and again the opening address and the themes of closure. Worthy of special mention are the three chief self references which the author leaves in the work (24:30-34; 33:16-18; 39:12), as if as a footprint of this interior journey: from the initial notice that he finds himself in the wake of the tradition of the prophets of Israel (24:33) there develops the more grown-up and modest awareness of one who understands himself as a careful gleaner of the fruit left behind by the grape-gatherers (33:16-17), finally turning out as the elderly and mature scribal reader with the humble and conscious awareness of one who has written because filled with the same “spirit of understanding” (39:6 Gr) which had been given to Elijah, Elisha and Micah (48:12 Gr; Mic 3:8). Even the so-called author’s signature (50:27-29) can be interpreted as a kind of guarantee of authenticity made by Ben Sira in the third person; a signature which seems to seal a first conclusion to his work, preceding the extension of the appendices of 50:25–51:30. Finally, we must still observe the conclusion of the final acrostic poem (51:30) which reveals a deliberate formal arrangement of the work of Ben Sira, parallel to the didactic texts of Proverbs but also in elegant contrast to the acrostic text of the Babylonian Theodicy. Do all these observations provide elements and indications to empow- er us to reconstruct the probable stages of the different steps of the composition of the book? Taken by themselves, these points have a limited probative value, but taken together, they would acquire a truly considerable force of argument for some scholars. A fascinating hypothesis on the possible compositional phases, supported by the information of the three self-refer- ential sequences, is that the first edition must have included 1:1–23:27 and 51:13-30. In three successive editions, probably by the same author, supplements were added. Each of these appendices begins with a reflection on wisdom (cf. 24:1-29; 32:14–33:15; 38:24–39:11) and contains, or is followed, by a not accidental biographical note. It is a widespread opinion that the Praise of the Fathers, being a unitary, self–standing pericope, in the final edition of the book, must have helped to make up the fifth edition as last supplement. This reconstruction proposed by Roth is a plausible theory of composition but not yet the last word on the argument. Unsupported by objective proofs or checks, it remains purely hypothetical. In fact, the com- 358 Angelo Passaro – Giuseppe Bellia positional phases envisaged are not supported by passages which clearly explain the literary intentions of the author. Once again, the same question arises: are we faced with new editions composed by zealous disciples, or more probably, should we speak of a progressive and natural process of refinement of a poetic work, completed by the author in several stages, following in the steps of the growth of his theological maturity? In this case, the compositional phases, reflected by the literary progression, would indicate not only the traces or the phases of different editions but could be, as has been hinted, the revealing signs of the unusual spiritual journey of the scribe Ben Sira.

2. Witness of an epochal turning point for the faith

The conclusions of historico-anthropological analysis also agree with this perspective of the personalisation of faith, understood as the development of the spiritual experience of Ben Sira already present in Qoheleth (8:16f). Because of the knowledge of the spatial-temporal coordinates of the author, place and date of composition of the work of Ben Sira, this young discipline had lain in wait for the binding proof. The study of culture has shown the different cultural universe existing between grandfather and grandson, reckoning as probable the information given in the prologue. The sociological structures hypothesised, the underlying anthropological typologies and the changes of a linguistic nature in the Greek text compared with the Hebrew, make the literary and theological indications converge towards a confirmation of the known historical framework, with a probable advance in knowledge where the addressees and the purpose of the work are concerned. If there is agreement in situating the first draft of the work in Hebrew in Jerusalem, around 175 BC, and the Greek translation of the grandson at Alexandria fifty years or so afterwards, the historico-anthropological analysis offers solutions on the addressees and the purpose of the work that are coherent and complementary to the more established exegetical hypotheses. The different level of culture found between the Hebrew and the Greek text reveals not only the passage from the official Jerusalem context to the cosmopolitan environment of the Alexandrian diaspora, a transposition which required an understandable and necessary work of linguistic adaptation of the text, of a pastoral and actualising nature, in the face of the challenges and criticisms provoked by the aggressive Umwelt of the Hellenis- tic koiné. It demanded above all the ability to conceptualise the personal process of spiritual maturing before a religious practice grasped in the transition from an imposing but now saturated official religiosity to the lively and participatory of the synagogue cult centred on the written word that Sirach, or the metamorphosis of the sage 359 had been transmitted. This irreversible transformation of the personal relation of the believer with his God, was not noticed by the priestly class in its explosive effects even if the incipient apocalyptic movement already signalled its restless political potential, thenceforward rather ably exploited by the Maccabees. It was precisely the scribe who was becoming, more or less consciously, the protagonist of this personalisation of the faith. He it was who was called to be, not only the able leader and qualified interpreter of the Book, but also the unique and authoritative mediator of a divine revelation which, through writing, wished now to reach the heart of every faithful hearer. The expert scribe’s picture of Wisdom handed over to Israel in the Book of the Covenant (24:23) makes this religious specialist the heir of the prophetic function (but not yet also of the royal function, a transition which would occur later in the Book of Wisdom), as turns out to be the case from the clear warning of the transformation in progress which Joshua ben Eleazar ben Sira shows himself to possess (24:33; 33:16-17; 39:6). The work of the grandfather and his grandson’s translation are situated at the epochal turning point of this new tendency of Second Temple Jew- ish religiosity which, realising the process of the written conceptualisation the faith of Israel and the rethinking of the covenant, would have contributed to Judaism’s evolving towards the two opposed poles of early Christianity and the later Rabbinism. In this historico-anthropologic perspective, the gallery of the famous ancestors presented by Ben Sira gains a less vacuous and more theological sense, together with the unusual surrender of his own identity at the end of the book. It is the conscious sketch of a theological experience which, like the other historical experiences of Israel, testifies to the discreet and uninterrupted action of the divine wisdom in the heart of every believer. The fearing scribe has now become the careful witness and the watchful interpreter of a process of real divine kenosis, where, in order to become the true partner of man, God did not seem to be contented with manifesting himself as wisdom but had become a book, was made writing. A considerable contribution towards a better argued explanation of the most ancient textual tradition but also of the true environment of production and destination of the book is to be wished for, and many think that it could come from a close knowledge of the points of contact between Ben Sira and Qumran. Together with an analysis of the respective positions on some elements of particular importance, we must compare in detail the quotations, allusions and common features shared by Hebrew Sirach and the manuscripts of Qumran, so as to verify what kind of continuity or actual dependence can be established between these different written works. The closeness of vocabulary and the indisputable affinity of thought, just like the handwriting itself, continuous or in stichs, indicate a considerable closeness in space and time between the Sirach manuscripts and those of the Qumran scriptorium, especially with regard to the placing of the sapiential 360 Angelo Passaro – Giuseppe Bellia literary genre in the fervent climate of the Palestinian Judaism of the second century, around 180 BC. We could speculate that, even before the grandson’s Greek translation made a half century afterwards, towards 132, the Hebrew text of Sirach must have already been known to the Essenes-Qum- ran dwellers who were in the habit of making all those corrections and adjustments to the copies of the book of Jesus Ben Sira which they held to be necessary. The recovery of different copies of Sirach in Hebrew, of clear Qumran extraction, reveals, more than a real religious influence, the sign of the strong impression exercised by the book at Qumran, as is inferred from the clear traces left in the compositions found in the library itself, especially in the writings of a sapiential character. Cultural closeness and religious proximity do not necessarily involve identity of views. On themes and questions of importance, between Ben Sira and Qumran, there is established, not infrequently, a circuit of relations of clear contraposition which well register the evolution of ideas and beliefs in different sapiential environments of the second century, pre-Qumran and Qumran. In particular, we should recall: the opposing judgement on the Aaronite and Zadokite priesthood, the different choice on the calendar to be adopted, lunar or solar, the different role assigned to the revealed Law (Sir 1:25-27) or to the meditation on the “mystery of existence” (hyhn zr). On the other hand, notwithstanding the difference in literary genres, the theological reflections of Ben Sira and of Qumran on two of the most important questions of the Judaism of the period, such as the theme of the Messianic hope and that of the eschatological expectation, appear, on closer observation, to be less dissonant and distant. This is the case in the wonderful Praise of the Ancestors where the eternity of the two covenants, priestly and royal, and the preparation for the Day of Yhwh with the coming of the prophet, already hint already at a two-headed messianism, open to belief in the resurrection of the righteous: themes which in the future will be readopted in toto by the Essenes and Pharisees. Moreover, the comparison between Sir- ach and Qumran makes the real socio-religious outline of the author emerge: Jesus Ben Sira must have been a scribe who was open and refined, linked to that priestly circle whose legitimacy and vocation to ritual holiness he defends with passion.

3. Possible features of the first addressees?

The features off the real (first) addressees of the literary toil of Ben Sira still remain veiled. Generally, it is held that behind the ancient debate formula (“do not say”) and behind the expression “you must not say” can be glimpsed the shrewd but polemical rejection by Ben Sira of the opinions of those who Sirach, or the metamorphosis of the sage 361 were his enemies in matters of theodicy. The target of these “complaints”, polite but deliberate could be three different destinations: traditional Jew- ish wisdom, the apocalyptic Enochic circles and Graeco-Hellenistic culture. The hymn to creation, or better, to the Creator, in the last part of Sirach (42: 15–43:33) is a valuable occasion for verifying theses reconstructions, actually more literary than sociological, because the real polemical dimension of the composition permits the unveiling of the true identity of those who are opposed to the sage’s school (51:23: Xrdm tyb). The inveterate habit of exegetes to imagine that they can reconstruct the real dialectic of the socio- religious conflicts of the groups of Jews hostile to one another starting form the literary works themselves is hard to die. A study that is more rigorous and open to new approaches has allowed for the consideration of the texts of the past with greater detachment, not understanding the hymn of Ben Sira as a polemic against the traditional wisdom of Israel. In this way the possibility of defining the real identities of the sages who are held to be the anonymous or implicit antagonists of Ben Sira is invalidated. If these groups within the sapiential current cannot be identified, can we seek to identify in the apocalyptic writings of 1 Enoch those Enochic circles which would have been the real rivals challenged in the hymn? The study of the similarities and differences between the texts of creation in 1 Enoch and in Sirach (which concern the presence and role of the angels, the knowledge of God, the immutability and obedience of the creation and the role of the sun, the moon and the stars), although allowing for elements of polemic against apocalyptic thought, does not autho- rise us to see in the hymn Ben Sira’s riposte to the astronomic wisdom and cosmic knowledge received by Enoch through angelic revelation (1 Enoch 72–82). An analogous argument can be made concerning the presumed polemic present in the hymn against the Graeco-Hellenistic hegemony and its attractive culture. We can reasonably ask if Ben Sira would have had a real knowledge of Alexandrian Hellenism or of the Phaenomena or the Astri- ca of Aratus. These are questions without answer which impel us towards new and more considered reconstructive hypotheses. It seems that the interest of our author is concentrated on two aspects, positive and not polemic, different and yet complementary: the aesthetic aspect of the beauty of creation and the spiritual aspect of the unconditional openness and obedience of creatures to their Creator. The persistent and primary drive of Israel’s Biblical tradition against idolatry is strengthened by the precise modifications contributed by the Greek translator. The grandson, aware of the fascination which the cult of the stars exercised in Alexandria on the younger generation, has sought to diminish or correct any possible mythological reading of the verses devoted to the sun, the moon and the stars by his grandfather. On the other hand, the pedagogic aim of the sage by its very nature needs to be formulated positively and not in a restrictive polemical 362 Angelo Passaro – Giuseppe Bellia form in order to bear fruit. It must present to its disciples the fascination of a wisdom that is always attractive, experienced in joy and still accessible. Further confirmation of the positive and not polemic nature of the work of Ben Sira comes from the unprejudiced analysis of the beginning of the book (1:1-10) which, differently from the past is not read prejudicially as a text in controversy with the nascent apocalyptic thought but is considered against its natural sapiential background and within the total architecture of the composition. Careful study shows how unstable was the perspective which linked Sirach’s writing with the apocalyptic situation of the evanescent Enochic circles. In fact, the comparison of the passage with other texts of sapiential literature, relative to the presentation of wisdom, permits us to grasp the whole movement of the pericope which does not seem to be aimed at all at an apologetic target, much rather oriented towards an infra- Biblical model of reference which can be identified in the “structural use of Scripture”, understood already as a revelatory locus of the experience of God. Normally, when they are concerned with wisdom, its origin and its works, the other sapiential texts develop a flow of thought which follows a course from below, the approach of an anthropological realism which starts off, now from human life, now from the earth and nature, now, finally, from wisdom personified, arriving in this way at a rational but undiffer- entiated reflection which only at the end of the cognitive process comes to see wisdom as beneficent power springing from God. In no other sapiential text is it explicitly said that “all types of wisdom come from the Lord”. Ben Sira, by contrast, right from the opening paragraph of his book chooses the way from above and invites us to travel another way: to view his vision on the origin and meaning of wisdom, he begins immediately with the gift of God: “All wisdom comes from the Lord [...] He alone is wise”. Furthermore, taking into consideration the lines of development of the whole passage, we discover that Ben Sira wished to establish a precise and fascinating literary and theological tension between the beginning and the end of the pericope. A translation more anchored rhetor- ically in the textual structure recognises in the clothing with wisdom on the part of God a climax such as cannot be found in any other place in Scrip- ture. In fact, while in the opening verse it is clear that wisdom is said to be “with him”, that is, with the Lord (1:1b), by means of the ascending progression provided by verses 9b-10ab (“all his works“/“all flesh”/“those who love him”), in the concluding verse we are led to a surprisingly universalistic outcome, truly unthinkable for a conservative and traditionalist author such as Ben Sira: wisdom is acknowledged as present “in those who love him” and so the gift can be extended to “all flesh”. Sirach, or the metamorphosis of the sage 363

4. An intra-jewish tension, not apocalyptic

The careful and strict examination of Sir 3:21-24 bears fruit in a redimen- sioning of the presumed anti-apocalyptic polemic of the work of Ben Sira, allowing us, also from the methodological and hermeneutical point of view, to overcome that state of inertia in which the exegesis which is aimed at defining, only in alternative terms, the real intention of the text is strug- gling. The true target of this discreet and intelligent controversial vein must be better defined in detail: does the author wish to show the inconsistency and the futility of the teaching of the Greeks (Di Lella) or, in a wholly inter-Jewish debate (Argall), is he polemicising with those groups of his coreligionists open to the esoteric teachings? The two perspectives, even if parallel, are not incompatible, revealing a common weave and architecture in the face of the different religious and cultural anxieties which were shared in the sphere of scribal activity,. In each case, whatever may be the real occasion of the polemic against the astrological or cosmological speculations of the Greeks or against the Jewish beliefs on the control of one’s own destiny, the prime intention lying beneath the whole work is to define at the epistemological level the true limits but also the possibilities of human knowledge. For the sages of Israel, the interpretative forms were already oriented to start from that cultural operation of natural theology which had brought Wisdom so close to Torah as to almost identify the two. In this infra-Bibli- cal optic Ben Sira can take up the perspective of Deuteronomy, not to deny value to the cognitive capacity of man, but to recall that the activity of God as object of knowledge is not reducible to that which man thinks of reaching by his own resources. The thought of Ben Sira is developed along that theological reflection which meanders through the Old Testament and, already spotted by Qoheleth, makes of the Torah the meeting point in the way of wisdom-word which is revealed in the book and of the sage who intercepts it there so as to hand it over to the younger generation. The book becomes the historic site of the objectivisation of revelation where the believer has the unique and concrete possibility of encountering and receiving wisdom. To accept the elusiveness of the object sought is, therefore, the inevitable condition of the search and is translated into the realism of the humble and modest attitude of the searcher, the only condition required to meet wisdom in the Book. The clear contraposition between the humble of vv. 17-20 and the many who are bound to the things of earth of v. 24 refers to the complaints against that uncommitted attitude of Greek wisdom which, presum- ing to rationalise the world of the sacred, free from all convention, is reckoned as a kind of intellectual pride. Probably the grandfather was aiming at that part of the Jewish world which was exposed to particular ideological influences or to the sectarian practices of those who thought they had knowl- 364 Angelo Passaro – Giuseppe Bellia edge of the secrets of the cosmos. The attempts to identify the addressees in apocalyptic circles or in minority groups of priests opposed to the official priesthood remain for the moment without proof. It is certain, however, that, while he was undertaking to compose his own tradition, the reading of Ben Sira became the heritage of Israel. At the same time, his honest toil enlightens those who do not try to force the mystery, accepting that they can understand only what God has given as light in wisdom. The hermeneutic which prefers the intra-Jewish track of Sirach, making the most of its interactive connection with the religious tradition of Israel, receives solid confirmation from study of the concluding pericope (51:13- 30 Gr), now considered an integral part of the book, where we are offered a rare self-presentation of the scribe as sage, caught in the act of taking leave of his readers-hearers. The literary analysis of the Greek text of Sir 51, structured in a cohesive compositional form such as to justify its being a literary unity, allows us to observe the presence of some semantic axes which run through the entire pericope, outlining a threefold level of relationships: God, the master/sage and the disciple. The reflection, following the typical treatment of the search for wisdom practised by the scribes of Israel, affirms that wisdom derives from God who is its unique dispenser, and he who searches for it passionately in a dimension of prayer encounters it, becoming, in his turn, its witness and master, able to had it over as an inheritance to those who seek it with holy fear. The formative journey of the sage, as it is traced by Sirach, finds references, agreements and echoes both in the Book of Ben Sira itself and in other compositions of a sapiential character and also in other books of the Scripture of Israel such as the great prophetic texts which allow us to develop the suggestions and the correspondences of the infra- Biblical literature towards new interpretations. In particular, it is to be observed that the activity of the prophets and the sages is interpreted as the gift of the Lord: both are concerned with instruction and therefore with word and hearing, sharing the certainty that their way of acting is approved by God. Certainly the differences are not lacking: even if the scribal activity presents itself as direct heir of the prophetic role, the toil of the scribe seems rather a small thing before the personal suffering of the prophet from which the sage seems to have been preserved. The figure of the prophet is no longer suitable to the new times; he is not regarded as the most reliable interpreter for understanding the historical change in process. There was need, therefore, for a new and more suitable form of religious mediation: the sage who experienced in the work of keeping the Torah the continuous divine instruction in his daily life seemed to respond better to this need. The final pericope of the Greek text thus offers a grand fresco of this new figure of a religious specialist and his forms of personal searching, but at the same time it arranges and interprets the theological seams proper to the theological heritage of Israel in the light of the experience of the wise scribe, Sirach, or the metamorphosis of the sage 365 undergone in an attitude of equilibrium, full of peace and harmony which makes it a means of knowledge for all those who in every age, as Matthew’s community well understood, have wisdom at heart.

5. A book behind the becoming of tradition

Always from this infra-Biblical viewpoint, the impressive closeness to the Psalter jumps to the eyes among the references, agreements and probable connections of Sirach with the other books of the Old Testament canon. In fact, in the language of Ben Sira there are found not a few texts similar to psalms, prayers and many hymnic elements which make a relationship with the book of Psalms more than probable, even if the meaning and direction of this relationship remains wholly to be defined: have we to think of a literary and theological dependence of Sirach on the Psalter, as has been the usual interpretation up to now, or of a common background? It is an enquiry to be conducted with patience, knowing how to orient oneself selectively, in method and in content, towards a defined and representative field of research to be explored to a deep level. A demanding but promising trail in the sapiential sphere can be that of tracing and appraising the broad use of the concept of Torah made by Sirach and the Psalter, studying and making a useful comparison of those texts of Ben Sira and the Psalms focused on the occurrence of the term and of a series of equivalent expressions. The pericope of Sir 32:14–33:6 where the use and extension of the term, employed predominantly in absolute fashion, appears in a systematic way lends itself to a methodical comparison. “Torah” occurs 36 times in the Psalter (26 in Ps 119 alone) with the meaning “instruction” in the broad sense, indicating both the teaching of God collected in the Pentateuch, which becomes the object of study, and the learning or the teaching on the part of a human master, charged with the formation of the people in the school of the Torah of the glorious salvific actions of God. A synoptic glance shows that these two meanings recur in Ben Sira and in the Psalter to the point of covering the same ethico-religious sphere. The human instructions collected by the assiduous study and observance of the Torah on the part of a wise and intelligent master, are so close to the divine instruction of the laws of the Pentateuch to be as trustworthy as the very ’ûrîm. Like the Psalmist (78:1), then, Ben Sira can also speak of a (his) human torah linked to the divine instruction of the Pentateuch. Is this datum sufficient to establish a nexus of dependence of Ben Sira on the Psalms-Torah, or does it strengthen the existence of a command background between the two? In reality, there is no firm proof which decides for the one or the other. Once again there emerges the possibility that we have to do 366 Angelo Passaro – Giuseppe Bellia with a structural use of Scripture which allow Ben Sira to interpret his own role in the manner of the prophets of the past, in continuity with their function, sharing their historico-theological vision. For this reason the Torah is understood by the Jerusalem sage as a reality which is alive and in the course of becoming, which must be reunderstood, reformulated and transmitted each time: sapiential activity with a lay imprint which no longer concerns only the priests or prophets but involves the figure of the wise scribe in his house of instruction Xrdm tyb (Sir 51:23). Precisely this slow and hidden becoming of the tradition required an extra amount of research to estimate what role did the interpretation of the sapiential tradition of the Torah perform within Sirach itself; more exactly how do we interpret its function with regard to its own tradition? An honest methodology can choose an approach that is not selective but organic, in other words one which is responsible for more point of observation heap- ing up different judgements. First of all, then, we shall take seriously the whole of the thought of the grandson in the preface to the Greek translation to grasp what topics, in his opinion, have been retained from the grandfather as most important and current. In the interpretation of the grandson, it is apparent that he wanted to place at the centre of attention of his readers of Greek culture some basic concepts: educational knowledge, wisdom and law come from God and are joined to one another internally in order that they may collaborate to make the revealed word of God understood and so to make men live in a way conforming to the divine plan. The grandson’s intention is supported by the considerations on the ideas and the forms of thought proper to Sirach who sees the Law as a whole closed in itself, not having any need for further retouches and additions. Ben Sira is fascinated by the irresistible and incomprehensible completeness of the divine work which is unveiled as a gift only to the one who assumes an attitude of intellectual modesty. Wisdom is not a gift given without conditions. The disciple must play his part assuming, beyond the right attitude with respect to God, a consequent behaviour that is correct because only the concrete fulfilling of the Law leads to the acquisition of wisdom (51: 19b). In this way, Sirach establishes strong internal links among the creation, wisdom, the fear of God and the Law, allowing the becoming of the tradition to be grasped as a cumulative and progressive process of individual instructions revealed by God and put into writing in a book in which his will is symbolised and transmitted. Thus, Sirach, aware of finding himself within a specific religious culture which entrusts the Law of the Most High to a written revelation, expresses an avowed line of continuity and of respect towards the ancestors, feeling himself oriented to following in their tracks in order to obtain that wisdom which allows one to know the guidelines of a human conduct ordered according to God. Through the mediation of wisdom, the Law becomes the gift which allows God’s plan to be realised in Sirach, or the metamorphosis of the sage 367 the world by means of human behaviour according to an internal order: Wisdom, creation, law. Sirach derives from there a high and manifold significance for the Torah which, beyond the historical sense (it is the document written for the instruction of contemporaries and for transmission to future generations), has also a theological function (word of God and word about God) and a soteriological role in that wisdom regulates the practical life of every man in a way conforming to the revelation of God. For Ben Sira, an interesting exemplification of human conduct inspired by wisdom was the good use of the tongue. For the sage formed by the Bib- lical tradition, if one lacks control in one’s speech, it is impossible to live a disciplined life and one falls easily into numerous faults and failings which have their origin precisely in the ill-considered use of the tongue which is able to procure good or evil. It is a pedagogic theme which is found already in Proverbs, a book much loved by Sirach who devotes three important passages to this topic: 5:9–6:1; 23:7-15; and 28:13-26). The three texts deal with the theme of discipline of the tongue from different if connected perspectives, as is evident from the intertextual forms, the synchronic aspects and other literary characteristics. Knowing the Hebrew text only for the first passage and having to rely on the Greek text of the grandson and the other ancient versions for the other two compositions, in order to value and appreciate adequately the sapiential teaching of Ben Sira, we must take into account the intertextual connections with the older books of the Bible against which he must certainly have compared what he wrote with regard to the ambiguous potential of the tongue, the lips and the mouth which can show themselves to be mechanisms of blessing and life or cursing and death, instruments of wisdom or of folly. An indicative example of this sapiential viewpoint on the disastrous consequences of improper speech is in 23:9a.13a.15a where the triple repetition of the verb suneqi,zw serves to emphasise the reasons for which one should never acquire the habit of such speech: whoever has picked up this vulgar habit “will never become disciplined” and the inopportune tri,th glw/ssa could not ever acquire wisdom. The pedagogic concern for the disasters of ill-considered speech not only has an ethical value and is not simply a rule of politeness for social living; for the sage, the intention is theological because the discipline of the tongue serves to prevent the slide (28:26a) towards sin. Indeed, in no other book of the Old Testament do we meet with such a well-nourished and pervasive reflection about that world which revolves around the use and abuse of the tongue, the lips, the mouth and the palate as in Sirach. They are all terms of language, true “organs of speech” or better, as the phenomenon of historical anthropology is more understood, they are all symbolic elements, expressive of that “culture of speech” which the Hellenistic influence of public debate and the thriving synagogal cult rendered a frequent and by now habitual experience and 368 Angelo Passaro – Giuseppe Bellia therefore one needful of careful vigilance on the part of the wise. The man who was good at speaking, the man “of the double tongue”, could spread confusion and cause death if he lingered in futile chit-chat, in lies or slander, or, worse, if he appealed to the Lord’s name with vain and unnecessary oaths to get the upper hand. The sage knew that the fruit of the mouth could have a devastating pedagogic effect: it could render the gift of speech no longer credible.

6. The theological aim of the pedagogy of Ben Sira

Beyond what is given in the thematic sphere, the theological aim which runs through the work of Sirach is inferred also from that lexical world which, not finding fitting expressions in normal language, communicates by means of the creative use of the metaphor. Behind this literary figure is hidden a universe of meaning which, in particular circumstances, holds figurative language to be the most adequate form of communication. The systematic study of a particularly suggestive metaphor reveals not only the style of the author but also his culture of reference, especially when it is present in various semantic contexts across the whole of his work, allowing thus the hidden nature of his personality to be sounded out and the particular mentality on which his thought has been nourished to be known. With an author of an identity so well defined as Ben Sira, the enquiry becomes more rigorous and intriguing; in fact, the figurative language, shielded from all intellectualism, introduces us into the ideal and imaginative world of the author with access to the less explicit mental presuppositions of his language. Among the metaphors used by Ben Sira, that of “falling” is undoubtedly the most recurrent and widespread. It is used to indicate the act of “falling” which can concern things and persons, but the metaphorical use refers to a transferred sense in which the expression acquires a very rich semantic force, indicating that basic experience which man has of himself and of the life which surrounds him: his own reality and that of the world in which he lives is perceived in its constituent weakness and instability. The concepts which can be referred to the semantic zone in question are numerous and converging, but, following a patient methodology of tabular compilation, they can be arranged and brought into ten or so thematic areas from which it transpires that “to fall” can be understood as an extremely traumatic and decisive event which compromises the condition of man before history and before God. From whence comes such a dramatic vision of the human condition in an author normally adjudged to be conservative because seized by a static conception of the world, contemplated in its per- Sirach, or the metamorphosis of the sage 369 fect order, without any concern for the ancient grief of Job or for the corrosive irony of Qoheleth? In order to give a sensible reply, we must gain a more careful and balanced understanding of the thought and personality of Ben Sira. His optimism is not superficial but reflects his interior equilibrium, fruit of a unitary vision of a world which tends to be harmonious in a cosmological, historical and religious sense. The unity between faith and reason gives his thought the stamp of rare serenity which presses him to seek the overcoming of fractures. For Ben Sira, God continues to regulate the moral life of man in a relationship that is always respectful of the complexity of the creation and of history. In this vision of the world and of man, which is at once both physical and spiritual in nature, the metaphor of “falling” is loaded with a strong symbolic value which pursues a theological intention: sin compromises this original harmony and damages that wonderful and delicate equilibrium of the world which is ruled by the wisdom of God communicated to man in the law. In the theoretical vision of Ben Sira, moral infraction upsets the order of creation and distorts the condition of man in history. The metaphor of falling is used as gracious stratagem of a prophetic function which is now fulfilled by the sages. Again, the theological intention of a text can be brought to light in a reflexive way from the hermeneutic practised or aimed at by copyists and translators with their additions, corrections and modifications. What specific contribution do they make with regard to the religious and cultural spheres of the most ancient translations? In particular, what knowledge comes from the comparison with the direct textual transmission of the Peshit- ta or of the Syro-Hexapla, believed to have been produced in the Syriac sphere? The new historico-textual hypotheses, attentive to the internal characteristics of Sirach, seem to orient towards different interpretative and contextual frameworks which, at least for the Syro-Hexapla, support as certain its Christian origin; while, for the Peshitta, the thinking is of a translation carried out directly on a Hebrew text in a Jewish environment which, only in a second phase, would end up in a Christian sphere. The history of modern research on the peculiarities of the Peshitta Sir- ach has highlighted the presence of so-called “targumisms”, as well as the particular orientations of the translator in matters of halakhah and haggadah, including the debated theme of eschatology. Research has caused the presence of an indirect textual tradition, both in intertestamental Judaism and in part also in rabbinic Judaism, to emerge beside a secure direct textual tradition, of at least one part of the Hebrew text in Jewish manuscripts. This and other reconstructions which seek to trace for the origin of the Peshitta Sirach a sectarian Christian context of Ebionite type or a successive Chris- tian revision, do not turn out to be convincing, from the methodological point of view, because they are without proof. However, they are indicative of the theological weave beneath the text. The rerunning through the chief 370 Angelo Passaro – Giuseppe Bellia traits of the most recent history of the discussion of the specific nature if the Peshitta Sirach by means of a sample collection of sections and passages of the Syriac version of Sirach has shown that the most pertinent annotations were directed not towards a Jewish environment of a tradition which did not observe the Biblical halakhah but towards the Christianity of Syriac language and tradition, related to Judaism and its exegetical and haggadic traditions, as well as to its literary genres. Behind the straightforward version, therefore, with its hermeneutical typicality, there would be a different theological context, close to a model of Syrian Christianity, very near to the tradition of Ephraim and Aphraat, witness of a clear Christian reformulation of the Biblical text. The variants, or better the twistings and turnings of the translators, would not be justified if the text had a value that was only ethical or pedagogic, for the most part dated and closed to the becoming of history and the approaching sovereignty of God. The theological value of the work of Ben Sira is objective and just as it has been valued as fruitful and contemporary by the grandson, in the same way, at every time, it finds attentive appraisers even in the other religious traditions based on the Bible. From an even older Christian context, from the community of the first canonical gospel, in fact, comes an open and nuanced understanding of Sir- ach. Of the hundred and more New Testament passages in which the text of Ben Sira is present through quotation or allusion, a third are found precisely in Matthew’s Gospel. This is a piece of information, which is not showy, perhaps but certainly not unimportant which allows us to find in the writing of Ben Sira a privileged place of inspiration for some of Matthew’s theological reflections on Christian discipleship. In particular, what an almost synoptic reading of some texts, as well as the construction of ways of speaking allows us to establish between the Jerusalem sage/scribe and the Christian-scribe-become-disciple-of-the-Kingdom is the relationship existing between the beatitude of the sage and the prophecy of the scribe. Just as for Ben Sira, the sage is proclaimed blessed because he is considered true heir of the work of the prophets, in the same way for Matthew the disciple of Christ must share in the beatitude of the one and the dramatic fate of the other. In actuality, where the first gospel is concerned, we have to think of the existence of a scribal tradition of Jewish background, heir of the sapiential school existing between the time of Ben Sira and the second century AD. This hypothesis is supported by the innumerable contacts of style and content but above all by the common necessity which Matthew shares with Ben Sira of accepting the discontinuity of the new thing preformed by God in the continuity of tradition of salvation that had been hallowed and consolidated, having to join, in a time of rapid change, the sapiential patrimony with the explosive novelty of the Kingdom. Like Ben Sira, Matthew too assigns to the scribes a central role of mediation which makes of them real points of spiritual and intellectual reference Sirach, or the metamorphosis of the sage 371

(cf. Sir 38:9 and Mt 23:1-7), even able to teach with a more demanding authority since, “having become disciples of the kingdom of heaven”, they are enabled to include the old teaching proceeding from the novelty of Christ in the traditional inheritance (Mt 13:51-52). What is brought about by Christ is a surplus of meaning and fullness which is present also in other passages of the first gospel, as for example, in the text of the Matthean beatitudes where there is proclaimed to the disciples a word which is simultaneously wisdom and prophecy. Whoever is enrolled in the following of Christ gains a wisdom which is also a prophetic word of judgement because he becomes its preacher in his own life, being thus assimilated to the ancient prophets in their common destiny of rejection and persecution. On the pages of the gospel, once again, there is a confirmation but also an excelling of something which the old sage only glimpsed: a wisdom granted to the babes and the humble, revealed by the Father to the Son as the truly wise (Mt 11:25- 30). The novelty of the scribe-become-disciple, in continuity with the common scribal tradition, manifests a theological shift which Jesus, Ben Eleazar, Ben Sira had perhaps glimpsed from afar: the wisdom which invites all those who labour and are oppressed to assume its yoke surpasses the function of the Law by identifying itself henceforth with the Christ, the living one, the Emmanuel who remains for ever with his own to make disciples of all the nations.

7. A summary consideration which looks further

The studies and the confrontation between the specialists allow us to lay down some summary but not conclusive notes on the latest research on the work of Ben Sira. For Sirach, the journey from wisdom to prophecy takes place in the midst of a time of tumultuous and radical changes, still marked by the instability and the damage of the military conflicts between the Ptolemies and Seleucids and under the insidious influence of the Hel- lenistic cultural hegemony which has enfeebled or at any rate marked the transmission of a traditional religious teaching which is inadequate to face the new things of a history which has advanced too quickly. Taken as a whole, not only the political and cultural framework is shown to be irre- mediably moulded by the Greek way of life, the religious world is also cracked by it and shot through with temptations to abandon or to relax the continuity with the authentic tradition. Easy ways of escape are anticipated as obvious and possible for those who ar tempted to participate socially in the way of life of the powerful, sharing with them their rapacious economic approach, their unrestrainable philosophic ybris, their unscrupulous moral conduct boldly combined or clothed with the defence or the promo- 372 Angelo Passaro – Giuseppe Bellia tion of the religious elements more extrinsic to the faith, to conserve acquired privileges and positions of power which the rapid epochal change rendered pretty unstable. This must probably have been the climate in which Ben Sira, a lay scribe of Jerusalem but one close to the priestly class, filled with fervent imagination but endowed also with a rare sapiential experience, sought new ways, a new land of blessing along the track of a tradition which could not be either consigned to an obtuse continuity or condemned to be merely reac- tive, incapable of grasping or opening itself to the new thing which the God of the fathers was continuing to perform. It is very probable that the development of a wisdom that was repetitive into one that was creative happened progressively over a long time while as a sage he recovered the heritage of his own believing tradition. It was the revisiting of a “hidden wisdom”, of an “invisible treasure” (Sir 20:30; 41:14), impenetrable to the sharp eye of an eagle but not to the eye of the heart of whoever has learned to fear the Lord by practising modesty: thus Ben Sira had learned to recognise the meaning and the richness of his own tradition. A reality, then, living and in a state of becoming which remained veiled to the many, revealing itself only to the eyes of those who learned to consider wisdom as a karstic river which, with invincible tenacity, sought its way towards the present, guarding unsus- pected treasures and showing itself stronger than all the other memorials of salvation. The Law is first of all Torah, illumination offered by God as written revelation; it is the book which becomes the divine gift par excellence, the instrument which allows God’s plan to be realised by means of accommodating and intelligent human behaviour. Ben Sira was a scribe of vast and solid culture who was not ignorant of the philosophical tendencies and the moral choices emerging in other cultural zones, from Greek reflection to Aramaic and Egyptian sapiential instruction, from which he freely drew what he considered useful for his scribal teaching. His methodology, anchored to his own understanding of faith, with a loving and reverent attitude towards God, preserved him from following in an uncritical way what he found to be positive in the other traditions. The same prudent disposition, therefore, characterised his judgement of the intra-Jewish apocalyptic concepts of which he had knowledge but from which he distanced himself, not sharing their ungenerous and self- harming flight from the present in the expectation of a new beginning, certain of nothing in a tragic time of political and social convulsion. The hesi- tations towards the breath-taking developments of of the apocalyptic world, for a scribe who had experienced the wisdom of one who has collaborated with the historical plan of God, was of a theological nature before even a political one. How could one who had contemplated the divinity who had entered into the world as wisdom searching for a personal encounter with the believer accept that God be conceived as an impersonal force who oper- Sirach, or the metamorphosis of the sage 373 ates out on his own in front of men who are considered as passive specta- tors? Rooted in the faith of the fathers, although aware of the “scepticism” within the Judaism of his day, his optimism wants to witness to the invincible force of a hope which persists in believing in the divine election, continuing to wager on the faithfulness of God rather than on the firmness of his own traditions. With fine irony it has been observed that the text of Ben Sira has had reserved for it the same fate as that assigned to Moses: if the latter contemplated from afar the promised land into which he could not ever enter, to the latter it was given to indicate the triple division of the future Hebrew canon without ever being able to make it himself. And just as Moses has those who read him in the synagogues today, in the same way, Ben Sira is still proclaimed in the ekklesia of the new sons of Abraham. The metamorphosis of wisdom into a book was rendered possible by the laborious evolution of the figure of the prophet into that of the sage, who, placed at the centre of the slow process of the Biblical conceptualisation of the faith of Israel and the long-suffering process of rethinking the covenant in a period of harrowing and epochal changes, had grasped the sense of the continuity of his own traditions. The scribe Joshua ben Eleazar ben Sira had gazed with lively awareness on the providential activity of God in history and among his people and experienced his discreet presence in the very existence of the believer, witnessing that continuity in change is a truth accessible to the sage. He wanted to summon the young to experience it by coming to lodge in his “school”.

Authors

PANCRATIUS BEENTJES Katholieke Theologische Universiteit. Utrecht

GIUSEPPE BELLIA Theological Faculty of Sicily, “St. John the Evangelist”. Palermo

NURIA CALDUCH-BENAGES Pontifical Gregorian University. Rome

JEREMY CORLEY Ushaw College, Durham University. Durham

ALEXANDER A. DI LELLA Catholic University of America. Washington, DC – USA

MAURICE GILBERT Pontifical Biblical Institute. Rome

JAN LIESEN Seminarie Rolduc. Kerkrade – NL

SILVANA MANFREDI Theological Faculty of Sicily, “St. John the Evangelist”. Palermo

ANTONINO MINISSALE Theological Seminary “St. Paul”. Catania

ANGELO PASSARO Theological Faculty of Sicily, “St. John the Evangelist”. Palermo

ROSARIO PISTONE Theological Faculty of Sicily, “St. John the Evangelist”. Palermo

ÉMILE PUECH CNRS France – École Biblique et Archéologique Française. Jérusalem

FRIEDRICH V. R EITERER Paris-Lodron-Universität Salzburg

GIOVANNI RIZZI Pontifical Urbanian University. Rome

Index of Modern Authors

Albani, M...... 126, 129, 130, 131, 136 Beuken, W. A. M...... 154 Albertz, R...... 60, 66, 72, 73, 75 Beyerlin, W...... 34, 46 Alfrink, J. B...... 104, 113 Blenkinsopp, J...... 51, 75, 222, 229 Alliata, E...... 116, 352 Boccaccini, G...... 123, 125, 127, Allison, D. C...... 314, 319, 322, ...... 135, 136 ...... 323, 327, 351 Boismard, M.-É...... 328, 351 Alonso Schökel, L...... 15, 18, 71, 75, Bonora, A...... 54 ...... 121, 128, 136, 198, 208, 308 Borgen, P...... 137 Amphoux, Ch.-B...... 19, 115 Bovati, P...... 329, 347, 351 Argall, R. A...... 26, 27, 46, 124, 125, Braudel, F...... 50, 75 ...... 126, 136, 155, 157, 158, Braun, O...... 80, 113 ...... 159, 161, 162, 163, 165, Brooke, G. J...... 87, 91, 113 ...... 166, 171, 227, 229, 363 Brown, J. K...... 314, 351 Auwers, J.-M...... 18, 114, 115 Brown, R. E...... 322, 351 Avigad, N...... 84 Brueggemann, W. A...... 136 Burke, P...... 50, 75 Backhaus, F. J...... 182, 195 Burkes, Sh...... 99, 113 Baillet, M...... 1, 18, 81, 85, 113 Burmester, O. H. E...... 140, 153 Barré, M. L...... 208 Burnett, F. W...... 313, 351 Barthélemy, D...... 234, 252 Burton, K. W...... 119, 136 Barucq, A...... 70, 75 Baslez, M.-F...... 168, 171 Cagni, L...... 18, 153 Battaglia, V...... 229 Calduch-Benages, N. ....IX, 6, 18, 19, Bauer, D. R...... 352 ...... 46, 70, 75, 79, 95, 111, 113, 116, Baumgarten, J. M...... 84, 113 ...... 119, 120, 122, 124, 126, 128, 130, Baumgartner, W...... XII, 71, 75 ...... 132, 134, 136, 138, 230, 278, 279, Beauchamp, P...... 73, 75 ...... 280, 281, 282, 286, 287, 288, 289, Becking, B...... 138 ...... 297, 301, 305, 306, 308, 375 Beentjes, P. C...... IX, 2, 18, 46, 80, 81, Cancik, H...... 50, 75 ...... 82, 83, 113, 116, 118, 138, 139, Canfora, L...... 50, 75 ...... 140, 142, 144, 146, 148, 149, 150, Caquot, A...... 103, 109, 113, 117, 171 ...... 152, 153, 154, 171, 182, 187, 195, Carbajosa, I...... 286 ...... 201, 202, 206, 208, 215, 229, 262, Carmignac, J...... 88, 113, 116 ...... 265, 275, 310, 351, 375 Carter, W...... 312, 351 Bellia, G...... III, VII, IX, X, 49, 50, 51, Cavalletti, S...... 283, 308 ...... 52, 54, 56, 58, 60, 62, 64, 66, 67, Ceresko, A. R...... 198, 208 ...... 68, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 117, Ceriani, A. M. ..234, 252, 281, 286, 308 ...... 171, 308, 355, 356, 358, 360, 362, Charlesworth, J. H...... 46, 124, ...... 364, 366, 368, 370, 372, 375 ...... 136, 328, 351 Ben Hayyim, Z...... 85, 113, 255, 275 Christensen, D. L...... 171 Berger, K...... 227, 229 Clamer, A...... 252 Bergson, H...... 50 Clifford, R. J...... 122, 136 Betz, H. D...... 319, 327, 347, 351 Clines, D. J. A...... 151, 153 378 Index of Modern Authors

Cohen, Ch...... 117 Dimant, D...... 208 Collado Bertomeu, V...... 18, 308 Dodd, C. H...... 311, 351 Collins, J. J. ....104, 105, 107, 108, 113, Dorival, G...... 79, 114 ...... 121, 136, 149, 153 Dubarle, A. M...... 62, 75 Conti, M...... 222, 229 Duesberg, H...... 60, 64, 75 Cope, M. L...... 322, 345, 351 Dumais, M...... 314, 351 Corley, J. ..IX, 15, 18, 21, 22, 24, 26, 27, Duval, R...... 80, 114 ...... 28, 30, 32, 34, 35, 36, 38, 40, 42, 44, ....46, 70, 75, 97, 113, 135, 136, 139, 148, Easterling, P. E...... 131, 136 ....195, 230, 259, 275, 318, 343, 351, 375 Eberharter, A...... 148, 153 Cowley, A. E...... 80, 114 Ebner, M...... 125, 137 Crenshaw, J. L...... 120, 121, 122, 136, Egger-Wenzel, R...... 18, 24, 46, 115, ...... 157, 159, 163, 171 ...... 136, 216, 229, 230 Cross, F. M...... 84 Elgvin, T...... 89, 91, 92, 94, 105, ...... 107, 114, 118 Dahmen, U...... 83, 114 Ellis, P. F...... 330, 351 Dalley, S...... 29, 46 Elwolde, J. F...... 260, 275 Dalman, G...... 262, 275 Ernst, A. B...... 138 Dan, Y...... 11, 28, 101, 103, 105, 113, Evans, A...... 114 ...... 147, 193, 195, 220, 221, 312, 356 Eynikel, E...... 140, 153, 242, 252, Davidson, R...... 60, 75 ...... 257, 275, 292, 308 Davies, W. D...... 314, 319, 322, ...... 323, 327, 351 Fabry, H.-J...... 91, 114 De Bruyne, D...... 5, 18, 279 Falk, D...... 118 De Fraine, J...... 121, 136 Farouky, N...... 329, 330, 352 De Jonge, H. J...... 114, 115 Fassnacht, M...... 137 de Lagarde, P. A...... 234, 252, 281 Ferrer, J...... 6, 18, 79, 113, 278, 279, De Pinto, B...... 198, 208 ...... 280, 281, 282, 286, 287, 288, 289, de Roo, J. C. R...... 89, 114 ...... 297, 301, 305, 306, 308 de Vaux, R...... 1, 18, 113 Fischer, G...... 18, 19, 46, 115, 171, Dean, M. E...... 344, 352 ...... 195, 208, 229, 230 Delcor, M...... 83, 84, 114 Fischer, R. H...... 308 Delkurt, H...... 138 Flechter-Louis, C. H. T...... 96, 114 Deutsch, C...... 312, 323, 327, 351 Flint, P. W...... 82, 84, 114, 115 Di Lella, A. A...... X, 2, 3, 12, 15, 18, Franco, E...... 76 ...... 20, 21, 23, 32, 34, 37, 47, 52, 53, Fransen, I...... 60, 64, 75 ...... 55, 64, 70, 77, 80, 81, 82, 86, 99, Frerichs, E...... 137 ...... 101, 108, 114, 118, 120, 121, 128, Frey, J...... 19, 92, 114, 115, 136 ...... 138, 141, 143, 145, 146, 147, 148, Fritzsche, O. F...... 262, 275 ...... 149, 151, 153, 154, 155, 157, 158, ...... 159, 161, 167, 171, 174, 182, 185, Gammie, J. G...... 51, 71, 75, 136 ...... 195, 201, 208, 215, 225, 230, 233, García López, F...... 198, 199, 208 ...... 234, 235, 236, 238, 240, 242, 244, García Martínez, F. ....26, 27, 46, 113, ...... 245, 246, 248, 250, 252, 256, 259, ...... 115, 116, 118, 136, ...... 260, 263, 268, 275, 278, 279, 280, ...... 153, 351, 352, 353 ...... 308, 316, 320, 341, 343, 352, 355, Gasser, J. K...... 148, 153 ...... 363, 375 Gench, F. T...... 323, 351 Diesel, A. A...... 252 Gilbert, M...... IX, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, Index of Modern Authors 379

....12, 13, 14, 16, 18, 19, 20, 23, 46, 51, Jones H. St...... 146, 242, 252 ....59, 62, 72, 75, 76, 79, 82, 83, 84, 85, Joüon, P...... 270, 275 ...... 86, 88, 99, 109, 114, 115, 116, 146, Jüngling, H.-W...... 21, 30, 35, 46 ...... 149, 152, 153, 164, 171, 173, 195, ...... 222, 224, 229, 230, 288, 308, 375 Kaestli, J.-D...... 20, 77 Glessmer, U...... 96, 115 Kaiser, O...... 100, 115, 219, 220, Gnilka, J...... 321, 322, 351 ...... 225, 227, 229, 230 Goff, M. J...... 77, 93, 96, 99, 103, Kampen, J...... 73, 76 ...... 104, 105, 106, 115 Kearns, C...... 6, 11, 19, 79, 101, 110, Goshen-Gottstein, A...... 44, 46 ...... 111, 115, 278, 308 Göttsberger, J...... 222, 229 Kenney, E. J...... 131, 136 Grabbe, L. L...... 58, 76 Kieweler, H.-V...... 131, 137, 227, 229 Graupner, A...... 138 Knibb, M. A...... 107, 108, 115 Green, H. B. ....317, 328, 329, 343, 351 Kollmann, B...... 117 Greenfield, J. C...... 89, 118 Koperski, V...... 79, 115 Grelot, P...... 79, 115, 194, 195 Krasˇovec, J...... 351 Gribomont, J...... 5 Kraus, H.-J...... 198, 208 Kugler, R. A...... 125, 137 Hadot, J...... 2, 19 Hainz, J...... 46 Labuschagne, C. J...... 162, 171 Harrington, D. J...... 91, 92, 94, 95, Lagrange, M.-J...... 314, 351 ...... 99, 105, 115, 118 Lang, B...... 222, 229 Hart, J. H. A...... 3, 11, 19, 110, 115 Lange, A. ....91, 113, 114, 115, 118, 136 Harvey, J. D...... 21, 35, 46 Lauret, B...... 75 Haspecker, J...... 2, 19, 21, 32, 46, 70, Le Deaut, R...... 68, 76 ...... 76, 143, 144, 153, 267, 275 Le Goff, J...... 77 Hatch, E...... 140, 151, 153 Lee, T. R...... 36, 44, 46, 57, 76 Hauspie, K...... 140, 153, 242, 252, Leemans, J...... 79, 115 ...... 257, 275, 292, 308 Legrand, Th...... 6, 11, 19, 111, 115 Hayward, R. C. T. ....89, 115, 219, 229 Lehmann M. E...... 80, 85, 94, 95, 115 Hegermann, H...... 227, 229 Lehmann, M. R...... 115 Hellholm, D...... 137 Leinhäupl-Wilke, A...... 137 Hempel, C. G...... 49, 76, 113, 114, Lemaire, A...... 51, 76, 117 ...... 115, 118, 275 Lévi, I...... 1, 19, 83, 89, 116, Hengel, M...... 32, 53, 55, 60, 61, 66, ...... 157, 171, 257, 260, 275 ...... 70, 71, 73, 76, 123, 131, 137, Lichtenberger, H. ....113, 114, 115, 118 ...... 157, 159, 167, 171, 323, 351 Lichtheim, M...... 26, 46 Herkenne, H...... 5, 19 Liddell, H. G. ..146, 242, 252, 338, 351 Horsley, R...... 137 Liesen, J...... IX, 6, 18, 19, 30, 46, 79, Hossfeld, F.-L...... 197, 208 ...... 113, 197, 198, 200, 202, 204, 206, Humphreys, L. W...... 136 ...... 208, 278, 279, 280, 282, 286, 287, Hurvitz, A...... 117 ...... 288, 289, 297, 301, 305, 306, 308, ...... 315, 351, 375 Isaac, E...... 27, 46, 302 Linder, A...... 245, 252 Iwry, S...... 95, 115 Liora, R...... 129, 137 Lohfink, N...... 162, 171 Jastrow, M...... 262, 275 Lücking, J...... 137 Jolley, M. A...... 222, 229 Lund, N. W...... 330, 351 380 Index of Modern Authors

Lust, J...... 140, 153, 242, 252, Murphy, R. E...... 57, 64, 76, ...... 257, 275, 292, 308 ...... 208, 222, 230 Luz, U...... 322, 351 Nau, F...... 283, 308 Mack, B. L...... 44, 46, 201, 208 Nauck, W...... 313, 352 Manfredi, S. ....IX, 164, 173, 174, 176, Nelson, M. D...... 6, 19, 282, 305, 308 ...... 178, 180, 182, 184, 186, 188, Neubauer, A...... 80, 114 ...... 190, 192, 194, 349, 351, 375 Neusner, J...... 137 Manns, F...... 116, 352 Niccacci, A...... 53, 76 Marböck, J...... 2, 10, 18, 19, 21, 22, Nickelsburg, E...... 123, 124, 137 ...... 35, 44, 46, 54, 55, 58, 76, 115, 119, Norden, E...... 327, 352 ...... 123, 137, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, ...... 147, 148, 153, 171, 195, 197, 208, Oesterley, W. O. E...... 240, 244, 248, ...... 209, 211, 216, 223, 225, 229, 230 ...... 249, 252 Marcus, J...... 2, 19 Okoye, J. I...... 235, 237, 249, 252 Martin, H...... 32, 125, 131, 132, Olyan, S. M...... 57, 76, 95, 96, ...... 136, 159, 227, 230 ...... 116, 123, 137 Martone, C...... 82, 83, 84, 116 Orton, D. E...... 313, 352 Mayes, A. D. H...... 229 Owens, R. J. ....19, 278, 279, 281, 282, Mays, J. L...... 198, 208 ...... 284, 285, 286, 303, McKenzie, R. A. F. ..143, 153, 242, 252 ...... 304, 305, 306, 308 Meier, J. P...... 322, 351 Menken, M. J. J...... 328, 351, 352 Parry, D. W...... 114, 118 Meynet, R...... 329, 330, 332, Passaro, A...... III, VII, IX, X, 62, 75, ...... 347, 351, 352 ...... 76, 117, 155, 156, 158, 160, 162, Middendorp, Th...... 22, 23, 24, 26, ...... 163, 164, 166, 168, 170, 171, 308, ...... 46, 62, 76, 131, 137, 223, ...... 351, 355, 356, 358, 360, 362, 364, ...... 227, 229, 230, 301, 308 ...... 366, 368, 370, 372, 375 Milik, J. T. ..1, 18, 84, 91, 107, 113, 116 Patte, D...... 149, 153, 206, 208 Mimouni, S...... 117 Paul, Sh. M...... 11, 14, 15, 49, Minear, P. S...... 315, 352 ...... 117, 324, 375 Minissale, A...... X, 2, 4, 10, 19, 35, Pax, E...... 63, 76 ...... 46, 54, 63, 67, 68, 70, 76, 83, Penar, T...... 155, 171 ...... 101, 116, 120, 126, 133, 134, Perdue, L. G...... 51, 75, 119, 128, 137 ...... 137, 158, 173, 195, 201, 202, Pesce, M...... 71, 76 ...... 208, 253, 254, 256, 258, 260, Peters, N...... 1, 19, 21, 23, 35, 46, 54, ...... 262, 264, 266, 268, 270, 271, ...... 141, 142, 143, 145, 146, 153, ...... 272, 274, 275, 278, 293, 294, ...... 201, 223, 230, 260, 275 ...... 295, 297, 308, 343, 352, 375 Philonenko, M...... 11, 19, 110, Morgan, D. F...... 73, 76 ...... 116, 117, 171 Morla Asensio, V...... 53, 54, 63, Pié y Ninot, S...... 222, 230 ...... 65, 76, 121, 137 Pirot, L...... 252 Mulder, O...... 21, 35, 46, 101, 116, Pistone, R...... X, 309, 310, 312, 314, ...... 173, 174, 195 ...... 316, 318, 320, 322, 324, 326, 328, Müller, A...... 88, 116, 149, 153 ...... 330, 332, 334, 336, 338, 340, 342, Müller-Kessler, Ch...... 88, 116 ...... 344, 346, 348, 350, 352, 375 Muraoka, T...... 83, 84, 116, 174, 195, Poirier, J. C...... 109, 116 ...... 208, 270, 275 Porter, S. E...... 114 Index of Modern Authors 381

Pouzet, L...... 329, 330, 352 Rüger, H. P...... 2, 6, 10, 20, 71, 77, Powell, M. A...... 352 ...... 141, 153, 281, 308 Prato, G. L...... 2, 9, 10, 19, 20, 30, ...... 34, 46, 52, 61, 76, 110, 111, 116, Sacchi, P...... 73, 77, 124, 129, 137 ...... 119, 121, 134, 137, 147, 153, 230 Saebø, M...... 153 Priest, J. ....9, 11, 21, 35, 37, 46, 51, 55, Saldarini, A. J...... 312, 352 ...... 56, 57, 60, 61, 75, 96, 101, 107, Salters, R. B...... 229 ...... 108, 118, 119, 125, 137, 138, 269 Sanders, J. A. ..1, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, Pritchard, J. B...... 28, 46 ...... 46, 83, 84, 117, 165, 171 Prockter, L. J...... 123, 137 Sanders, J. Th...... 222, 227, 230 Puech, É. ..IX, 79, 80, 82, 84, 85, 86, 87, Saracino, F...... 101, 117 ...... 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 98, Sauer, G. ....3, 20, 21, 35, 46, 120, 121, ....100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 106, 107, 108, ....130, 133, 138, 141, 143, 146, 148, 154 ....109, 110, 112, 114, 116, 117, 118, 323, Schattner-Rieser, U...... 19, 115 ....327, 328, 341, 344, 345, 347, 352, 375 Schechter, S...... 1, 80, 117 Schiller, J...... 18, 115, 171, 195, 208 Quimron, E...... 126, 137 Schimanowski, G...... 222, 230 Schlatter, A...... 110, 117 Rabinowitz, I...... 83, 117 Schmidt, D. D...... 138, 328, 352 Rahlfs, A...... 144, 153, 246, 258 Schnabel, E. J...... 145, 154 Rapp, U...... 18, 115, 171, 195, 208 Schoors, A...... 171 Rappaport, U...... 208 Schrader, L. ....21, 22, 23, 24, 32, 34, 47 Ravasi, G...... 165, 171 Schreiner, J...... 145, 146, 154 Redpath, H. A...... 140, 151, 153 Schuller, E...... 118 Refoulé, F...... 75 Schüngel-Straumann, H...... 222, 230 Reicke, B...... 148, 153 Scott, R...... 146, 242, 252, 338, Reinbold, W...... 117 ...... 344, 351, 352 Reitemeyer, M...... 73, 77, 197, 208 Segal, M. H...... 117 Reiterer, F. V. ..II, VII, X, 209, 210, 212, Segal, M. Z. ..21, 23, 31, 32, 34, 35, 36, ...... 214, 216, 218, 220, 221, 222, 223, ...... 41, 43, 47, 82, 140, 141, 154, ...... 224, 225, 226, 228, 230, 375 ...... 201, 257, 259, 262, 263, 275 Reymond, E. D...... 343, 352 Segalla, G...... 222, 230 Rickenbacher, O. ....2, 20, 63, 77, 141, Senior, D...... 330, 352 ...... 142, 143, 145, 152, 153, Seybold, I...... 208 ...... 222, 223, 230, 234, 252 Shakespeare, W...... 249, 252 Ricks, S...... 114 Sheppard, G. T...... 222, 230 Ricoeur, P...... 49, 77 Sinno, A...... 329, 330, 352 Rizzi, G. ....X, 277, 278, 280, 282, 284, Sixdenier, G. D...... 5 ...... 286, 288, 290, 292, 294, 296, 298, Skehan, P. W...... 3, 15, 20, 21, 23, 32, ...... 300, 302, 304, 306, 308, 375 ...... 34, 37, 47, 53, 55, 64, 70, 77, 81, Rofé, A...... 128, 137 ...... 83, 84, 85, 99, 101, 108, 117, 118, Rogers, J. F...... 222, 230 ...... 120, 128, 138, 141, 143, 145, 146, Röhser, G...... 319, 352 ...... 147, 148, 149, 151, 154, 155, 157, Rossano, P...... 137 ...... 158, 161, 171, 174, 182, 185, 195, Rossetti, M...... 11, 20 ...... 201, 208, 215, 222, 225, 230, 245, Rost, L...... 275 ...... 248, 252, 256, 259, 260, 263, 268, Roth, W...... 21, 30, 41, 45, 46, ...... 275, 278, 279, 280, 308, 316, 320, ...... 53, 77, 357 ...... 341, 343, 352 382 Index of Modern Authors

Smend, R. ..1, 20, 21, 32, 35, 39, 47, 55, Vermes, G...... 91, 118, 323, 353 ...... 77, 128, 140, 141, 142, 144, 145, Vermeylen, J...... 19, 46, 116, 195, 230 ...... 154, 159, 171, 201, 233, 245, 251, Veyne, P...... 51, 77 ....252, 260, 264, 265, 275, 279, 287, 308 Vilchez Lindez, J...... 71, 75 Snaith, J. G. ....143, 145, 154, 182, 195 von Rad, G...... 254, 275 Sokoloff, M...... 88, 116 Vonach, A...... 19, 229 Soll, W...... 37, 47 Vovelle, M...... 50, 77 Sparks, H. F. D...... 124, 138 Spicq, C...... 248, 252 Wagner, C...... 139, 140, 154, 257, Spiekermann, H...... 197, 208 ...... 264, 265, 275 Spronk, K...... 134, 138 Wahl, O...... 3, 20 Stadelmann, H...... 9, 20, 55, 59, Watson, W. G. E...... 37, 39, 40, 47, ...... 77, 95, 118 ...... 330, 343, 353 Stanton, G...... 312, 353 Weber, R...... 113 Stegemann, H...... 117, 207, 208 Weigl, M...... 227, 231 Stendhal, H...... 322, 353 Weitzman, M. P...... 12, 20, 282, 287, Steudel, A...... 91, 117 ...... 304, 308 Stone, M...... 89, 118, 125, 138 Welch, J. W...... 330, 353 Strothman, W...... 284 Wermelinger, O...... 20, 77 Strugnell, J...... 84, 91, 92, 94, Whybray, R. N...... 149, 154, 199, 208 ...... 95, 118, 126 Wick, P...... 314, 353 Stuckenbruck, L...... 94, 118 Wicke-Reuter, U...... 131, 138, 147, Stuhlmacher, P...... 228, 230 ...... 154, 227, 231 Suggs, M. J...... 313, 353 Wied, G...... 222, 231 Swete, H. B...... 144, 154 Wills, L. M...... 58, 322, 353 Winter, M. M...... 12, 20, 281, 282, Talmon, Sh...... 114 ...... 284, 286, 291, 294, 296, 297, Tcherikover, V...... 73, 77 ...... 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, Thiele, W...... 5, 20, 279 ...... 304, 305, 306, 308 Tigchelaar, E. J. C...... 26, 27, 46, 87, Winton, A. P...... 323, 353 ...... 89, 96, 103, 104, 105, 107, 118 Wishmeyer, O...... 261, 274, 275 Tournay, R. J...... 29, 47 Witte, M...... 212, 221, 225, 230, 231 Trinquet, J...... 108, 118 Wright. B. G...... 10, 20, 95, 96, 118, ...... 123, 125, 128, 129, 138, Ulrich, E...... 85, 115, 118 ...... 140, 154, 165, 171

Vaccari, A...... 15, 20 Yadin, Y...... 1, 2, 20, 84, 86, Van Cangh, J.-M...... 91, 118, 328, 353 ...... 118, 126, 137 van der Horst, P. W...... 138 Yassif, E...... 193, 195 van der Torn, K...... 138 van Oorschot, J...... 150, 154 Zappella, M...... 119, 138 van Tilborg, S...... 322, 353 Zenger, E...... 76, 137, 197, 208, 230 van Wolde, E...... 150, 153, 154 Zenner, J. K...... 223, 231 VanderKam, J. C...... 29, 47, 114, 115 Ziegler, J...... 4, 5, 14, 15, 20, 140, 144, Vattioni, F. ..5, 18, 20, 54, 77, 146, 153, ...... 147, 154, 155, 174, 233, 246, 252, ...... 257, 275, 278, 279, 280, 283, ...... 255, 272, 273, 275, 288, 297, 308 ...... 287, 291, 300, 301, 303, 308 Zumstein, J...... 322, 353 Index of References

I. OLD TESTAMENT Numbers

Genesis Num 19:2...... 223 Num 25:23...... 300 Gen 1 ...... 121 Num 30:6-15 ...... 92 Gen 1:3...... 121 Num 31:21...... 220, 223 Gen 1:14f ...... 96, 217 Gen 1:14-15 ...... 128 Deuteronomy Gen 1:14-18 ...... 121 Gen 1:16...... 121 Deut 4:6 ...... 202 Gen 2:18 (LXX) ...... 258 Deut 4:8 ...... 214 Gen 2:24...... 92 Deut 4:9 ...... 200 Gen 2-3 ...... 93 Deut 4:19 ...... 133 Gen 3:16...... 92 Deut 4:44 ...... 220 Gen 5:24...... 97 Deut 5:11 ...... 238, 241, 242 Gen 9:12-17 ...... 122 Deut 5:16 ...... 92 Gen 17 ...... 225 Deut 7:25 ...... 262 Deut 11:14 ...... 33 Exodus Deut 12:30 ...... 262 Deut 13:7 ...... 92 Exod 3:20...... 165 Deut 17:19 ...... 198 Exod 5:2...... 110 Deut 18:10f ...... 97 Exod 7:3...... 110 Deut 18:15-18 ...... 184 Exod 19:16-19 ...... 225 Deut 18:18 ...... 323 Exod 19:19...... 226 Deut 19:18 (LXX) ...... 241 Exod 20:7...... 238, 241, 242 Deut 21:3 (LXX) ...... 249 Exod 20:12...... 92 Exod 24:16-17 ...... 225 Deut 22:9-11 ...... 92 Exod 34:10...... 165 Deut 28:54 ...... 92 Deut 28:56 ...... 92 Leviticus Deut 29:28 ...... 162 Deut 31:9 ...... 220 Lev 5:4 ...... 243 Deut 31:24 ...... 223 Lev 5:22-23 ...... 239 Deut 32:1-43 ...... 34 Lev 19:17 ...... 39 Deut 32:9 (LXX) ...... 243 Lev 19:19 ...... 92 Deut 32:15 ...... 270 Lev 19:29 (LXX) ...... 242 Deut 32:46 ...... 223 Lev 24:11-16 ...... 243 Deut 33:2-29 ...... 34 Lev 24:16 ...... 239, 242 Deut 33:4 ...... 220, 223 Lev 26:11 ...... 265 Deut 33:33 ...... 126 Lev 26:15 ...... 265 Lev 26:30 ...... 265 Joshua Lev 26:43 ...... 265 Lev 26:44 ...... 265 Josh 1:7 ...... 220, 223 Lev 26:46 ...... 214, 220 Josh 8:31 ...... 220, 223 384 Index of References

Josh 8:32 ...... 220 1 Chronicles Josh 22:5 ...... 220, 223 Josh 23:6 ...... 220, 223 1 Chr 10:10 ...... 270 Josh 24:16 ...... 250 1 Chr 16:31 ...... 332 Josh 24:26 ...... 219 1 Chr 16:40 ...... 219, 223 1 Chr 17:14 ...... 107 Judges 1 Chr 22:12 ...... 219 1 Chr 29:22 ...... 107 Judg 6:13 ...... 165 Judg 18:19 ...... 251 2 Chronicles 1 Samuel 2 Chr 2:4 ...... 223 2 Chr 12:1 ...... 219 1 Sam 1:22 ...... 304 2 Chr 14:3 ...... 219 1 Sam 2:2 ...... 241 2 Chr 23:18 ...... 220 1 Sam 25:25 ...... 39 2 Chr 25:4 ...... 223 2 Chr 28:6 ...... 250 2 Samuel 2 Chr 30:16 ...... 219, 221 2 Sam 1:21 ...... 265 2 Chr 31:3 ...... 219 2 Sam 7:16 ...... 107 2 Chr 31:4 ...... 219 2 Sam 12:10 (LXX) ...... 242 2 Chr 33:8 ...... 214, 220, 223 2 Sam 22 ...... 42 2 Chr 34:14 ...... 219, 220, 223 2 Sam 22:2-51 ...... 34 2 Chr 35:26 ...... 219 2 Sam 23:1-7 ...... 34 2 Sam 24:10 (LXX) ...... 244 Ezra 2 Sam 24:14 ...... 39 Ezra 2:36ff ...... 60 Ezra 2:61f...... 60 1 Kings Ezra 3:2 ...... 221 1 Kgs 1:39 ...... 107 Ezra 7:6 ...... 220 1 Kgs 2:3 ...... 214, 220 Ezra 7:10 ...... 214, 219 1 Kgs 3:9 ...... 28 Ezra 7:11 ...... 323 1 Kgs 10:4 ...... 28 Ezra 7:26 ...... 214 1 Kgs 12:10 ...... 270 1 Kgs 12:14 ...... 39 Nehemiah 1 Kgs 21:10 ...... 243 Neh 2:16 ...... 60 1 Kgs 21:13 ...... 243 Neh 3:1 ...... 60 Neh 5 ...... 66 2 Kings Neh 8:1 ...... 220, 223 2 Kgs 5:23 ...... 250 Neh 8:3 ...... 72 2 Kgs 10:31 ...... 219 Neh 8:8 ...... 72, 219 2 Kgs 14:6 ...... 220, 223 Neh 8:14 ...... 220, 223 2 Kgs 17:13 ...... 223 Neh 8:18 ...... 214, 219 2 Kgs 17:34 ...... 214, 223 Neh 9:13 ...... 214 2 Kgs 17:37 ...... 214 Neh 9:14 ...... 223 2 Kgs 19:22 ...... 241 Neh 9:29 ...... 214 2 Kgs 21:8 ...... 221, 223 Neh 10:29 ...... 219 2 Kgs 23:25 ...... 220 Neh 10:30 ...... 214, 219, 220, 221 Index of References 385

Neh 12:1-7...... 60 Job 28:12 ...... 150 Neh 13:4 ...... 60 Job 28:14 ...... 150 Neh 13:28 ...... 60 Job 28:20 ...... 150 Job 28:20-28...... 150 Tobit Job 28:23 ...... 150 Job 28:25-26...... 150 Tob 10:11 (LXX) ...... 240 Job 28:27 ...... 151 Tob 14:7 ...... 332 Job 28:28 ...... 25, 151 Tob 14:11 ...... 332 Job 29:9 ...... 251 Job 31:26ff ...... 133 Esther Job 31:40 ...... 32 Est 12:3 (LXX)...... 242 Job 32:18 ...... 31 Job 32:22 ...... 40 1 Maccabees Job 36:27 ...... 149 Job 38:2–39:30 ...... 24 1 Macc 2:50 ...... 240 Job 38–41 ...... 121 1 Macc 2:64 ...... 240 Job 40:4 ...... 251 Job 40:7–41:26 ...... 24 2 Maccabees Job 42:2-6...... 24 2 Macc 7...... 11, 356 Job 42:7-14...... 24 2 Macc 14:36 ...... 241 2 Macc 15:13-16 ...... 194 Psalms Ps 1...... 197, 198, 204 Job Ps 1:1-2 ...... 204 Job 1:1 ...... 24, 151 Ps 1:2 ...... 219 Job 1:6–2:10 ...... 24 Ps 1:3 ...... 33 Job 1:8 ...... 151 Ps 5:9-10 ...... 234 Job 1:8-9...... 24 Ps 8...... 37 Job 2:3 ...... 151 Ps 9:2 ...... 165 Job 6:10 ...... 241 Ps 12:3-5 ...... 234 Job 7:21 ...... 40 Ps 15:1 ...... 243 Job 8:12 ...... 39 Ps 15:3a ...... 90 Job 8:22 ...... 40 Ps 15:4 ...... 243 Job 9:13 ...... 134 Ps 18:8 ...... 321 Job 12:11-12 ...... 241 Ps 19...... 198 Job 14:1 ...... 39 Ps 19:8-11...... 198 Job 15:15 ...... 126 Ps 19:9 ...... 204 Job 20:6 ...... 39 Ps 19:18 ...... 219 Job 21:5 ...... 251 Ps 21...... 37 Job 21:9 (LXX)...... 242 Ps 22:4 ...... 241 Job 21:10 ...... 265 Ps 24:8 ...... 312 Job 21:33 ...... 39 Ps 27:1-2 ...... 274 Job 22:13-14...... 122 Ps 31:11 ...... 332 Job 25:6 ...... 39 Ps 31(30):21b (LXX) ...... 249 Job 26:3 ...... 147 Ps 32:1 ...... 332 Job 26:12 ...... 134 Ps 32:12 ...... 285 Job 28...... 25, 121, 149, 150 Ps 33...... 37 386 Index of References

Ps 33:9 ...... 312 Ps 125:1 ...... 274 Ps 37:31 ...... 199, 219 Ps 131:1 ...... 164 Ps 39:2 ...... 234, 250 Ps 136...... 108, 121 Ps 40:9 ...... 199 Ps 137:9 ...... 40 Ps 46...... 39 Ps 138...... 82 Ps 47:12 ...... 332 Ps 139...... 37 Ps 49:13 ...... 332 Ps 139:6 ...... 164 Ps 55:24 ...... 40 Pr 141:3 ...... 233, 250 Ps 66:5 ...... 332 Ps 146–150...... 197 Ps 67...... 39 Ps 147...... 121 Ps 67:4 ...... 332 Ps 148...... 121 Ps 68:17 ...... 312 Ps 148:1 ...... 311 Ps 69:5 ...... 332 Ps 148:2 ...... 126 Ps 71:22 ...... 241 Ps 149:2 ...... 332 Ps 78...... 198, 199, 200, 203 Ps 150...... 37 Ps 78:1 ...... 205, 365 Ps 78:5 ...... 223 Proverbs Ps 78:41 ...... 241 Ps 88:31 ...... 214 Prov 1:1 ...... 28 Ps 89:6 ...... 126 Prov 1:1-6 ...... 23 Ps 89:8 ...... 126 Prov 1:1–9:18...... 34 Ps 89:11 ...... 134 Prov 1:7 ...... 23 Ps 89:19 ...... 241 Prov 2:1-22 ...... 23, 37 Ps 89:31 ...... 199 Prov 2:5 ...... 23 Ps 94:12 ...... 199 Prov 2:6 ...... 29 Ps 95:1 ...... 332 Prov 2:16 ...... 257 Ps 96...... 121 Prov 3:16 (LXX) ...... 245 Ps 96:1 ...... 332 Prov 3:23 ...... 202 Ps 103...... 37 Prov 3:35 ...... 236 Ps 103:21 ...... 126 Prov 5:3 ...... 257 Ps 104...... 37, 121, 197 Prov 5:20 ...... 257 Ps 105:45 ...... 199 Prov 5:23 ...... 40 Ps 106:15 ...... 241 Prov 6:2 ...... 203, 241 Ps 106:27 ...... 147 Prov 6:20 ...... 221 Ps 107:11 ...... 204 Prov 6:22 ...... 221 Ps 108:21 ...... 312 Prov 6:23 ...... 214 Ps 111:10 ...... 39 Prov 7:5 ...... 257 Ps 114:6 ...... 321 Prov 7:6-27 ...... 37 Ps 117:25-26...... 311 Prov 7:18 (LXX) ...... 243 Ps 118:13-14...... 274 Prov 7:27 ...... 40 Ps 118:130 ...... 321 Prov 8...... 149 Ps 119...... 198, 199, 202, 365 Prov 8:1-36 ...... 23 Ps 119:1 ...... 219 Prov 8:4-21 ...... 149, 150 Ps 119:24 ...... 204 Prov 8:4-36 ...... 23 Ps 119:34 ...... 205 Prov 8:12 ...... 23 Ps 119:96 ...... 204 Prov 8:17 ...... 23 Ps 119:171-172...... 234 Prov 8:22 ...... 149, 149 Ps 120:2 ...... 234 Prov 8:22-29 (LXX)...... 149 Index of References 387

Prov 8:22-30 ...... 149, 150 Prov 31:20 ...... 24 Prov 8:22-31 ...... 23, 122 Prov 31:25 ...... 139 Prov 8:27 ...... 23 Prov 31:26 ...... 24 Prov 8:30 ...... 122 Prov 31:31 ...... 24, 33, 39 Prov 8:36 ...... 23, 40 Prov 9:3-6 ...... 186 Qoheleth Prov 9:10 ...... 23, 241 Prov 9:18 ...... 40 Qoh 1:13 ...... 163 Prov 10:1–22:16...... 34 Qoh 3:11 ...... 33 Prov 10:18 ...... 233 Qoh 7:17 ...... 33 Prov 10:31 ...... 234 Qoh 8:5 ...... 204 Prov 11:4 ...... 39 Qoh 8:16 ...... 358 Prov 11:13a (LXX) ...... 237 Qoh 8:16-17...... 163, 164 Prov 13:14 ...... 221 Qoh 9:2 ...... 164 Prov 14:27 ...... 33 Qoh 9:7-9...... 29 Prov 15:1-2 ...... 233 Qoh 12:13 ...... 40 Prov 14:4 ...... 249 Prov 15:23 ...... 33 Canticles Prov 15:33a ...... 33 Cant 2:7 ...... 39 Prov 18:7 ...... 234 Cant 3:5 ...... 39 Prov 18:21 ...... 233, 237 Cant 5:8 ...... 39 Prov 19:6 ...... 167 Prov 19:16 ...... 204 Wisdom of Salomon Prov 19:23 ...... 33 Prov 19:26 ...... 206 Wis 2:12 ...... 214 Prov 21:23 ...... 233 Wis 4:15 ...... 167 Prov 22:1 ...... 237 Wis 5:1 ...... 104 Prov 22:14 ...... 257 Wis 8:8 ...... 146 Prov 22:17–24:22...... 34 Wis 13:5 ...... 217 Prov 23:27 ...... 257 Wis 14:15 ...... 168 Prov 24:23-34 ...... 34 Wis 15:1 ...... 312 Prov 25:1–29:27...... 34 Prov 25:15b ...... 249 Sirach Prov 26:18 ...... 205 Prov 30:1-14 ...... 34 Sir prol. 5...... 325 Prov 30:3 ...... 241 Sir prol. 12-14 ...... 56 Prov 30:5-6 ...... 41 Sir prol. 14...... 210, 211, 214 Prov 30:15-33 ...... 34 Sir prol. 29-30 ...... 56 Prov 30:18-20 ...... 41 Sir prol. 34-36 ...... 56 Prov 30:32 ...... 251 Sir prol. 36...... 214 Prov 30–31 ...... 41, 42 Sir 1:1...... 27, 43, 147, 148, 215 Prov 31...... 24 Sir 1:1a ...... 147 Prov 31:1-9 ...... 34 Sir 1:1b...... 122, 143, 144, 145 Prov 31:2-3 ...... 41 Sir 1:1-2 ...... 150 Prov 31:8-9 ...... 41 Sir 1:1-10 ...... 23, 27, 28, 37, 43, 44, 53, Prov 31:10-31 ...... 23, 37, 41, 248 ...... 54, 61, 125, 139, 144, 147, 148, Prov 31:16 ...... 23 ...... 149, 150, 151, 215, 362 Prov 31:19 ...... 23 Sir 1:1–2:18 ...... 26, 53, 144 388 Index of References

Sir 1:1–3:5 ...... 51 Sir 1:24 ...... 151 Sir 1:1–23:27 ...... 41, 45, 53 Sir 1:25 ...... 151 Sir 1:1–32:13 ...... 42 Sir 1:25-27 ...... 98, 360 Sir 1:1–38:23 ...... 42 Sir 1:26...... 88, 145, 318 Sir 1:1–43:33 ...... 42 Sir 1:27...... 143, 240, 320, 323 Sir 1:1–51:30 ...... 43 Sir 1:27a ...... 241 Sir 1:2 ...... 149 Sir 1:28 ...... 288 Sir 1:2b...... 143, 145 Sir 1:30...... 39, 263 Sir 1:2-3 ...... 27, 140, 150 Sir 2:1 ...... 135 Sir 1:2–3:6 ...... 143 Sir 2:1a ...... 240 Sir 1:3...... 142, 151 Sir 2:1-6 ...... 205 Sir 1:3b...... 150 Sir 2:1-18 ...... 24, 39 Sir 1:4...... 122, 148, 149, 150, 306 Sir 2:3 ...... 71 Sir 1:4b...... 143, 145 Sir 2:7 ...... 266 Sir 1:4-5 ...... 70 Sir 2:8...... 267, 271 Sir 1:5...... 14, 144, 145, 146, 148 Sir 2:9c ...... 102 Sir 1:6...... 29, 145 Sir 2:12 ...... 234 Sir 1:7...... 14, 144, 145, 146 Sir 2:12-14 ...... 69 Sir 1:8...... 141, 150 Sir 2:14 ...... 100 Sir 1:8-9 ...... 29 Sir 2:15-16 ...... 144, 145 Sir 1:9...... 122, 141, 149, 151, 217, 306 Sir 2:18...... 39, 267 Sir 1:9a ...... 286 Sir 2:18d...... 39 Sir 1:9b...... 152 Sir 3:1a ...... 240 Sir 1:9-10 ...... 70, 362 Sir 3:1b...... 102 Sir 1:10...... 43, 144 Sir 3:1-16 ...... 22, 25, 66, 92 Sir 1:10a ...... 152 Sir 3:4-12 ...... 25 Sir 1:10cd...... 4, 14, 144, 146 Sir 3:16-27 ...... 66 Sir 1:10d...... 152 Sir 3:17 ...... 324 Sir 1:11 ...... 39, 41 Sir 3:17-24 ...... 69, 71 Sir 1:11-20 ...... 144 Sir 3:17-28 ...... 67 Sir 1:11-30 ...... 23, 24, 37, 39, 40, 144 Sir 3:17-31 ...... 212 Sir 1:11–2:18 ...... 22 Sir 3:18 ...... 212, Sir 1:12...... 33, 102 Sir 3:18-24 ...... 57 Sir 1:14...... 23, 143, 145 Sir 3:19 ...... 320 Sir 1:14-15 ...... 146 Sir 3:20...... 212, 320 Sir 1:16...... 143, 145 Sir 3:21-23 ...... 56 Sir 1:18...... 143, 145 Sir 3:21-24 ...... 96, 133, 155, 318, 363 Sir 1:19-20 ...... 52, 82 Sir 3:22...... 163, 212 Sir 1:19–2:18 ...... 67 Sir 3:22-24 ...... 349 Sir 1:20...... 102, 110, 143, 145 Sir 3:23b...... 97 Sir 1:20 ...... 289 Sir 3:24...... 159, 264, 271, 272 Sir 1:21...... 5, 288 Sir 3:25 ...... 38 Sir 1:21a ...... 52 Sir 3:25-29 ...... 38 Sir 1:21-27 ...... 110 Sir 3:28b...... 297 Sir 1:22 ...... 263 Sir 3:29–4:10 ...... 66 Sir 1:22a ...... 52 Sir 3:30 ...... 38 Sir 1:22-27 ...... 6, 288 Sir 3:30–4:10 ...... 38 Index of References 389

Sir 3:31...... 262, 271 Sir 6:1bc ...... 251 Sir 4:1-10 ...... 66 Sir 6:1c ...... 234, 237 Sir 4:7 ...... 244 Sir 6:1-6 ...... 120 Sir 4:8 ...... 324 Sir 6:2...... 270, 271, 272 Sir 4:10 ...... 310 Sir 6:2-4 ...... 38, 66 Sir 4:10d...... 35 Sir 6:4a ...... 39 Sir 4:11 ...... 319, 321 Sir 6:5-17 ...... 26, 39, 66 Sir 4:11-19 ...... 4, 53 Sir 6:14-15 ...... 52, 82 Sir 4:11–6:17 ...... 28 Sir 6:16 ...... 39 Sir 4:12a ...... 35 Sir 6:16b...... 35 Sir 4:14 ...... 241 Sir 6:17 ...... 39 Sir 4:15b...... 248 Sir 6:17b...... 39 Sir 4:15-19 ...... 150 Sir 6:18...... 40, 90, 241 Sir 4:17-18 ...... 321 Sir 6:18b...... 40 Sir 4:18...... 166, 320, 321 Sir 6:18-37 ...... 22, 37, 39, 40, Sir 4:19...... 69, 71, 269, 272 ...... 44, 53, 183, 312 Sir 4:20-28 ...... 67 Sir 6:19a ...... 40 Sir 4:20-29 ...... 70 Sir 6:19b...... 40 Sir 4:20-31 ...... 67 Sir 6:19-31 ...... 52 Sir 4:22...... 264, 273 Sir 6:20b...... 40 Sir 4:23 ...... 33 Sir 6:20-31 ...... 52, 81 Sir 4:23-24 ...... 250 Sir 6:23-25 ...... 81 Sir 4:26-27 ...... 58 Sir 6:32-33 ...... 135 Sir 4:28d...... 90 Sir 6:36...... 90, 93, 145 Sir 4:30a ...... 286 Sir 6:37...... 33, 39, 40, 166 Sir 4:31 ...... 283 Sir 7:1-17 ...... 39, 40 Sir 5:1-4 ...... 63 Sir 7:4-7 ...... 55 Sir 5:1-8 ...... 38, 39 Sir 7:6...... 271, 272 Sir 5:1–6:4 ...... 38, 39 Sir 7:6cd...... 260 Sir 5:6c ...... 39 Sir 7:7...... 260, 271, 273 Sir 5:8 ...... 39 Sir 7:8-28 ...... 66 Sir 5:9 ...... 38 Sir 7:15 ...... 66 Sir 5:9-12 ...... 236 Sir 7:16-17b ...... 101 Sir 5:9-13 ...... 235 Sir 7:17...... 39, 40, 100 Sir 5:9–6:1...... 38, 233, 235, 236, Sir 7:18-36 ...... 37, 38, 40 ...... 237, 250, 256, 367 Sir 7:20-21 ...... 66 Sir 5:9–6:4 ...... 70 Sir 7:29-31 ...... 60 Sir 5:12b...... 237 Sir 7:31 ...... 300 Sir 5:13...... 236, 237, 255, 256, 271, 273 Sir 7:32-36 ...... 66 Sir 5:13a...... 236, 247 Sir 7:36...... 40, 100, 101 Sir 5:13-30 ...... 185 Sir 8:1...... 58, 256, 271, 273 Sir 5:14a...... 234, 237 Sir 8:2 ...... 58 Sir 5:14b...... 90 Sir 8:8-9 ...... 61 Sir 5:14cd...... 251 Sir 8:12 ...... 92 Sir 5:14d...... 234, 237 Sir 8:18 ...... 93 Sir 5:14–6:1 ...... 237 Sir 9:1-9 ...... 40, 66, 257 Sir 6:1b...... 251 Sir 9:2-9 ...... 25 390 Index of References

Sir 9:3...... 257, 258, 271, 273 Sir 11:29–12:6 ...... 22 Sir 9:5...... 257, 271, 273 Sir 11:29–12:18 ...... 66 Sir 9:9...... 40, 257, 271, 272 Sir 11:30...... 66, 269, 270, 272 Sir 9:10 ...... 38 Sir 12:1-18 ...... 26 Sir 9:10-16 ...... 38, 39 Sir 12:2 ...... 243 Sir 9:10-18 ...... 66 Sir 12:4 ...... 243 Sir 9:12 ...... 99 Sir 12:11 ...... 93 Sir 9:13...... 260, 271, 273 Sir 12:15...... 259, 271, 273 Sir 9:15...... 39, 88, 219 Sir 12:18...... 36, 280 Sir 9:16...... 39, 85, 93 Sir 13:1...... 36, 38 Sir 9:17 ...... 61 Sir 13:1-23 ...... 37, 38, 39 Sir 9:17–10:18 ...... 39 Sir 13:1–14:10 ...... 66 Sir 10:1 ...... 61 Sir 13:3-4a ...... 280 Sir 10:1-18 ...... 66 Sir 13:7 ...... 280 Sir 10:3 ...... 58 Sir 13:9-13 ...... 25 Sir 10:4 ...... 58 Sir 13:10...... 261, 272 Sir 10:6 ...... 309 Sir 13:12 ...... 271 Sir 10:8 ...... 58 Sir 13:13...... 269, 272 Sir 10:10...... 58, 268, 271, 272 Sir 13:17 ...... 243 Sir 10:12...... 71, 85 Sir 13:20 ...... 301 Sir 10:12-18 ...... 69 Sir 13:21...... 261, 271, 273 Sir 10:18 ...... 39 Sir 13:23...... 36, 39, 262, 271, 273 Sir 10:19b...... 39 Sir 13:24 ...... 36 Sir 10:19-25 ...... 66 Sir 13:24–14:19 ...... 39, 40 Sir 10:19–11:6 ...... 37, 39 Sir 13:25–14:2 ...... 67 Sir 10:22...... 85, 93 Sir 14:1...... 250, 256, 271, 272 Sir 10:26–11:6 ...... 67 Sir 14:1a ...... 250 Sir 11:4 ...... 110 Sir 14:2...... 263, 272 Sir 11:5 ...... 58 Sir 14:3-10 ...... 66 Sir 11:7 ...... 243 Sir 14:3-19 ...... 26 Sir 11:7-9 ...... 70 Sir 14:9...... 265, 271, 272 Sir 11:7-28 ...... 40 Sir 14:11 ...... 300 Sir 11:8 ...... 89 Sir 14:11-19 ...... 65, 66 Sir 11:10-19 ...... 26 Sir 14:12-16 ...... 100 Sir 11:10-21 ...... 65 Sir 14:16 ...... 85 Sir 11:12c ...... 287 Sir 14:17 ...... 100 Sir 11:14 ...... 94, 301 Sir 14:19...... 34, 39, 40 Sir 11:15-16 ...... 3, 14, 110 Sir 14:20...... 88, 327 Sir 11:17 ...... 243 Sir 14:20a ...... 90 Sir 11:18 ...... 301 Sir 14:20-21 ...... 33, 330 Sir 11:19 ...... 301 Sir 14:20-27 ...... 91, 183, 330, 341 Sir 11:22 ...... 243 Sir 14:20–15:1...... 90, 327, 329, Sir 11:23 ...... 120 ...... 332, 333, 344 Sir 11:24 ...... 120 Sir 14:20–15:10 ...... 22, 37, 38, 39, 53 Sir 11:26-28 ...... 100 Sir 15:1 ...... 88, 97, 145, 148, 166, Sir 11:27-28 ...... 40 ...... 183, 200, 340, 341 Sir 11:28 ...... 40 Sir 15:2-3 ...... 24 Index of References 391

Sir 15:4...... 267, 271 Sir 18:13-14 ...... 213 Sir 15:9...... 36, 234 Sir 18:14 ...... 214 Sir 15:9-10 ...... 9, 39, 183, 356 Sir 18:15-18 ...... 66 Sir 15:11 ...... 36, 120 Sir 18:15-19 ...... 250 Sir 15:11–16:14 ...... 34 Sir 18:18 ...... 311 Sir 15:11–18:14 ...... 34, 147 Sir 18:19-29 ...... 67 Sir 15:12...... 120, 262, 266, 271, 272 Sir 18:22b...... 102 Sir 15:14b...... 93, 94, 110 Sir 18:24 ...... 100 Sir 15:15 ...... 145 Sir 18:29 ...... 321 Sir 15:15-17 ...... 135 Sir 18:30–19:3 ...... 39, 40, 66 Sir 15:17-18 ...... 99 Sir 18:33 ...... 87 Sir 16:2 ...... 93 Sir 18:33c ...... 88 Sir 16:4 ...... 110 Sir 19:1...... 88, 270, 272, 300 Sir 16:6-11b ...... 110 Sir 19:3 ...... 40 Sir 16:11c ...... 39 Sir 19:3b...... 39 Sir 16:11c-14 ...... 110 Sir 19:4-17 ...... 39, 70, 256 Sir 16:13 ...... 243 Sir 19:5b...... 52 Sir 16:14...... 34, 100 Sir 19:5-12 ...... 247 Sir 16:15 ...... 110 Sir 19:5-17 ...... 250 Sir 16:15-16 ...... 4, 14 Sir 19:13-16 ...... 66 Sir 16:16 ...... 110 Sir 19:16 ...... 255 Sir 16:17 ...... 120 Sir 19:17...... 36, 39, 89, 219 Sir 16:17-23 ...... 100 Sir 19:19 ...... 102 Sir 16:19...... 266, 271 Sir 19:20 ...... 25, 28, 29, 36, 39, 88, Sir 16:22 ...... 102 ...... 145, 147, 148, 226 Sir 16:24-25 ...... 7 Sir 19:20-24 ...... 147, 148 Sir 16:24-30 ...... 127 Sir 19:20–20:31 ...... 28, 39, 147 Sir 16:24–17:14 ...... 120, 125 Sir 19:22 ...... 146 Sir 16:25a ...... 250 Sir 19:22a ...... 148 Sir 16:28–30:10 ...... 51 Sir 19:24...... 145, 147, 148 Sir 17:1-12 ...... 121 Sir 19:24b...... 148 Sir 17:1-14 ...... 94 Sir 20:1-8 ...... 70, 237 Sir 17:5 ...... 12 Sir 20:13 ...... 244 Sir 17:6 ...... 226 Sir 20:18...... 241, 255, 271 Sir 17:9-10 ...... 9, 356 Sir 20:18-20 ...... 250 Sir 17:11 ...... 145, 214, 225 Sir 20:18-26 ...... 70, 256 Sir 17:11-14 ...... 225 Sir 20:19 ...... 311 Sir 17:15-23 ...... 100 Sir 20:28 ...... 66 Sir 17:25...... 267, 271 Sir 20:30...... 227, 372 Sir 17:27-28 ...... 9, 100, 105, 356 Sir 20:30-31 ...... 39 Sir 18:1 ...... 214 Sir 21:1-10 ...... 40 Sir 18:1-7 ...... 36, 147 Sir 21:1–22:15 ...... 66 Sir 18:1-14 ...... 53, 147, 213 Sir 21:4 ...... 66 Sir 18:2 ...... 214 Sir 21:7...... 255, 271 Sir 18:5-6 ...... 213 Sir 21:9-10 ...... 100 Sir 18:7 ...... 220 Sir 21:10 ...... 40 Sir 18:8 ...... 213 Sir 21:10b...... 102 392 Index of References

Sir 21:11 ...... 39, 145, 148 Sir 24 ...... 184 Sir 21:11-21 ...... 39 Sir 24:1-22 ...... 61, 92, 119, 224 Sir 21:15 ...... 321 Sir 24:1-29 ...... 30, 41, 45, 54, 357 Sir 21:16 ...... 234 Sir 24:1-34 ...... 23, 38, 39 Sir 21:20 ...... 94 Sir 24:1–32:13 ...... 30, 41, 42, 53 Sir 22:16-18 ...... 67 Sir 24:2 ...... 152 Sir 22:17–23:6 ...... 53 Sir 24:3...... 217, 318 Sir 22:19 ...... 38 Sir 24:3b...... 35 Sir 22:19-26 ...... 38, 66 Sir 24:3-7 ...... 125 Sir 22:27...... 89, 250, 255 Sir 24:3-17 ...... 37, 38 Sir 22:27–23:1 ...... 238 Sir 24:3-22 ...... 23 Sir 22:27–23:6 ...... 36, 66, 255 Sir 24:5 ...... 23 Sir 22:27–23:27 ...... 38, 39, 41, 42, 238 Sir 24:8...... 207, 217, 224 Sir 23:3 ...... 256 Sir 24:9...... 23, 122 Sir 23:7...... 38, 238, 240 Sir 24:10-11 ...... 30, 207 Sir 23:7a ...... 245 Sir 24:11-12 ...... 224 Sir 23:7b...... 241 Sir 24:12 ...... 224 Sir 23:7-11 ...... 240 Sir 24:13-22 ...... 27 Sir 23:7-15...... 70, 233, 238, Sir 24:16 ...... 23 ...... 250, 256, 367 Sir 24:18...... 14, 37 Sir 23:8...... 241, 256, 271 Sir 24:18cd...... 5 Sir 23:9a...... 241, 242, 367 Sir 24:19-22 ...... 37, 38, 186 Sir 23:10...... 66, 241 Sir 24:22...... 23, 88, 145, 318 Sir 23:10d...... 242 Sir 24:22b...... 102 Sir 23:11a ...... 242 Sir 24:23 ...... 24, 89, 97, 145, 166, Sir 23:11b ...... 242 ...... 200, 222, 223, 224 Sir 23:11c ...... 242, 243 Sir 24:23-34 ...... 92 Sir 23:11d...... 243 Sir 24:24 ...... 14 Sir 23:11e ...... 243 Sir 24:25 ...... 224 Sir 23:11f ...... 243 Sir 24:27 ...... 30 Sir 23:12a ...... 243 Sir 24:28-32 ...... 61 Sir 23:12b...... 243 Sir 24:30ff ...... 321 Sir 23:12cd...... 243 Sir 24:30-33 ...... 31, 32 Sir 23:12-15 ...... 238, 243 Sir 24:30-34 ...... 9, 29, 30, 41, 44, 45, Sir 23:13 ...... 244 ...... 53, 184, 206, 315, 357 Sir 23:13a ...... 367 Sir 24:31 ...... 5 Sir 23:14ef ...... 244 Sir 24:32...... 31, 317, 322 Sir 23:15a...... 245, 367 Sir 24:32-33 ...... 145 Sir 23:15b...... 238 Sir 24:32-34 ...... 10, 71 Sir 23:16 ...... 38 Sir 24:33 ...... 30, 55, 59, 206, Sir 23:16-18 ...... 53 ...... 316, 322, 359 Sir 23:16-27 ...... 38, 66 Sir 24:34...... 31, 35, 39 Sir 23:18 ...... 63 Sir 25:1 ...... 42 Sir 23:22-26 ...... 66 Sir 25:1-2 ...... 38, 42 Sir 23:23...... 89, 219 Sir 25:1-6 ...... 38, 39 Sir 23:27...... 39, 41 Sir 25:1–32:13 ...... 42 Sir 23:27a ...... 35 Sir 25:3 ...... 283 Index of References 393

Sir 25:3-6 ...... 241 Sir 28:8-26 ...... 37, 70, 256 Sir 25:6...... 39, 146 Sir 28:9b...... 247 Sir 25:7 ...... 259 Sir 28:10cd...... 249 Sir 25:7b...... 90 Sir 28:12-16 ...... 247 Sir 25:7-11 ...... 39, 53 Sir 28:12-26 ...... 233, 237, 245, 250, 251 Sir 25:8...... 90, 250, 255, 271 Sir 28:13 ...... 237 Sir 25:8b...... 250 Sir 28:13a ...... 247 Sir 25:9...... 90, 148 Sir 28:13b...... 247 Sir 25:10-11 ...... 39 Sir 28:13-26 ...... 367 Sir 25:12 ...... 33 Sir 28:14a ...... 248 Sir 25:13-26 ...... 257 Sir 28:15a...... 248, 249 Sir 25:13–26:18 ...... 66 Sir 28:16 ...... 248 Sir 25:13–26:27 ...... 38 Sir 28:17-26 ...... 249 Sir 25:14-24 ...... 92 Sir 28:18...... 89, 255 Sir 25:19...... 268, 271, 273 Sir 28:19 ...... 90 Sir 25:21...... 257, 258, 271, 273 Sir 28:19a ...... 249 Sir 25:23...... 258, 271, 272 Sir 28:19b...... 249 Sir 25:24 ...... 100 Sir 28:19c ...... 249 Sir 25:27 ...... 175 Sir 28:20 ...... 319 Sir 25:29 ...... 258 Sir 28:20a ...... 249 Sir 26:1 ...... 90 Sir 28:20b...... 249 Sir 26:1-4 ...... 22, 248 Sir 28:21 ...... 249 Sir 26:5-6 ...... 53 Sir 28:22...... 243, 249 Sir 26:13-18 ...... 22 Sir 28:23...... 69, 71, 249, 255 Sir 26:15b...... 250 Sir 28:23cd...... 250 Sir 26:16 ...... 145 Sir 28:24a ...... 250 Sir 26:19-27 ...... 14 Sir 28:24b...... 250 Sir 26:22 ...... 52 Sir 28:24b-25a ...... 250 Sir 26:28 ...... 38 Sir 28:26...... 255, 271 Sir 26:28–27:7 ...... 38 Sir 28:26a...... 250, 367 Sir 26:29–27:3 ...... 66 Sir 28:26b...... 250 Sir 27:5 ...... 63 Sir 29:1-2 ...... 92 Sir 27:5-6 ...... 81 Sir 29:1-3 ...... 66 Sir 27:7 ...... 63 Sir 29:1-7 ...... 38 Sir 27:8 ...... 102 Sir 29:1-20 ...... 22, 38, 40 Sir 27:11 ...... 243, 244 Sir 29:8-13 ...... 38, 66, 309 Sir 27:11-29 ...... 70 Sir 29:9 ...... 66 Sir 27:13a ...... 242 Sir 29:11 ...... 66, 89 Sir 27:14 ...... 242 Sir 29:12 ...... 283 Sir 27:16-21 ...... 37, 66 Sir 29:14 ...... 66 Sir 27:22-29 ...... 256 Sir 29:14-20 ...... 37, 38, 92 Sir 27:22–28:7 ...... 26, 40 Sir 29:16 ...... 311 Sir 27:23 ...... 271 Sir 29:19 ...... 264 Sir 27:29...... 243, 259 Sir 29:19-20 ...... 265 Sir 28:2 ...... 283 Sir 29:20 ...... 264 Sir 28:6-7 ...... 100 Sir 29:21 ...... 39 Sir 28:7 ...... 40 Sir 29:21-28 ...... 39, 66 394 Index of References

Sir 29:21–30:13 ...... 40 Sir 32:19 ...... 204 Sir 29:24 ...... 283 Sir 32:19-23 ...... 202 Sir 29:25 ...... 311 Sir 32:20...... 262, 264, 271, 273 Sir 29:28 ...... 148 Sir 32:20-22 ...... 204 Sir 29:28 ...... 301 Sir 32:21...... 269, 271, 272 Sir 30:1-13 ...... 26, 39, 66 Sir 32:23...... 204, 205, 206 Sir 30:4-6 ...... 100 Sir 32:24...... 97, 200, 283 Sir 30:13...... 39, 263, 271, 272 Sir 32:24–33:3 ...... 202 Sir 30:14-17 ...... 43 Sir 33:2...... 200, 205, 267, 271, 272 Sir 30:14-25 ...... 67 Sir 33:2-3 ...... 145 Sir 30:14–31:11 ...... 39 Sir 33:3...... 97, 200, 201, 203, 316 Sir 30:21...... 263, 271, 272 Sir 33:6 ...... 201 Sir 30:21-25 ...... 66 Sir 33:7-15 ...... 125 Sir 30:23 ...... 63 Sir 33:7-19 ...... 217 Sir 30:24 ...... 33 Sir 33:8 ...... 218 Sir 30:25–33:16a ...... 4 Sir 33:8-9 ...... 217 Sir 31:1-11 ...... 63 Sir 33:10...... 217, 220 Sir 31:3 ...... 283 Sir 33:11 ...... 217, 218 Sir 31:7...... 262, 265, 266, 271, 273 Sir 33:12 ...... 310 Sir 31:8 ...... 309 Sir 33:13 ...... 297 Sir 31:9 ...... 310 Sir 33:14 ...... 243 Sir 31:11 ...... 39 Sir 33:14-15 ...... 94 Sir 31:11b ...... 39 Sir 33:15 ...... 93 Sir 31:12-30 ...... 265 Sir 33:15-19 ...... 187 Sir 31:12–32:13 ...... 26, 39, 66 Sir 33:16 ...... 187 Sir 31:15 ...... 90 Sir 33:16-17 ...... 30, 55, 59, 359 Sir 31:17...... 265, 271, 272 Sir 33:16-18 ...... 8, 29, 30, 31, 41, 44, Sir 31:22...... 8, 38 ...... 45, 53, 61, 218, 357 Sir 31:25...... 265, 271, 272 Sir 33:16-19 ...... 315 Sir 31:28 ...... 33 Sir 33:16b–36:13a ...... 4 Sir 31:29...... 265, 271, 272 Sir 33:17 ...... 31 Sir 31:30...... 265, 271, 273 Sir 33:18...... 28, 31, 35, 39, 184, 201 Sir 32:12...... 35, 39, 42, 93, 285 Sir 33:18-19 ...... 205 Sir 32:13 ...... 42 Sir 33:19 ...... 38 Sir 32:14...... 201, 203 Sir 33:19–38:23 ...... 42 Sir 32:14-18 ...... 202 Sir 33:20-21 ...... 42 Sir 32:14–33:3 ...... 197, 205, 206 Sir 33:20-24 ...... 43, 63 Sir 32:14–33:6 ...... 200, 201, 365 Sir 33:20-30 ...... 25 Sir 32:14–33:15 ...... 30, 41, 45, 357 Sir 33:23b...... 205 Sir 32:14–33:18 ...... 31, 35, 37, 39 Sir 33:25-33 ...... 66, 67 Sir 32:14–38:23 ...... 30, 41, 42, 53 Sir 33:27 ...... 201 Sir 32:15 ...... 200, 203, 204, 205, Sir 34:1-8 ...... 40, 97, 226 ...... 267, 271, 273 Sir 34:7-18 ...... 70 Sir 32:16...... 35, 204, 205 Sir 34:8...... 40, 90, 145, 226 Sir 32:16-18 ...... 204 Sir 34:9-12 ...... 63 Sir 32:17...... 200, 204 Sir 34:10-12 ...... 29 Sir 32:18...... 200, 204 Sir 34:13 ...... 42 Index of References 395

Sir 34:19a-d ...... 267 Sir 37:27–38:15 ...... 43 Sir 34:21-27 ...... 66 Sir 37:27–38:23 ...... 37, 38 Sir 34:24-27 ...... 71 Sir 38–39 ...... 321 Sir 35:1 ...... 301 Sir 38:1-8 ...... 38 Sir 35:2-13 ...... 25 Sir 38:9 ...... 371 Sir 35:9...... 291, 292 Sir 38:9-15 ...... 38 Sir 35:10...... 291, 292 Sir 38:11 ...... 300 Sir 35:11-12 ...... 292 Sir 38:15...... 260, 272 Sir 35:11–36:17 ...... 66 Sir 38:16-23 ...... 38, 42, 43 Sir 35:13-19 ...... 66 Sir 38:18-21 ...... 25 Sir 35:14-26 ...... 66 Sir 38:20a ...... 35 Sir 36:1 ...... 53 Sir 38:21 ...... 301 Sir 36:1-22 ...... 36, 37 Sir 38:21-23 ...... 100 Sir 36:7-15 ...... 120 Sir 38:23...... 41, 42 Sir 36:9 ...... 55 Sir 38:24 ...... 62 Sir 36:18-20 ...... 67 Sir 38:24-34 ...... 38 Sir 36:21-27 ...... 66 Sir 38:24–39:11...... 30, 31, 41, 45, Sir 36:22 ...... 53 ...... 61, 62, 357 Sir 36:23 ...... 324 Sir 38:24–39:12 ...... 38, 39, 40 Sir 36:23–37:15 ...... 38 Sir 38:24–43:33 ...... 41, 42 Sir 36:26-31 ...... 257, 258 Sir 38:24–50:24 ...... 53 Sir 36:26–37:11 ...... 38 Sir 38:24–50:29 ...... 30, 41, 53 Sir 36:29...... 258, 271, 273 Sir 38:27–39:14 ...... 51 Sir 37:1 ...... 300 Sir 38:33 ...... 218 Sir 37:1-6 ...... 66, 290 Sir 38:33d...... 214 Sir 37:1-10 ...... 290, 300 Sir 38:34...... 89, 218, 219 Sir 37:1-13 ...... 305 Sir 38:34cd–39:1 ...... 200, 218 Sir 37:2-4 ...... 305 Sir 38:34cd–39:8 ...... 145 Sir 37:3 ...... 243 Sir 39:1...... 31, 218, 219, 317, 318 Sir 37:3-4 ...... 300 Sir 39:1-4 ...... 61 Sir 37:4 ...... 301 Sir 39:1-11 ...... 61, 62 Sir 37:5...... 290, 300 Sir 39:4 ...... 63 Sir 37:6 ...... 300 Sir 39:5-6 ...... 28 Sir 37:7 ...... 300 Sir 39:6...... 31, 55, 59, 359 Sir 37:8...... 271, 273, 300 Sir 39:6-11 ...... 318 Sir 37:8cd...... 268 Sir 39:8 ...... 214 Sir 37:9 ...... 300 Sir 39:9-10 ...... 39 Sir 37:10 ...... 300 Sir 39:10 ...... 35 Sir 37:11 ...... 291, 312 Sir 39:10b...... 39 Sir 37:12...... 243, 259, 271, 273, 292 Sir 39:11 ...... 40 Sir 37:13 ...... 292 Sir 39:12 ...... 29, 30, 31, 41, Sir 37:16 ...... 39 ...... 44, 45, 53, 357 Sir 37:16-26 ...... 39 Sir 39:12-35 ...... 53, 120, 125 Sir 37:23 ...... 61 Sir 39:13 ...... 38 Sir 37:24 ...... 61 Sir 39:13-35 ...... 31, 36, 39 Sir 37:26 ...... 61 Sir 39:13–43:33 ...... 43 Sir 37:27-31 ...... 38, 66 Sir 39:15b–40:8 ...... 1 396 Index of References

Sir 39:15cd...... 8 Sir 41:15-25 ...... 213 Sir 39:16 ...... 33 Sir 41:16 ...... 38 Sir 39:21 ...... 120 Sir 41:16a ...... 8 Sir 39:24...... 266, 271, 272 Sir 41:16–42:1d ...... 40 Sir 39:27...... 84, 93, 243 Sir 41:17 ...... 67 Sir 39:27–44:18 ...... 6 Sir 41:18 ...... 67 Sir 39:28 ...... 287 Sir 41:19 ...... 293 Sir 39:28-31 ...... 127 Sir 41:19b...... 67 Sir 39:32-33 ...... 8 Sir 41:22 ...... 86 Sir 39:33...... 33, 84 Sir 41:24 ...... 66 Sir 39:34...... 33, 120 Sir 41:25 ...... 66 Sir 39:35...... 8, 39 Sir 41:42 ...... 263 Sir 40:1-17 ...... 39, 43 Sir 42–43 ...... 166 Sir 40:1–41:13 ...... 43 Sir 42:1c ...... 68 Sir 40:7 ...... 84 Sir 42:1d...... 40 Sir 40:8 ...... 301 Sir 42:1c-2 ...... 56 Sir 40:9 ...... 301 Sir 42:1e-8 ...... 40 Sir 40:9-10 ...... 84 Sir 42:2...... 88, 200, 214, 219 Sir 40:12 ...... 86 Sir 42:4 ...... 86 Sir 40:16 ...... 39 Sir 42:5...... 86, 200 Sir 40:17...... 262, 271, 272 Sir 42:6-14 ...... 66 Sir 40:18-27 ...... 39 Sir 42:8...... 40, 264, 271, 272 Sir 40:18–41:4 ...... 38 Sir 42:9-14 ...... 66 Sir 40:22-25 ...... 84 Sir 42:12a ...... 306 Sir 40:26...... 33, 85, 93, 271, 272 Sir 42:14 ...... 92 Sir 40:26cd...... 267 Sir 42:15...... 85, 212, 216 Sir 40:26-27 ...... 39 Sir 42:15c ...... 121 Sir 40:27...... 39, 85, 93 Sir 42:15cd...... 34 Sir 40:28 ...... 301 Sir 42:15-17 ...... 27 Sir 40:28a ...... 230 Sir 42:15-18 ...... 25 Sir 40:28–41:4 ...... 67 Sir 42:15-25 ...... 120, 212 Sir 41:1-4 ...... 43 Sir 42:15–43:26 ...... 24, 38, 43 Sir 41:2...... 263, 271, 272 Sir 42:15–43:33...... 27, 36, 37, 40, 43, Sir 41:3-4 ...... 100 ...... 53, 54, 96, 107, 119, Sir 41:4...... 88, 200 ...... 130, 133, 135, 361 Sir 41:5-13 ...... 43 Sir 42:15–51:30 ...... 9 Sir 41:5-15 ...... 39 Sir 42:16...... 85, 121, 128 Sir 41:8...... 88, 200, 219 Sir 42:17...... 125, 126, 134, 212 Sir 41:8-9 ...... 55, 56, 71 Sir 42:17b...... 85 Sir 41:9...... 259, 271 Sir 42:17c ...... 85, 134 Sir 41:9b...... 297 Sir 42:18...... 83, 212, 287 Sir 41:12 ...... 86 Sir 42:18ab...... 128 Sir 41:12-13 ...... 237 Sir 42:18c-d ...... 86 Sir 41:14...... 38, 227, 372 Sir 42:18-20 ...... 122, 126 Sir 41:14a...... 8, 240 Sir 42:19 ...... 166 Sir 41:14-15 ...... 39 Sir 42:21...... 122, 212 Sir 41:14–42:8 ...... 67 Sir 42:22 ...... 86 Index of References 397

Sir 42:22-25 ...... 213 Sir 44:17...... 84. 97 Sir 42:23 ...... 127 Sir 44:17-23 ...... 40 Sir 42:24 ...... 93 Sir 44:17–45:26 ...... 27, 44 Sir 43:1-10 ...... 121 Sir 44:17–50:24 ...... 43 Sir 43:1-12 ...... 120 Sir 44:19 ...... 39 Sir 43:1-26 ...... 120 Sir 44:20...... 89, 219, 293 Sir 43:2-5 ...... 128 Sir 44:21 ...... 13 Sir 43:5...... 85, 95, 134 Sir 44:22 ...... 293 Sir 43:5b...... 128 Sir 44:22a ...... 294 Sir 43:6ab...... 134 Sir 44:23 ...... 40 Sir 43:6-8 ...... 130 Sir 44:23de ...... 294 Sir 43:6-33 ...... 25 Sir 44:23g...... 39 Sir 43:7ab...... 134 Sir 45:1f ...... 294 Sir 43:8ab...... 134 Sir 45:1-5 ...... 44, 221 Sir 43:9 ...... 145 Sir 45:2...... 85, 287, 323 Sir 43:9-10 ...... 132 Sir 45:3...... 301, 323 Sir 43:10...... 85, 127, 241 Sir 45:4...... 323, 324 Sir 43:11 ...... 122 Sir 45:5 ...... 200, 214, 221, 222, Sir 43:13-26 ...... 120 ...... 225, 294, 318, 323 Sir 43:23 ...... 86 Sir 45:5cd...... 145 Sir 43:25 ...... 86 Sir 45:6 ...... 301 Sir 43:25b...... 134 Sir 45:6-22 ...... 60, 222 Sir 43:26-28 ...... 84 Sir 45:6-25d ...... 44 Sir 43:27 ...... 40 Sir 45:7...... 58, 60, 107, 300 Sir 43:27-28 ...... 53 Sir 45:9-14 ...... 300 Sir 43:27-33 ...... 25, 40, 43, 120 Sir 45:9-15 ...... 293 Sir 43:29 ...... 141 Sir 45:11 ...... 60 Sir 43:30-33 ...... 84 Sir 45:15...... 58, 293 Sir 43:32 ...... 126 Sir 45:15...... 293, 294 Sir 43:32-33 ...... 53 Sir 45:15a ...... 294 Sir 43:33...... 28, 35, 43, 166, 243, 244 Sir 45:15cd...... 294 Sir 44–49 ...... 107 Sir 45:15f ...... 294 Sir 44:1 ...... 35 Sir 45:17...... 214, 222 Sir 44:1-15 ...... 37, 39, 40 Sir 45:21 ...... 300 Sir 44:1–45:26 ...... 44 Sir 45:23-24 ...... 60 Sir 44:1–49:16 ...... 119 Sir 45:23-26 ...... 107 Sir 44:1–50:24 ...... 36, 43, 44, 45, 53 Sir 45:24...... 60, 293 Sir 44:1–50:29 ...... 41, 54 Sir 45:25...... 44, 58, 108, 293 Sir 44:4 ...... 145 Sir 45:25b...... 58, 60 Sir 44:11ab ...... 294 Sir 45:25e-26 ...... 44 Sir 44:11-15 ...... 53 Sir 45:25–46:8 ...... 280 Sir 44:12...... 86, 293 Sir 45:26...... 44, 55, 60 Sir 44:14 ...... 40 Sir 45:26c ...... 107 Sir 44:14-15 ...... 39 Sir 46:1...... 39, 44, 107 Sir 44:15 ...... 35 Sir 46:1–49:16 ...... 44 Sir 44:15b...... 39 Sir 46:1–50:24 ...... 44 Sir 44:16...... 27, 44, 86, 97, 107, 126 Sir 46:12 ...... 101 398 Index of References

Sir 46:13...... 39, 58, 59 Sir 50:1-5 ...... 108 Sir 46:15 ...... 59 Sir 50:1-21 ...... 44, 60 Sir 46:20 ...... 101 Sir 50:1-24 ...... 37, 55, 119 Sir 46:26 ...... 73 Sir 50:4...... 269, 272 Sir 47:2b...... 296 Sir 50:6...... 31, 96, 130 Sir 47:2-11 ...... 44 Sir 50:11c ...... 295 Sir 47:11 ...... 58, 107, 108 Sir 50:14 ...... 295 Sir 47:12 ...... 108 Sir 50:17...... 268, 271 Sir 47:12-22 ...... 44 Sir 50:19...... 294, 295, 296 Sir 47:13 ...... 39 Sir 50:19-22 ...... 300 Sir 47:20 ...... 287 Sir 50:20...... 295, 296 Sir 47:21 ...... 58 Sir 50:21...... 268, 271 Sir 47:22...... 58, 268, 271, 272 Sir 50:22...... 296, 297, 298 Sir 47:23...... 39, 264, 271, 272 Sir 50:22-24 ...... 44 Sir 48:1 ...... 59 Sir 50:23-24 ...... 11, 60 Sir 48:3 ...... 58 Sir 50:24...... 96, 108, 300 Sir 48:5 ...... 101 Sir 50:25-26 ...... 43, 53 Sir 48:6 ...... 58 Sir 50:25-29 ...... 39, 41 Sir 48:8...... 58, 59 Sir 50:25–51:30 ...... 34, 44, 357 Sir 48:9 ...... 101 Sir 50:27 ....7, 32, 33, 52, 54, 56, 57, 124 Sir 48:9-10 ...... 109 Sir 50:27-29 ...... 8, 29, 32, 33, 43, Sir 48:10...... 101, 283, 287 ...... 44, 59, 61, 357 Sir 48:11...... 90, 101, 102, 109, 303 Sir 50:28...... 33, 90 Sir 48:11b ...... 102 Sir 50:28a ...... 90 Sir 48:12...... 31, 55, 59, 357 Sir 50:29...... 39, 93 Sir 48:12-14 ...... 101 Sir 50:29a...... 32, 33 Sir 48:12-16 ...... 59 Sir 50:29b...... 33 Sir 48:17 ...... 39 Sir 51 ...... 8, 95, 186, 327 Sir 48:20 ...... 241 Sir 51:1 ...... 85 Sir 48:22 ...... 59 Sir 51:1-2 ...... 94 Sir 48:22-25 ...... 97 Sir 51:1-12....4, 6, 24, 36, 41, 42, 53, 205 Sir 49:1-16 ...... 37, 38, 40 Sir 51:1-30 ...... 30, 41, 42, 53 Sir 49:3 ...... 58 Sir 51:2 ...... 58 Sir 49:4...... 88, 200, 219 Sir 51:3...... 259, 271, 273 Sir 49:6 ...... 287 Sir 51:12...... 8, 34, 108 Sir 49:7...... 59, 287 Sir 51:13...... 34, 52, 163 Sir 49:9 ...... 288 Sir 51:13-14 ...... 28 Sir 49:10...... 59, 101, 287 Sir 51:13-15 ...... 53 Sir 49:11 ...... 108 Sir 51:13-20 ...... 92, 312 Sir 49:12 ...... 301 Sir 51:13-29 ...... 53 Sir 49:13 ...... 107 Sir 51:13-30 ...... 3, 8, 23, 24, 37, 41, 42, Sir 49:14...... 97, 101 ...... 45, 61, 82, 88, 173, 174, 175, Sir 49:14-16 ...... 107 ...... 187, 191, 193, 215, 357, 364 Sir 49:16...... 36, 40 Sir 51:13-50 ...... 174 Sir 50 ...... 57 Sir 51:15 ...... 85 Sir 50:1...... 36, 55, 107 Sir 51:15cd...... 145 Sir 50:1-4 ...... 60 Sir 51:16...... 189, 192 Index of References 399

Sir 51:18 ...... 23 Isa 29:19...... 104, 241 Sir 51:19...... 23, 163, 185, 215, 216, 366 Isa 29:23...... 241 Sir 51:20...... 24, 216 Isa 30:8-11 ...... 206 Sir 51:20b...... 52 Isa 30:9...... 206 Sir 51:21 ...... 188 Isa 30:11-12 ...... 241 Sir 51:23 ...... 56, 61, 63, 70, 74, Isa 30:15...... 241 ...... 120, 207, 361, 366 Isa 31:1...... 241 Sir 51:23-28 ...... 31 Isa 35:1...... 332 Sir 51:24-25 ...... 186 Isa 37:23...... 241 Sir 51:25...... 24, 188 Isa 40:25...... 241 Sir 51:26...... 189, 216 Isa 41:14...... 241 Sir 51:27 ...... 184 Isa 41:16...... 241 Sir 51:28...... 34, 215, 240 Isa 41:20...... 241 Sir 51:30 ...... 24, 26, 27, 33, 34, Isa 43:3...... 241 ...... 44, 45, 145, 357 Isa 43:14-15 ...... 241 Sir 51:30b...... 52 Isa 45:11 ...... 241 Isa 47:4...... 241 Isaiah Isa 48:17...... 241 Isa 49:7...... 241 Isa 1:4...... 241 Isa 50:4...... 192 Isa 1:10...... 219 Isa 50:4-9 ...... 191 Isa 1:15...... 185, 190 Isa 50:5...... 192 Isa 2:3...... 31 Isa 50:7...... 192 Isa 2:5...... 31 Isa 50:8...... 193 Isa 4:6...... 39 Isa 51:9...... 134 Isa 5:1-7 ...... 31 Isa 54:5...... 241 Isa 5:7...... 94 Isa 55:1...... 185 Isa 5:19...... 241 Isa 55:5...... 241 Isa 5:24 ...... 241. Isa 57:15...... 241 Isa 6:9-10 ...... 328 Isa 58:13-14 ...... 243 Isa 8:3...... 328 Isa 59:2-3 ...... 234 Isa 8:11-21 ...... 206 Isa 60:9...... 241 Isa 8:14...... 202 Isa 60:14...... 241 Isa 8:16-18 ...... 206 Isa 60:21...... 94 Isa 8:21...... 202 Isa 61:3...... 94 Isa 9:11 ...... 39 Isa 61:10...... 332 Isa 9:16...... 39 Isa 9:20...... 39 Jeremiah Isa 10:4...... 39 Isa 10:17...... 241 Jer 1:6 ...... 188 Isa 10:20...... 241 Jer 1:7 ...... 188 Isa 12:6...... 241 Jer 1:10...... 287, 301, 302 Isa 17:7...... 241 Jer 1:11-12 ...... 31, 59 Isa 22:13...... 40 Jer 2:20 ...... 189 Isa 22:18...... 236 Jer 4:19 ...... 188 Isa 24:19...... 205 Jer 4:31 ...... 190 Isa 26 ...... 103 Jer 5:3 ...... 189 400 Index of References

Jer 5:5 ...... 189 Dan 9:11...... 220, 221 Jer 5:6 ...... 250 Dan 9:13 ...... 220 Jer 5:7 ...... 190 Dan 12 ...... 103 Jer 6:9 ...... 187 Dan 12:1-3 ...... 11, 101, Jer 6:10 ...... 188 ...... 105, 356 Jer 8:2 ...... 133 Jer 13:16 ...... 201 Hosea Jer 14:19 ...... 265 Jer 17:22b-23 ...... 190 Hos 4:6...... 219 Jer 20:14 ...... 245 Hos 4:7...... 236 Jer 21:2 ...... 165 Hos 11:9...... 241 Jer 28:14 ...... 249 Hos 12:1...... 241 Jer 32:23 ...... 223 Hos 13:13...... 316 Jer 33:17-22 ...... 107 Hos 14:10...... 316 Jer 40:11 ...... 312 Jer 41:14b...... 191 Joel Jer 42:15 ...... 191 Joel 2:23 ...... 332 Jer 50:29 ...... 241 Joel 3:1-2 ...... 152 Jer 51:5...... 191, 241 Jer 51:64...... 32, 59 Amos Lamentations Am 2:1-6 ...... 348 Am 2:4 ...... 219 Lam 3:27 ...... 241 Am 2:6-8 ...... 329, 347 Lam 5:1-22...... 37 Am 2:6-12 ...... 346 Am 2:11-12 ...... 329, 347 Baruch Am 3:7 ...... 320 Bar 3–4...... 223 Am 8:11 ...... 186, 347 Bar 4:19 (LXX) ...... 240 Am 12:11-12 ...... 347 Bar 4:21 (LXX) ...... 240 Bar 4:22 ...... 241 Jonah Bar 4:25 (LXX) ...... 240 Jon 2:1 ...... 328 Bar 4:27 (LXX) ...... 240 Micah Ezekiel Mic 3:8 ...... 31, 357 Ezek 8:16 ...... 133 Mic 7:16 ...... 251 Ezek 8:17 (LXX) ...... 242 Ezek 14:14 ...... 288, 301, 302 Nahum Ezek 16:45 ...... 265 Ezek 28:16 (LXX) ...... 242 Na 1:7...... 312 Ezek 39:7 ...... 241 Ezek 47:1-12 ...... 31 Habakkuk Hab 1:4 ...... 214 Daniel Hab 1:12 ...... 214 Dan 1:4 ...... 28, 147 Hab 2:16 ...... 236 Dan 3:89 ...... 312 Hab 3:3 ...... 241 Index of References 401

Zephaniah Mt 6:24...... 309 Mt 7:13-14 ...... 330 Zeph 3:3...... 320 Mt 7:15-20 ...... 330 Mt 7:23-24 ...... 348 Haggai Mt 7:24...... 316 Ha 2:23...... 208 Mt 10:16...... 316 Mt 10:25...... 321 Zechariah Mt 10:40-41 ...... 317 Mt 10:46...... 321 Zech 6:9-14 ...... 107 Mt 11:2 ...... 320 Zech 14:5 ...... 126 Mt 11:9 ...... 321 Mt 11:13 ...... 317 Malachi Mt 11:19...... 319, 320 Mal 2:8...... 262 Mt 11:20-24 ...... 320 Mal 3:22...... 223 Mt 11:25...... 316, 321, 348 Mal 3:23-24 ...... 101, 109 Mt 11:25-30 ...... 319, 371 Mal 3:24...... 287, 301, 302 Mt 11:28-30 ...... 312, 327 Mt 11:29 ...... 324 Mt 12:37...... 237 Mt 12:40...... 328 II. NEW TESTAMENT Mt 13:11...... 313, 319, 325 Matthew Mt 13:13...... 326 Mt 13:14-15 ...... 328 Mt 1:22-23 ...... 319 Mt 13:19...... 326 Mt 3:15...... 320 Mt 13:23...... 326 Mt 5:3...... 304 Mt 13:51...... 326 Mt 5:3-10 ...... 328, 329, Mt 13:51-52 ...... 313, 321, 371 ...... 344, 347 Mt 13:52...... 194, 314, 319 Mt 5:3-12 ...... 91, 99, 313 Mt 14:31-33 ...... 314 Mt 5:5...... 324 Mt 16:5-12 ...... 314 Mt 5:6...... 332 Mt 16:17...... 319 Mt 5:6-7 ...... 347 Mt 16:27...... 283 Mt 5:9 ...... 311 Mt 18:17...... 310 Mt 5:11-12 ...... 347 Mt 18:21-22 ...... 309 Mt 5:12...... 314, 315, 332, 332 Mt 18:33...... 310 Mt 5:16 ...... 311 Mt 19:21...... 309 Mt 5:17...... 317 Mt 21:5...... 324 Mt 5:17-20 ...... 348 Mt 21:16...... 328 Mt 5:18...... 317 Mt 21:23...... 322 Mt 5:19...... 319 Mt 21:43...... 322 Mt 5:21-24 ...... 309 Mt 21:45...... 322 Mt 5:21-48 ...... 319 Mt 22:40...... 317 Mt 5:45 ...... 311 Mt 23:1-7 ...... 321, 371 Mt 5:48...... 310, 311 Mt 23:13...... 313 Mt 6:14...... 283 Mt 23:29–31:35 ...... 314 Mt 6:19...... 283 Mt 23:34...... 313, 316, 322, 349 Mt 6:19-21 ...... 309 Mt 23:35-36 ...... 314 402 Index of References

Mt 23:37...... 313 Galatians Mt 24–25 ...... 348 Mt 24:45...... 316 Gal 3:8-14 ...... 324 Mt 25:2...... 316 Gal 5:23 ...... 324 Mt 25:4...... 316 Gal 6:1 ...... 324 Mt 25:8...... 316 Mt 25:9...... 316 Ephesians Mt 25:34...... 310 Eph 4:2...... 324 Mt 25:41...... 310 Eph 4:32...... 312 Mt 26:65-66 ...... 243 Mt 28:18-20 ...... 322 Colossians Mt 28:19-20 ...... 314 Mt 28:20...... 322 Col 3:12 ...... 324 Mt 28:28...... 349 Col 4:5 ...... 326

Mark 1 Thessalonians Mk 4:11 ...... 325 1 Thess 4:12...... 326 1 Thess 4:13...... 326 Luke 1 Thess 5:6...... 326 Lk 1:17 ...... 283, 302 1 Timothy Lk 1:51-53 ...... 310 Lk 6:20-26 ...... 99 1 Tim 3:7 ...... 324 Lk 6:35 ...... 310 1 Tim 6:11 ...... 324 Lk 7:35 ...... 319, 321 Lk 8:10 ...... 325 2 Timothy Lk 10:7 ...... 283 2 Tim 2:25 ...... 324 Lk 11:1-54 ...... 329 Lk 12:15ff...... 283 Titus Lk 16:16 ...... 317 Tit 3:2 ...... 324 John Hebrews Jn 10:11 ...... 302 Jn 10:33 ...... 243 Heb 2:2 ...... 283

Romans James Rom 2:4 ...... 312 Jas 1:21...... 324 Jas 2:10...... 318 1 Corinthians Jas 3:2-10 ...... 237 Jas 3:5-6 ...... 249 1 Cor 4:21 ...... 324 Jas 3:5-10 ...... 241 1 Cor 5:12-13...... 326 1 Peter 2 Corinthians 1 Pt 2:3 ...... 312 2 Cor 10:1 ...... 324 1 Pt 3:16 ...... 324 Index of References 403

2 Peter PeshSir 1:7a...... 288, 289 PeshSir 1:7b...... 289 2 Pt 2:22 ...... 243 PeshSir 1:8...... 289, 306 PeshSir 1:9...... 303, 306 PeshSir 1:9a...... 288, 289 III. ANCIENT VERSIONS PeshSir 1:9b...... 289 PeshSir 1:10a...... 288, 289 Peshitta PeshSir 1:10b...... 289 PeshSir 1:11a...... 289 Genesis PeshSir 1.11b...... 289 PeshGen 30:8 ...... 304 PeshSir 1:20...... 288 PeshSir 1:20a...... 285, 289 Exodus PeshSir 1:27...... 288 PeshSir 1:7...... 284 PeshExod 38:8 ...... 304 PeshSir 2:1...... 298 PeshSir 3:5...... 286 1 Chronicles PeshSir 7:31...... 300, 303 Pesh1Chr 29:28...... 304 PeshSir 9:15b...... 302 PeshSir 11:14...... 301 2 Chronicles PeshSir 11:15...... 286 PeshSir 11:16...... 286 Pesh2Chr 26:16...... 304 PeshSir 11:18...... 301 PeshSir 11:19...... 301 Job PeshSir 11:21...... 287 PeshJob 28:27 ...... 306 PeshSir 13:20...... 301 PeshSir 14:11...... 300, 303 Psalms PeshSir 16:15...... 286 PeshSir 16:16...... 286 PeshPs 106:23 ...... 285 PeshSir 18:13...... 302 PeshSir 19:1...... 300 Proverbs PeshSir 19:15b...... 302 PeshSir 19:17b...... 302 PeshProv 8:22 ...... 307 PeshSir 19:20...... 302 PeshSir 24:8b...... 307 Sirach PeshSir 24:9...... 307 PeshSir 1:1a...... 288, 289 PeshSir 26:26...... 286 PeshSir 1:1-12 ...... 289 PeshSir 28:6b...... 303 PeshSir 1:2a...... 289 PeshSir 28:18...... 284 PeshSir 1:3a...... 289 PeshSir 29:11...... 285, 302 PeshSir 1:3b...... 289 PeshSir 29:12...... 285 PeshSir 1:4...... 303, 306 PeshSir 29:18...... 284, 285 PeshSir 1:4a...... 289, 306 PeshSir 29:28...... 301 PeshSir 1:4b...... 289 PeshSir 30:12d ...... 286 PeshSir 1:5a...... 289 PeshSir 30:20c...... 286 PeshSir 1:6 ...... 284, 285, 288, 306 PeshSir 32:10c...... 284 PeshSir 1:6b...... 289 PeshSir 32:12...... 285 404 Index of References

PeshSir 35 ...... 293, 303 PeshSir 45:3...... 285, 301 PeshSir 35:1...... 301 PeshSir 45:6...... 301 PeshSir 35:1b...... 300 PeshSir 45:7...... 300 PeshSir 35:1-8 ...... 300 PeshSir 45:8...... 300, 303 PeshSir 35:1-11 ...... 289, 290 PeshSir 45:8-15 ...... 289, 293 PeshSir 35:1-13 ...... 305 PeshSir 45:15 ...... 293, 294, 300, 303 PeshSir 35:2...... 300 PeshSir 45:21...... 300, 303 PeshSir 35:2-4 ...... 305 PeshSir 45:23...... 284, 285 PeshSir 35:3...... 300 PeshSir 47:20...... 287 PeshSir 35:4...... 300, 302 PeshSir 48:3...... 284, 285 PeshSir 35:5...... 290, 300 PeshSir 48:4...... 284 PeshSir 35:6...... 300 PeshSir 48:10...... 287, 302, 303 PeshSir 35:7...... 300, 305 PeshSir 48:10c...... 301 PeshSir 35:8...... 300, 304, 305 PeshSir 48:11...... 303 PeshSir 35:9-10 ...... 304 PeshSir 49:6-7 ...... 288 PeshSir 35:9-13 ...... 305 PeshSir 49:9...... 288, 302 PeshSir 35:10...... 292 PeshSir 49:12...... 301 PeshSir 35:10c...... 298 PeshSir 49:67...... 302 PeshSir 35:11...... 290, 291, 292, 305 PeshSir 50:17...... 296 PeshSir 35:12...... 292 PeshSir 50:19...... 300, 303 PeshSir 35:15...... 303 PeshSir 50:19-22 ...... 290, 294 PeshSir 35:16...... 304 PeshSir 50:22 ...... 295, 296, 297, PeshSir 35:17...... 302 ...... 298, 300, 303 PeshSir 35:24...... 302, 304 PeshSir 50:24...... 300, 303 PeshSir 36:2...... 302 PeshSir 36:2-3 ...... 304 Ezekiel PeshSir 36:3...... 302 PeshEzek 22:30...... 285 PeshSir 37:4...... 301, 304 PeshSir 37:26...... 285 Luke PeshSir 38:4...... 298 PeshSir 38:11...... 300, 303 PeshLk 1:19...... 303 PeshSir 38:21...... 301 PeshLk 2:10...... 303 PeshSir 39:28...... 287 PeshLk 3:18...... 303 PeshSir 39:32...... 303, 306 PeshLk 6:34-35 ...... 290, 291, 305 PeshSir 40:8...... 301 PeshSir 40:20-21 ...... 303 Acts PeshSir 40:28...... 301 PeshActs 8:12 ...... 303 PeshSir 41:8...... 304 PeshActs 8:35 ...... 303 PeshSir 41:13...... 285 PeshActs 8:40 ...... 303 PeshSir 42:12a...... 306 PeshSir 42:18...... 287 Syro-Hexapla PeshSir 44:14...... 284 PeshSir 44:17...... 284, 285 Sirach PeshSir 44:20...... 284, 304 PeshSir 45:1...... 284, 285 SyhSir 1:1 ...... 280 PeshSir 45:2...... 285, 287 SyhSir 51 ...... 280 Index of References 405

IV. OLD TESTAMENT PSEUDEPIGRAPHA 1 Enoch 93-2 ...... 27 AND QUMRAN 1 Enoch 94:8 ...... 304 1 Enoch 98:15 ...... 124 1 Enoch 1 Enoch 99:10 ...... 26 1 Enoch 101:1-9 ...... 125 1 Enoch 1:2 ...... 27 1 Enoch 102-104 ...... 107 1 Enoch 1:9 ...... 126 1 Enoch 104:1-5...... 110 1 Enoch 1–36...... 27 1 Enoch 104:10 ...... 124 1 Enoch 2:1-3 ...... 27 1 Enoch 105:1 ...... 27 1 Enoch 2:1–5:4...... 125 1 Enoch 12:3-4 ...... 323 2 Enoch 1 Enoch 12–36...... 125 1 Enoch 14:20-23 ...... 27 2 Enoch 64:5 ...... 323 1 Enoch 15:1 ...... 323 1 Enoch 18:14-15 ...... 127 1 Ezra 1 Enoch 19:3 ...... 27 1 Ezra 1:38...... 249 1 Enoch 19:4 ...... 126 1 Ezra 4:21...... 244 1 Enoch 20:1 ...... 126 1 Enoch 20:3-6 ...... 127 4 Ezra 1 Enoch 32:3 ...... 26 1 Enoch 32:3-4 ...... 27 4 Ezra 4:2...... 326 1 Enoch 32:6 ...... 26 4 Ezra 4:10...... 326 1 Enoch 72:1 ...... 126 4 Ezra 4:21-22 ...... 326 1 Enoch 72–80...... 125 4 Ezra 5:22...... 326 1 Enoch 72–82...... 27, 129, 361 4 Ezra 5:34...... 326 1 Enoch 75:1-3 ...... 96 4 Ezra 5:39...... 326 1 Enoch 75:2 ...... 129 4 Ezra 8:3...... 326 1 Enoch 75:3 ...... 126 4 Ezra 13:53...... 326 1 Enoch 79:1-6 ...... 127 4 Ezra 14:1...... 323 1 Enoch 80:1 ...... 126, 127 4 Ezra 14:5...... 323 1 Enoch 80:2-8 ...... 96, 127 4 Ezra 14:26...... 323 1 Enoch 81:2 ...... 27 1 Enoch 81:5 ...... 126 Jubilees 1 Enoch 82...... 128 Jub. 2:9...... 128 1 Enoch 82:1 ...... 126 1 Enoch 82:2-3 ...... 26 Psalms of Solomon 1 Enoch 82:4-7 ...... 96, 129 1 Enoch 82:4-20 ...... 125 PssSol 2:36...... 312 1 Enoch 82:37 ...... 128 PssSol 5:2...... 312 PssSol 5:12...... 312 1 Enoch 91:11-17...... 27 PssSol 10:2...... 312 1 Enoch 92:1 ...... 26 PssSol 10:7...... 312 1 Enoch 92:3-5 ...... 106 1 Enoch 92–105...... 27 Testament 1 Enoch 93:1-10 ...... 27 of the Twelve Patriarchs 1 Enoch 93:5 ...... 94 1 Enoch 93:10 ...... 94 Test. Abr. B 11,3 ...... 3232 1 Enoch 93:11-14...... 27, 125 Test. Lev. 13,1 ...... 89 406 Index of References

Qumran 4Q212 ii 23 ...... 26 4Q212 iii 22 ...... 27 CD I 7...... 93 4Q213a 1 ii 14-18 ...... 97 CD VI 2-3 ...... 326 4Q369 1 i 6 ...... 97 CD VII 9 ...... 94 4Q415 2 ii 1-9 ...... 92 CD XIX 6 ...... 94 4Q416 1 10-16 ...... 102 4Q416 1 11...... 103 1Q27 1-3 ...... 93 4Q416 1 14-16 ...... 98 4Q416 2 ii 4-7 ...... 22 1QAp Gn XIV 13-14 ...... 93 4Q416 2 ii 5-7 ...... 92 4Q416 2 ii 8-9 ...... 98 1QH V 18ff ...... 98 4Q416 2 ii 17-18 ...... 92 1QH VI 13-16 ...... 328 4Q416 2 ii 21 ...... 92 1QH X 22-30 ...... 304 1QH XI 20f ...... 94 4Q416 2 iii 14-16...... 98 1QH XIV 18 ...... 93 4Q416 2 iii 15-19...... 22, 92 1QH XIV 32 ...... 97, 103 4Q416 2 iii 18-21...... 92 1QH XVI 7 ...... 93 4Q416 2 iii 19 ...... 22 1QH XVI 11...... 93 4Q416 2 iv 11 ...... 92 1QH XVI 17 ...... 93 4Q416 2 iv 13 ...... 22 1QH XVI 21 ...... 93 4Q417 1 i 6-8...... 93, 104 4Q417 1 i 6-19 ...... 102 1QM XI 13...... 94 4Q417 1 i 6-27 ...... 97 4Q417 1 i 7-10 ...... 22 1QpHab 12:4...... 321 4Q417 1 ii 21-23 ...... 22 1QpNah 3–4 ...... 321 4Q417 1 iii 9 ...... 93 1QpNah 3:5...... 321 4Q417 2 i 6-13 ...... 22 1QpNah 3:7...... 321 4Q417 2 i 10-11 ...... 93 4Q417 2 i 10-12...... 99, 104 1QS I 4 ...... 94 4Q417 2 i 15-16...... 105, 107 1QS I 10 ...... 94 4Q417 2 ii 21-23 ...... 92 1QS III 13 – IV ...... 93, 98 4Q418 2 2-9 ...... 102 1QS III 13 – IV 26 ...... 110 4Q418 9 15-17 ...... 98 1QS III 15f ...... 94, 97 4Q418 69 ii ...... 102, 107 1QS IV 7-8...... 87 4Q418 69 ii 7 ...... 103, 104 1QS IV 25 ...... 97 4Q418 69 ii 10-15 ...... 106 1QS VI 10 ...... 89 4Q418 81 ...... 110 1QS VII 14...... 94 4Q418 81 1-5 ...... 105 1QS VIII 5 ...... 93 4Q418 81-81a 2-3 ...... 93 1QS VIII 6-7 ...... 94 4Q418 81 12-14 ...... 93 1QS IX 10-11 ...... 109 4Q418 103 ...... 92 1QS X 4 ...... 95 4Q418 123 ii 3-8 ...... 98, 102 1QS XI 3...... 93 4Q418 126 ii 6-9 ...... 105 1QS XI 8 ...... 93 4Q418 212 1-2 ...... 102 4Q420 1a-b ii 1-3 ...... 89 4Q185 1-2 ii 13-14...... 90 4Q421 1a-b ii 13-14 ...... 89 4Q201 i 2-3 ...... 27 4Q423 1-2 i 7 ...... 93 4Q203 8 4 ...... 26 4Q525 2 ii 1 ...... 90 Index of References 407

4Q525 2 ii 1-6 ...... 90 Letter of Aristeas 4Q525 2 ii 2 ...... 88 4Q525 2 ii 3-4 ...... 90 Aristeas § 16 ...... 312 4Q525 2 ii 4 ...... 88 4Q525 11-12...... 87 4Q525 14 ii 7 ...... 89 VII. HELLENISTIC LITERATURE 4Q525 14 ii 22-24 ...... 89 4Q525 14 ii 26-28 ...... 89 Aratus of Soli 4Q525 25 4...... 87 Phaen. 1-18 ...... 132 4Q530 ii 2 ...... 29 Phaen. 19-21 ...... 132 4Q531 17 12...... 29 Phaen. 19-732 ...... 132 4Q542 1 ii 13 ...... 110 Phaen. 733-1154 ...... 132

11QPsa XXVII 2-3 ...... 326 a 11QPs XVIII...... 323 VIII. EARLY CHRISTIAN SOURCES 11QPsa XVIII 14 ...... 89 11QPsa XXI 11-18 ...... 92 Aphrahat 11QPsa XXI 13...... 85 11QPsa XXVI 9-15 ...... 92 Dem. 1–10 ...... 284 Dem. 4,2 ...... 284 Dem. 4,12 ...... 285 V. R ABBINIC TEXTS Dem. 11–22 ...... 284 Dem. 12,3 ...... 284 bAr 15b ...... 248 Dem. 13,5 ...... 284, 285 bBer 48a...... 283 Dem. 14,15 ...... 285 bSan 100b ...... 283 Dem. 14,35 ...... 284, 285 Dem. 14,45 ...... 284 jSan 28a ...... 283 Dem. 20,4 ...... 284, 285 Dem. 20,7 ...... 284 Tos.Yad 2,13 ...... 283 Dem. 22,7 ...... 284, 285 Dem. 23 ...... 284 Dem. 23,4 ...... 284, 285 VI. HELLENISTIC JEWISH LITERATURE Dem. 23,5 ...... 285 Dem. 23,14 ...... 285 Philo Dem. 23,19 ...... 284, 285

Ebr. 158 ...... 63 Didache Vit. Mos. 2, 279...... 324 Did. 4,5 ...... 283 Josephus Did. 4,13 ...... 319

Ant. XIII, 311-313 ...... 324 Letters of Barnabas Ant. XV, 373-379...... 324 Ant. XVII, 345-348 ...... 324 Barn. 19,9...... 283 Ant. XX, 264 ...... 321 Barn. 19,11...... 319

Index of Subjects

Afterlife ...... 99, 100, 101, 106 Dualism ...... 93, 94 Apocalyptic circles ...... 70, 121, 123, ...... 125, 168, 364 Ebionite theology ...... 298, 300, 302 Apocalyptic speculations ...... 226 Enemies ...... 192, 234, 254, 256, 258, Astral cult ...... 133, 135 ...... 259, 260, 269, 274, 311, 361 Authorial self-references ...... 44, 45 Enochic groups ...... 70 Epic of Gilgamesh ...... 28, 29, 44 Banquet ...... 265 Eschatology ....11, 16, 93, 94, 99, 104, Beatitude ...... 324, 327, 341, ...... 105, 106, 108, 109, 113, ...... 347, 350, 370 ...... 114, 115, 288, 369 Esoteric doctrines ...... 226 Canonicity ...... V, VI, 14, 16, Essenes ...... 11, 13, 59, 85, 86, 87, 109, ...... 79, 115, 283 ...... 112, 324, 360 Commandment(s) ....39, 98, 100, 145, ...... 162, 166, 180, 183, 198, 200, 202, Fear of God ..23, 33, 36, 39, 40, 41, 45, ...... 204, 205, 214, 221, 222, 225, 226, ...... 70, 93, 151, 209, 217, 228, ...... 228, 288, 290, 318, 319, 323, 324 ...... 229, 254, 263, 288, 366 Cosmos ...... 97, 119, 129, 143, Fear of the Lord ...... VI, 9, 23, 24, 25, ...... 168, 217, 228, 364 ...... 29, 33, 41, 70, 135, 143, 144, 148, Covenant ...... 27, 43, 44, 58, 67, 68, ...... 151, 153, 164, 226, 241, 266, 267, ...... 70, 71, 74, 81, 95, 100, 107, ...... 288, 320, 356 ...... 108, 109, 115, 122, 185, 200, ...... 206, 221, 222, 224, 225, 229, Geniza ...... 1, 12, 18, 23, 24, 26, 27, 33, ...... 293, 294, 323, 359, 373 ...... 34, 38, 52, 80, 81, 86, 87, 89, 96, Creation ...... IX, 23, 24, 25, 34, 37, ...... 110, 116, 153, 233, 235, 278, 279, ...... 38, 46, 54, 93, 96, 98, 100, 103, ...... 308, 309, 341 ...... 104, 105, 110, 113, 119, 120, 121, Gerousi,a ...... 60 ...... 122, 123, 124, 125, 127, 129, 130, ...... 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, Halakhah ...... 282, 290, 291, 295, 296, ...... 142, 150, 165, 171, 201, 209, 211, ...... 307, 369, 370 ...... 212, 213, 214, 216, 217, 218, 220, Hexaplaric recension ...... 146 ...... 222, 227, 228, 229, 230, 282, 303, Hidden things ...... 97, 157, 165, 166, ...... 305, 306, 361, 366, 367, 369 ...... 320, 324 Cult ...... 72, 95, 125, 133, 135, 180, Hidden wisdom ...... 227, 312, 327, ...... 184, 185, 193, 222, 228, ...... 351, 372 ...... 299, 305, 358, 361, 367 High Priest ...... 21, 35, 37, 46, 55, 60, ...... 61, 107, 108, 116, 119, 207, 269, 296 Death ...... 22, 28, 37, 38, 40, 42, 43, ...... 55, 94, 99, 100, 101, 104, 105, Intellectual activity ...... 157 ...... 111, 124, 127, 133, 150, 168, 233, ...... 237, 238, 240, 242, 243, 247, 249, Judgement ...... V, VI, 56, 66, 124, 125, ...... 250, 259, 260, 263, 274, 282, 303, ....136, 171, 183, 187, 188, 229, 273, 310, ...... 313, 367, 368 ...... 347, 348, 349, 350, 360, 371, 372 410 Index of Subjects

Kingdom ...... 194, 310, 313, 314, 319, Pharisees ...... 11, 109, 313, 314, ...... 321, 322, 325, 326, 331, 348, ...... 319, 322, 360 ...... 350, 351, 370, 371 Poor ...... 25, 36, 55, 65, 66, 91, 99, 105, Kingship ...... 107, 109 ...... 123, 248, 254, 261, 262, 286, 290, Knowledge of God ...... 61, 122, 126, ...... 291, 292, 301, 324, 328, 331, 346, ...... 217, 361 ...... 347, 348 Poverty ...... 34, 65, 111, 281, 282, Law ...... V, VI, VII, 25, 29, 36, 39, 40, ...... 298, 299, 301, 304, 305 ...... 51, 54, 55, 56, 60, 66, 70, 71, 72, 73, Praise of the Ancestors ...... 27, 36, 37, ...... 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 96, 97, 98, 99, ...... 38, 43, 44, 45, 53, 58, 96, ...... 111, 112, 122, 127, 133, 135, 139, 145, ...... 101, 109, 119, 323, 360 ....148, 154, 158, 162, 164, 165, 166, 167, Praise of the Fathers ...... 46, 116, ....179, 180, 182, 183, 184, 190, 191, 193, ...... 300, 357 ....198, 199, 200, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, Prayer ....6, 8, 9, 10, 18, 28, 34, 36, 52, ....210, 211, 213, 214, 215, 217, 218, 219, ...... 61, 63, 73, 99, 165, 174, 176, 178, ....220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 228, ...... 179, 180, 190, 194, 195, 199, 230, ....229, 235, 239, 251, 254, 256, 260, 263, ...... 233, 255, 282, 290, 294, 295, 303, ....264, 265, 267, 273, 274, 281, 282, 288, ...... 304, 356, 364 ....290, 298, 300, 302, 303, 316, 317, 318, Priesthood ....9, 12, 57, 58, 76, 95, 96, ....319, 320, 321, 324, 328, 334, 341, 348, ...... 97, 107, 108, 109, 112, 116, 118, ...... 353, 360, 366, 367, 369, 371, 372 ...... 125, 137, 138, 168, 171, 228, 281, ...... 293, 294, 296, 298, 300, 360, 364 Lo,goj ...... 70, 239 Process of becoming literature ..71, 355 Profits ...... 264, 265 Macarism ....90, 91, 198, 319, 331, 341 Psalter ...... IX, 83, 114, 197, 198, 199, Mercy ...... 34, 106, 108, 110, 147, 155, ....200, 201, 203, 205, 206, 207, 208, 365 ...... 156, 169, 175, 176, 259, 266, 268, Ptw/sij ....255, 256, 259, 262, 263, 264, ...... 297, 298, 310, 312, 331, 332, 347 ...... 267, 269, 270, 271, 272, 273 Merism ...... 176, 331 Messiah ...... 59, 109, 322, 323, hyhn zr ...... 93, 98, 360 ...... 324, 328, 348 Resurrection ....11, 101, 102, 103, 104, Messianism ....107, 108, 109, 115, 360 ...... 105, 109, 117, 360 Monarchy ...... 281, 298, 301 Rich ...... 4, 36, 37, 61, 65, 66, 71, 159, rswm ...... 32, 240 ...... 173, 248, 254, 261, 262, 269, Mystery ...... 62, 92, 93, 97, 98, 99, 102, ...... 270, 310, 326, 368 ...... 104, 106, 107, 114, 163, 168, ...... 320, 325, 326, 360, 364 Sabbath ...... 121, 129, 243 Sacrifice ...... 293, 300, 303, 304, 305 No,moj ...... 88, 200, 209, 210, 211, 213, Sapiential doxology ...... 43 ...... 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, Secret things ...... 157, 160, 161, 162, ...... 221, 223, 224, 225, 226, 317 ...... 164, 170 (Non-)Alphabetic acrostic ...... 23, 37, Stoic school ...... 278 ...... 38, 40, 43, 44, 45 Temple ..VII, 30, 31, 56, 57, 59, 60, 67, Paidei,a ...... 61, 63, 176, 192, 210, ...... 72, 73, 95, 113, 176, 177, 179, 180, ...... 211, 214, 240, 320 ...... 182, 185, 207, 268, 299, 305, 327, Pedagogic intention ...... 61 ...... 356, 359 Index of Subjects 411

Theodicy ...... 31, 34, 45, 93, 119, 120, ....217, 219, 221, 222, 223, 225, 227, 229, ...... 121, 136, 157, 274, 357, 361 ....231, 309, 313, 316, 317, 318, 319, 356, Tongue ...... X, 38, 41, 70, 89, 90, 128, ...... 363, 364, 365, 366, 367, 372 ...... 175, 177, 180, 192, 233, 234, hrwt ...... 198, 199, 208, 209, 213, 215, ...... 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 241, ...... 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 228 ...... 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, ...... 249, 250, 251, 252, 254, 255, Vices ...... 66, 254, 262, 263, 264 ...... 256, 258, 259, 367, 368 Violence ...... 268, 269, 347 Torah ..VI, IX, X, 9, 10, 13, 28, 44, 123, Virtues ....213, 254, 262, 263, 264, 347 ...... 137, 145, 159, 161, 166, 197, 198, ...... 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, Woman ...... 41, 66, 70, 92, 127, 248, ...... 206, 207, 208, 209, 211, 213, 215, ...... 254, 257, 258, 267