The object of the verb is the “words of the traitor” ( בֹגֵד דִּבְרֵי , divre voged ); cf. NASB “the words of the treacherous man.” What treacherous people say is treachery. In this context “traitor, treacherous” refers to one who is “unfaithful” (cf. NIV). sn The proverb affirms that God in safeguarding true knowledge will frustrate deception from faithless people – what they say will not have its intended effect.


The LXX changes the phrase to read “murderers in the street” to form a better parallelism, possibly because the verb רָצַח ( ratsakh ) is used only of humans, not wild animals. The NIV attempts to solve the problem by making the second line a separate claim by the sluggard: “or, ‘I will be murdered in the streets!’”


The comparative “like” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is implied by the metaphor; it is supplied for the sake of clarity.


Heb “the one who is cursed by the Lord” (cf. NASB). The construction uses the passive participle in construct with Yahweh. The “ Lord ” is genitive of agency after the passive form. The verb means “be indignant, express indignation.” So it is talking about one against whom the Lord is angry.


Heb “will fall there.” The “falling” could refer to the curse itself or to the result of the curse. sn The proverb is saying that the Lord will use the seductive, deceptive words of the adulteress to bring about the downfall of one who is inclined to such folly.


The “heart of a child” ( לֶב־נָעַר , lev-na ’ ar ) refers here to the natural inclination of a child to foolishness. The younger child is meant in this context, but the word can include youth. R. N. Whybray suggests that this idea might be described as a doctrine of “original folly” ( Proverbs [CBC], 125). Cf. TEV “Children just naturally do silly, careless things.”


The word “rod” is a metonymy of adjunct; it represents physical chastening for direction or punishment, to suppress folly and develop potential. The genitive (“discipline”) may be taken as an attributive genitive (“a chastening rod”) or an objective genitive, (“a rod [= punishment] that brings about correction/discipline”).


Heb “oppressing the poor, it is gain; giving to the rich, it is loss.” The Hebrew is cryptic, but two sins are mentioned here that will be punished by poverty: extortion and bribery. Perhaps the proverb is simply saying it is easy to oppress the poor for gain, but it is a waste of money to try to buy or bribe a patron (D. Kidner, Proverbs [TOTC], 149).


Heb “knowledge” (so KJV, NASB); in this context it refers to the knowledge that is spoken by the wise, hence “instruction.”


Or “when” (so NIV).


Heb “keep them,” referring to the words of the wise expressed in these sayings. The referent has been specified in the translation for clarity.


The term “and” does not appear in the Hebrew but is supplied in the translation.


The form לִהְיוֹת ( lihyot , “to be”) is the infinitive construct indicating the purpose (or result) of the teaching (cf. NASB, NIV, NRSV).


Heb “I cause you to know.” The term “today” indicates that the verb should have the instantaneous nuance, and so an English present tense is used in the translation (“am making…known”).


Older English versions and a few more recent ones render this phrase as either “excellent things” following the Qere (so KJV, ASV, NASB, NKJV), “officers,” or “heretofore” [day before yesterday], following the Kethib . However (as in most recent English versions) the Qere should be rendered “thirty,” referring to the number in the collection (cf. NAB, NIV, NRSV, NLT).


The term “sayings” does not appear in the Hebrew text but is supplied in the translation for the sake of clarity.


Heb “to cause you to know the truth of words of truth” (NASB similar).


Heb “to return true words”; NAB “a dependable report”; NIV “sound answers.”


Two negated jussives form the instruction here: אַל־תִּגְזָל (’ al-tigzal , “do not exploit”) and וְאַל־תְּדַכֵּא ( ve ’ al-tÿdakke ’, “do not crush”). sn Robbing or oppressing the poor is easy because they are defenseless. But this makes the crime tempting as well as contemptible. What is envisioned may be in bounds legally (just) but out of bounds morally.


Heb “in the gate” (so KJV); NAB, NASB, NRSV “at the gate.” The “gate” of the city was the center of activity, the place of business as well as the place for settling legal disputes. The language of the next verse suggests a legal setting, so “court” is an appropriate translation here.


The construction uses the verb יָרִיב ( yariv ) with its cognate accusative. It can mean “to strive,” but here it probably means “to argue a case, plead a case” (cf. KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV). How the Lord will do this is not specified – either through righteous people or by direct intervention.


The verb קָבַע ( qava ’, “to rob; to spoil; to plunder”) is used here in both places to reflect the principle of talionic justice. What the oppressors did to the poor will be turned back on them by the Lord .


Heb “possessor of anger.” This expression is an idiom for “wrathful person” or “an angry person” (cf. NAB “a hotheaded man”; NLT “short-tempered people”). These are people characterized by anger, meaning the anger is not a rare occurrence with them.


The verb פֶּן־תֶּאֱלַף ( pen-te ’ elaf ) is translated “lest you learn.” The idea is more precisely “become familiar with his ways.” The construction indicates that if one associates with such people he will become like them (cf. TEV “you might learn their habits”).


The “bed” may be a metonymy of adjunct, meaning the garment that covers the bed (e.g., Exod 22:26 ). At any rate, it represents the individual’s last possession (like the English expression “the shirt off his back”).


Heb “If you cannot pay, why should he take the bed from under you?” This rhetorical question is used to affirm the statement. The rhetorical interrogative לָמָּה ( lamah , “why?”) appears in MT but not in the ancient versions; it may be in the Hebrew text by dittography.


Heb “your fathers” (so NAB, NASB). sn The fourth saying deals with respect for property that belongs to other people (cf. Instruction of Amenemope, chap. 6, 7:12-13 [ ANET 422]).


The verb form used twice here is יִתְיַצֵּב ( yityatsev ), the Hitpael imperfect of יָצַב ( yatsav ), which means “to set or station oneself; to take one’s stand” in this stem. With the form לִפְנֵי ( life ) it means “to present oneself before” someone; so here it has the idea of serving as a courtier in the presence of a king.


The construction uses the imperfect tense of instruction with the infinitive absolute to emphasize the careful discernment required on such occasions. Cf. NIV “note well”; NLT “pay attention.”


Or “who,” referring to the ruler (so ASV, NAB, TEV).


Heb “lord of appetite.” The idiom בַּעַל נֶפֶשׁ ( ba ’ al nefesh ) refers to someone who possesses a large appetite (cf. NAB “a ravenous appetite”). A person with a big appetite is in danger of taking liberties when invited to court.


Heb “his”; the referent (the ruler mentioned in v. 1 ) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


Heb “from your understanding cease.” In the context this means that the person should have enough understanding to stop wearing himself out trying to be rich (cf. NRSV “be wise enough to desist”).


The Kethib is הֲתָעוּף ( hata ’ uf ), “do your eyes fly [light] on it?” The Qere is the Hiphil, הֲתָעִיף ( hata ’ if ) “do you cause your eyes to fly on it?” But the line is difficult. The question may be indirect: If you cast your eyes on it, it is gone – when you think you are close, it slips away. tn The term “riches” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation based on the previous verse.


Heb “an evil eye.” This is the opposite of the “good eye” which meant the generous man. The “evil eye” refers to a person who is out to get everything for himself (cf. NASB, NCV, CEV “selfish”). He is ill-mannered and inhospitable (e.g., Prov 28:22 ). He is up to no good – even though he may appear to be a host.


The line is difficult; it appears to mean that the miser is the kind of person who has calculated the cost of everything in his mind as he offers the food. The LXX has: “Eating and drinking with him is as if one should swallow a hair; do not introduce him to your company nor eat bread with him.” The Hebrew verb “to calculate” ( שָׁעַר , sha ’ ar ) with a change of vocalization and of sibilant would yield “hair” ( שֵׂעָר , se ’ ar ) – “like a hair in the throat [ נֶפֶשׁ , nefesh ], so is he.” This would picture an irritating experience. The Instruction of Amenemope uses “blocking the throat” in a similar saying (chapt. 11, 14:7 [ ANET 423]). The suggested change is plausible and is followed by NRSV; but the rare verb “to calculate” in the MT would be easier to defend on the basis of the canons of textual criticism because it is the more difficult reading.


The phrase “the cost” does not appear in the Hebrew but is implied by the verb; it is supplied in the translation for the sake of clarity.


Heb “soul.”


Or “your compliments” (so NASB, NIV); cf. TEV “your flattery.” sn This is the eighth saying; it claims that it would be a mistake to accept hospitality from a stingy person. He is always thinking about the cost, his heart is not in it, and any attempt at pleasant conversation will be lost.


Or “encroach on” (NIV, NRSV); Heb “go into.”


The participle גֹּאֵל ( go ’ el ) describes a “kinsman redeemer.” Some English versions explicitly cite “God” (e.g., NCV, CEV) or “the Lord” (e.g. TEV). sn The Hebrew term describes a “kinsman-redeemer.” That individual would be a rich or powerful relative who can protect the family; he does this by paying off the debts of a poor relative, buying up the property of a relative who sells himself into slavery, marrying the widow of a deceased relative to keep the inheritance in the family, or taking vengeance on someone who harms a relative, that vengeance often resulting in delivering (“redeeming”) the relative from bondage. If there was no human “kinsman redeemer,” then the defenseless had to rely on God to perform these actions (e.g., Gen 48:16 ; Exod 6:6 ; Job 19:25 ; –63). In the prophetic literature God is presented as the Redeemer in that he takes vengeance on the enemies (the Babylonians) to deliverer his people (kin). In this proverb the Lord is probably the Protector of these people who will champion their cause and set things right.


Heb “bring.” The Hiphil imperative “come; enter” means “to apply the heart,” to use the heart or mind in the process. The same would be true in the second half: “to bring the ears” would mean to listen very carefully. Cf. TEV “Pay attention.”


Or “punish” (NIV). The syntax of these two lines suggests a conditional clause (cf. NCV, NRSV).


Heb “his soul.” The term נֶפֶשׁ ( nefesh , “soul”) functions as a synecdoche of part (= soul) for the whole (= person); see BDB 660 s.v. 4 .


The term שְׁאוֹל ( shÿ ’ ol , “Sheol”) in this context probably means “death” (so NIV, NCV, NLT) and not the realm of the departed (wicked) spirits (cf. NAB “the nether world”). In the wisdom of other lands, Ahiqar 6:82 says, “If I strike you, my son, you will not die.” The idea is that discipline helps the child to a full life; if the child dies prematurely, it would be more than likely a consequence of not being trained by discipline. In the book of Proverbs the “death” mentioned here could be social as well as physical.


Heb “my son,” although the context does not limit this exhortation to male children.


Heb “my kidneys”; in biblical Hebrew the term was used for the innermost being, the soul, the central location of the passions. Cf. NASB, NIV “my inmost being.”


The verb in this line is אַל־יְקַנֵּא (’ al-yÿqanne ’), the Piel jussive negated. The verb means “to be jealous, to be zealous”; it describes passionate intensity for something. In English, if the object is illegitimate, it is called “envy”; if it is correct, it is called “zeal.” Here the warning is not to envy the sinners. The second colon could use the verb in the positive sense to mean “but rather let your passion burn for the fear of the Lord .”


Heb “the fear of the Lord .” This expression features an objective genitive: “fearing the Lord .”


Heb “end” (so KJV); ASV “a reward.”


Heb “my son,” but the immediate context does not limit this to male children.


Heb “do not be among,” but in the sense of “associate with” (TEV); “join” (NIV); “consort…with” (NAB).


The verb סָבָא ( sava ’) means “to imbibe; to drink largely.” The participial construction here, סֹבְאֵי־יַיִן ( sov ’ e-yayin ), describes “drunkards” (cf. NLT) which is somewhat stronger than saying it refers to “people who drink too much” (cf. NIV, TEV).


The verb זָלַל ( zalal ) means “to be light; to be worthless; to make light of.” Making light of something came to mean “to be lavish with; to squander,” especially with regard to food. So it describes “gluttons” primarily; but in the expression there is also room for the person who wastes a lot of food as well.


Here “drowsiness” is a metonymy of effect or adjunct, put for the drunkenness and gluttony that causes it. So all of it, the drunkenness and the drowsiness that comes from it, brings on the ruin (cf. CEV “you will end up poor”). Likewise, “rags” is a metonymy of adjunct, associated with the poverty brought on by a dissolute lifestyle.


Heb “buy” (so KJV, NASB, NIV, NLT); CEV “Invest in truth.” sn The sixteenth saying is an instruction to buy/acquire the kind of life that pleases God and brings joy to parents. “Getting truth” would mean getting training in the truth, and getting wisdom and understanding would mean developing the perception and practical knowledge of the truth.


The Qere reading has the imperfect יָגִיל ( yagil ) with the cognate accusative גִּיל ( gil ) which intensifies the meaning and the specific future of this verb.


The term “child” is supplied for the masculine singular adjective here.


The form תָגֵל ( tagel ) is clearly a short form and therefore a jussive (“may she…rejoice”); if this second verb is a jussive, then the parallel יִשְׂמַח ( yismakh ) should be a jussive also (“may your father and your mother have joy”).


Heb “my son”; the reference to a “son” is retained in the translation here because in the following lines the advice is to avoid women who are prostitutes.


The comparative “like” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is implied by the metaphor; it is supplied for the sake of clarity.


Heb “foreign woman” (so ASV). The term נָכְרִיָּה ( nokhriyyah , “foreign woman”) often refers to a prostitute (e.g., Prov 2:6; 5:20; 6:24; 7:5 ). While not all foreign women in Israel were prostitutes, their prospects for economic survival were meager and many turned to prostitution to earn a living. Some English versions see this term referring to an adulteress as opposed to a prostitute (cf. NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT).


The comparative “like” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is implied by the metaphor; it is supplied in the translation for the sake of clarity.


The noun חֶתֶף ( khetef ) is defined by BDB 369 s.v. as “prey,” but this is the only occurrence of the word. The related verb BDB 368-69 s.v. חָתַף defines as “to seize; to snatch away” (with an Aramaic cognate meaning “to break in pieces” [ Pa ], and an Arabic word “death”). But the only occurrence of that word is in Job 9:12 , where it is defined as “seizes.” So in this passage the noun could have either a passive sense (what is seized = prey), or an active sense (the one who seizes = a robber, bandit). The traditional rendering is “prey” (KJV); most modern English versions have the active sense (“robber” or similar; cf. NIV “like a bandit”). Since the prepositional phrase (the simile) is modifying the woman, the active sense works better in the translation.


The participle means “unfaithful [men]” (masculine plural); it could also be interpreted as “unfaithfulness” in the abstract sense. M. Dahood interprets it to mean “garments” (which would have to be repointed), saying that she collects garments in pledge for her service (M. Dahood, “To Pawn One’s Cloak,” Bib 42 [1961]: 359-66). But that is far-fetched; it might have happened on occasion, but as a common custom it is unlikely. Besides that, the text in the MT makes perfectly good sense without such a change. sn Such a woman makes more people prove unfaithful to the law of God through her practice.


Heb “its eye gives.” With CEV’s “bubbling up in the glass” one might think champagne was in view.


The expression is difficult, and is suspected of having been added from Song 7:10 , although the parallel is not exact. The verb is the Hitpael imperfect of הָלַךְ ( halakh ); and the prepositional phrase uses the word “upright; equity; pleasing,” from יָשָׁר ( yashar ). KJV has “when it moveth itself aright”; much more helpful is ASV: “when it goeth down smoothly.” Most recent English versions are similar to ASV. The phrase obviously refers to the pleasing nature of wine.


Heb “its end”; NASB “At the last”; TEV (interpretively) “The next morning.”


The feminine plural of זָר ( zar , “strange things”) refers to the trouble one has in seeing and speaking when drunk.


Heb “heart.” The idiom here means “middle”; KJV “in the midst.”


The phrase “You will say” is supplied in the translation to make it clear that the drunkard is now speaking.


The last line has only “I will add I will seek it again.” The use of אוֹסִיף (’ osif ) signals a verbal hendiadys with the next verb: “I will again seek it.” In this context the suffix on the verb refers to the wine – the drunkard wants to go and get another drink.


Heb “evil men,” although the context indicates a generic sense.


The Hitpael jussive is from the verb that means “to crave; to desire.” This is more of a coveting, an intense desire.


The preposition בְּ ( bet , “by; through”) in these two lines indicates means.


The expression בַּעוֹז ( ba ’ oz ) employs a beth essentiae , meaning he “ is strong,” not “in strength.”


The MT reads רָאמוֹת ( ra ’ mot , “corals”) – wisdom to the fool is corals, i.e., an unattainable treasure. With a slight change in the text, removing the א ( alef ), the reading is רָמוֹת ( ramot , “high”), i.e., wisdom is too high – unattainable – for a fool. The internal evidence favors the emendation, which is followed by most English versions including KJV.


Heb “[city] gate,” a metonymy of subject, meaning what goes on in the gate – court cases and business transactions. So it is in these assemblies that the fool keeps quiet. The term “court” has been used in the translation for clarity. Some English versions do not emphasize the forensic connotation here: NCV “in a discussion”; NLT “When the leaders gather.”


Heb “possessor of schemes”; NAB “an intriguer.” The picture of the wicked person is graphic: He devises plans to do evil and is known as a schemer. Elsewhere the “schemes” are outrageous and lewd (e.g., Lev 18:7 ; Judg 20:6 ). Here the description portrays him as a cold, calculating, active person: “the fool is capable of intense mental activity but it adds up to sin” (W. McKane, Proverbs [OTL], 399).


Heb “the scheme of folly” (NIV similar). The genitive functions as an attributive genitive, meaning “foolish scheme.” But it could also be interpreted as a genitive of source, the scheme that comes from folly (or from the fool if “folly” were metonymical).


Heb “to a man”; cf. CEV “Everyone hates senseless fools.” sn This describes evil people who flout all morality and goodness; sooner or later the public will have had enough of them.


Heb “show yourself slack” (NASB similar). The verb רָפָה ( rafah ) means “to sink; to relax.” In the causative stems it means “to let slacken; to let go; to refrain; to fail; to do nothing.” In the Hitpael stem BDB 952 s.v. defines it as “to show yourself slack.” It has also been rendered as “give up” (NCV, CEV); “fail” (NLT); “falter” (NIV). The colon implies a condition, for which the second part of the verse is the apodosis.


The verse employs a paronomasia to underscore the point: “trouble” is צָרָה ( tsarah ), literally “a bind; a strait [or, narrow] place”; “small” is צַר ( tsar ), with the same idea of “narrow” or “close.”


The idea of “slipping” (participle from מוֹט , mot ) has troubled some commentators. G. R. Driver emends it to read “at the point of” (“Problems in Proverbs,” ZAW 50 [1932]: 146). But the MT as it stands makes good sense. The reference would be general, viz., to help any who are in mortal danger or who might be tottering on the edge of such disaster – whether through sin, or through disease, war, or danger. Several English versions (e.g., NASB, NIV, NRSV) render this term as “staggering.” sn God holds people responsible for rescuing those who are in mortal danger. The use of “death” and “slaughter” seems rather strong in the passage, but they have been used before in the book for the destruction that comes through evil.


Heb “weighs” (so NASB, NIV, NRSV) meaning “tests” or “evaluates.”


D. W. Thomas argues for a meaning of “seek” in place of “know” (“Notes on Some Passages in the Book of Proverbs,” JTS 38 [1937]: 400-403).


The phrase “is sweet” is supplied in the translation as a clarification.


The term “it” is supplied in the translation.


Heb “there will be an end.” The word is אַחֲרִית (’ akhrit , “after-part, end”). BDB 31 s.v. b says in a passage like this it means “a future,” i.e., a happy close of life, sometimes suggesting the idea of posterity promised to the righteous, often parallel to “hope.”


The word “wicked” could be taken as a vocative (cf. KJV, ASV, NASB, “O wicked man ”); but since the next line refers to the wicked this is unlikely. It serves better as an adverbial accusative (“like the wicked”).


The clause beginning with כִּי ( ki ) could be interpreted as causal or conditional; but in view of the significance of the next clause it seems better to take it as a concessive clause (“although”). Its verb then receives a modal nuance of possibility. The apodosis is then “and he rises up,” which could be a participle or a perfect tense; although he may fall, he gets up (or, will get up). sn The righteous may suffer adversity or misfortune any number of times – seven times here – but they will “rise” for virtue triumphs over evil in the end (R. N. Whybray, Proverbs [CBC], 140).


The verb could be translated with an English present tense (“are brought down,” so NIV) to express what happens to the wicked in this life; but since the saying warns against being like the wicked, their destruction is more likely directed to the future.


Heb “and [it is] evil in his eyes.”


Heb “there is no end [i.e., future] for the evil.”


Heb “my son,” but there is no indication in the immediate context that this should be limited only to male children.


Heb “do not get mixed up with”; cf. TEV “Have nothing to do with”; NIV “do not join with.” The verb עָרַב (’ arav ) is used elsewhere meaning “to exchange; to take on pledge.” In the Hitpael stem it means “to have fellowship; to share; to associate with.” Some English versions (e.g., KJV) interpret as “to meddle” in this context, because “to have fellowship” is certainly not what is meant.


The form rendered “rebellious” is difficult; it appears to be the Qal active participle, plural, from שָׁנָה ( shanah ), “to change” – “those who change.” The RV might have thought of the idea of “change” when they rendered it “political agitators.” The Syriac and Tg . Prov 24:21 have “fools,” the Latin has “detractors,” and the LXX reads, “do not disobey either of them,” referring to God and the king in the first line. Accordingly the ruin predicted in the next line would be the ruin that God and the king can inflict. If the idea of “changers” is retained, it would have to mean people who at one time feared God and the king but no longer do.


Heb “will rise” (so NASB).


Heb “the ruin of the two of them.” Judgment is sent on the rebels both by God and the king. The term פִּיד ( pid , “ruin; disaster”) is a metonymy of effect, the cause being the sentence of judgment (= “ruinous judgment” in the translation; cf. NLT “punishment”). The word “two of them” is a subjective genitive – they two bring the disaster on the rebels. The referents (the Lord and the king) have been specified in the translation for clarity. sn The reward for living in peace under God in this world is that those who do will escape the calamities that will fall on the rebellious. Verse 21 a is used in 1 Peter 2:17 , and v. 22 is used in Romans 13:1-7 (v. 4 ). This is the thirtieth and last of this collection.


Heb “to recognize faces”; KJV, ASV “to have respect of persons”; NLT “to show favoritism.”


Heb “not good.” This is a figure known as tapeinosis – a deliberate understatement to emphasize a worst-case scenario: “it is terrible!”


The word means “wicked; guilty” or “criminal”; the contrast could be “wicked – righteous” (cf. KJV, ASV, NAB, NASB) or “innocent – guilty” (cf. NIV, TEV, CEV). Since this line follows the statement about showing partiality in judgment, it involves a forensic setting. Thus the statement describes one who calls a guilty person innocent or acquitted.


Or “righteous”; the same Hebrew word may be translated either “innocent” or “righteous” depending on the context.


The verb means “to be indignant.” It can be used within the range of “have indignation,” meaning “loathe” or “abhor,” or express indignation, meaning “denounce” or “curse.” In this passage, in collocation with the previous term “curse,” the latter is intended (cf. NAB, NIV, NLT).


The verb means “to be pleasant; to be delightful.” The imperfect tense promises that there “will be delight” to those who rebuke the wicked.


The verb יָכַח ( yakhakh ) means “to decide; to adjudge; to prove.” This word occurs frequently in the book of Proverbs meaning “to reprove” or “to rebuke.” It deals with disputes, legal or otherwise. It can refer to a charge against someone or starting a dispute (and so rebuke); it can mean quarrel, argue; and it can mean settle a dispute. In this context the first or last use would work: (1) reproving the wicked for what they do (cf. KJV, NASB, NRSV), or (2) convicting them in a legal setting (cf. NAB, NIV, NLT). In light of the previous forensic context the second sense is preferred here.


“The guilty” is supplied in the translation for clarity based on the preceding context. See the previous note on the word “convict”: If a non-forensic context is preferred for vv. 23-25 , “wicked” would be supplied here.


The expression is בִרְכַּת־טוֹב ( birkat-tov , “blessing of good”); the genitive “good” has to be an attributive genitive modifying “blessings.” The word is general enough to mean any number of things – rich, healthy, pleasing, etc. The parallelism here narrows the choice. Some English versions interpret the “blessing” here as prosperity (cf. NAB, TEV, CEV).


Heb “the one who returns right words kisses the lips.” This is an implied comparison for giving an honest answer. Honesty is like a kiss. The kiss would signify love, devotion, sincerity, and commitment (in that culture) – an outward expression of what is in the heart. It is an apt illustration of telling the truth. Some English versions now replace the figure to avoid cultural misunderstanding (cf. TEV, CEV “a sign of true friendship”; NLT “an honor”).


The perfect tense with vav following the imperatives takes on the force of an imperative here.


Heb “lips.” The term “lips” is a metonymy of cause; it means “what is said.” Here it refers to what is said in court as a false witness.


Heb “repay to the man.” The verb is שׁוּב ( shuv ), which in the Hiphil stem means “to restore; to repay; to return” (cf. TEV, CEV, NLT “I’ll get even”). The idea is that of repaying someone for what he did.


Heb “lacks heart”; KJV “understanding”; NAB, NASB, NLT “sense.”


The Hebrew term וְהִנֵּה ( vÿhinneh , traditionally “and, lo” [KJV, ASV]) is a deictic particle that calls attention to what comes next. “And look” is too abrupt here; “I saw” calls attention to the field that was noticed.


Heb “its face” (so KJV, ASV).


Heb “I looked, I received instruction.” There are four verbs in the two parts of this verse: “I saw…I set…I saw…I received.” It is clear that the first two verbs in each half verse are the foundation for the next two. At the beginning of the verse the form is the preterite with the vav ( ו ) consecutive; it can be subordinated as a temporal clause to the next verb, probably to be identified as a preterite with the vav – “when I saw, I put.” The next two verbs are both perfect tenses; their construction would parallel the first half of the verse, even though there are no conjunctions here – “[when] I saw, I received.” sn The teacher makes several observations of the state of the sluggard that reveal that his continued laziness will result in poverty. The reminiscence used here may be a literary device to draw a fictional but characteristically true picture of the lazy person.


Heb “a man of shield.” This could refer to an armed warrior (so NRSV) but in this context, in collocation with the other word for “robber” in the previous line, it must refer to an armed criminal.


Heb “heavens for height and earth for depth.” The proverb is clearly intending the first line to be an illustration of the second – it is almost emblematic parallelism.


The Hebrew כֶּלִי ( keli ) means “vessel; utensil” (cf. KJV, ASV, NASB). But purging dross from silver does not produce a “vessel” for the silversmith. Some versions therefore render it “material” (e.g., NIV, NRSV). The LXX says “that it will be entirely pure.” So D. W. Thomas reads כָּלִיל ( kalil ) and translates it “purified completely” (“Notes on Some Passages in the Book of Proverbs,” VT 15 [1965]: 271-79; cf. NAB). W. McKane simply rearranges the line to say that the smith can produce a work of art ( Proverbs [OTL], 580; cf. TEV “a thing of beauty”). The easiest explanation is that “vessel” is a metonymy of effect, “vessel” put for the material that goes into making it (such metonymies occur fairly often in Psalms and Proverbs).


The phrase “for him” is supplied in the translation for clarity.


The two infinitives construct form the contrast in this “better” sayings; each serves as the subject of its respective clause.


Most modern commentators either omit this last line or attach it to the next verse. But it is in the text of the MT as well as the LXX, Syriac, Vulgate, and most modern English versions (although some of them do connect it to the following verse, e.g., NAB, NIV, NRSV, NLT).


Heb “do not go out hastily to strive”; the verb “to strive” means dispute in the legal context. The last clause of v. 7 , “what your eyes have seen,” does fit very well with the initial clause of v. 8 . It would then say: What you see, do not take hastily to court, but if the case was not valid, he would end up in disgrace. sn The Hebrew verb רִיב ( riv ) is often used in legal contexts; here the warning is not to go to court hastily lest it turn out badly.


The clause begins with פֶּן ( pen , “lest”) which seems a bit out of place in this line. C. H. Toy suggests changing it to כִּי ( ki , “for”) to make a better connection, instead of supplying an ellipsis: “lest it be said what…” ( Proverbs [ICC], 461).


The verse begins with the direct object רִיבְךָ ( ribkha , “your case”) followed by the imperative from the same root, רִיב ( riv , “argue”). It is paralleled by the negated Piel jussive. The construction of the clauses indicates that the first colon is foundational to the second: “Argue…but do not reveal,” or better, “When you argue…do not reveal.”


The noun דִּבָּה ( dibbah , “infamy; defamation; evil report; whispering”) is used of an evil report here (e.g., Gen 37:2 ), namely a true report of evil doing. So if a person betrays another person’s confidence, he will never be able to live down the bad reputation he made as one who betrays secrets (cf. NIV).


Heb “on its wheels.” This expression means “aptly, fittingly.” The point is obviously about the immense value and memorable beauty of words used skillfully (R. N. Whybray, Proverbs [CBC], 148). Noting the meaning of the term and the dual form of the word, W. McKane suggests that the expression is metaphorical for the balancing halves of a Hebrew parallel wisdom saying: “The stichos is a wheel, and the sentence consisting of two wheels is a ‘well-turned’ expression” ( Proverbs [OTL], 584). The line then would be describing a balanced, well-turned saying, a proverb; it is skillfully constructed, beautifully written, and of lasting value.


The “ear of the listener” refers to the obedient disciple, the one who complies with the reproof he hears. Cf. KJV, ASV, NAB “an obedient ear.”


Heb “he restores the life [or, soul] of his masters.” The idea suggests that someone who sends the messenger either entrusts his life to him or relies on the messenger to resolve some concern. A faithful messenger restores his master’s spirit and so is “refreshing.”


The form מִתְהַלֵּל ( mithallel ) is the Hitpael participle of the well-known word for “praise”; but in this stem it means “to praise oneself” or “to boast.” The description of “windbag” seems appropriate in this context.


Heb “a gift of falsehood.” This would mean that the individual brags about giving a gift, when there is no gift.


Heb “long of anger” or “forbearance” (so NASB).


The two imperfect verbs in this line may be nuanced as potential imperfects because what is described could happen, but does not do so as a rule.


The “tongue” is a metonymy of cause; and so the expression here refers to soft or gentle speech. This fits well with the parallel idea of patience (“long of anger”) – through a calm patient persuasion much can be accomplished. Some English versions relate this figure directly to the persuasion of a ruler in the previous line (cf. TEV “can even convince rulers”).


The verse simply begins “you have found honey.” Some turn this into an interrogative clause for the condition laid down (cf. KJV, ASV, NASB, NLT); most make the form in some way subordinate to the following instruction: “when you find…eat.”


The verb means “to be satisfied; to be sated; to be filled.” Here it means more than satisfied, since it describes one who overindulges and becomes sick. The English verb “stuffed” conveys this idea well.


Heb “make your foot rare.” The verb is הֹקַר ( hoqar ), the Hiphil imperative of יָקַר ( yaqar , “to be rare; to be precious”). To “make one’s foot rare” would mean to keep the visits to a minimum as well as making them valuable – things increase in value, according to the nuances of this word, when they are rare.


Heb “gets full.” This verb means “to be sated; to be satisfied; to be filled.” It is often used with reference to food, but here it refers to frequent visits that wear out one’s welcome (cf. NLT).


The verb עָנָה (’ anah ) followed by the preposition בְּ ( bet ) with its object means “to testify against” (answer against someone). With the preposition לְ ( lamed ) it would mean “to testify for” someone. Here the false witness is an adversary, hence the comparison with deadly weapons.


While עֵד (’ ed ) could be interpreted as “evidence” (a meaning that came from a metonymy – what the witness gives in court), its normal meaning is “witness.” Here it would function as an adverbial accusative, specifying how he would answer in court.


Since there is no preposition to clarify the construction, there are two ways to take the term מִבְטָח ( mivtakh , “confidence”) in the context. It can either refer (1) to reliance on an unfaithful person, or it can refer (2) to that on which the unfaithful person relies. C. H. Toy argues for the second, that what the faithless person relies on will fail him in the time of trouble ( Proverbs [ICC], 466). This view requires a slight change in the MT to make “confidence” a construct noun (i.e., the confidence of the faithless); the first view, which fits better the MT as it stands, says that “confidence [in] a faithless person” is like relying on a decaying tooth or a lame foot. This is the view preferred in most English versions, including the present one.


Heb “in the day of trouble”; KJV, NASB “in time of trouble.”


The consonants of the Hebrew text of this verse are similar to the consonants in v. 19 . The LXX has a much longer reading: “Like vinegar is bad for a wound, so a pain that afflicts the body afflicts the heart. Like a moth in a garment, and a worm in wood, so the pain of a man wounds the heart” (NRSV follows much of the LXX reading; NAB follows only the second sentence of the LXX reading). The idea that v. 20 is a dittogram is not very convincing; and the Greek version is too far removed to be of help in the matter.


The second simile mentions pouring vinegar on soda. The LXX has “scab,” but that does not fit as a sensitive thing. The reference is to sodium carbonate (natural in Egypt) which can be neutralized with vinegar.


Heb “a tongue of secret” or “a hidden tongue,” referring to someone who goes around whispering about people behind their backs (cf. KJV, NAB, NASB, NRSV “a backbiting tongue”).


The phrase “brings forth” does not appear in Hebrew in this line but is implied by the parallelism with the previous line; it is supplied here in the translation for clarity.


This proverb is identical with 21:9 ; see the notes there.


Heb “a weary [or, faint] soul” (so NASB, NIV); KJV, ASV, NRSV “a thirsty soul,” but “soul” here refers to the whole person.


The Niphal participle is from רָפַס ( rafas ), which means “to stamp; to tread; to foul by treading [or, by stamping].” BDB 952 s.v. defines it here as a “fountain befouled.” The picture is one of a spring of water where men and beasts gather and muddy it by their trampling in and out of it.


The Hophal participle from שָׁחַת ( shakhat , “to ruin; to destroy; to corrupt”) provides a general description – the well has been “ruined” or “corrupted” (so ASV) and is therefore unusable.


The verb מָט ( mat ) means “to give way; to move.” This probably refers to the integrity of the righteous being lost – comparing it to moving [off course]. T. T. Perowne writes, “To see a righteous man moved from his steadfastness through fear or favour in the presence of the wicked is as disheartening as to find the stream turbid and defiled at which you were longing to quench your thirst” ( Proverbs , 161). But the line may refer to the loss of social standing and position by the righteous due to the plots of the wicked – just as someone muddied the water, someone made the righteous slip from his place.


Heb “and the investigation of their glory is not glory.” This line is difficult to understand but it forms an analogy to honey – glory, like honey, is good, but not to excess. The LXX rendered this, “it is proper to honor notable sayings.” A. A. MacIntosh suggests, “He who searches for glory will be distressed” (“A Note on Prov 25:27 ,” VT 20 [1970]: 112-14). G. E. Bryce has “to search out difficult things is glorious” (“Another Wisdom ‘Book’ in Proverbs,” JBL 91 (1972): 145-47). R. C. Van Leeuwen suggests, “to seek difficult things is as glory” (“ Proverbs 25:27 Once Again,” VT 36 [1986]: 105-14). The Hebrew is cryptic, but not unintelligible: “seeking their glory [is not] glory.” It is saying that seeking one’s own glory is dishonorable.


Heb “whose spirit lacks restraint” (ASV similar). A person whose spirit ( רוּחַ , ruakh ) “lacks restraint” is one who is given to outbursts of passion, who lacks self-control (cf. NIV, NRSV, CEV, NLT). This person has no natural defenses but reveals his true nature all the time. The proverb is stating that without self-control a person is vulnerable, like a city without defenses.


Heb “causeless curse” (KJV similar) describes an undeserved curse (cf. NIV, NRSV). The Hebrew word translated “causeless” is the adverb from ָחנַן ( khanan ); it means “without cause; gratuitous.” sn This proverb is saying that a curse that is uttered will be powerless if that curse is undeserved. It was commonly believed in the ancient world that blessings and curses had power in themselves, that once spoken they were effectual. But scripture makes it clear that the power of a blessing or a curse depends on the power of the one behind it (e.g., Num 22:38; 23:8 ). A curse would only take effect if the one who declared it had the authority to do so, and he would only do that if the curse was deserved.


The MT has the negative with the verb “to enter; to come” to mean “will not come” ( לֹא תָבֹא , lo ’ tavo ’). This is interpreted to mean “will not come to rest” or “will not come home.” Some commentators have taken the Qere reading of לוֹ ( lo ) instead, and read it as “will come home to him.” This is also a little difficult; but it gives the idea that an undeserved curse will come [back] to him [who gave it]. Just as a bird will fly around and eventually come home, so will the undeserved curse return on the one who gave it. This is plausible; but there is no referent for the suffix, making it syntactically difficult.


Heb “in his own eyes” (so NAB, NASB, NIV).


The participle could be taken as the subject of the sentence: “the one who sends…cuts off…and drinks.”


Heb “like the legs which hang down from the lame” (so NASB). The is דַּלְיוּ ( dalyu ), from דָּלַל ( dalal , “to hang; to be low; to languish”) although the spelling of the form indicates it would be from דָּלָה ( dalah , “to draw” [water]). The word indicates the uselessness of the legs – they are there but cannot be used. Luther gave the verse a fanciful but memorable rendering: “Like dancing to a cripple, so is a proverb in the mouth of the fool.”


The proverb does not begin with a כְּ ( bet ) preposition to indicate a simile; but the analogy within the verse makes it clear that the first line is the emblem. The conjunction vav then indicates the equation – “so.”


The translation “like tying a stone in a sling” seems to make the most sense, even though the word for “sling” occurs only here. sn The point is that only someone who does not know how a sling works would do such a stupid thing (R. N. Whybray, Proverbs [CBC], 152). So to honor a fool would be absurd; it would be counterproductive, for he would still be a fool.


Heb “who wounds everyone” (so NASB). A similar rendering is given by ASV, NAB, NIV, NRSV, and NLT; it is the only one that makes sense out of a verse that most commentators consider hopelessly corrupt. That is not to say it is the correct rendering, only that it makes sense as a required negative statement in a proverb. The first line has רַב מְחוֹלֵל־כֹּל ( rav mÿkholel-col ). The first word, רַב ( rav ), can mean “archer,” “ master,” or “much.” The verb מְחוֹלֵל ( mÿkholel ) can mean “to wound” or “to bring forth.” The possibilities are: “a master performs [or, produces] all,” “a master injures all,” “an archer wounds all,” or “much produces all.” The line probably should be stating something negative, so the idea of an archer injuring or wounding people [at random] is preferable. An undisciplined hireling will have the same effect as an archer shooting at anything and everything (cf. NLT “an archer who shoots recklessly”).


The participle שֹׂכֵר ( shokher ) is rendered here according to its normal meaning “hires” or “pays wages to.” Other suggestions include “one who rewards a fool” (derived from the idea of wages) and “one who stops a fool” (from a similar word).


The verse simply uses a perfect tense. The meaning of the verse would be the same if this were interpreted as an affirmation rather than as an interrogative. The first line calls such a person to one’s attention.


Heb “in his own eyes” (so NAB, NASB, NIV). sn The subject matter of the verse is the person who is wise in his own opinion. Self-conceit is actually part of the folly that the book of Proverbs criticizes; those who think they are wise even though they are not are impossible to help. For someone to think he is wise when he is not makes him a conceited ignoramus (W. G. Plaut, Proverbs , 268).


Heb “in the broad plazas”; NAB, NASB “in the square.” This proverb makes the same point as 22:13 , namely, that the sluggard uses absurd excuses to get out of work. D. Kidner notes that in this situation the sluggard has probably convinced himself that he is a realist and not a lazy person ( Proverbs [TOTC], 163).


The comparative “like” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied from context in the translation.


The term “turns” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation from the parallelism.


Heb “buries” (so many English versions); KJV “hideth”; NAB “loses.”


Heb “in his eyes.” The lazy person thinks that he has life all figured out and has chosen the wise course of action – but he is simply lazy. J. H. Greenstone says, for example, “Much anti-intellectualism may be traced to such rationalization for laziness” ( Proverbs , 269).


The term means “taste; judgment.” The related verb means “to taste; to perceive,” that is, “to examine by tasting,” or examine by experiencing (e.g., Ps 34:9 ). Here the idea is expressed with the participle in construct, “those returners [of] good sense,” those who answer tastefully, with discretion. Cf. NIV “who (+ can NRSV) answer discreetly.”


Heb “grabs the ears of a dog. The word “wild” has been supplied in the translation to make clear that these were not domesticated pets. CEV, to accomplish the same point, has “a mad dog,” but there is no indication of that in context. sn Someone who did this ran a serious risk of injury or harm. Dogs were not domestic pets in the ancient Near East; they were scavengers that ran in packs like jackals.


The word מִתְעַבֵּר ( mit ’ abber ) means “to put oneself in a fury” or “become furious” (BDB 720 s.v.). The Latin version apparently assumed the verb was עָרַב (’ arav ), for it has the sense of “meddle” (so also NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV). However, the MT reading could easily fit the verse, referring to anyone passing by who gets furious over a fight that is not his.


The term כְּמִתְלַהְלֵהַּ ( kÿmitlahleah ) is the Hitpalpel participle of the quadriliteral verbal root לִהְלֵהַּ ( lihleah ), which means “to amaze; to startle” (BDB 529 s.v.). Here it functions as a substantive – the object of the preposition – and has the meaning of “madman” (cf. NRSV “maniac”). This is the only occurrence of the term.


Heb “arrows and death” (so KJV, NASB). This expression can be understood as a nominal hendiadys: “deadly arrows” (so NAB, NIV).


Heb “man.”


Heb “becomes silent.”


The Pilpel infinitive construct לְחַרְחַר ( lÿkharkhar ) from חָרַר ( kharar , “to be hot; to be scorched; to burn”) means “to kindle; to cause to flare up.”


The proverb is essentially the same as 18:8 ; it observes how appealing gossip is.


The traditional translation of “silver dross” (so KJV, ASV, NASB) never did make much sense because the parallel idea deals with hypocrisy – “fervent lips with an evil heart.” But silver dross would not be used over earthenware – instead it is discarded. Yet the MT clearly has “silver dross” ( כֶּסֶף סִיגִים , kesef sigim ). Ugaritic turned up a word spsg which means “glaze,” and this found a parallel in Hittite zapzaga[y]a. H. L. Ginsberg repointed the Hebrew text to k’sapsagim , “like glaze,” and this has been adopted by many commentators and recent English versions (e.g., NAB, NIV, NRSV, NLT). The final ם ( mem ) is then classified as enclitic. See, among others, K. L. Barker, “The Value of Ugaritic for Old Testament Studies,” BSac 133 (1976): 128-29.


The word translated “fervent” actually means “burning, glowing”; the LXX has “flattering lips” (as if from חָלַק [ khalaq ] rather than דָּלַק [ dalaq ]).


The Niphal imperfect from נָכַר ( nakhar ) means “to act [or, treat] as a foreigner [or, stranger]; to misconstrue; to disguise.” The direct object (“it”) is not present in the Hebrew text but is implied. In this passage it means that the hater speaks what is “foreign” to his thought; in other words, he dissembles.


Or “places; puts; lays up” (cf. KJV, ASV, NASB).


Heb “within him” (so KJV, ASV) or “in his midst”; NAB “in his inmost being.” sn Hypocritical words may hide a wicked heart. The proverb makes an observation: One who in reality despises other people will often disguise that with what he says.


The particle כִּי ( ki ) is here interpreted with a temporal nuance. It is also possible that it could be read as concessive (so NIV, NLT “Though”).


The meaning of the rare Piel form of חָנַן ( khanan ) is “to make gracious; to make favorable.” The subject is קוֹלוֹ ( qolo , “his voice”), a metonymy of cause for what he says. The idea is that what he says is very gracious in its content and its effect.


The referent is apparently the individual of vv. 24-25 .


The form תִּכַּסֶּה ( tikkasseh ) is the Hitpael imperfect (with assimilation); it is probably passive, meaning “is concealed,” although it could mean “conceals itself” (naturally). Since the proverb uses antithetical parallelism, an imperfect tense nuance of possibility (“may be concealed”) works well here (cf. NIV, NLT).


Heb “the tongue of deception.” The subject matter of this proverb is deceptive speech. The “tongue of deception” (using a metonymy of cause with an attributive genitive) means that what is said is false. Likewise the “smooth mouth” means that what is said is smooth, flattering.


The form אַל־תִּתְהַלֵּל (’ al-tithallel ) is the Hitpael jussive negated; it is from the common verb “to praise,” and so in this setting means “to praise oneself” or “to boast.” sn The verse rules out one’s overconfident sense of ability to control the future. No one can presume on the future.


Heb “a stranger.” This does not necessarily refer to a non-Israelite, as has been demonstrated before in the book of Proverbs, but these are people outside the familiar and accepted circles. The point is that such a person would be objective in speaking about your abilities and accomplishments.


“a foreigner”; KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV “a stranger.”


The subject matter is the vexation produced by a fool. The term כַּעַס ( ca ’ as ) means “vexation” (ASV); provocation” (NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV); “anger” (KJV “wrath”) and usually refers to undeserved treatment. Cf. NLT “the resentment caused by a fool.” sn The same noun is used in 1 Sam 1:6, 16 for the “provocation” given to Hannah by Peninnah for being barren.


Heb “fierceness of wrath and outpouring [= flood] of anger.” A number of English versions use “flood” here (e.g., NASB, NCV, NLT).


The Hebrew term translated “jealousy” here probably has the negative sense of “envy” rather than the positive sense of “zeal.” It is a raging emotion (like “anger” and “wrath,” this word has nuances of heat, intensity) that defies reason at times and can be destructive like a consuming fire (e.g., 6:32-35 ; Song 8:6-7 ). The rhetorical question is intended to affirm that no one can survive a jealous rage. (Whether one is the subject who is jealous or the object of the jealousy of someone else is not so clear.)


Heb “revealed” or “uncovered” (Pual participle from גָּלָה , galah ). This would specify the reproof or rebuke as direct, honest, and frank, whether it was coming from a friend or an enemy.


The Hebrew term translated “hidden” (a Pual participle from סָתַר , satar ) refers to a love that is carefully concealed; this is contrasted with the open rebuke in the first line. What is described, then, is someone too timid, too afraid, or not trusting enough to admit that reproof is a genuine part of love (W. McKane, Proverbs [OTL], 610). It is a love that is not expressed in proper concern for the one loved. See also, e.g., 28:23 and 29:3 .


The Niphal participle of אָמַן (’ aman ) means “faithful; reliable; sure; trustworthy.” The word indicates that the wounds from a friend “can be trusted” (so NIV, NCV) because they are meant to correct and not to destroy (e.g., 25:12 ; Deut 7:9 ; Job 12:20 ).


The form is נַעְתָּרוֹת ( na ’ tarot ), the Niphal participle of עָתַר (’ atar , “to be abundant”). Contemporary translations render this rare form in a number of different ways: “deceitful” (NASB, NKJV); “profuse” (NRSV); “many” (NLT). But the idea of “excessive” or “numerous” fits very well. The kisses of an enemy cannot be trusted, no matter how often they are presented.


Traditionally, “soul” (so KJV, ASV). The Hebrew text uses נֶפֶשׁ ( nefesh ) here for the subject – the full appetite [“soul”]. The word refers to the whole person with all his appetites. Here its primary reference is to eating, but it has a wider application than that – possession, experience, education, and the like.


Here the term נֶפֶשׁ ( nefesh , traditionally, “soul”) is used again, now in contrast to describe the “hungry appetite” (cf. NRSV “ravenous appetite”), although “hungry mouth” might be more idiomatic for the idea. Those whose needs are great are more appreciative of things than those who are satisfied. The needy will be delighted even with bitter things.


The form נוֹדֶדֶת ( nodedet ) is the Qal participle from נָדַד ( nadad ), “to wander; to stray; to flutter; to retreat; to depart”; cf. NIV, NRSV, NLT “strays.” It will be directly paralleled with the masculine participle in the second colon.


Heb “place” (so KJV, ASV); most other English versions translate as “home.” sn The reason for the wandering from the nest/place is not given, but it could be because of exile, eviction, business, or irresponsible actions. The saying may be generally observing that those who wander lack the security of their home and cannot contribute to their community (e.g., the massive movement of refugees). It could be portraying the unhappy plight of the wanderer without condemning him over the reason for the flight.


Some think the MT is unintelligible as it stands: “The sweetness of his friend from the counsel of the soul.” The Latin version has “the soul is sweetened by the good counsels of a friend.” D. W. Thomas suggests, “counsels of a friend make sweet the soul” (“Notes on Some Passages in the Book of Proverbs,” VT 15 [1965]: 275). G. R. Driver suggests, “the counsel of a friend is sweeter than one’s own advice” (literally, “more than the counsel of the soul”). He also suggests “more than of fragrant wood.” See G. R. Driver, “Hebrew Notes,” ZAW 52 (1934): 54; idem , “Suggestions and Objections,” ZAW 55 (1937): 69-70. The LXX reads “and the soul is rent by misfortunes.” The MT, for want of better or more convincing readings, may be interpreted to mean something like “[Just as] ointment and incense brings joy to the heart, [so] the sweetness of one’s friend [comes] from his sincere counsel.”


Heb “my son”; the reference to a “son” is retained in the translation here because in the following lines the advice is to avoid women who are prostitutes.


The verb is the cohortative of שׁוּב ( shuv ); after the two imperatives that provide the instruction, this form with the vav will indicate the purpose or result (indirect volitive sequence).


Heb “go on”; the word “right” is supplied in the translation to clarify the meaning: The naive person, oblivious to impending danger, meets it head on.


Heb “his garment.”


Or “for a strange (= adulterous) woman.” Cf. KJV, ASV, NASB, NLT; NIV “a wayward woman.”


The verse begins with the Piel participle from בָּרַךְ ( barach ). It could be taken as the subject, with the resulting translation: “Blessing…will be counted as a curse.” However, that would be rather awkward. So it is preferable to take the first line as the condition (“if someone blesses”) and the second as the consequence (“[then] it will be counted”).


Heb “rising early in the morning” (so KJV, ASV). The infinitive explains the verb “bless,” giving the circumstances of its action. The individual rises early to give his blessing.


Heb “a wife of contentions” (an attributive genitive). Cf. NAB, NIV “a quarrelsome wife”; NLT “a nagging wife.”


The form נִשְׁתָּוָה ( nishtavah ) is classified by BDB as a Nitpael perfect from the root שָׁוָה ( shavah , “to be like; to resemble”; BDB 1001 s.v. I שָׁוָה ). The form also has metathesis before the sibilant. The LXX interprets it as “Drops drive a man out of his house on a wintry day; so a railing woman also drives him out of his own house.”


The participle and verb both are from the root צָפַן ( tsafan , “to hide”). This combination could be translated “hiding her is [like] hiding the wind.” sn A contentious woman is uncontrollable. The wind can gust at any moment; so too the contentious woman can nag or complain without warning. If anyone can hide the wind he can hide her.


The LXX took an etymologizing approach to the whole verse and translated it “the north wind is a severe wind, but by its name is termed auspicious.” In this rendering the Hebrew text’s “oil” became “its name,” “right hand” became “auspicious,” and “grasp” became “called.”


The term “as” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation to clarify the comparison.


BDB classifies the verb in the first colon as a Qal apocopated jussive of I חָדָה ( khadah , “to grow sharp”; BDB 292 s.v.), and the verb in the second half of the verse ( יַחַד , yakhad ) as a Hiphil apocopated jussive. The difference would be: “let iron by means of iron grow sharp, and let a man sharpen the countenance of his friend.” But it makes more sense to take them both as Hiphil forms, the first being in pause. Other suggestions have been put forward for the meaning of the word, but the verb “sharpens” fits the context the best, and is followed by most English versions. The verb may be a shortened form of the imperfect rather than a jussive.


Heb “and a man,” although the context does not indicate this should be limited to males only.


Heb “sharpens the face of his friend.” The use of the word “face” (cf. KJV, ASV “countenance”) would here emphasize that it is the personality or character that is being sharpened. Constructive criticism sharpens character. Use of the wits in interaction that makes two people sharp as a razor (W. McKane, Proverbs [OTL], 615); another example, from the Talmud, is that of two students sharpening each other in the study of the Torah ( b. Ta’anit 7a).


The verse is somewhat cryptic and so has prompted many readings. The first line in the MT has “As water the face to the face.” The simplest and most probable interpretation is that clear water gives a reflection of the face (cf. NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT). One creative but unconvincing suggestion is that of L. Kopf, who suggests the idea is “water of face” (a construct) and that it means shame or modesty, i.e., a face is not really human without shame, and a man without a heart is not human (“Arabische Etymologien und Parallelen zum Bibelwörterbuch,” VT 9 [1959]: 260-61).


The second line has “so the heart of a man to a man” (cf. KJV, ASV). The present translation (along with many English versions) supplies “reflects” as a verb in the second line to emphasize the parallelism. sn In the parallelism this statement means that a person’s heart is the true reflection of that person. It is in looking at the heart, the will, the choices, the loves, the decisions, the attitudes, that people come to self-awareness.


The term “as” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation in light of the analogy.


Heb “eyes of a man.” This expression refers to the desires – what the individual looks longingly on. Ecclesiastes Rabbah 1:34 (one of the rabbinic Midrashim) says, “No man dies and has one-half of what he wanted.”


The LXX contains a scribal addition: “He who fixes his eye is an abomination to the Lord , and the uninstructed do not restrain their tongues.” This is unlikely to be original.


Heb “and a man,” but the context does not indicate this is limited only to males.


The verb “is proved” was supplied in the translation in view of the analogy. Many English versions supply “tested” for the same reason. sn The proverb is saying that public praise is usually a good measure of the qualities and contributions of a person. The other side of it is that righteousness is often denounced, but the proverb is not addressing everything that people say.


Heb “by [the] praise of him.” The pronominal suffix is an objective genitive, meaning “the praise about him” (= “the praise he receives”). Some commentators would take the suffix as a subjective genitive, meaning “the praise he gives”; this would mean people stand revealed by what they praise (D. Kidner, Proverbs [TOTC], 168). That does not seem to work as well with the emblem of the first line which indicates being tested. The LXX adds a couplet: “The heart of the transgressor seeks evil; but the upright heart seeks knowledge.”


The verb means “to pound” in a mortar with a pestle (cf. NRSV “Crush”; NLT “grind”). The imperfect is in a conditional clause, an unreal, hypothetical condition to make the point.


The Hebrew term רִיפוֹת ( rifot ) refers to some kind of grain spread out to dry and then pounded. It may refer to barley groats (coarsely ground barley), but others have suggested the term means “cheeses” (BDB 937 s.v.). Most English versions have “grain” without being more specific; NAB “grits.”


The LXX contains this paraphrase: “If you scourge a fool in the assembly, dishonoring him, you would not remove his folly.” This removes the imagery of mortar and pestle from the verse. Using the analogy of pounding something in a mortar, the proverb is saying even if a fool was pounded or pulverized, meaning severe physical punishment, his folly would not leave him – it is too ingrained in his nature.


The sentence uses the infinitive absolute and the imperfect from יָדַע ( yada ’, “to know”). The imperfect here has been given the obligatory nuance, “you must know,” and that has to be intensified with the infinitive.


Heb “the faces of your flock.”


The idiom is “place [it on] your heart” or “take to heart.” Cf. NLT “put your heart into.” sn The care of the flock must become the main focus of the will, for it is the livelihood. So v. 23 forms the main instruction of this lengthy proverb (vv. 23-27 ).


Heb “riches are not forever” (so KJV, NASB); TEV “wealth is not permanent.” The term “last” is supplied in the translation for clarity.


The conjunction and the particle indicate that the same nuance continues here in the second colon, and so “last” has been supplied here as well.


Heb “life”; KJV, NAB “maintenance”; NRSV “nourishment.”


The verb בָּטַח ( batakh ) means “to trust; to be secure; to be confident.” Cf. KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT “bold.” sn The righteous, who seek to find favor with God and man, have a clear conscience and do not need to look over their shoulders for avengers or law enforcers. Their position is one of confidence, so that they do not flee.


Heb “many are its princes” (so NASB). sn In such a chaotic time there will be many rulers, either simultaneously or in a rapid sequence. The times of the judges or the days of the northern kings of Israel provide examples.


Heb “a man who understands [and] knows”; NRSV “an intelligent ruler”; NLT “wise and knowledgeable leaders.”


The LXX reads (probably from a different underlying Hebrew text): “It is the fault of a violent man that quarrels start, but they are settled by a man of discernment.” For a survey of suggestions, see C. H. Toy, Proverbs (ICC), 495, and W. McKane, Proverbs (OTL), 630. tn This last line is difficult. The MT has כֵּן יַאֲרִיךְ ( ken ya ’ arikh ). The verb means “to prolong,” but כֵּן ( ken ) is open to several possibilities for meaning. J. H. Greenstone’s interpretation of it as a noun from the Hollow root כּוּן ( kun ) with a meaning of “established order” is what is expected here ( Proverbs , 293). sn For a study of the verses in chapters 28 and 29 concerning kings and governments, see B. V. Malchow, “A Manual for Future Monarchs,” CBQ 47 (1985): 238-45.


The MT reads “a poor man,” גֶּבֶר רָשׁ ( gever rash ); cf. KJV, NASB, NLT. The problem is that the poor in the book of Proverbs is not an oppressor and does not have the power to be such. So commentators assume the word is incorrect. By a slight change to רָשָׁע ( rasha ’) the reading becomes “a wicked ruler” [ Heb “a wicked mighty man”]. There is no textual support for this change. The LXX, however, reads, “A courageous man oppresses the poor with impieties.” If “a poor man” is retained, then the oppression would include betrayal – one would expect a poor man to have sympathy for others who are impoverished, but in fact that is not the case. It is a sad commentary on human nature that the truly oppressed people can also be oppressed by other poor people.


The comparative “like” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is implied by the metaphor; it is supplied in the translation for the sake of clarity.


The verb is the Hitpael imperfect of גָּרָה ( garah ), which means “to stir up strife” but in this stem means “to engage in strife” (cf. NIV “resist them”). Tg . Prov 28:4 adds an explanatory expansion, “so as to induce them to repent.”


Heb “men of evil”; the context does not limit this to males only, however.


The term translated “justice” is מִשְׁפָּט ( mishpat ); it refers to the legal rights of people, decisions that are equitable in the community. W. G. Plaut observes that there are always those who think that “justice” is that which benefits them, otherwise it is not justice ( Proverbs , 282).


The Hebrew term translated “ways” is in the dual, suggesting that the person has double ways, i.e., he is hypocritical. C. H. Toy does not like this idea and changes the form to the plural ( Proverbs [ICC], 497), but his emendation is gratuitous and should be rejected.


Heb “and he is rich.” Many English versions treat this as a concessive clause (cf. KJV “though he be rich”).


The Hebrew word could refer (1) to “instruction” by the father (cf. NCV) or (2) the Mosaic law (so most English versions). The chapter seems to be stressing religious obedience, so the referent is probably the law. Besides, the father’s teaching will be what the law demands, and the one who associates with gluttons is not abiding by the law.


Heb “son,” but the immediate context does not suggest limiting this only to male children.


Heb “father,” but the immediate context does not suggest limiting this only to the male parent.


Heb “by interest and increase” (so ASV; NASB “by interest and usury”; NAB “by interest and overcharge.” The two words seem to be synonyms; they probably form a nominal hendiadys, meaning “by increasing [exorbitant] interest.” The law prohibited making a commission or charging interest ( Exod 22:25 ; Lev 25:36-37 ; Deut 23:20 ; Ps 15:5 ). If the poor needed help, the rich were to help them – but not charge them interest.


The term חוֹנֵן ( khonen , “someone who shows favor”) is the active participle. sn The verse is saying that in God’s justice wealth amassed unjustly will eventually go to the poor. God will take the wealth away from them and give it to people who will distribute it better to the poor.


Heb “a rich man,” although the context does not indicate that this is limited only to males.


The form יַחְקְרֶנּוּ ( yakhqÿrennu ) means “he searches him” (cf. KJV, ASV) or “he examines him”; a potential imperfect nuance fits well here to indicate that a discerning person, even though poor, can search the flaws of the rich and see through the pretension and the false assumptions (cf. NAB, NASB, NIV “sees through him”). Several commentators have connected the word to the Arabic root hqr , which means “despise” (D. W. Thomas, “Notes on Some Passages in the Book of Proverbs,” JTS 38 [1937]: 400-403), but that would be both predictable and flat.


The form בַּעֲלֹץ ( ba ’ alots ) is the infinitive construct with the preposition indicating a temporal clause (“when…”); the “righteous” are the subject of this clause (subjective genitive). The word may be taken as a metonymy of adjunct – the righteous exult or rejoice because they are prosperous (cf. NLT “succeed”).


The meaning of “sought out” ( יְחֻפַּשׂ , yÿkhuppas ) indicates that people have gone into hiding. So the development of the ideas for this proverb require in the first line that “rejoice” be connected with “triumph” that means they have come to power; and in the second line that “are sought out” means people have gone into hiding (cf. ASV, NIV, NRSV, NLT). C. H. Toy thinks this is too strained; he offers this rendering: “When the righteous are exalted there is great confidence, but when the wicked come into power men hide themselves” ( Proverbs [ICC], 500). For the verb G. R. Driver posits an Arabic cognate hafasa , “prostrated; trampled on” (“Problems in the Hebrew Text of Proverbs,” Bib 32 [1951]: 192-93), which gives a clearer result of wicked rule, but is perhaps unnecessary (e.g., Prov 28:28; 29:2 ). See J. A. Emerton, “Notes on Some Passages in the Book of Proverbs,” JTS 20 (1969): 202-20.


The Hebrew participles provide the subject matter in this contrast. On the one hand is the person who covers over ( מְכַסֶּה , mÿkhasseh ) his sins. This means refusing to acknowledge them in confession, and perhaps rationalizing them away. On the other hand there is the one who both “confesses” ( מוֹדֶה , modeh ) and “forsakes” ( עֹזֵב , ’ ozev ) the sin. To “confess” sins means to acknowledge them, to say the same thing about them that God does.


Most commentators (and some English versions, e.g., NIV) assume that the participle מְפַחֵד ( mÿfakhed , “fears”) means “fears the Lord ,” even though “the Lord ” is not present in the text. Such an assumption would be more convincing if the word יִרְאַת ( yir ’ at ) had been used. It is possible that the verse refers to fearing sin or its consequences. In other words, the one who is always apprehensive about the nature and consequences of sin will avoid sin and find God’s blessing. Of course the assumption that the phrase means “fear the Lord ” could be correct as well. There would be little difference in the outcome; in either case sin would be avoided.


The term “like” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity and smoothness.


Heb “A prince lacking of understanding [is] also a great oppressor” (both KJV, ASV similar) The last clause, “and a great oppressor,” appears to modify “the prince.” There is little difference in meaning, only in emphasis. The LXX has “lacks income” (reading תְּבוּאוֹת [ tÿvu ’ ot ] instead of תְּבוּנוֹת [ tÿvunot ]). C. H. Toy ( Proverbs [ICC], 501) suggests deleting the word for “prince” altogether, but this emendation is gratuitous.


This follows the Qere reading of the participle which is singular (as opposed to the plural). The implication is that this one is also a ruler, paralleling the first half. But since he “hates” (= rejects) unjust gain he will extend [his] days, meaning he will enjoy a long and happy life (cf. NIV, NRSV, CEV).


The form is the Qal passive participle. The verb means “to oppress; to wrong; to extort”; here the idea of being “oppressed” would refer to the burden of a guilty conscience (hence “tormented”; cf. NAB, NRSV “burdened”). Some commentators have wanted to emend the text to read “suspected,” or “charged with,” or “given to,” etc., but if the motive is religious and not legal, then “oppressed” or “tormented” is preferred.


The verse is cryptic; it simply says that he will “flee to the pit.” Some have taken the “pit” to refer to the place of detention for prisoners, but why would he flee to that place? It seems rather to refer to death. This could mean that (1) since there is no place for him to go outside of the grave, he should flee to the pit (cf. TEV, NLT), or (2) he will be a fugitive until he goes to the grave (cf. NASB, NIV, NCV, NRSV, CEV). Neither one of these options is easily derived from the text. The verse seems to be saying that the one who is guilty of murder will flee, and no one should assist him. The meaning of “the pit” is unresolved.


The form is the Niphal imperfect of יָשַׁע ( yasha ’, “will be saved”). In all probability this refers to deliverance from misfortune. Some render it “kept safe” (NIV) or “will be safe” (NRSV, TEV). It must be interpreted in contrast to the corrupt person who will fall.


The Qal imperfect יִפּוֹל ( yipol ) is given a future translation in this context, as is the previous verb (“will be delivered”) because the working out of divine retribution appears to be coming suddenly in the future. The idea of “falling” could be a metonymy of adjunct (with the falling accompanying the ruin that comes to the person), or it may simply be a comparison between falling and being destroyed. Cf. NCV “will suddenly be ruined”; NLT “will be destroyed.”


The last word in the verse, בְּאֶחָת ( bÿ ’ ekhat ), means “in one [= at once (?)].” This may indicate a sudden fall, for falling “in one” (the literal meaning) makes no sense. W. McKane wishes to emend the text to read “into a pit” based on v. 10 b ( Proverbs [OTL], 622); this emendation is followed by NAB, NRSV.


Or “will have plenty of food” ( Heb “bread”); so NAB, NASB, NCV.


Heb “empty things” or “vain things”; NRSV “follows worthless pursuits.” sn Prosperity depends on diligent work and not on chasing empty dreams. The proverb is essentially the same as Prov 12:11 except for the last expression.


The repetition of the verb strengthens the contrast. Both halves of the verse use the verb יִשְׂבַּע ( yisba ’, “will be satisfied; will be filled with; will have enough”). It is positive in the first colon, but negative in the second – with an ironic twist to say one is “satisfied” with poverty.


Heb “a man of faithfulness,” although the context does not indicate this should be limited only to males. sn The text does not qualify the nature of the faithfulness. While this would certainly have implications for the person’s righteous acts, its primary meaning may be his diligence and reliability in his work. His faithful work will bring the returns.


The construction uses the Hiphil infinitive הַכֵּר ( hakken ) as the subject of the sentence: “to have respect for [or, recognize] persons is not good” (e.g., 24:23; 18:5 ; Deut 1:17 ; Lev 19:15 ). Such favoritism is “not good”; instead, it is a miscarriage of justice and is to be avoided.


Heb “not good.” This is a figure of speech known as tapeinosis – a deliberate understatement to emphasize a worst-case scenario: “it is terrible!”


The meaning and connection of the line is not readily clear. It could be taken in one of two ways: (1) a person can steal even a small piece of bread if hungry, and so the court should show some compassion, or it should show no partiality even in such a pathetic case; (2) a person could be bribed for a very small price (a small piece of bread being the figure representing this). This second view harmonizes best with the law.


Heb “a man with an evil eye” (as opposed to the generous man who has a “good” eye). This individual is selfish, unkind, unsympathetic to others. He looks only to his own gain. Cf. NAB “The avaricious man”; NLT “A greedy person.”


Or “rebukes” (NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV).


Heb “a man,” but the context does not indicate this should be limited only to males.


There is a problem with אַחֲרַי (’ akharay ), which in the MT reads “after me.” This could be taken to mean “after my instructions,” but that is forced. C. H. Toy suggests simply changing it to “after” or “afterward,” i.e., “in the end” ( Proverbs [ICC], 504), a solution most English versions adopt. G. R. Driver suggested an Akkadian cognate ahurru , “common man,” reading “as a rebuker an ordinary man” (“Hebrew Notes,” ZAW 52 [1934]: 147).


The construction uses the Hiphil participle מַחֲלִיק ( makhaliq , “makes smooth”) followed by the adverbial accusative of means, the metonymy “tongue” – he makes what he says smooth. This will be pleasing for the moment, but it will offer no constructive help like the rebuke would.


Heb “man who destroys” (so NASB); TEV “no better than a common thief.”


Heb “wide of soul.” This is an idiom meaning “a greedy person.” The term נֶפֶשׁ ( nefesh , traditionally, “soul”) has here its more basic meaning of appetites (a person is a soul, a bundle of appetites; BDB 660 s.v. 5 .a). It would mean “wide of appetite” ( רְהַב־נֶפֶשׁ ), thus “greedy.”


The construction uses the participle בּוֹטֵחַ ( boteakh ) followed by עַל־יְהוָה (’ al-yÿhvah ), which gives the sense of “relying confidently on the Lord .” This is the antithesis of the greedy person who pushes to get what he desires.


The verb דָּשֵׁן ( dashen ) means “to be fat,” and in the Piel / Pual stems “to make fat/to be made fat” (cf. KJV, ASV). The idea of being “fat” was symbolic of health and prosperity – the one who trusts in the Lord will be abundantly prosperous and fully gratified (cf. NRSV “will be enriched”).


The verb form יִמָּלֵט ( yimmalet ) is the Niphal imperfect; the form means “to escape.” In this context one would conclude that it means “to escape from trouble,” because the one who lives in this life by wisdom will escape trouble, and the one who trusts in himself will not.


Heb “hides his eyes”; “to them” is supplied in the translation to indicate the link with the poor in the preceding line. Hiding or closing the eyes is a metonymy of cause or of adjunct, indicating a decision not to look on and thereby help the poor. It could also be taken as an implied comparison, i.e., not helping the poor is like closing the eyes to them.


The term “receives” is not in the Hebrew text but is implied, and is supplied in the translation.


Heb “the wicked rise,” referring to an accession to power, as in a government. Cf. TEV “come to power”; NLT “take charge.” sn The proverb is essentially the same as 28:12 (e.g., Prov 11:10; 29:2, 16 ). It refers to the wicked “rising to power” in government.


Heb “a man” or “mankind” in a generic sense.


The form is the Niphal imperfect of סָתַר ( satar , “to hide”); in this stem it can mean “to hide themselves” or “to go into hiding.” In either case the expression would be a hyperbole; the populace would not go into hiding, but they would tread softly and move about cautiously. G. R. Driver suggests the Akkadian sataru instead, which means “to demolish,” and is cognate to the Aramaic “to destroy.” This would produce the idea that people are “destroyed” when the wicked come to power (“Problems in the Hebrew Text of Proverbs,” Bib 32 [1951]: 192-93). That meaning certainly fits the idea, but there is no reason for the change because the MT is perfectly readable as it is and makes good sense.


The two clauses have parallel constructions: They both begin with infinitives construct with prepositions functioning as temporal clauses, followed by subjective genitives (first the wicked, and then the pronoun referring to them). This heightens the antithesis: “when the wicked rise…when they perish.”


The idiom “to harden the neck” ( מַקְשֶׁה־עֹרֶף , maqsheh- ’ oref ) is the idea of resisting the rebukes and persisting in obstinacy (e.g., Exod 32:9 ). The opposite of a “stiff neck” would be the bending back, i.e., submission.


The Hebrew construction is אִישׁ תּוֹכָחוֹת (’ ish tokhakhot , “a man of rebukes”), meaning “a man who has (or receives) many rebukes.” This describes a person who is deserving of punishment and who has been given many warnings. The text says, then, “a man of rebukes hardening himself.”


Or “healing” (NRSV).


The Hebrew form בִּרְבוֹת ( birvot ) is the Qal infinitive construct of רָבָה ( ravah ) with a בּ ( bet ) preposition, forming a temporal clause with a subjective genitive following it. It is paralleled in the second colon by the same construction, showing the antithesis: וּבִמְשֹׁל ( uvimshol ), “and when the wicked rule.” Some commentators wish to change the first verb to make it parallel this more closely, e.g., רָדָה ( radah , “to rule”), but that would be too neat and is completely unsupported. The contrast is between when the righteous increase and when the wicked rule. It is not hard to see how this contrast works out in society.


The Niphal verb אָנַח (’ anakh ) means “to sigh; to groan,” usually because of grief or physical and emotional distress. The word is a metonymy of effect; the cause is the oppression and distress due to evil rulers.


Heb “a man.” Here “man” is retained in the translation because the second colon mentions prostitutes.


Or “causes his father to rejoice”; NAB “makes his father glad.”


The active participle רֹעֶה ( ro ’ eh ) is from the second root רָעָה ( ra ’ ah ), meaning “to associate with.” The verb occurs only a few times, and mostly in the book of Proverbs. It is related to רֵעֶה ( re ’ eh , “friend; companion; fellow”). To describe someone as a “companion” or “friend” of prostitutes is somewhat euphemistic; it surely means someone who is frequently engaging the services of prostitutes.


The Hebrew verb יְאַבֶּד ( yÿ ’ abbed ) means “destroys”; it is the Piel imperfect of the verb that means “to perish.”


The form is the Hiphil imperfect of the verb עָמַד (’ amad , “to stand”), hence, “to cause to stand.” It means that the king makes the nation “stand firm,” with “standing firm” being a figure for strength, security, and stability. Cf. NCV “makes his country (the nation CEV) strong.”


Or “country.” This term functions as a metonymy of subject for the people in the land.


The Hebrew text reads אִישׁ תְּרוּמוֹת (’ ish tÿrumot , “a man of offerings”), which could refer to a man who “receives gifts” or “gives gifts.” Because of its destructive nature on the country, here the phrase must mean that he receives or “exacts” the money (cf. NRSV “makes heavy exactions”). This seems to go beyond the ordinary taxation for two reasons: (1) this ruler is a “man of offerings,” indicating that it is in his nature to do this, and (2) it tears down the country. The word “offerings” has been taken to refer to gifts or bribes (cf. NASB, NIV, CEV, NLT), but the word itself suggests more the idea of tribute or taxes that are demanded; this Hebrew word was used in Leviticus for offerings given to the priests, and in Ezek 45:16 for taxes. The point seems to be that this ruler or administrator is breaking the backs of the people with heavy taxes or tribute (e.g., 1 Sam 8:11-18 ), and this causes division and strife.


Heb “a man,” but the context here does not suggest that the proverb refers to males only.


The form is the Hiphil participle, literally “deals smoothly,” i.e., smoothing over things that should be brought to one’s attention. sn The flatterer is too smooth; his words are intended to gratify. In this proverb some malice is attached to the flattery, for the words prove to be destructive.


There is some ambiguity concerning the referent of “his steps.” The net could be spread for the one flattered (cf. NRSV, “a net for the neighbor’s feet”; NLT, “their feet,” referring to others), or for the flatterer himself (cf. TEV “you set a trap for yourself”). The latter idea would make the verse more powerful: In flattering someone the flatterer is getting himself into a trap (e.g., 2:16; 7:5; 26:28; 28:23 ).


The Syriac and Tg . Prov 29:6 simplify the meaning by writing it with a passive verb: “the evil man is ensnared by his guilt.” The metaphor of the snare indicates that the evil person will be caught in his own transgression.


The two verbs create some difficulty because the book of Proverbs does not usually duplicate verbs like this and because the first verb יָרוּן ( yarun ) is irregular. The BHS editors prefer to emend it to יָרוּץ ( yaruts , “will rush”; cf. NAB “runs on joyfully”). W. McKane emends it to “exult” to form a hendiadys: “is deliriously happy” ( Proverbs [OTL], 638). G. R. Driver suggests changing the word to יָדוֹן ( yadon ) based on two Hebrew mss and an Arabic cognate dana , “continue.” He translates it “but the righteous remains and rejoices” (“Problems in the Hebrew Text of Proverbs,” Bib 32 [1951]: 193-94). None of these changes are particularly helpful. The verb is unusual for a geminate root, but Gesenius shows several places where the same pattern can be seen in other geminate verbs (GKC 180 §67. q ). In light of this it is preferable to retain the reading of the MT here.


The form is an active participle, יֹדֵעַ ( yodea ’); it describes the righteous as “knowing, caring for, having sympathetic knowledge for, or considering favorably” the legal needs of the poor. Cf. NAB “has a care for”; NASB “is concerned for.”


The Hebrew word used here is דִּין ( din ), which typically means “judgment,” but can also mean “strife” and “cause.” Here it refers to the “cause” of the poor (so KJV, ASV), their plea, their case, their legal rights. A righteous person is sympathetic to this.


The term “such” is supplied in the translation for clarification. It is not simply any knowledge that the wicked do not understand, but the knowledge mentioned in the first colon. They do not understand the “sympathetic knowledge” or “concern” for the cause of the poor.


Heb “men of scorn”; NAB “Arrogant men”; ASV, NRSV “Scoffers”; NIV, NLT “Mockers.”


The verb means “to blow; to breathe” (BDB 806 s.v. פּוּחַ ). In the Hiphil imperfect its meaning here is “to excite; to inflame” a city, as in blowing up a flame or kindling a fire. It is also used with “words” in 6:19 and 12:17 – they “puff out words.” Such scornful people make dangerous situations worse, whereas the wise calm things down (e.g., ).


The term “city” is a metonymy of subject; it refers to the people in the city who can easily be set in an uproar by such scornful people.


Heb “a wise man…a foolish man.”


The verb שָׁפַט ( shafat ) means “to judge.” In the Niphal stem it could be passive, but is more frequently reciprocal: “to enter into controversy” or “to go to court.” The word is usually used in connection with a lawsuit (so many recent English versions), but can also refer to an argument (e.g., 1 Sam 12:7 ; Isa 43:26 ); cf. NAB “disputes”; NASB “has a controversy.”


The noun נָחַת ( nakhat ) is a derivative of נוּחַ ( nuakh , “to rest”) and so means “quietness” or “rest,” i.e., “peace.” sn The proverb is saying that there will be no possibility of settling the matter in a calm way, no matter what mood the fool is in (e.g., Prov 26:4 ). R. N. Whybray says one can only cut the losses and have no further dealings with the fool ( Proverbs [CBC], 168).


Heb “and he is angry and he laughs.” The construction uses the conjunctive vav to express alternate actions: “whether…or.”


Heb “men of bloods.” The Hebrew word for “blood” is written in the plural to reflect the shedding of blood. So the expression “men of bloods” means people who shed blood – murderers, bloodthirsty men, or those who would not hesitate to commit murder in order to get what they want.


Heb “and the upright seek his life.” There are two ways this second line can be taken. (1) One can see it as a continuation of the first line, meaning that the bloodthirsty men also “seek the life of the upright” (cf. NIV, NRSV). The difficulty is that the suffix is singular but the apparent referent is plural. (2) One can take it is as a contrast: “but as for the upright, they seek his life” – a fairly straightforward rendering (cf. ASV). The difficulty here is that “seeking a life” is normally a hostile act, but it would here be positive: “seeking” a life to preserve it. The verse would then say that the bloodthirsty hate the innocent, but the righteous protect them (W. McKane, Proverbs [OTL], 637; cf. NAB, NASB, TEV).


Heb “his spirit.” It has been commonly interpreted to mean “his anger” (ASV, NAB, NIV, NRSV), but it probably means more than that. The fool gives full expression to his “soul,” whether it is anger or bitterness or frustration or any other emotions. He has no self-control.


The line is difficult. The MT has בְּאחוֹר יְשַׁבְּחֶנָּה ( bÿ ’ khor yÿshabbÿkhennah ), which literally means “steals it back.” The verb שָׁבַח ( shavakh ) means “to soothe; to still,” as with a storm, or here with the temper. But because אָחוֹר (’ akhor ) does not fit very well with this verb, most commentators offer some suggested change. C. H. Toy reads “anger” instead of “back” and translates the verb “restrain” following the LXX, which has “self-control” ( Proverbs [ICC], 510). The idea of self-control is what is intended, but the changes suggested are not entirely warranted. A number of English versions have “holds it back” (e.g., NASB, NRSV, NLT), and this fits the Hebrew as well as any.


The Hiphil participle מַקְשִׁיב ( maqshiv ) means “to give attention to; to regard; to heed.” Cf. NASB, NCV, TEV “pays attention to.” sn Such a ruler would become known as one who could be lied to, because he paid attention to lies.


Heb “word of falsehood” or “lying word.” Cf. TEV “false information.”


The verb שָׁרַת ( sharat ) means “to minister; to serve.” The Piel plural participle here refers to servants of the king who attend to him – courtiers and ministers (cf. NIV, NRSV, TEV, CEV “officials”; NLT “advisers”). This, his entourage, will have to resort to evil practices to gain his favor if he is swayed by such lies.


Heb “a man of oppressions”; KJV “the deceitful man.” The noun תֹּךְ ( tokh ) means “injury; oppression” (BDB 1067 s.v.). Such men were usually the rich and powerful. The Greek and the Latin versions have “the debtor and creditor.”


The verb פָּגַשׁ ( pagash ) means “to meet; to encounter.” In the Niphal it means “to meet each other; to meet together” (cf. KJV, ASV). The focus in this passage is on what they share in common.


The king must judge “in truth” ( בֶּאֱמֶת , be ’ emet ). Some have interpreted this to mean “faithfully” (KJV, ASV) but that is somewhat unclear. The idea is that the poor must be treated fairly and justly (cf. NIV “with fairness”; NRSV “with equity”); “truth” is that which corresponds to the standard of the law revealed by God. There must be no miscarriage of justice for these people simply because they are poor.


The word “rod” is a metonymy of cause, in which the instrument being used to discipline is mentioned in place of the process of disciplining someone. So the expression refers to the process of discipline that is designed to correct someone. Some understand the words “rod and reproof” to form a hendiadys, meaning “a correcting [or, reproving] rod” (cf. NAB, NIV “the rod of correction”).


Heb “gives” (so NAB).


The form is a Pual participle; the form means “to let loose” (from the meaning “to send”; cf. KJV, NIV “left to himself”), and so in this context “unrestrained.”


The verb רָבָה ( ravah ), which is repeated twice in this line, means “to increase.” The first occurrence here is usually taken to mean that when the wicked increase they hold the power (cf. NRSV, NLT “are in authority”; TEV, CEV “are in power”). The text does not explain the details, only that when the wicked increase sin will increase in the land.


The verb, a Hiphil imperfect with a suffix, could be subordinated to the preceding imperative to form a purpose clause (indirect volitive classification): “that he may give you rest.” The same then could apply to the second part of the verse.


Heb “your soul.” The noun נַפְשֶׁךָ ( nafshekha , “your soul”) is a synecdoche of part (= inner soul) for the whole person (= you); see, e.g., Isa 43:4; 51:23 ; BDB 600 s.v. 4 .a.2.


Heb “no vision.” The Hebrew word “vision” (from the verb חָזָה [ khazah , “to see”]) refers to divine communication to prophets (as in 1 Sam 3:1 ) and not to individual goals or plans. C. H. Toy sees a problem here: The most calamitous period of Israel’s history was when prophetic vision was at its height, whereas people were often more obedient when God was silent. He also notes that in the book of Proverbs there is no mention of prophetic teaching with wisdom as a guide. So he emends the word to “guidance” following the LXX ( Proverbs [ICC], 512). The TEV has “guidance”; the NIV retains “revelation.” It must be stated that the prophetic ministry was usually in response to the calamitous periods, calling the people back to God. Without them the downward rush to anarchy and destruction would have been faster than with these prophetic calls from God.


The verb פָּרַע ( para ’) means “to let go; to let alone.” It occurs here in the Niphal with the meaning of “[the people] are let loose,” meaning, they cast off restraint (e.g., Exod 32:25 ). Cf. NLT “run wild.”


There is a tendency among commentators and English versions to translate אַשְׁרֵהוּ (’ ashrehu ) as “happy is he!” (cf. KJV, ASV, NAB, NASB, TEV, NLT). But “happy” can be a misleading translation. The Hebrew word refers to a heavenly bliss, an inner joy, that comes from knowing one is right with God and experiencing his blessing. “Happiness,” on the other hand, depends on what happens.


The Niphal imperfect here is best rendered as a potential imperfect – “cannot be corrected.” The second line of the verse clarifies that even though the servant understands the words, he does not respond. It will take more.


Heb “for he understands, but there is no answer.” The concessive idea (“although”) is taken from the juxtaposition of the two parts.


Heb “a man,” but there is no indication in the immediate context that this should be limited only to males.


There is no conditional particle at the beginning of the verse; however, the relationship of the clauses, which lay down the condition first and then (with a vav ) the consequences, indicates a conditional construction here. Cf. also NAB, NIV, NCV, TEV.


The word מָגוֹן ( magon ) is a hapax legomenon ; accordingly, it has been given a variety of interpretations. The LXX has “grief,” and this has been adopted by some versions (e.g., NIV, NCV). The idea would be that treating the servant too easily for so long would not train him at all, so he will be of little use, and therefore a grief. J. Reider takes the word to mean “weakling” from the Arabic root na’na (“to be weak”), with a noun/adjective form muna’ana’ (“weak; feeble”); see his “Etymological Studies in Biblical Hebrew,” VT 4 [1954]: 276-95. This would give a different emphasis to the sentence, but on the whole not very different than the first. In both cases the servant will not be trained well. Rashi, a Jewish scholar who lived a.d. 1040-1105, had the translation “a master.” The servant trained this way will assume authority in the household even as the son. This may be behind the KJV translation “son” (likewise ASV, NASB). Tg . Prov 29:21 and the Syriac have “to be uprooted,” which may reflect a different text entirely.


Heb “a man of anger.” Here “anger” is an attributive (“an angry man”). This expression describes one given to or characterized by anger, not merely temporarily angry. The same is true of the next description.


Heb “possessor of wrath.” Here “wrath” is an attributive (cf. ASV “a wrathful man”; KJV “a furious man”).


Heb “an abundance of transgression.” The phrase means “abounding in transgression” (BDB 913 s.v. רַב 1.d]). Not only does the angry person stir up dissension, but he also frequently causes sin in himself and in others (e.g., 14:17, 29; 15:18; 16:32; 22:24 ).


Heb “pride of a man,” with “man” functioning as a possessive. There is no indication in the immediate context that this is restricted only to males.


There is a wordplay here due to the repetition of the root שָׁפֵל ( shafel ). In the first line the verb תִּשְׁפִּילֶנּוּ ( tishpilennu ) is the Hiphil imperfect of the root, rendered “will bring him low.” In the second line the word is used in the description of the “lowly of spirit,” שְׁפַל־רוּחַ ( shÿfal-ruakh ). The contrast works well: The proud will be brought “low,” but the one who is “lowly” will be honored. In this instance the wordplay can be preserved in the translation.


Heb “low in spirit”; KJV “humble in spirit.” This refers to an attitude of humility. sn The Hebrew word translated “lowly” forms an implied comparison: To be humble is like being low, base, earthbound; whereas pride is often compared to being high, lofty – at least in one’s own eyes.


Heb “hates his soul.” The accomplice is working against himself, for he will be punished along with the thief if he is caught.


Heb “oath” or “imprecation”; ASV “adjuration.” This amounted to an “oath” or “curse” (cf. NAB “he hears himself put under a curse”; NRSV “one hears the victim’s curse”) either by or on behalf of the victim, that any witness to the crime must testify (cf. Lev 5:1 ). However, in this legal setting referring to “a victim’s curse” could be misleading (cf. also KJV “he heareth cursing”), since it could be understood to refer to profanity directed against those guilty of the crime rather than an imprecation called down on a witness who refused to testify (as in the present proverb). The present translation specifies this as an “oath to testify.” sn The oath to testify was not an oath to tell the truth before a court of law in the modern sense. Instead it was a “curse” or “imprecation” expressed by the victim of the theft, or by the legal authorities, called down on any witness of the crime who kept silent or refused to testify (as here). According to Lev 5:1 , if a witness does not speak up he is accountable for the crime. This person hears the adjuration, but if he speaks up he is condemned, and if he does not speak up he is guilty under the law. The proverb is an unusual one; it seems to be warning against getting mixed up in any way with the thief, for it will create a serious ethical dilemma.


Heb “the fear of man.” This uses an objective genitive to describe a situation where fearing what people might do or think controls one’s life. There is no indication in the immediate context that this should be limited only to males, so the translation uses the more generic “people” here.


Heb “gives [or yields, or produces]”; NIV “will prove to be.”


Heb “but from the Lord [is] justice of a man.” The last part uses the construct state followed by the genitive, which here shows the advantage – it is justice for the person. The implication of the matter is that people should seek the Lord ’s favor (rather than a human ruler’s) if they want true justice.


Heb “who is upright in the way” (so NASB; KJV and ASV are similar). Here “in the way” refers to the course of a person’s life, hence “who lives an upright life.” Cf. NAB “he who walks uprightly.” sn The proverb makes a simple observation on life: The righteous detest the wicked, and the wicked detest the lifestyle of the righteous. Each is troublesome to the beliefs and the activities of the other.


The title הַמַּשָּׂא ( hammasa ’) means “the burden,” a frequently used title in prophetic oracles. It may be that the word is a place name, although it is more likely that it describes what follows as an important revelation.


The definite article is used here as a demonstrative, clarifying the reference to Agur.


The particle כִּי ( ki ) functions in an asseverative sense, “surely; indeed; truly” (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax , 73, §449).


The noun בַּעַר ( ba ’ ar ) means “brutishness”; here it functions as a predicate adjective. It is followed by מֵאִישׁ ( me ’ ish ) expressing comparative degree: “more than a man” or “more than any man,” with “man” used in a generic sense. He is saying that he has fallen beneath the level of mankind. Cf. NRSV “I am too stupid to be human.”