Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - Proverbs 29:21 - 29:21
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
21 If one pampers his servant from youth up,
He will finally reach the place of a child.
The lxx had no answer to the question as to the meaning of מנון. On the other hand, for פִּנֵּק, the meaning to fondle; delicatius enutrire, is perfectly warranted by the Aram. and Arab. The Talmud, Succa 52b, resorts to the alphabet בח''אט in order to reach a meaning for מנון. How the Targ. comes to translate the word by מְנַסַּח (outrooted) is not clear; the rendering of Jerome: postea sentiet eum contumacem, is perhaps mediated by the ἔσται γογγυσμός of Symmachus, who combines נון with לון, Niph. γογγύζειν. The ὀθυνηθήσεται of the lxx, with the Syr., von Hofmann has sought to justify (Schriftbew. ii. 2. 404), for he derives מָנוֹן = מַנְהוֹן from נָהָה. We must then punctuate מַנּוֹן; but perhaps the lxx derived the word from אָנַן = מַֽאֲנוֹן, whether they pronounced it מָנוֹן (cf. מָסֹרֶת = מַֽאֲסֹרֶת) or מַנּוֹן. To follow them is not wise, for the formation of the word is precarious; one does not see with the speaker of this proverb, to whom the language presented a fulness of synonyms for the idea of complaint, meant by using this peculiar word. Linguistically these meanings are impossible: of Jerome, dominus = מְמֻנֶּה (Ahron b. Josef, Meîri, and others); or: the oppressed = מוּנֶה, from יָנָה (Johlson); or: one who is sick = מוֹנֶה (Euchel). and Ewald's “undankbar” [unthankful], derived from the Arabic, is a mere fancy, since (Arab.) manuwan does not mean one who is unthankful, but, on the contrary, one who upbraids good deeds shown.
(Note: In Jahrb. xi. p. 10f. Ewald compares, in an expressive way, the Ethiopic mannána (Piel) to scorn; menûn, a reprobate; and mannânı̂, one who is despised; according to which מנון hcih could certainly designate “a man despising scornfully his own benefactors, or an unthankful man.” But this verbal stem is peculiarly Ethiop., and is certainly not once found in Arab. For minnat (which Ewald compares) denotes benefaction, and the duty laid on one thereby, the dependence thereby produced. The verb (Arab.) minn (= מָנַן) signifies to divide; and particularly, partly to confer benefaction, partly to attribute benefaction, reckon to, enumerate, and thereby to bring out the sense of obligation. Thus nothing is to be derived from this verbal stem for מנון.)
The ancients are in the right track, who explain מנון after the verb נוּן, Psa 72:17 = נִין = בֵּן; the Venet., herein following Kimchi, also adopts the nominal form, for it translates (but without perceptible meaning) γόνωσις. Luther's translation is fortunate:
“If a servant is tenderly treated from youth up,
He will accordingly become a Junker [squire].”
The ideas represented in modern Jewish translations: that of a son (e.g., Solomon: he will at last be the son) and that of a master (Zunz), are here united. But how the idea of a son (from the verb נון), at the same time that of a master, may arise, is not to be perceived in the same way as with Junker and the Spanish infante and hidalgo; rather with מנון, as the ironical naming of the son (little son), the idea of a weakling (de Wette) may be connected. The state of the matter appears as follows: - the Verb נוּן has the meanings of luxuriant growth, numerous propagation; the fish has from this the Aram. name of נוּן, like the Heb. דָּג, from דָּגָה, which also means luxuriant, exuberant increase (vid., at Psa 72:17). From this is derived נִין, which designates the offspring as a component part of a kindred, as well as מָנוֹן, which, according as the מ is interpreted infin. or local, means either this, that it sprouts up luxuriantly, the abundant growth, or also the place of luxuriant sprouting, wanton growing, abundant and quick multiplication: thus the place of hatching, spawning. The subject in יִֽהְיֶה might be the fondled one; but it lies nearer, however, to take him who fondles as the subject, as in 21a. אַֽחֲרִיתוֹ is either adv. accus. for בְאחריתו, or, as we preferred at Pro 23:32, it is the subj. introducing, after the manner of a substantival clause, the following sentence as its virtual predicate: “one has fondled his servant from his youth up, and his (that of the one who fondles) end is: he will become a place of increase.” The master of the house is thought of along with his house; and the servant as one who, having become a man, presents his master with יְלִידֵי בַּיִת, who are spoilt scapegraces, as he himself has become by the pampering of his master. There was used in the language of the people, נִין for בֵּן, in the sense on which we name a degenerate son a “Schönes Früchtchen” [pretty little fruit]; and מָנוֹן is a place (house) where many נינים are; and a man (master of a house) who has many of them is one whose family has increased over his head. One reaches the same meaning if מָנון is rendered more immediately as the place or state of growing, increasing, luxuriating. The sense is in any case: he will not be able, in the end, any more to defend himself against the crowd which grows up to him from this his darling, but will be merely a passive part of it.