Page:04.BCOT.KD.PoeticalBooks.vol.4.Writings.djvu/1717

 offerings or banquets of slain beasts; it is the old name of the שׁלמים (cf. Exo 18:12; Exo 24:5; Pro 7:14), part of which only were offered on the altar, and part presented as a banquet; and זבח (in contradist. to טבח, Lev 9:2; 43:16) denotes generally any kind of consecrated festival in connection with the worship of God, 1Sa 20:29; cf. Gen 31:54. “Festivals of hatred” are festivals with hatred. מלא is part. with object.-accus.; in general מלא forms a constructive, מלא occurs only once (Jer 6:11), and מלאי not at all. We have already, Pro 7:14, remarked on the degenerating of the shelamı̂m feasts; from this proverb it is to be concluded that the merriment and the excitement bordering on intoxication (cf. with Hitzig, 1Sa 1:13 and 1Sa 1:3), such as frequently at the Kirmsen merry-makings, brought quarrels and strife, so that the poor who ate his dry bread in quiet peace could look on all this noise and tumult without envy.

Verse 2
Pro 17:2 2 A prudent servant shall rule over the degenerate son;   And he divides the inheritance among the brethren. Regarding the contrasts of משׂכּיל and מבישׁ, vid., at Pro 10:5; Pro 14:35. The printed editions present בּבן־מבישׁ in genit. connection: a son of the scandalous class, which is admissible; but Cod. 1294 and Cod. Jaman, Erf. No. 2, 3, write בּבן מבישׁ (with Tsere and Munach), and that is perhaps right, after Pro 10:5; Pro 17:25. The futures have here also a fut. signification: they say to what it will come. Grotius remarks, with reference to this: manumissus tutor filiis relinquetur; יחלק tutorio officio. But if he is a conscientious, unselfish tutor, he will not enrich himself by property which belongs to another; and thus, though not without provision, he is yet without an inheritance. And yet the supplanting of the degenerate is brought about by this, that he loses his inheritance, and the intelligent servant steps into his place. Has one then to suppose that the master of the house makes his servant a co-heir with his own children, and at the same time names him as his executor? That were a bad anachronism. The idea of the διαθήκη was, at the time when this proverb was coined, one unknown - Israelitish iniquity knows only the intestate right of inheritance, regulated by lineal and gradual succession. Then, if one thinks of the degenerate son, that he is disowned by the father, but that the intelligent servant is not rewarded during the life of his master for his true