Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - Proverbs 26:2 - 26:2
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
This verse is formed quite in the same way as the preceding:
As the sparrow in its fluttering, as the swallow in its flying,
So the curse that is groundless: it cometh not.
This passage is one of those fifteen (vid., under Psa 100:3) in which the לא of the text is changed by the Kerı̂ into לו; the Talm., Midrash, and Sohar refer this לּוֹ partly to him who utters the curse himself, against whom also, if he is a judge, such inconsiderate cursing becomes an accusation by God; partly to him who is cursed, for they read from the proverb that the curse of a private person also (הדיוט, ἰδιώτης) is not wont to fall to the ground, and that therefore one ought to be on his guard against giving any occasion for it (vid., Norzi). But Aben Ezra supposes that לא and לו interchange, as much as to say that the undeserved curse falls on him (לו) who curses, and does not fall (לא) on him who is cursed. The figures in 2a harmonize only with לא, according to which the lxx, the Syr., Targ., Venet., and Luther (against Jerome) translate, for the principal matter, that the sparrow and the swallow, although flying out (Pro 27:8), return home again to their nest (Ralbag), would be left out of view in the comparison by לו. This emphasizes the fluttering and flying, and is intended to affirm that a groundless curse is a פֹּרֵחַ בְּאַוֵּיר, aimless, i.e., a thing hovering in the air, that it fails and does not take effect. Most interpreters explain the two Lameds as declaring the destination: ut passer (sc. natus est) ad vagandum, as the sparrow, through necessity of nature, roves about... (Fleischer). But from Pro 25:3 it is evident that the Lamed in both cases declares the reference or the point of comparison: as the sparrow in respect to its fluttering about, etc. The names of the two birds are, according to Aben Ezra, like dreams without a meaning; but the Romanic exposition explains rightly צִפּוֹר by passereau, and דְּרוֹר by hirondelle, for צפור (Arab. 'uṣfuwr), twitterer, designates at least preferably the sparrow, and דרור the swallow, from its flight shooting straight out, as it were radiating (vid., under Psa 84:4); the name of the sparrow, dûrı̂ (found in courtyards), which Wetstein, after Saadia, compares to דרור, is etymologically different.
(Note: It is true that the Gemara to Negaïm, Pro 14:1, explains the Mishnic צפרים דרור, “house-birds,” for it derives דרור from דור, to dwell.)
Regarding חִנָּם, vid., under Pro 24:28. Rightly the accentuation separates the words rendered, “so the curse undeserved” (קִלְלַת, after Kimchi, Michlol 79b, קִֽלֲלַת), from those which follow; לֹא תָבֹא is the explication of כן: thus hovering in the air is a groundless curse - it does not come (בוא, like e.g., Jos 21:43). After this proverb, which is formed like Pro 26:1, the series now returns to the “fool.”