Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - Proverbs 18:12 - 18:12
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
We place together Pro 18:12-19, in which the figure of a secure fortress returns:
Pro 18:12
This proverb is connected with the preceding of the rich man who trusts in his mammon.
Before destruction the heat of man is haughty;
And humility goeth before honour.
Line first is a variation of Pro 16:18, and line second is similar to Pro 15:33.
Pro 18:13
13 If one giveth an answer before he heareth,
It is to him as folly and shame.
The part. stands here differently from what it does at Pro 13:18, where it is subj., and at Pro 17:14, where it is pred. of a simple sentence; it is also here, along with what appertains to it in accordance with the Semitic idiom, subj. to 13b (one who answers ... is one to whom this...); but, in accordance with our idiom, it becomes a hypothetical antecedent. For “to answer” one also uses הָשִׁיב without addition; but the original full expression is הָשִׁיב דָּבָר, reddere verbum, referre dictum (cf. עָנָה דָּבָר, Jer 44:20, absol. in the cogn., Pro 15:28); דבר one may not understand of the word to which, but of the word with which, the reply is made. הִיא לוֹ comprehends the meaning: it avails to him (ducitur ei), as well as it reaches to him (est ei). In Agricola's Fünfhundert Sprüchen this proverb is given thus: Wer antwortet ehe er höret, der zaiget an sein torhait und wirdt ze schanden [he who answers before he hears shows his folly, and it is to him a shame]. But that would require the word to be יֵבוֹשׁ, pudefiet; (היא לו) כְּלִמָּה means that it becomes to him a ground of merited disgrace. “כְּלִמָּה, properly wounding, i.e., shame (like atteinte à son honneur), from כָּלַם (cogn. הָלַם), to strike, hit, wound” (Fl.). Sirach (11:8) warns against such rash talking, as well as against the rudeness of interrupting others.
Pro 18:14
14 The spirit of a man beareth his sickness;
But a broken spirit, who can bear it?
The breath of the Creator imparting life to man is spoken of as spiritus spirans, רוּח (רוּח חַיִּים), and as spiritus spiratus, נֶפֶשׁ (נפשׁ חַיָּה); the spirit (animus) is the primary, and the soul (anima) the secondary principle of life; the double gender of רוח is accounted for thus: when it is thought of as the primary, and thus in a certain degree (vid., Psychol. p. 103ff.) the manly principle, it is mas. (Gen 6:3; Psa 51:12, etc.). Here the change of gender is in the highest degree characteristic, and אִישׁ also is intentionally used (cf. 1Sa 26:15) instead of אָדָם, 16a: the courageous spirit of a man which sustains or endures (כִּלְכֵּל R. כל, comprehendere, prehendere; Luther, “who knows how to contain himself in his sufferings;” cf. Psa 51:12, “may the free Spirit hold me”) the sickness [Siechthum] (we understand here “siech” in the old meaning = sick) with self-control, is generis masculini; while, on the contrary, the רוּחַ נְכֵאָה (as Pro 15:13; Pro 17:22), brought down from its manliness and superiority to disheartened passivity, is genere feminino (cf. Psa 51:12 with Pro 18:19). Fleischer compares the Arab. proverb, thbât âlnfs bâlghdhâ thbât alrwh balghnâ, the soul has firmness by nourishment, the spirit by music.
(Note: In the Arab. language, influenced by philosophy, rwh, the anima vitalis, and nfs, the anima rationalis, are inverted; vid., Baudissin's Translationis antiquae Arab. libri Jobi quae supersunt (1870), p. 34.)
The question מִי יִשָּׂאֶנָּה is like Mar 9:50 : if the salt becomes tasteless, wherewith shall one season it? There is no seasoning for the spice that has become insipid. And for the spirit which is destined to bear the life and fortune of the person, if it is cast down by sufferings, there is no one to lift it up and sustain it. But is not God the Most High the lifter up and the bearer of the human spirit that has been crushed and broken? The answer is, that the manly spirit, 14a, is represented as strong in God; the discouraged, 14b, as not drawing from God the strength and support he ought to do. But passages such as Isa 66:2 do not bring it near that we think of the רוח נכאה as alienated from God. The spirit is נֹשֵׂא, the bearer of the personal and natural life with its functions, activities, and experiences. If the spirit is borne down to powerless and helpless passivity, then within the sphere of the human personality there is no other sustaining power that can supply its place.
Pro 18:15
15 The heart of a man of understanding gaineth knowledge,
And the ear of the wise seeketh after knowledge.
נָבוֹן may be also interpreted as an adj., but we translate it here as at Pro 14:33, because thus it corresponds with the parallelism; cf. לֵב צַדִּיק, Pro 15:28, and לב חָכָם, Pro 16:23, where the adject. interpretation is excluded. The gaining of wisdom is, after Pro 17:16, referred to the heart: a heart vigorous in embracing and receiving it is above all necessary, and just such an one possesses the נבון, which knows how to value the worth and usefulness of such knowledge. The wise, who are already in possession of such knowledge, are yet at the same time constantly striving to increase this knowledge: their ear seeks knowledge, eagerly asking where it is to be found, and attentively listening when the opportunity is given of מְצֹא, obtaining it.
Pro 18:16
16 The gift of a man maketh room for him,
And bringeth him before the great.
That מַתָּן may signify intellectual endowments, Hitzig supposes, but without any proof for such an opinion. Intellectual ability as the means of advancement is otherwise designated, Pro 22:29. But Hitzig is right in this, that one mistakes the meaning of the proverb if he interprets מתן in the sense of שֹׂחַד (vid., at Pro 17:8): mtn is an indifferent idea, and the proverb means that a man makes free space, a free path for himself, by a gift, i.e., by this, that he shows himself to be agreeable, pleasing where it avails, not niggardly but liberal. As a proverb expresses it:
Mit dem Hut in der Hand
Kommt man durchs ganze Land
[with hat in hand one goes through the whole land], so it is said here that such liberality brings before the great, i.e., not: furnishes with introductions to them; but helps to a place of honour near the great, i.e., those in a lofty position (cf. לִפְנֵי, Pro 22:29; עם, Psa 113:8). It is an important part of practical wisdom, that by right liberality, i.e., by liberal giving where duty demands it, and prudence commends it, one does not lose but gains, does not descend but rises; it helps a man over the difficulties of limited, narrow circumstances, gains for him affection, and helps him up from step to step. The ā of מַתָּן is, in a singular way (cf. מַתָּנָה, מַתְּנַת), treated as unchangeable.
Pro 18:17
17 He that is first in his controversy is right;
But there cometh another and searcheth him thoroughly -
an exhortation to be cautious in a lawsuit, and not to justify without more ado him who first brings forward his cause, and supports it by reasons, since, if the second party afterwards search into the reasons of the first, they show themselves untenable. הָרִאשׁוֹן בְּרִיבוֹ are to be taken together; the words are equivalent to אשׁר יבא בריבו בָרִאשׁוֹנָה: qui prior cum causa sua venit, i.e., eam ad judicem defert (Fl.). הראשׁון may, however, also of itself alone be qui prior venit; and בריבו will be taken with צדיק: justus qui prior venit in causa sua (esse videtur). The accentuation rightly leaves the relation undecided. Instead of יבא (יָבֹא) the Kerı̂ has וּבָא, as it elsewhere, at one time, changes the fut. into the perf. with ו (e.g., Pro 20:4; Jer 6:21); and, at another time, the perf. with ו into the fut. (e.g., Psa 10:10; Isa 5:29). But here, where the perf. consec. is not so admissible, as Pro 6:11; Pro 20:4, the fut. ought to remain unchanged. רֵעֵהוּ is the other part, synon. with בעל דין חברו, Sanhedrin 7b, where the אזהרה לבית־דין (admonition for the court of justice) is derived from Deu 1:16, to hear the accused at the same time with the accuser, that nothing of the latter may be adopted beforehand. This proverb is just such an audiatur et altera pars. The status controversiae is only brought fairly into the light by the hearing of the altera pars: then comes the other and examines him (the first) to the very bottom. חָקַר, elsewhere with the accus. of the thing, e.g., רִיב ,., thoroughly to search into a strife, Job 29:16, is here, as at Job 28:11, connected with the accus. of the person: to examine or lay bare any one thoroughly; here, so that the misrepresentations of the state of the matter might come out to view along with the reasons assigned by the accuser.
Pro 18:18
18 The lot allayeth contentions,
And separateth between the mighty,
i.e., erects a partition wall between them - those contending (הִפְרִיד בֵּין, as at 2Ki 2:11, cf. Arab. frḳ byn); עֲצוּמַים are not opponents who maintain their cause with weighty arguments (עַצֻּמוֹת, Isa 41:21), qui argumentis pollent (vid., Rashi), for then must the truth appear in the pro et contra; but mighty opponents, who, if the lot did not afford a seasonable means of reconciliation, would make good their demands by blows and by the sword (Fl.). Here it is the lot which, as the judgment of God, brings about peace, instead of the ultima ratio of physical force. The proverb refers to the lot what the Epistle to the Heb; Heb 6:16, refers to the oath, vid., at Pro 16:33. Regarding מִדְיָנִים and its altered forms, vid., p. 145.
Pro 18:19
19 A brother toward whom it has been acted perfidiously resists more than a strong tower;
And contentions are like the bar of a palace.
Luther rightly regarded the word נוֹשָׁע, according to which the lxx, Vulg., and Syr. translated frater qui adjuvatur a fratre, as an incorrect reading; one would rather expect אח מושׁיע, “a brother who stands by,” as Luther earlier translated; and besides, נוֹשׁע does not properly mean adjuvari, but salvari. His translation -
Ein verletzt Bruder helt herter denn eine feste Stad,
Und Zanck helt herter, denn rigel am Palast
[a brother wounded resisteth more than a strong city, and strife resisteth more than bolts in the palace], is one of his most happy renderings. מִקִּרְיַת־עֹז in itself only means ὑπὲρ πόλιν ὀχυράν (Venet.); the noun-adjective (cf. Isa 10:10) to be supplied is to be understood to עז: עַז הוּא or קָשֶׁה הוא (Kimchi). The Niph. נפשׁע occurs only here. If one reads נִפְשָׁע, then it means one who is treated falsely = נִפְשָׁע בּוֹ, like the frequently occurring קָמַי, my rising up ones = קָמִים עָלַי, those that rise up against me; but Codd. (Also Baer's Cod. jaman.) and old editions have נִפְשַׁע, which, as we have above translated, gives an impersonal attributive clause; the former: frater perfidiose tractatus (Fl.: mala fide offensus); the latter: perfide actum est, scil. בּוֹ in eum = in quem perfide actum. אח is, after Pro 17:17, a friend in the highest sense of the word; פשׁע means to break off, to break free, with ב or עַל of him on whom the action terminates. That the פּשֵׁעַ is to be thought of as אח of the אח נפשׁע is obvious; the translation, “brothers who break with one another” (Gesen.), is incorrect: אח is not collective, and still less is נפשׁע a reciprocum. The relation of אח is the same as that of אַלּוּף, Pro 16:28. The Targum (improving the Peshito) translates אָחָא דְמִתְ עֲוֵי מִן אֲחוֹי, which does not mean: a brother who renounces (Hitzig), but who is treated wickedly on the part of, his brother. That is correct; on the contrary, Ewald's “a brother resists more than...” proceeds from a meaning of פשׁע which it has not; and Bertheau gives, with Schultens, an untenable
(Note: Among the whole Heb. synon. for sinning, there exists no reflexive Niph.; and also the Arab. fsḳ has no ethical signification. נִסְכָּל only, in the sense of fool, is found.)
reflexive meaning to the Niph. (which as denom. might mean “covered with crime,” Venet. πλημμεληθείς), and, moreover, one that is too weak, for he translates, “a brother is more obstinate then....” Hitzig corrects אֱחֹז פֶּשַׁע, to shut up sin = to hold it fettered; but that is not correct Heb. It ought to be עֲצֹר, כְּבשׁ, or רְדוֹת. In 19a the force of the substantival clause lies in the מִן (more than, i.e., harder = more difficult to be gained), and in 19b in the כְּ; cf. Mic 7:4, where they are interchanged. The parallelism is synonymous: strifes and lawsuits between those who had been friends form as insurmountable a hindrance to their reconciliation, are as difficult to be raised, as the great bars at the gate of a castle (Fl.). The point of comparison is not only the weight of the cross-beam (from ברח, crosswise, across, to go across the field), but also the shutting up of the access. Strife forms a partition wall between such as once stood near each other, and so much thicker the closer they once stood.
With Pro 18:19, the series of proverbs which began with that of the flatterer closes. The catchword אח, which occurred at its commencement, 9b, is repeated at its close, and serves also as a landmark of the group following Pro 18:20-24. The proverb of the breach of friendship and of contentions is followed by one of the reaction of the use of the tongue on the man himself.