Page:Jewish Encyclopedia Volume 2.pdf/730

680 Ben Sira

THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA

Ben-Ze'eb them.

Half of the proverbs are borrowed from the Talmud and it is clear that some of

The Second them are Alphabet,

divided into several proverbs

numnumber of

in order to preserve the desired

ber of twenty-two,

the other half consist of platitudes whose form and contents betray a lack of literary training. But the proverbs themselves are of secondary interest for the author, whose main purpose is to use them as a basis for the legends which he not unskilfully groups about the person of letters in the

Hebrew alphabet.

The

Ben Sira. The account begins with the remarkable birth of Ben Sira. He is represented as the son of Jeremiah, and was born with the physical and mental powers of an adult. In fact, the proverbs were made by him when as a one-year-old child he was sent to a teacher, and was taught the alphabet by him. As his teacher began to say the alphabet, Ben Sira interrupted him by giving a proverb which corresponded to the letter about to be taught him. His fame for wisdom

who sent for him, and at gave many proofs of his wis-

reached Nebuchadnezzar,

whose court Ben Sira dom, which are described by the commentator. The alleged intercourse between Ben Sira and Nebuchadnezzar is the invention of the author, while the miraculous birth and early history of Ben Sira are a Jewish echo of a Christian legend, in which JesusBen Sira is made to pla}- the part of Jesus of NazAccording to the "Evangel of the Childhood areth. of Jesus, " a pseudepigraph written in Arabic (Thilo's

"Codex Apocryphus Novi Testam." i. 122 et seq.), Jesus spoke to his mother (chap, i.) while he was still in the cradle, and said: "I, whom thou hast brought forth, am Jesus, the son of God." Ben Sira, likewise, had teeth when he was born and could talk, for he at once told his mother who he was, whence he came, his name, and what he would accomplish (ed. Venice, 17a, b). Furthermore, just as the "Evangel" chap, xlviii.) mentioned above narrates that Jesus, while a schoolboy, astonished his teacher by explaining the names, form, and order of the Hebrew letters in this book Ben Sira is said The story of the extraordito have done the same. nary conception of Ben Sira by his mother, p. 16S, is evidently a parody of the familiar Christian

—

dogma.

The

chief interest attaches to the animal fables,

which are of great value for comparative folk-lore. The following may serve as an instance At the creation of the world God consigned a male and a female of every kind of animal to the sea. When the Angel of Death ("Malak ha-Mawet"), who was charged with the duty of sinking them in the water, was about to take the fox, that animal began to cry. The Angel of Death asked him why he did this. The fox answered that he wept because his friend had been condemned to live in the water and going to the shore, he pointed to his own image in the water. The Angel of Death, believing that a fox had already been sunk, allowed him to go. Levia:



than, the ruler of the sea, now tried to lure the fox into its depths, because he believed that if he could eat the heart of so cunning an animal he would gain in wisdom. One day, while the fox was walking

by the sea, some fishes came and spoke to him.

They

68O

him that Leviathan was nearing his end and wanted the craftiest of animals to be his successor.

told

the fox to carry him to a rock in the his throne without fear of the surrounding waters. When he reached the high seas the fox knew that for once he had been tricked but he did not lose his self-possession. " What

They promised

sea

where he could erect

!

my

heart you want, is it? Well, why did you not say so before ? I would then have brought it here; for usually, you know, I do not carry it with me. " The fish quickly conveyed him back, to the shore, and in exultation he leaped about. The fish called to him to fetch his heart and come with them but the fox replied " To be sure, I went with you when I had no heart " (the ancients considered the heart the seat of wisdom); "but now I have my heart, I'll stay here. I got the better of the Angel of Death; how much easier, then, to fool stupid fish " (Ed. Venice, pp. 27«-28S partly given, according to the MS. version by Schorr, in "Hesaid he.

"It

is





!



Haluz," viii. 170, 171.) A comparison of this fable with the Indian fables as given in the " Panchatantra " and " Kalila and Dimna," shows that the author fused three into one. Evidently the story of the fox and the Angel of Death has no connection with the story of the fox and the fish. The latter is identical with the Indian fable of the ape and the crocodile ("Panchatantra," iv. 1; French translation by E. Lancereau, pp. 271-278, Paris, 1871), which corresponds to the fable of the ape and the turtle in " Kalila and Dimna (Hebrew version, ed. Derenbourg, pp. 128-138, Paris, Syriac version, ed. Bickell, pp. 49-52, Leipsic, The end of the fable, as told in the Alphabet, does not belong to this fable, but to the Indian one of the lion, the jackal, and the ass ("Panchatantra," iv. 3, 285-288; "Kalila and Dimna," Hebrew, pp. 139-142 Syriac, pp. 52, 53). The author, however, did not draw upon the "Panchatantra," but upon some version of the "Kalila and Dimna," as is evident from the fact that in the latter the two fables are joined, while in the " Panchatantra " there is no direct connection. It is difficult to decide which version of Bidpai Ben Sira drew upon, since the date of the composition of the Alphabet has not been Date. determined. The earliest authority who cites the little book is the author of the 'Aruk, s.v. &ns, ed. Kohut, vi. 450; but it 1881



1876).



is doubtful in what form he knew it; and there is reason to suppose that it underwent changes insertions and elaborations in the course of time. Yet it is probable that Abraham ben Nathan in the second half of the twelfth century was acquainted with the legends and fables of the book as it now is (compare the citations from the manuscript of Abraham ben Nathan in "Jewish Quarterly Review," iii. 685). Maimonides did not know of the book for the remark in his Mishnah commentary on Sanh. x. 1 shows that he obtained his opinion of Ben Sira from the Talmud (I.e. 100). In spite of Maimonides' disparaging opinion of the book, it has survived; and, to judge from the many manuscripts, both the Alphabets and the commentaries had a certain popularity, though mostly among the unlearned. The commentary on the sec-

—

—