CHAPTER XI
The Wisdom Literature; the Jewish Conception of Wisdom

I. The Wisdom Literature

The Wisdom Literature of the Jews which has come down to us comprises both canonical and uncanonical books[300]; but the distinction may be ignored, for all the books which belong to this Literature, though each has its particular characteristics, are clearly members of one family; they are all alike in possessing one outstanding and typical mark of differentiation from the rest of the Old Testament books, viz., in them religion has become philosophy. It was not, of course, philosophy in the Greek, any more than in the modern, sense of the word; “the wise men of Israel never approached their inquiries without theological presuppositions; they had no desire to investigate final causes; they started from a fundamental axiom, ‘In the beginning was God ...’; this postulate indicates the character of their studies, which were not so much speculative as practical: their desire was not so much to understand the works of God, as to acquaint themselves with their harmonies, beauties, and adaptations, and all this with the final object of knowing and doing the will of God.”[301] But while the fundamental Jewish monotheistic belief is taken for granted throughout the Wisdom Literature, the latter has other characteristics which are not wholly in accord with traditional Judaism. That the various writers differ in their teaching from each other, and that the same writer is not always consistent in his teaching, is not a cause for surprise; these men had entered upon new ways of thinking, and were grappling with new subjects of thought; it was natural that their speculations should sometimes be only tentative; they had, moreover, come into contact with new influences which would have affected one more than another. It must also be remembered that some of the books belonging to this literature, notably Proverbs and Job, are of composite authorship, and that possibly the component parts belong to different periods; so that what may sometimes appear contradictory in one writing in reality represents some development of thought belonging to a later writer. But however this may be, we certainly find in the Wisdom Literature positions taken up which show to some extent a departure from traditional Judaism. The wise men present a very interesting combination in that they are at once universalistic and conservative. We find in the Wisdom Literature but little stress laid on national institutions and laws, such, for example, as the sacrificial system; it is recognized, it is true, but rather because it is thought right to keep up the old customs than that there is any intrinsic value or permanent necessity in the system. In like manner the Messianic expectations receive very scanty recognition. The attitude of the sages towards the Gentiles is generally friendly; they recognized the higher culture, in many respects, of these nations, and were therefore willing to learn from them; not infrequently we find, for example, that the God of the Jews is declared to be the God of all men. But the most striking characteristic, which is quite un-Jewish, is the conception of the God-like Sophia, which is conceived of as a creative divine power existing before the creation of the world; “this hypostatization of Wisdom,” says Friedländer, “is here a downright sacrilege; it betrays the violent entry of an alien spirit into the domain of Judaism, and even the fine way in which the essence of the divine Wisdom is described cannot for a moment blind us to the act of violence perpetrated by the forcible intrusion of Greek conceptions into the atmosphere of the old Hebrew idea of Wisdom.”[302] But as we deal in section III of this chapter with the conception of Wisdom as portrayed in all the books of the Wisdom Literature, it will not be necessary to say anything on this subject here.

II. The Origin of the Hebrew Conception of Wisdom

There is a great difference between the conception of Wisdom which is presented in the literature of Israel prior to the captivity and that which meets us in the Wisdom Literature proper; yet there is no sort of doubt that the latter represents the full growth of a plant whose seed can be clearly seen in the early writings of the Old Testament. This is, however, only part of the truth; for while it is true to say that the religious-intellectual spirit to which the Wisdom Literature of the Jews owed its existence was of indigenous growth, it is no less true to say that the elements which contributed to the production of that Literature were not exclusively Jewish. We shall try to show presently that Babylonian influence was, in part, at work in helping the sages of Israel both before the captivity, as well as in post-exilic times, to frame their ideas on Wisdom as these appear in the Wisdom Literature, while still later the influence of the Greek spirit is to be clearly discerned. But our first task must be to seek the first beginnings of Wisdom in the earlier books of the Old Testament.

When precisely ideas about Wisdom began to manifest themselves in Israel it would be impossible to say, but the germs from which, centuries after, the Wisdom Literature grew were already in existence during the early days of the Monarchy, for the tradition of Solomon’s wisdom is undoubtedly based upon fact. In 1 Kings iv. 30-34 (verses 10-14 in the Hebrew) it is said: “And Solomon’s wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the children of the east, and all the wisdom of Egypt. For he was wiser than all men.... And he spake three thousand proverbs; and his songs were a thousand and five. And he spake of trees.... And there came of all peoples to hear the wisdom of Solomon, from all the kings of the earth, which had heard of his wisdom.”[303] Even allowing for some exaggeration, which is so natural to an oriental writer, there can be little doubt that this passage is based upon actual fact, though what is meant by Wisdom in this and similar passages was very different from what would now be understood by that term, as we shall see. But Solomon was not the first example of a “wise man” in Israel. The earliest form of Wisdom is represented by what the Hebrews called a māshāl; this is usually translated by “proverb,” but it has, in addition to this, a much wider signification, for it is used of a prophetic figurative discourse, such as those uttered by Balaam; in later times it was also used to describe a parable and an allegory; in this sense it occurs in Ezekiel. In its earlier simple sense a māshāl meant a “proverb,” not necessarily of a religious, or even ethical, content; it expressed some general truth brought home to men by the observance of the ordinary experiences of life. One of the very simplest of these found in the Old Testament is: “Out of the wicked cometh forth wickedness” (1 Sam. xxiv. 13); this is said to be “a proverb of the ancients,” which shows that it must have long been in use among the Israelites. In 2 Samuel xx. 18 another proverb, which seems likewise to have been long current among the people, is preserved: “They were wont to speak in old time, saying, ‘They shall surely ask counsel at Abel’”; this was uttered by a “wise woman.” With deeper observation and reflection more subtle thoughts came to be expressed in this form. “The Israelites, like all other peoples, must have reflected more or less, from the moment when they attained a settled civilization, on general questions of life. The lowest form of such reflection appears in popular proverbs and fables, which express, usually in a one-sided and superficial way, the result of the ordinary common-sense experience and observation.”[304] As a general rule, however, the few examples of proverbs which we find in the earlier books of the Old Testament reflect a relatively somewhat advanced type, and what is especially interesting about them is that they appear not infrequently to have been made on the spur of the moment; this is the case with the proverb in 1 Samuel x. 12: “Is Saul among the prophets?” which is said to have “become a proverb.” Another saying the form and rhythm of which marks it out as a proverb is: “The blind and the lame shall not come into the house” (2 Sam. v. 8, R.V. marg.); the fact that this is prefaced by the words, “Wherefore they say,” also points to its having been a popular proverb. These, and similar proverbs, though originally composed in reference to some particular occurrence, became applicable in course of time in a more general way. The proverb, for example, “Is Saul among the prophets?” might be described as the converse of the modern proverb: “Birds of a feather flock together”; or, again, the proverb: “They shall surely ask counsel at Abel,” may well have become a popular way of expressing the truth that if you want guidance you must seek it at the right quarter. A later and more advanced type of proverb is uttered by the prophet Hosea (viii. 7): “They sow the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind”; another is quoted in Jeremiah xxxi. 29 and Ezekiel xviii. 2 in the words: “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.”

The simplest form of proverb was thus the earliest type of “Wisdom” among the Israelites, as it was among other peoples. But the content of a proverb easily lent itself, in the minds of the more reflective, to expansion, and thus by degrees were formed fables and parables whereby truths were illustrated and brought home to the minds of men. One of the earliest fables—the exact application of which in its present context is not quite easy to determine—is preserved in Judges ix. 8-15:

We have attempted to translate this in the poetical form of the original Hebrew; it will be seen that the thought-structure is very simple, so that the ideas conveyed would be easily apprehended by the common people to which the fable was addressed. Another fable, the only other one preserved in the Old Testament, occurs in 2 Kings xiv. 9: “The bramble that was in Lebanon sent to the cedar that was in Lebanon, saying, ‘Give thy daughter to my son to wife’; and there passed by a wild beast that was in Lebanon and trod down the bramble.” But it is in the early Old Testament parables that the highest form of “Wisdom” in pre-exilic Israel is reached. As in the case of fables, only two parables are preserved; they differ from fables in two important particulars: in that only men are represented as taking part and speaking, and that the content of a parable, so far as we are able to judge from the specimens preserved, is religious; this is a large step forward in approximation to the later Jewish conception of Wisdom. The earliest Old Testament parable occurs in 2 Samuel xii. 1-4, Nathan’s parable of the ewe-lamb; it is sufficiently well known, and need not be quoted. The other is Isaiah’s parable of the vineyard in Isaiah v. 1-4, which is written in poetry, while the former is in prose. We may add here one other form of Wisdom, found mainly in Ezekiel, namely the allegory; this is also called a māshāl, but this word is here used in an extended sense, for the allegory, though a parable in form, presents a symbolical picture the meaning of which is not, like the parable, easily grasped, but demands some thought before it can be properly understood; it is therefore sometimes called a “riddle.” It differs in another respect from the parable, for symbols take the place of persons; but, like the parable, the Old Testament allegory has a religious signification. Among the most striking allegories are: the allegory of the great eagles (Ezek. xvii. 3-8), the allegory of the caldron (Ezek. xxiv. 3-5), and the allegory of the valley full of dry bones (Ezek. xxxvii. 1-10); but there are a considerable number of others.

The examples of “Wisdom” which have so far been given form an important element in the antecedents of the Wisdom literature; but that this element was not exclusively Israelite is implied in the Old Testament itself, for in a passage already quoted (1 Kings iv. 30, [verse 10 in Hebrew]) it is said: “And Solomon’s wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the children of the east, and all the wisdom of Egypt.” As in so many other respects, so, too, in the domain of Wisdom, Babylon and Egypt evidently exercised considerable influence over the Israelites[305]; and if this was so in pre-exilic times, much more will it have been the case—at any rate as far as Babylon was concerned—when a large portion, especially of the cultured classes, of the nation was brought into immediate contact with Babylonian thought during the exile. The following may be given as an example of the way in which the Babylonian conception of Wisdom influenced the Jews. According to the Babylonian cosmology, Wisdom dwelt in the depths of the sea with Ea, the creative deity. Apsu, “the deep,” is called “the house of Wisdom” because out of it came forth the Wisdom of Ea, and the word of Ea; one of the epithets applied to the god Ea is “lord of Wisdom.”[306] This conception of the “deep” being the home of Wisdom is reflected in the Wisdom Literature of the Jews; in Psalms xxxvi. 6 it is said:

the original is more forcible, for literally it runs:

which is the ancient proper name for the ocean. So, too, in Ecclesiasticus xxiv. 5, Wisdom says:

Moreover, the fundamental conception of Wisdom in the Wisdom Literature (of which we shall speak presently) is its inseparable connection with God; the deeper insight of the Jewish sages saw some truth in the Babylonian conception of the origin of Wisdom, that it dwelt in the depth of the sea with the “Lord of Wisdom,” i.e. was in close touch with the creative deity, so they adopted the conception and placed it in a truer perspective.[308] What Kohler[309] says in a somewhat different connection is applicable here: “As soon as monotheism was firmly established as a result of the labours of the prophets, the wisdom of the east could be consulted by Israel’s sages, and questions concerning the origin of all things could be answered, in both poetry and prose, far more intelligently than had been possible for the ancient Babylonians.”

The origin of Wisdom is thus to be sought partly in Israel itself, and partly in certain ideas which were adopted from extraneous sources. But the way in which the Jewish sages of post-exilic times developed both the indigenous as well as the foreign elements is extremely instructive; to this we must now devote some attention.

III. The Jewish Conception of Wisdom

Our chief concern is the conception of Wisdom as portrayed in the Wisdom Literature; but it will be well to say just a word as to how Wisdom was conceived of in the earlier literature, if only to show the immense development of thought on the subject which took place after the Exile. Wisdom (in Hebrew, Chokmah), and wise men (in Hebrew, Chakāmîm) are fairly frequently mentioned in the Pentateuch, and in the prophetical as well as in the historical books; the words connote in general skill in doing anything, whether in reference to artisans, or goldsmiths, or sailors, or mourning women, or of the shrewdness of the astrologer or the magician. In a higher sense it is used of wisdom in the administration of affairs; in a few instances, as in Hosea xiv. 10, a man is called wise who is far-seeing in religious things (cp. also Deut. iv. 6, Isa. xi. 2). That the prophets rarely refer to the subject of Wisdom is natural enough; it was not their function; they were called forth to rebuke and exhort in the words and after the manner of preachers; they appealed rather to the heart, to the emotions, to the conscience, than to the intellect. Sometimes, it is true, we find that “wise men” are spoken of as a class; thus Jeremiah witnesses to the fact that already in his day the Chakam (“wise man”) occupied a recognized position side by side with the priest and the prophet: “For the law shall not perish from the priest, nor counsel from the wise, nor the word from the prophet” (Jer. xviii. 18).

Turning now to consider the various conceptions of Wisdom as portrayed in the Wisdom Literature, we may begin with the well-known words: “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom.” This saying was to the Jewish sages probably the most important of any that was uttered on the subject; it occurs in Job xxviii. 28 in the form: “Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom.” In its more familiar form it appears in Psalms cxi. 6, Proverbs i. 7, ix. 10 (cp. xv. 33), Ecclesiasticus i. 14 (cp. i. 15, 20, 27), and the sense of the words occurs very often besides. But it is worth pointing out that the meaning of the phrase is not that the fear of the Lord is the commencement of Wisdom, but rather the “end” of it; it is true that the Hebrew word used, rôsh (lit. “head”), has also the sense of “beginning”; but here it is “zenith” that is meant; the highest and most perfect form of Wisdom is the fear of the Lord; so that one might quite correctly render: “The fear of the Lord is the end of Wisdom.”

In the Wisdom Literature generally Wisdom is never used in the sense of pure knowledge; in its earliest meaning it connoted the faculty of distinguishing between what was useful or beneficent, and what was harmful; later, more ethically, between what was good and what was bad. In the Wisdom Literature there is always at bottom a religious content in Wisdom; that is to say, it is a divinely bestowed gift the possession of which makes man in some measure like God. To be able to distinguish truly between good and evil is the means whereby man is enabled to stand in close relationship with God. But since the faculty to distinguish between good and evil is a divine endowment, every form of Wisdom comes from God, so that although the knowledge and fear of the Lord is the highest type of Wisdom, there are less exalted forms of it which are also regarded as part of the one great gift of God; that is to say, what is called worldly wisdom does not differ in kind, but only in degree from the higher form. In Proverbs and Ecclesiasticus, which belong closely together, and which are the chief exponents of this worldly wisdom, moral precepts form the main topics; and though widely different from divine Wisdom, both emanate from the same source, and are ultimately to be traced back to the Giver of all good things.

But the particular conception of Wisdom which is of far-reaching importance is that of personification which is attributed to it in the Wisdom Literature. As a general rule Wisdom is spoken of as something abstract; but in some very striking passages it is personified. Before proceeding to illustrate this it is necessary to utter a note of warning against exaggeration in two opposite directions; on the one hand, we are not justified in reading into the words which speak of the personification of Wisdom a meaning which they were not intended to bear; still less, on the other hand, are we justified in explaining away altogether the meaning which those words were intended to bear. When, nowadays, we speak of things, whether abstract or concrete, as personalities the words are used metaphorically without the remotest intention of really imputing personality to the things described; but we must guard against the danger of assuming that our modern way of envisaging things can be paralleled by that of two thousand years ago; the mode of expression may not have greatly changed, but the way of conceiving is totally different. When, among the Jewish sages of old, Wisdom was personified, it was conceived of, according to a modern writer on the subject, as a “projection out of the Divine mind, as something more than an attribute, but as something less than a hypostasis; ‘a little more than kin, and less than kind.’”[310] This is true as far as it goes; but the words of the Jewish sages, as we shall see, lead one to believe that in their conception of Wisdom they went even further than this; one may go so far as to say that Wisdom was thought of as an intermediate being between God and the world, a personality existing alongside of God, but separate from Him. This is more or less parallel to some other personifications, or quasi-personifications, of certain attributes proper to God which appear in early post-Christian Jewish writings; these occupy an intermediate position between personalities and abstract beings. While, on the one hand, they are represented as being so closely connected with God as to appear as parts of Him, or attributes, they are, on the other hand, so often spoken of as undertaking individual action that they must be regarded in a real sense as separate from Him.[311]

The special importance of this conception of the hypostasis of Wisdom lies not only in the fact that it forms the link between the Palestinian and Hellenistic development of Judaism, but also that it represents the contribution made by the Wisdom Literature to the Christology of the Old Testament, and has, moreover, greatly influenced Christian theology.[312]

What has been said must now be illustrated from the books of the Wisdom Literature.

In the earlier portions of Proverbs, Wisdom is always an abstract thing; the only passage in which one might conceivably discern a tendency to something different would be xxii. 24:

but it is doubtful whether this means more than that when a man has sought Wisdom and has found it, Wisdom may be said to be “before his face,” i.e., it is the man who has understanding before whose face (mental vision) Wisdom appears, because he has sought her. It is in what is pretty generally regarded as the latest portion of the book (viz. i.-ix., belonging to the third century B.C. circa) that a real personification of Wisdom is found; the whole of chapter viii. is a speech uttered by Wisdom; much of it is undoubtedly figurative, but the section viii. 22-31 evidently represents something more than figurative language; it is too long to give in full, but a few of the verses must be given in order to illustrate what has been said:

With the thought of Wisdom being utilized by God in creating the world (“Then was I by him, as a master workman”), one must compare the thought of God having created the world by means of His Word; this thought is already adumbrated in such a passage as Psalms xxxiii. 6: “By the Word of the Lord were the heavens made”[313]; these words were, at any rate, interpreted in later times to mean that the whole of the Creation, as described in Genesis i., was accomplished by means of the Word of God, “Word,” or Memra, having become, in the meantime, a quasi-personality like Wisdom. This development may be seen at work in the Wisdom Literature; for example, in Ecclesiasticus xlii. 15 it is said: “By the Word of God (are) His works,” i.e. were His works created; the context shows that it is the works of the Creation which are referred to. In Wisdom iv. 1 we have the same thought: “O God of my fathers, and Lord of mercy, Who hast made all things by Thy Word, and by Thy wisdom didst form man ...”; and, much later, in 2 (4) Esdras vi. 38, it is said again: “Thy Word was (i.e. made) a perfect work,” where the reference is to the first day of Creation. We are here irresistibly led to think of the opening words of the fourth Gospel: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that hath been made” (John i. 1-3). It is very striking to notice here how Christian truth was adumbrated in pre-Christian times.

In the Book of Job, as everywhere in the Wisdom Literature, Wisdom is of divine origin, e.g. xi. 5, 6:

As a general rule the wisdom spoken of in this book is that of experience; but in one striking passage there is a definite personification of Wisdom, viz. xxviii. 12-28; it begins with the question: “Where shall Wisdom be found?” And after its priceless value has been described, the writer continues (verses 23 ff.):

But in this book where problems of great perplexity are treated, there is less scope than in the other Wisdom books for dealing specifically with Wisdom.

In Ecclesiastes (B.C. 200) Wisdom, as one would naturally expect, is always something abstract; but in this book, with its terribly pessimistic tone, we come across a phenomenon which is found nowhere else in the Wisdom literature; the Preacher’s pessimism is seen to affect even his estimate of Wisdom; what, for example, could be more dismal than this?

This forlorn writer, furthermore, seems sometimes to approach the subject in an entirely perverse spirit; he says later:

This same spirit is manifested in the little parable in ix. 13-16:

We can only say that such an attitude is deplorable; the writer seems to think that unless Wisdom is recognized and the wise man rewarded, it is vanity! That is quite different from the usual attitude of the authors of the Wisdom Literature, who esteem and love Wisdom for its own sake. There are, it is true, a few passages in this book which witness to a better appreciation of Wisdom; for example, in vii. 11, 12 it is said:

Or again in viii. 1:

So that, in spite of what he says elsewhere, the Preacher has an innate liking for Wisdom; as a recent commentator on the book says, “he admires it, and at times follows it (i. 13, vii. 25, ix. 16); but, on the other hand, he cannot rid himself of the feeling that the wise man toils in vain (ix. 16), that his labour is a fruitless endeavour, and that a child born dead is in reality happier than the wise man (vi. 3-8). It is true that in another mood he declares that it is better to know that one will die than to know nothing (ix. 5); but, on the whole, his verdict is that Wisdom, like all other things mundane, is vanity. The wise man has no real advantage, except that he suffers with his eyes open; in the end he dies like a fool, and goes to the same place (ix. 1 ff.).”[314]

In the Wisdom of Ben-Sira (Ecclesiasticus) all that is taught concerning Wisdom in the earlier books (with the exception of what is peculiar to Ecclesiastes) finds full expression, though Ben-Sira is not a slavish imitator; he has his own ideas, and amplifies the earlier teaching, always making it his own before giving expression to it. The divine origin of Wisdom is shown by teaching that it is a direct emanation from God:

The existence of Wisdom before the creation of world is definitely stated in the words:

It is especially characteristic of Ben-Sira’s teaching that he identifies the Law with Wisdom; this identification is often taken for granted, while in several passages it is categorically set forth. “Ben-Sira inculcates the truth that the way to lead a wise life is to live according to the divine commandments, and acting accordingly, man makes his human wisdom approximate to the divine, and worldly, practical wisdom, in its many and various forms, is thus of the same kind, only less in degree, as divine wisdom. It is thus easy to see that the identification between the Law and Wisdom was inevitable.”[315] This identification is to be seen in such passages as the following:

The most direct assertion, however, of this identity between the Law and Wisdom is found in xxiv. 23, 25:

And again in xix. 20:

Although Wisdom is the free gift of God,

yet man is not able to utilize it without earnest effort; he has an irksome discipline to go through which will test his sincerity:

but to the persevering the reward is great; this Ben-Sira expresses in a passage full of poetical beauty:

It will have been noticed that in several of the passages just quoted the personification of Wisdom is graphically expressed; there are many others in this book in which this is taught[316]; an interesting one is i. 15, where Wisdom is described in taking up her abode among men:

In another passage Wisdom invites men to come and abide with her:

This thought of Wisdom abiding among men is illustrated in another way; Ben-Sira, in desiring to show the superiority of the wisdom of Israel over that of the Greeks, represents Wisdom as having sought a resting-place among the nations of the world, but found that none were worthy of her; thereupon God commanded her to abide in Israel where she would find a permanent home:

In his teaching concerning the personification of Wisdom Ben-Sira offers something that is of a transitional character; in the main, he bases his teaching on Proverbs, though he shows some advance upon this; but he falls far behind what the Book of Wisdom has to say on the subject. To this we must now devote some attention.

The writer of the Book of Wisdom, like the writers of all the books belonging to this literature, teaches the divine origin of Wisdom; but he has his own way of expressing this truth:

This divine Wisdom is so indispensable to man that he is of no account without it:

Another invariable doctrine in the Wisdom books, namely the existence of Wisdom before the world was created, and her part in the Creation, is taught thus:

Ben-Sira, as we saw, identifies the Law with Wisdom; the Jewish-Hellenistic writer of the Book of Wisdom does not do so, but he teaches an identification between the Holy Spirit of the Lord and Wisdom[317]; this is clear from the following passage: