E.D. Reymond, «The Wisdom of Words in the Wisdom of Ben Sira», Vol. 95 (2014) 224-246
This article explores the problems posed by language due to its imprecision, the disparity between what one says (or means to say) and what is interpreted. Ben Sira warns his readers of the dangers posed by the changing contexts of an utterance. Sensitivity to context reflects other aspects of Ben Sira's teaching, such as his awareness of people's differing perspectives. In addition, Ben Sira is concerned that his readers be aware of the multiple meanings behind words due to the polysemous nature of the words themselves, their morphology, and/or how they are used.
04_Reymond_224_246 15/07/14 12:18 Pagina 228
228 ERIC D. REYMOND
as stated above, not withhold wisdom 9. But he also suggests that
when one’s ideas do not comport with those of the powerful or
wealthy, one should not expose one’s views. In 8,1-2 he encourages
not “contending” or quarrelling with the rich, in 8,14 not going to
court against a judge; in 9,13 one should not anger the person who
has the authority to kill. Moreover, an individual should not engage
with nobles who are always looking to undermine others (13,9-11).
In relation to speech specifically, Bradley C. Gregory observes that
although Ben Sira posits a traditional polarity whereby a fool is
garrulous and a sage is discreet, Ben Sira does seem to suggest that
even the wise will “sin with their tongue” (Sir 19,16) and that,
therefore, one should be empathetic toward those who have also
said something inappropriate 10. Thus, contrary to Okoye’s depic-
tion of the ideal speaker, Ben Sira himself exhibits conflicting ideas.
Moreover, he expresses himself through ambiguous language
(wordplay), and his proverbs depend, in certain instances, on am-
biguity for their effect.
From a practical perspective, then, it seems likely to me that Ben
Sira did not wish to encourage people to purge their language of
all words and sentences that could be interpreted in two or more
ways. Rather, it seems, he likely thought that imprecision in com-
munication was an inevitable aspect of language and of the people
using it, a natural result of people having different perspectives and
interests and holding different biases.
9
The phrase “to the death” (Ms A twmh d[) is ambiguous itself. It is often
taken to imply that one should argue even if it results in one’s demise, e.g.,
P.W. SKEHAN – A.A. DI LELLA, The Wisdom of Ben Sira (AB 39; New York
1987) 177, though it could also imply until one’s old age (cf. 2 Sam 6,23; 1
Kgs 11,40; Jer 52,34). In Jon 4,9 the phrase twm-d[ occurs in a statement that
can be translated: “It is right (that) it angers me to the point of dying”. The
same Hebrew phrase without the definite article occurs with the sense “to
death” in Ms D to Sir 37,2; Ms B expresses the same idea with twm la, while
Ms C has a different phrasing. On the different Hebrew versions, see
S. ELITZUR, “A New Hebrew Fragment of Ben Sira (Ecclesiasticus)”, Tarbiz
76 (2006-2007) 17-28, here 22, and IDEM, “Two New Leaves of the Hebrew
Version of Ben Sira”, DSD 17 (2010) 13-29, here 21-22. The sense “to the
point of dying” is expressed in phrases like twml in Isa 53,12.
10
B.C. GREGORY, “Slips of the Tongue in the Speech Ethics of Ben Sira”,
Bib 93 (2012) 321-339, here 330-333.