Keil and Delitzsch Commentary - Proverbs 30:32 - 30:32

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary - Proverbs 30:32 - 30:32


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

Another proverb, the last of Agur's “Words” which exhorts to thoughtful, discreet demeanour, here follows the proverb of self-conscious, grave deportment:

32 If thou art foolish in that thou exaltest thyself,

Or in devising, - put thy hand to thy mouth!

33 For the pressure on milk bringeth forth butter,

And pressure on the nose bringeth forth blood,

And pressure on sensibility bringeth forth altercation.

Löwenstein translates Pro 30:32 :

Art thou despicable, it is by boasting;

Art thou prudent, then hold thy hand on thy mouth.

But if זמם denotes reflection and deliberation, then נָבַל, as its opposite, denotes unreflecting, foolish conduct. Then בְּהִתְנַשֵּׂא ne by boasting is not to be regarded as a consequent (thus it happens by lifting thyself up; or: it is connected with boasting); by this construction also, אִם־נָבַלְתָּ must be accented with Dechi, not with Tarcha. Otherwise Euchel:

Hast thou become offensive through pride,

Or seems it so to thee, - lay thy hand to thy mouth.

The thought is appropriate,

(Note: Yet the Talmud, Nidda 27a, derives another moral rule from this proverb, for it interprets זָמַם in the sense of זְמַם = חָסַם, to tie up, to bridle, to shut up, but אם נבלת in the sense of “if thou hast made thyself despicable,” as Löwenstein has done.)

but נָבַלְתָּ for נֻבַּלְתָּ is more than improbable; נָבַל, thus absolutely taken in an ethical connection, is certainly related to נָבָל, as כָּסַל, Jer 10:8, to כְּסִיל. The prevailing mode of explanation is adopted by Fleischer: si stulta arrogantia elatus fueris et si quid durius (in alios) mente conceperis, manum ori impone; i.e., if thou arrogantly, and with offensive words, wilt strive with others, then keep thyself back, and say not what thou hast in thy mind. But while מְזִמָּה and מְזִמּוֹת denote intrigues, Pro 14:17, as well as plans and considerations, זָמַם has never by itself alone the sense of meditari mala; at Psa 37:12, also with ל of the object at which the evil devices aim. Then for וְאִם ... אִם (Arab. ân ... wân) there is the supposition of a correlative relation, as e.g., 1Ki 20:18; Ecc 11:3, by which at the same time זַמּוֹתָ is obviously thought of as a contrast to נָבַלְתָּ. This contrast excludes

(Note: The Arab. signification, to become proud, is a nüance of the primary signification, to hold erect - viz. the head - as when the rider draws up the head of a camel by means of the halter (Arab. zamam).)

for זמות not only the sense of mala moliri (thus e.g., also Mühlau), but also the sense of the Arab. zamm, superbire (Schultens). Hitzig has the right determination of the relation of the members of the sentence and the ideas: if thou art irrational in ebullition of temper and in thought - thy hand to thy mouth! But הִתְנִשֵּׂא has neither here nor elsewhere the meaning of הִתְעַבֵּר (to be out of oneself with anger); it signifies everywhere to elevate or exalt oneself, i.e., rightly or wrongly to make much of oneself. There are cases where a man, who raises himself above others, appears as a fool, and indeed acts foolishly; but there are also other cases, when the despised has a reason and an object for vindicating his superiority, his repute, his just claim: when, as we say, he places himself in his right position, and assumes importance; the poet here recommends, to the one as well as to the other, silence. The rule that silence is gold has its exceptions, but here also it is held valid as a rule. Luther and others interpret the perfecta as looking back: “hast thou become a fool and ascended too high and intended evil, then lay thy hand on thy mouth.” But the reason in Pro 30:33 does not accord with this rendering, for when that has been done, the occasion for hatred is already given; but the proverb designs to warn against the stirring up of hatred by the reclaiming of personal pretensions. The perfecta, therefore, are to be interpreted as at Deu 32:29; Job 9:15, as the expression of the abstract present; or better, as at Job 9:16, as the expression of the fut. exactum: if thou wouldest have acted foolishly, since thou walkest proudly, or if thou hadst (before) thought of it (Aquila, Theodotion: καὶ ἐὰν ἐννοηθῇς) - the hand on thy mouth, i.e., let it alone, be silent rather (expression as Pro 11:24; Jdg 18:19; Job 40:4). The Venet. best: εἴπερ ἐμώρανας ἐν τῷ ἐπαίρεσθαι καὶ εἴπερ ἐλογίσω, χεὶρ τῷ στόματι. When we have now interpreted התנשׂא, not of the rising up of anger, we do not also, with Hitzig, interpret the dual of the two snorting noses - viz. of the double anger, that of him who provokes to anger, and that of him who is made angry - but אַפַּיִם denotes the two nostrils of one and the same person, and, figuratively, snorting or anger. Pressure against the nose is designated ומִֽיץ־אַף, ἐκμύζησις (ἐκπίεσις) μυκτῆρος (write ומִֽיץ־אף, with Metheg, with the long tone, after Metheg-Setzung, §11, 9, 12), and מִיץ אַפַּיִם, ἐκμύζησις θυμοῦ (Theodotion), with reference to the proper meaning of אפים, pressure to anger, i.e., to the stirring up and strengthening of anger. The nose of him who raises himself up comes into view, in so far as, with such self-estimation, sneering, snuffling scorn (μυκτηρίζειν) easily connects itself; but this view of מתנשׂא is not here spoken of.