Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - Proverbs 6:12 - 6:12
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
There follows now a third brief series of instructions, which run to a conclusion with a deterring prospect similar to the foregoing.
12 A worthless man, a wicked man,
Is he who practiseth falsehood with his mouth;
13 Who winketh with his eyes, scrapeth with his foot,
Pointeth with his fingers.
14 Malice is in his heart,
He deviseth evil at all times,
He spreadeth strife.
15 Therefore suddenly his destruction shall come,
Suddenly shall he be destroyed, and there is no remedy.
It is a question, what is the subject and what the predicate in Pro 6:12. Thus much is clear, that upon him who is here described according to his deceitful conduct the sentence of condemnation shall fall. He who is so described is thus subject, and אָדָם בְּלִיַּעַל is without doubt predicate. But does the complex subject begin with אִישׁ אָוֶן? Thus e.g., Hitzig: “A worthless man is the wicked man who....” But the interchange of עדם and אישׁ is a sign of parallel relation; and if 12b belonged attributively to אישׁ און, then since אִישׁ הָאָוֶן is not used, it ought at least to have been continued by הַהוֹלֵךְ. The general moral categories, 12a, are thus predicates, as was indeed besides probable; the copious division of the subject demands also in point of style a more developed predicate. Pro 16:27 is simpler in plan, and also logically different. There the expression is, as is usual, אִישׁ בליעל. Since אדם און is not possible, the author uses instead בליעל. This word, composed of בְּלִי and יַעַל (from יָעַל, וָעַל, to be useful, to be good for), so fully serves as one word, that it even takes the article, 1Sa 25:25. It denotes worthlessness, generally in a chain of words in the genitive, but also the worthless, Job 34:18; and it is to be so taken here, for אָדָם does not form a constructivus, and never governs a genitive. בליעל is thus a virtual adjective (as nequam in homo nequam); the connection is like that of אדם רָשָׁע, Pro 11:7, and elsewhere, although more appositional than this pure attributive. Synonymous with בליעל is אָוֶן (from an, to breathe), wickedness, i.e., want of all moral character. Thus worthless and wicked is he who practises deceit with his mouth (cf. Pro 4:24), i.e., who makes language the means of untruthfulness and uncharitableness. עִקְּשׁוּת פֶּה is meant in a moral sense, but without excluding that distortion of the mouth which belongs to the mimicry of the malicious. It is the accus. of the object; for הָלַךְ is also bound in a moral sense with the accusative of that which one practises, i.e., dealing with, exercises himself in, Pro 2:7; Pro 28:18, Isa 33:15.
Pro 6:13
קוֹרֵץ בְּעֵינָיו is translated according to the sense: who winks (nictat) with his eyes; but that is not the proper meaning of the word, for קרץ is used not only of the eyes. Pro 10:10 (cf. Pro 16:30, qui oculos morsicat or connivet), Psa 35:19, but also of the lips, Pro 16:30. Thus Löwenstein's explanation: who opens up the eyes, is incorrect. The verb קרץ unites in it the meanings of Arab. qrts, to pinch off with a sharp implement, and Arab. qrd, with a blunt instrument (Arab. miḳraḍ, pincers). It means to pince, to nip, as Arab. ḳarṣ, pincer - e.g., ḳarṣ balskyn alarsasat, he cuts off with the knife the leaden seal - hence frequently, to nip together the eyes, provincially: to wink (“zwickern,” frequent. of “zwicken,” to nip) with the eyes - the action of the deceiver, who thereby gives the sign to others that they help or at least do not hinder him from bantering and mocking, belying and deceiving a third person (Fl.); cf. Ali's proverb, “O God, pardon to us the culpable winking with the eye (ramzat),” and Fleischer's notes thereon, the Proverbs of Ali, p. 100f.
That the words which follow, בְּרַגְלָיו מוֹלֵל, are meant of discourse, i.e., the giving of signs, with the feet, and, so to say, significant oratio pedestris (lxx, Aben-Ezra, Bertheau, Hitzig, and others), is very improbable, since the usage of language has set apart the Piel מִלֵּל for the meaning loqui, and מולל admits another suitable signification, for מוֹלֵל means in Talmudic fricare, confricare - e.g., המולל מלילות, he who grinds the parched ears of corn (b. Beza 12b; Ma'seroth, iv. 5) - after which Syr., Targ., תָכֵס (stamping), Aq. τρίβων, Symm. προστρίβων, Jerome, (qui) terit pede, and Rashi משׁפשׁף (grinding, scratching); it means one who scrapes with his feet, draws them backwards and forwards on the ground in order thereby to give a sign to others; also the Arab. mll, levem et agilem esse, which as the synonym of Arab. sr is connected with Arab. fı̂ of the way, signifies properly to move the feet quickly hither and thither (Fl.).
(Note: The root-idea of the Arab. mall is unquietness of motion; the Arab. noun mallt signifies the glow with its flickering light and burning: glowing ashes, inner agitation, external haste; Arab. malil (מָלֵל) is the feverish patient, but also one quickly hastening away, and generally an impatient or hasty person (vid., Wetstein in Baudissin in his Job. Tischendorfianus, vii. 6). The grinding is made by means of a quick movement hither and thither; and so also is speaking, for the instrument of speech, particularly the tongue, is set in motion. Only the meaning praecidere, circumcidere, does not connect itself with that root-idea: מל in this signification appears to be a nüance of מר, stringere.)
מֹרֶה appears here, in accordance with its primary signification (projicere, sc. brachium or digitum = monstrare), connected with בְּעֶצְבְּעֹתָיו; another expression for this scornful, malicious δακτυλοδεικνεῖν is שְׁלַח אֶצְבַּע, Isa 58:9.
Pro 6:14
In this verse is continued the description of the subject, only once returning to the particip. The clauses are arranged independently, but logically according to the complex conception of the subject. תַּהְפֻּכוֹת .tce are just the knaveries, i.e., the malicious wickedness which comes to light in word and deportment as עקשׁות פה. Regarding the double figure of the smithy and of agriculture underlying חרשׁ, machinari, vid., at Pro 3:29, and regarding the omission of the הוּא to חֹרֵשׁ, at Psa 7:10. The phrase שִׁלֵּחַ מדנים (as Pro 6:19, Pro 16:28), to let loose disputes, so that they break forth, reminds us rather of the unfettering of the winds by Aeolus than of the casting in of the apple of discord. Instead of מדנים the Kerı̂ has מִדְיָנִים; on the other hand, מְדָנִים remains uncorrected Pro 6:19; Pro 10:12. The form מִדְיָנִים occurs once, Pro 18:18, and its constr. מִדְיְנֵי once, Pro 19:13. Everywhere else the text has מדונים, for which the Kerı̂ has מִדְיָנִים, Pro 18:19; Pro 21:9, Pro 21:19; Pro 23:29; Pro 25:24; Pro 26:21; Pro 27:15. The forms מִדְיָן and מְדָן are also recognised: the former stands alone without any analogous example; the latter is compared at least with מְצָד, Arab. masâd (Psalmen, p. 163, 3). Probably these two forms are warranted by Gen 25:2, cf. Gen 37:28, Gen 37:36, where מִדְיָן and מְדָן occur as the names of two sons of Abraham by Keturah. But the national name מִדְיָנִים is no reason for the seven times laying aside of the regular form מדונים, i.e., מְדוֹנִים, which is the plur. of מָדוֹן after the forms מְאוֹרִים, מְעוֹרִים, although מְדוּנִים, after the forms מְבוּשִׁים, מְצוּקִים, is also found.
Pro 6:15
With the 14th verse the description terminates. A worthless and a wicked person is he who does such things. The point lies in the characteristic out of which the conclusion is drawn: therefore his ruin will suddenly come upon him, etc. Regarding אֵיד, the root-meaning of which is illustrated by Amo 2:13, vid., at Pro 1:26. פִּתְאֹם is an old accus. of an absol. פֵּתֶא, of the same meaning as פֶּתַע, used as an adverbial accus., both originating in the root-idea of splitting, opening, breaking out and breaking forth. “Shall be broken to pieces” (as a brittle potter's vessel, Psa 2:9; Isa 30:14; Jer 29:11) is a frequent figure for the destruction (שֶׁבֶר) of an army (cf. Arab. ânksar âljysh), of a city or a state, a man. וְאֵין continues the יִשָּׁבֵר as Pro 29:1 : there shall be as it were no means of recovery for his shattered members (Fl.). Without the Vav this אֵין מַרְפֵּא would be a clause conceived of accusatively, and thus adverbially: without any healing.