Part 75
On the other hand, we cannot repeat too often that we are quite unable to identify any intervals, scales, or tunes as having been used in ancient Israel. Even those who hold that the early church took the Gregorian "tones" from the sjmagogue, confess that it was "certainly not without considerable modifications." And, of course, there was not the slightest affinity between the Heb and the Anghcan chant. See Music; Praise; Song; Temple.
S.V.). While no certain decision is possible, probability points to the E., and China cannot be quite ruled out. See art. "China," Enc Bril^'^, 188b.
W. EwiNG SINITES, si'nits (TP , ?lni): A Canaanite people mentioned in Gen 10 17; 1 Ch 1 15. The identification is uncertain. Jerome mentions a ruined city Sin, near Arka, at the foot of Lebanon.
James Millar SINGLE, sin'g'l, EYE: Mt 6 22 f |1 Lk 11 34: "If therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of hght. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. "Single" and "evil" here represent airXois, haplous, and
SINLESSNESS, sin'les-nes: The 15th Anglican
article ("Of Christ Alone without Sin") may be quoted as a true summary of Scripture teaching on sinlessness: "Christ in the truth of our nature was made like unto us in all things, sin only excepted, from which He was clearly [prorsji-s] void, both in His flesh and in His spirit Sin, as Saint John saith, was not in Him. But all we the rest, though baptized, and born again in Christ, yet offend in many things; and, if we say we have no
TTovripbs, ponerds. Poneros elsewhere in the NT means "wicked"; haplous occurs only here in the NT, but is very common in ordinary Gr and always has the meaning "simple." But in view of the context, most commentators take haplous here as meaning "normal," "healthy," and poneros as "diseased," so rendering "Just as physical enlightenment depends on the condition of the eye, so does
sin, we deceive ourselves."
Here the sinlessness of the Incarnate Son is affirmed. It needs no elaborate argument to show that this is the affirmation of
spiritual enlightenment depend on the condition
1. Christ Scripture. It is not only, as we are Sinless reminded above, definitely taught there. Yet more is it implied in the mysterious (and morally miraculous) phenomenon of the Lord's evidently total immunity from the sense of sin, His freedom from inward discord or imperfection, from the slightest discontent with
of the heart." This is natural enough, but it is not
satisfactory, as it gives to haplous a unique sense and to poneros a sense unique in the 73 NT examples
of the word. Moreover, the same expression, "evil
eye," is found also in Mt 20 15; Mk 7 22, where
it means "jealousy" or "covetousneas." With poneros = "covetous," haplovs would = "generous"
self. It is not too much to say that this representation is self-evidential of its truth to fact. Had it been the invention of worshipping disciples, w« may say with confidence that they (supposed thus capable of "free handling") would have been certain to betray some moral aberrations in their portraiture of their Master. They must have failed to put before us the profound ethical paradox of a person who, on the one hand, enjoins penitence and (with a tenderness infinitely deep) loves the penitent, and, on the other hand, is never for a moment penitent Himself, and who all the while has proved, from the first, a supreme moral and spiritual magnet, "drawing all men to him." Meanwhile the Scripture represents the sinlessness of the Incarnate Lord as no mere automatic or effortless condition. He is sensitive to temptation, to a degree which makes it agony. His sinlessness, as to actual experience (we are not here considering the matter sub specie aeternitatis) , lies in the perfect
and this rendition gives excellent sense in Mt, where
the further context deals with love of money. Yet
in Lk it is meaningless, where the context is of a
different sort, a fact perhaps indicating that Lk has
placed the saying in a bad context. Or the Gr
tr of Christ's words used by Matthew and Luke may have taken the moral terms haplous^ and
poneros to translate physical terms ("healthy" and
"diseased"?) employed in the original Aramaic. The Sinaitic Syr version of Lk 11 36 may perhaps
contain a trace of an older rendering. See Julicher,
Die Gleichnisreden Jesu, II, 98-108. Burton Scott Easton SINGULAR, sin'gll-lar: "Pertaining to the single
person " "individual," and so sometimes "unusual,
"remarkable." So Wisd 14 18, AV "the singular
dihgence of the artificer" ((piXoniila, philohmia, love
of honor " RV "ambition"). In Lev 27 2 by "when
a man shall make a singular vow" AV seems to have
understood a "personal" or "private" vow. RV
has "accomplish a vow," with m "make a special
fidelity to the Father of a will, exercised under human conditions, filled absolutely with the Holy
. " Cf the same phrase (yaphW [y'phalle ] nedher)
vow
used of the Nazirite vow in Nu 6 2.
Spirit, willingly received.
Sinner Sirach, Book of THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2806
On the other hand, "we the rest," contemplated as true beHevers, arc warned hy the general teaching
in Acts 7 26; 14 15; 19 25, etc; more frequently Kvpios,kdrios. "lord," as in Mt 13 27; 21 30; 27 3(i; Jn 4 11.15.19.49 (RVm "lord"); 20 15. In Rev 7 14, RV renders "my lord."
of Scripture never to affirm sinlessness
2. Saints as our condition. There are passages Not Sinless (e.g. 1 Jn 3 9; 5 1 f) which affirm of the regenerate man that he "sinneth not." But it seems obvious to remark that such words, taken without context and balance, would prove too much; they would make the smallest sense of sin a tremendous evidence against the person's regeneration at all. It would seem that such words practically mean that sin and the regenerate character are diametrical opposites, so that sinning is out of character, not in the man as such, but in the Christian as such. And the practical result is an unconquerable aversion and opposition in the regenerate will toward all known sin, and a readiness as sensitive as possible for confession of
SIRACH, si'rak (BOOK OF), or The Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach:
I. Name
II. Canonicity III. Contents IV. Teaching 1. Religion 2. Morals 3. Manners 4. Counsels of Prudence V. Literary Form VI. Author
1. Jesus, Son of Sirach 2. Other Views VII. Unity and Integrity VIII. Date 1 Most Probable Views 2. Other Views IX. Original Languages 1. Composed in Hebrew 2. Margoliouth's View X. Versions 1. Greek 2. Syriac 3. Latin 4. English Literature
failure. Meanwhile such passages as 1 Jn are, to the unbiased reader, an urgent warning of the peril of affirming our perfect purity of will and character. But then, on the other hand. Scripture abounds in both precepts and promises bearing on the fact that
in Christ and by the power of His Spirit, received by faith into a watchful soul, our weakness can be so Kfted and transformed that a moral purification and emancipation is possible for the weakest Christian which, compared with the best efforts of unregenerate nature, is a "more than conquest" over
Sirach is the largest and most comprehensive example of Wisdom Literature (see Wisdom Literature), and it has also the distinction of being the oldest book in the Apoc, being indeed older than at least two books (Dnl, Est) which have found a place in the Canon alilce of the Eastern and Western churches.
evil (see e.g. 2 Cor 12 9.10; Gal 2 20; Eph 6 16; Judever24). See further Flesh; Spirit.
HaNDLEY DtlNELM SINNER, sin'er (t?tpn , hatta'; ajiapTuXos, hamar-
tolos, "devoted to sin," "erring one"): In the NT,
/. Name.—The Heb copy of the book which Jerome knew bore, according to his explicit testimony (see his preface to his version of Libri Sol.),
in addition to its ordinary significance of one that
sins (Lk 5 8; 13 2; Rom 5 8.19; 1 Tim 1 15; He 7 26), the term is applied to those who lived in disregard of ceremonial prescription (Mt 9 10.11; Mk 2 15 ff; Lk 5 30; Gal 2 15); to those stained with certain definite vices or crimes, as the publicans (Lk 15 2; 18 13; 19 7); to the heathen (Mt 26 45 Gal 2 15; cf Tob 13 6; 1 Mace 1 34; 2 Mace 2 48
the same title as the canonical Prov, i.e. D''512Jp
m'shalim, "Proverbs" (Faro6oZae is Jerome's word). It is quoted in rabbinical lit. by the sing, of this name, '1?P , masAai = Aram. S?briT2 , mathla' , but
62); to the preeminently sinful (Mk 8 38; Jn 9 24 31; Gal 2 17; 1 Tim 1 9; Jude ver 15). It was the Jewish term for a woman of ill-fame (Lk 7 37
in the Talm it is cited by the author's name, "Ben Sira" (5<T'D '\'2. , hen fira'). The Heb fragments found in recent years have no title attached to them. In the Gr MSS the heading is 'Zotpla. 'l-qaod
cf Mt 21 32, where it is stated that such had come even to John's baptism also). For the general Bib. conception of the term, see Sin. M, O. Evans
vlov 'S,i.pAx (or 'S'eipdx), Sophia lesoii huiou Sirach (Seirdch), "The Wisdom of Jesus, son of Sirach"
(.so SA); or simply 2o0ia "Zeipdx-, Sophia Scirdch
(B), "The Wisdom of Sirach.'' The Fathers called
SIGN, si'un nii5"^iS , sl'on; ^r^iiv, Seon):
(1) A name given to Mt. Hermon in Dt 4 48. The name may mean "protuberance" or "peak," "and may have denoted the lofty snow-covered horn of the mountain as seen from the S. It may, however, be a scribal error for Sirion, the name by which the mountain was known to the Zidonians. Syr takes it in this sense, which, however, may be a correction of the Heb. It is possible that this name, like Senir, may have applied to some distinct part of the Hermon Range.
it either (as Euseb., etc) v TrandpeTos uotpLa., he pandretos sophia, "the all virtuous wisdom," or simply v TraxapeTos, he pandretos, "the all virtuous (one)," or (Clement of Alex.) Tvaidayicy6$, paidagogds, "teacher." The first Heb and the several Gr titles describe the subject-matter, one Heb title {hen sirs') the author. But the Lat name Ecclesiasticus was given the book because it was one of the books allowed to be read in the Ecclesia, or church, for edification {libri ecclesiastici) , though not one of the books of the Canon {libri canonici) which could be quoted in proof or disproof of doctrine. The present book is called Ecclesiasticiis by way of preeminence since the time of Cyprian {Testimon.
(2) Mt. Sion; see ZioN.
SIPHMOTH, sif'moth, sif'moth (ni)3SiC , siph-
moth [Ginsburg], rTl)3SlB , s/up/ta»jo(/i [Baer]; 2a<j>6t,
2, etc). The Syr (Pesh) title as given in the London Polyglot is "The Book of Jesus the son of Simon 'Ai^ird' [lAyO^] , called also the Book of the Wisdom of Bar [ = B[eb ben, "son of"] 'Astra'." There can be no doubt that Asira (sometimes tr'' "bound") is but a corrupted form of Sira. For other explanations see Ryssel in Kautzsch, AT Apoc, 234.
Saphel) : One of the cities to which David sent presents from Ziklag (1 S 30 28). It occurs between Aroer and Eshtemoa, so it mu.st have been somewhere in Southern Judah. The site has not been recovered. Zabdi theShiphmite (1 Ch 27 27) may quite probably have been a native of this place.
SIPPAI, sip'i, si-pa'i. See Saph.
Lagarde in his corrected text prefixes the title. "The Wisdom of Bar 1 =Heb ben, "son of"l Sira." How is it that the Heb S^"'0 . .sird', has in tlie Gr become Sirach {or Setrach) ? How are wo to explain the final ch in the Gr ? The present writer thinks it is due to an
SIR, sdr: In the OT this word in Gen 43 20 AV i'adhdn) is changed in RV into "my lord." In the NT the word sometimes represents avrip, antr, as
2807 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Sinner Sirach, Book of
attempt to represent in writing tiie guttural sound ol the flnalletter 'aleph in the Heb name as in the Gr 'AKeASanix.
Eichhorn (Einleilung, 50 IT) divides the book into three parts (ciis 1-23; 21—42 14; 42 15—50 24), and maintains that at first each of these was a separate work, united subsequently by the author. Julian divides the work into three, Scholz into twelve, Fritzsche (Ein-
Akddamdch, for the Aram. X12T bpn , hdkal dcmd' (Acts 1 19), Dalraan, however (/I ram. Gr'amm., 161, n. 6), followed by Ryssel, holds that the final ch is simply a sign that the word is indeclinable; of 'Iiu<r^x> loatch (Lk 3 26), for Heb loi"! vose.
leiturtfj, xxxii) and Ryssel (op. cit. , 240) into seven, Edersheim (op. cit., 19 f) and R. G. Moulton (Modern Reader's
Bible: Eccius, xvi If) into five portions, and many other arrangements have been proposed and defended as by Pjwald, Holzmann, Bissell, Zcickler, etc. That there are small independent sections, essayettes, poems, etc, was seen by the early scribes to whom the LXX in its present form was largely due, for they have prefixed headings to the sections beginning with the following verses: 18 30 ("Temperance of Soul"); 20 27 ("Proverbs"); 23 7 ("Discipline of the Mouth"); 24 1 ("The Praise of Wisdom"); 30 1 ("Concerning Children"); 30 14 ("Concerning Health"); 30 16 ("Concerning Foods"; this is absent from many MSS, though retained by Swete who, however, omits the preceding heading)
II. Canonicity.—Though older than both Dnl and Est, this book was never admitted into the Jewish Canon. There are numerous quotations from it, however, in Talmudie and rabbinic lit. (see a list in Zunz, D-ie Gollesdiensllichen Vorlrage^, 101 f
Dclitzsch, Zur Geschichle der jild. Poesie, 204 f; Schechter, JQR, III, 682-706; Cowley and Neubauer, The Original Heb of a Portion of Ecdus, xix-xxx) . ^ It is not referred to explicitly in Scripture, yet it is always cited by Jewish and Christian writers with respect and perhaps sometimes as Scripture. It forms a part of the Vulg of the Tridentine Council and therefore of the Romanist Canon, but the Protestant churches have never recognized it as canonical, though the bulk of modem Protestant scholars set a much higher value upon it than they do upon many books in the Protestant Canon (Ch, Est, etc). It was accepted as of canonical rank by Augustine and by the Councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397, 419), yet it is omitted from the lists of accepted books given by Melito (c 180 AD), Origen, in the Aposl. Canons and in the list of the Councils of Laodicea (341 and 381). Jerome writes in Lihri, Sol.: "Let the church read these two books [Wisd and Sir] for the instruction of the people, not for establishing the authority of the dogmas of the church." It suffered in the respect of many because it was not usually connected with a great name; cf the so-called "Proverbs of Solomon." Sir is cited or referred to frequently in the Ep. of Jas (Jas 1 2-4—cf Sir 2 1-5; Jas 1 5—cf Sir 1 26; 41 22; 51 13 f; Jas 1 8 ["double minded"]—cf Sir 1 28, etc). The book
30 24 (BV33 24, "Concerning Servants"); 35 (EV32 1, "Concerning Rulers"); 44 1 ("Praise of the Fathers"); 51 1 ("The Prayer of Jesus, Son of Sirach"). Probably the whole book possessed such headings at one time, and it is quite possible that they originated in the need to guide readers after the book had become one of the chief church reading-books (so W. J. Deane in Expos, II, vi. 327). These headings are given in Eng. in AV proper (in the margin), though in modern reprints, as also in RV, they are unfortunately omitted. The whole book has been arranged in headed sections by H. J. Holzmann (Bunsen's Bibelwerk, IX, 392 ff) and by R. G. Moulton (op. cit.).
IV. Teaching.—In general it may be said that the principles enunciated in this book agree with those of the Wisdom school of Palestinian Judaism about 200 BC, though there is not a word in the book about a Messianic hope or the setting up of a Messianic kingdom. None of the views characteristic of Alexandrian Judaism and absent from the teaching of Palestinian Judaism are to be found in this book, though some of them at least are represented in Wisd (see Wisdom of Solomon, VI; Teaching). Gfrorer {Milo und die jiid.-alex. Philo., II, 18 ff) and Dahne (Gesch. der jiid.-alex.
rel. Phil., II, 141 ff) hold that the book contains many Alexandrian expressions and numerous statements peculiar to the Alexandrian philosophy. But apart from some late interpolations, mostly Christian, what these Ger. scholars say is untrue, as Drummond (Philo Judaeus, I, 144 ff), Deane {Expos, II, V, 334 ff) and others have shown. The outstanding features of Alexandrianism are the allegorical interpretation of the Scriptures, its conception of the ecstatic vision of God, its doctrine of mediating powers between man and God and
is often cited in the works of the Fathers (Clem. Alex., Origen, Augustine, etc) and also in the Apos Const with the formula that introduces Scripture passages: "The Scripture says," etc. TheReformers valued Sir highly, and parts of it have been incorporated into the Anglican Prayer-book.
///. Contents.—It is quite impossible in the book as it stands to trace any one scheme of thought,
for the author's mind moves lightly from topic to
its adoption of purely Gr ideas. None of these can be traced in Sir. The Hebrews never developed a theoretical or speculative theology or philosophy:
topic, recurring frequently to the same theme and repeating not seldom the same idea. It is, however, too much to say with Sonntag (De Jesu Siracidae,
all their thinking gathered about life and conduct; the duties that men owed to God and to one another; the hopes that they cherished and the fears by which they were animated. This is the only philosophy which the Bible and the so-called Apoc teach, and it is seen at its highest point in the so-called Wisdom Literature (q.v.). The main lines of the teaching of Sir may be set out as follows, under the three heads of religion, morals, and manners.
etc) that the book is a farrago of sayings with no connection, or with Berthold that the "work is but a rhapsody," for the whole is informed and controlled by one master thought, the supreme value to everyone of Wisdom. By this la.st the writer means the Jewish religion as conceived by enlightened Jews toward the beginning of the 2d cent. BC, and as
reflected in the Law of IVIoses (see 24 23-34), and in a less degree in the books of the Prophets and in the other writings (see Prologue) . The book follows the Unes of the canonical Book of Prov, and is made up
(1) God.—The view of God given in this book agrees generally with that put forth by the later
writers of the OT from the exile
of short pithy sayings with occasional longer discus-
1. Religion (Second Isa, Job, etc) onward, though the God of this book lacks the love and tenderness of the Jeh of the OT prophets. God is present everywhere (16 17-23) ; He created the world as an ordered whole (16 26-30) and made man intelligent and supreme over all flesh. The expressions used are no doubt modeled on Gen 1, and it may fairly be inferred that creation out of nothing is meant. Wisd, on the other hand, teaches the Alexandrian doctrine that matter (CXi),
sions, largely collected but in part composed, and all informed and governed by the dominant note of the book: true Wisdom, the chief end of man. Most of
the book is poetical in form, and even in the prose
parts the parallelism of Heb poetry is found. Many unsuccessful attempts have been_ made to
trace a definite continuous line of reasoning m the
book, but the vital differences in the schemes propounded suggest what an examination of the book itself confirms, that the compiler and author
hide) is eternal and that the Creator's work consisted of fashioning, adapting and beautifying. The world is a creature of God, not (as in Philo, etc)
put his materials together with little or no regard
to logical connection, though he never loses sight
of his main theme—Wisdom the chief thing.
Sirach, Book of THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2808
passage (2 K 19 35) has nD3T2 , maggephah, "plague," and so the Syr, though the LXX (followed by the Vulg) has "angel."
an emanation from Him. Yet is He compassionate and forgiving (17 24 ff). His worlis are past finding out (18 2 ff) ; but His compassion is upon aU flesh (18 13), i.e. upon all that accept His chastening and seek to do His will (18 14). In 43 27 God is said to be "the all" (t6 irSc, to -pdn), which simply means that He pervades and is the ground of everything. It is not Alexandrian pantheism that is taught. Gfrorer and others take a contrary view.
(11) Eschalology.—Nowhere in this book is the doctrine of a future Ufe taught, and the whole teaching of the book leaves no place for such a doctrine. Men will be indeed rewarded or punished according to their conduct, but in this world
(see 2 10 f; 9 12; 11 26 f). The retribution is, however, not confined to the individuals in their lifetime; it extends to their children and involves their own glorious or inglorious name after death (see 11
(2) Revelation.—In harmony with other products
of the "Wise Men," Sir sets chief value upon natural
28; 40 15; 41 6; 44 11-13). The passage concerning Gehenna (7 17) is undoubtedly spurious and is lacking in the Syr, Ethiopic, etc. Since the book
religion, that revealed in the instincts, reason and conscience of man as well as by the sun, moon,
stars, etc. Yet Sir gives far more prominence than Prov to the idea that the Divine Will is specially made known in the Law of Moses (24 23; 45 1-4). We do not meet once with the word "law" inEccl,nor law in the technical sense (Law of Moses) in either Job, Wisd or Prov. In the last-named it is simply one of many synonyms denoting "Wisdom." In
is silent as to a future life, it is of necessity silent on the question of a resurrection. Nothing is hinted as to a life beyond the grave, even in 41 1-4, where the author deprecates the fear of death. In these matters Sir agrees with the Pent and the prophetic and poetical books of the OT (Pss, Job,
Sir the word occurs over 20 t, not, however, always, even when the expression "Law of Moses" is used, in the sense of the "five books" (Pent). It generally includes in its connotation also "the prophecies and therestof the books" (Prologue); see 32 (LXX 35) 24; 33 (LXX 36) 1-3.
etc), none of which give any intimation of a life beyond the grave. Little or nothing is said of the Messianic hope which must have been entertained largely by Palestinian Jews living in the author's time, though in 36 (LXX 33) 1-17 the writer prays for the restoration of Israel and Jerus, i.e. R. H. Charles thinks {Eschatology, etc, 65), for the bringing in of the Messianic kingdom.
(3) Sin.—Sin is due to the wrong exercise of man's
free will. Men can, if they like, keep the commandments, and when they break from them they are themselves alone to be blamed (15 14-17). Yet
(12) Sirach's doctrine of Wisdom.—For a general discussion of the rise and development of the conception of Wisdom in the OT and in the Apoc see Wisdom Literature. A brief statement as to what the word implies in Sir is all that can here be attempted. It is in chs 1 and 24 that Ben Sira's doctrine is chiefly contained.
it was through a woman (Eve) that sin entered the world and death by sin (26 24; cf 1 Tim 2 14). See Rom 5 12 where "one man," strictly "human being" (ver 14, "Adam"), is made the first cause of
sin. But nowhere in Sir is the doctrine of original
Wisdom is from God: He created it and it must therefore have a separate existence. Yet it is dependent on Him. It is omnipresent, though it dwells in a peculiar sense with all flesh. The root and beginning of Wisdom, its fulness and crown, are the fear of God (1 14.16.18.21); so that only the obedient and pious possess it (1 10.26) ; indeed Wisdom is identified with the fear of the Lord and the observance of the Law (19 20) ; it is even made one with the Law of Moses (24 23), i.e. it consists of practical principles, of precepts regulating the life. In this doctrine we have a combination of universalism, principles of reason and Jewish particularism as the teaching of the revealed Law. We have the first in 24 3-21; the second in 24 23-34. Have we in this chapter, as in Prov, nothing outside the teaching of Palestinian Judaism? Gfrorer (op. cit.,
sin taught.
(4) Predestination.—Notwithstanding the prominence given to "free will" (see [3], above). Sir teaches the doctrine of predestination, for God has determined that some men should be high and some low, some blessed and others cursed (33 lOff).
(5) Satan.—The word "Satan" (Sararas, Satands)
in 21 27 (it occurs nowhere else in the Apoc) denotes one's own wicked heart, as the parallelism shows.
(6) Salvation.—There is no salvation except by way of good works on man's part (14 16 f) and forgiveness on God's (17 24r-32). The only atonement is through one's own good works (5 5 f), honoring parents (32 14 f), almsgiving, etc (3 30; 17 19 ff). There is no objective atonement ("expiation," lit. "propitiation"; the Gr vb. ^fiXdo-KOMcti, exildskomai, is the great LXX word for the Heb IBS, kipper, "to atone").
II, 18 ff) denies this, maintaining that the whole of ch 24 was written by an Alexandrian Jew and adopted unchanged by Ben Sira. But what is there in this chapter which an orthodox, well-informed Palestinian Jew of Ben Sira's time might not well have written?
(7) Sacrifice.—The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to God (34 18 ff), though He Himself appointed sacrifices and first-fruits (45 20 f), and when the righteous offer sacrifices to God they are accepted and remembered in the time to come (35 1-12).
It is quite another question whether this whole conception of Wisdom in the so-called Wisdom books is not due, in some measure, to Gr, though not Alexandrian, influence, unless indeed the Gr influence came by way of Alexandria. In the philosophy of Socrates, and in a less exclusive sense in that of Plato and Aristotle, the good man is the wise one. Cheyne (Job and Sol, 190) goes probably too far when he says, "By Gr philosophy Sirach, as far as we can see, was wholly uninfluenced." The ethical principle of Sir is Hedonism or individual utilitarianism, as is that of Prov and the OT generally, though in the Pss and
(8) Feasts.—Festivals as well as seasons are ordained by God to be observed by man (33 [LXX 36] 8 f; cf Gen 1 14).
(9) Prayer.—The duty of prayer is often pointed out (37 15, etc), the necessary preparation defined (17 2.5; 18 20.23), and its successful issue promised (35 17). There must be no vain repetitions
(7 14; cf Mt 6 7), nor should there be any faintheartedne.ss in the matter (5 10; cf Jas 1 6). Men are to pray in sickness (38 9), but all the same the physician should be consulted and his advice followed (38 lf.l2ff).
2. Morals in the prophetical writings gratitude to God for the love He has shown and the kind acts He has performed is the basis of end-
(10) Angelology.—Sir nowhere clearly expresses his belief in angels or uses language which implies such a belief. For "an angel [6 dyyeXo^, ho
less appeals and vows. Moreover, the individual point of view is reached only in the late parts of the OT. In the older OT books, as in Plato, etc,
dos] destroyed them" the Heb of the original
2809 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Sirach, Book of
which characterizes Heb poetry, though it is less
it is the state that constitutes the unit, not the individual human being. The rewards and penalties of conduct, good and bad, belong to this present world. See what is said in (11) "Eschatology," above; see also 2 7 f ; 11 17; 16 6 f ; 40 13 f, etc.
antithetic and regular than in Prov. No definite meter has been discovered, though Bickell, Margoliouth and others maintain the contrary (see Poetry, Hebrew). Even in the prose parts parallelism
is found. The only strophio arrangement is that suggested by similarity of subject-matter.
The hedonistic principle is carried bo far that we are urged to help the good because they are mo.st likely to prove serviceable to us (12 2) ; to aid our fellow-man in distress, so that in his days of prosperity he may be our friend (22 23) ; contrast the teaching of Jesus Christ (Lk 6 30-36). Friends are to be bemoaned for appearance' sake (38 17). Yet many of the precepts are lofty. We are exhorted to show kindness and forbearance to the poor and to give help to our fellow-man (29 8.20) ; to give alms (12 3); speak kindly (18 15-18); masters should treat servants as brethren, nay as they would themselves be treated (7 20-22; 33 30 f); parents should give heed to the proper training of their children (3 2; 7 23; 30 1-13); and children ought to respect and obey their parents (3 1-16). It is men's duty to defend the truth and to fight for it. So shall the Lord fight for them (4 2.5.28). Pride
Bickell {Zeitschr. fur katholische Theol., 1882) tr<i 51 120 back into Heb and tried to prove that it is an alphabetic acrostic ps, and Taylor supports this view by an examination of the lately di.scovered fragments of the Heb text (see The Wisdom of Ben Sira, etc, by S. Schechter and C. Taylor, Ixxixfl). After 51 12 of the Gr and other VSS the Heb has a ps of 15 verses closely resembling Ps 136; but the Heb VS of 51 1-20 does not favor Bickell's view, nor does the ps, found only in the Heb, lend much support to what either Bickell or Taylor says. Space precludes detailed proofs.
VI. Author.—The proper name of the author was Jesus {Jeshua, Gr Iesous['!]), the family name being
"Ben Sira." The full name would
1. Jesus, be therefore "Jesus Ben Sira." In Son of the Talm and other Jewish writings Sirach he is known as "Ben Sira," lit. "son
[or descendant?] of Sira." Who Sira was is unknown. No other book in the Apoc gives the name of its author as the Prologue to Sir does. In the best Gr MSS (BSA) of 50 27, the author's name appears as 'Iijo-oCs uiij "Zeipax 'EXeafdp 6
is denounced (10 2 ff), and humility (3 18), as well as forgiveness (28 2), commended. Sir is as much a code of etiquette as one of ethics, the motive being almost invariably the individual's
'lepocroXu/iefTi;!, lesous huids Scirdch Eleazdr ho Hierosolumeites, "Jesus the son of Sirach [son of] Eleazar the Jerusalemite." For the last two words S has by a copyist's error, 6 lepeis 6 2oXu-
own good. Far more attention is
3. Manners given to "manners" in Sir than in Prov, owing to the fact that a more complex and artificial state of society had arisen
ficlTTjs, ho hiereus ho Solumeites, "the Solomon-like priest." The Heb text of 50 27 and 51 30 gives the following genealogy: Simeon son of Jesus, son of Eleazar, son of Sira, making the author the grandson and not the son of Sira, and so he is called by Saadia; see HDB (Nestle) and EB, II, 1165 (Toy). We know nothing of Ben Sira beyond what can be gathered from the book itself. He was a resident in Pal (24 10 f), an orthodox Jew, well read in at least Jewish lit., a shrewd observer of Ufe, with a philosophical bent, though true to the national
in Pal. When one is invited to a banquet he is not to show greed or to be too forward in helping himself to the good things provided. He is to be the first to leave and not to be insatiable (31 12-18) Moderation in eating is necessary for health as well as for appearance' sake (31 19-22). Mourning
for the dead is a social propriety, and it should on that account be carefully carried out, since failure to do this brings bad repute (38 16 f). It is quite wrong to stand in front of people's doors, peeping and listening : only fools do this (21 23 f ) . Music and wine are praised : nay even a "concert of music" and a "banquet of wine" are good in their season and in moderation (32 [LXX 35] 5 f). The author has not a high opinion of woman (25 13). A man
faith. He had traveled far and seen much (34 1 1 f ) His interests were too general and his outlook too wide to allow of his being either a priest or a scribe.
Many suppositions have been put forward as to the author's identity.
is to be on his strict guard against singing and dancing girls and harlots, and adultery is an evil
(1) That the author was a priest: so in cod. >? (50 27). In 7 29-31 he speaks much of the priesthood, and there are numerous references to sacrifices in 2 Other ^^^ book, in 45 6-26 he has a long
to be feared and avoided (36 18-26). From a woman sin began, and it is through her that we all
,,*. poem in praise of Aaron and his highViews priesthood. Yet on the whole Ben Sira does not write as a priest.
die (25 4). Yet no one has used more eulogistic terms in praising the good wife than Ben Sira (26
(2) That he was a high priest: so Syncellus {Chron, ed Dindf., 1 525) through a misunderstanding of a passage in Eusebius. But the teaching and temper of the book make this supposition more improbable than the last.
1 ff), or m extolling the happiness of the home when the husband and wife "walk together in agreement" (25 1). Never lend money to a man more powerful than
(3) That he was a physician: an inference drawn from 38 lf.l2ff and other references to the professional healer of the body (10 10). But this is a very small foundation on which to build so great an edifice.
thyself or thou wilt probably lose it (8 12). It is unwise to become surety for another
(4) That he was one of the 72 translators (LXX)
4. Counsels (29 18; 8 13), yet for a good man one
,so Lapide (Cnmm.), Calmet, Goldhager, a wholly unsupported hypothesis.
of Prudence would become surety (29 14) and he would even lend to him (29 Iff). It
(5) No one of course believes that Solomon wrote the book, though many of the early Fathers held that he was the author of the five Wisdom Books, Prov, Eccl, Cant, Sir and Wisd.
should be remembered that in those times lendmg and becoming financially liable were acts of kind-
ness, pure and simple: the Jewish Law forbade the
VII. Unity and Integrity.—There is, on the whole, such a uniformity in the style and teaching
taking of interest in any form (see Century Bible,
"Ezra," etc, 198). "A slip on a pavement is better
of the book that most scholars agree in ascribing the whole book (except the Prologue, which is the work of the translator) to Ben Sira. This does not mean that he composed every hne; he must have adopted current sayings, written and oral, and this will account for the apparent contradictions, as about becoming surety (29 14), and refusing to become surety (8 13; 29 18); words in praise (25 1; 26 1 ff) and condemnation of women (25 4.13; 36 18-26); the varymg estimates of fife (36 16-35;
than a shp with the tongue," so guard thy mouth
(20 18); "He that is wise in words shall advance
himself; and one that is prudent will please great men" (20 27) . The writer has the pride of his class
for he thinks the common untrained mind, that of
the ploughman, carpenter and the like, has little
capacity for dealing with problems of the intellect
(38 24-34). - . , , , • V. Literary Form.—The bulk of the book is
poetical in form, abounding in that parallelism
Sirach, Book of THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2810
(/) The only references to Simon II in Jewish history and tradition depict him in an unfavorable
40 1-11), etc. But in these seeming opposites we have probably no more than complementary principles, the whole making up the complete truth. Nothing is more manifest in the booli than the allpervading thought of one dominant mind. Some have denied the genuineness of ch 51, but the evidence is at least indecisive. There is nothing in this chapter inconsistent with the rest of the book.
light. In 2 IMacc 3 he is the betrayer of the temple to the Syrians. Even if the incident of the above chapter were unhistorical, there must have been some basis for the legend. Jos ( Ant, XII, iv, 10 f) makes him side with the sons of Tobias against Hyrcanus, son of Joseph, the wrong side from the orthodox Jewish point of view.
In the recently discovered fragments of Heb text there is a ps between vs 12 and 1.3 of the Gr and EV which seems a copy of Ps 136. It is absent from the VSS and its genuineness is doubtful. But in J^oth the Heb and Gr texts there are undoubted additions and omissions. There are, in the Gr, frequent glosses by Christian editors or copyists and other changes (by the translators ?) in the direction of Alexandrian Judaism: see Speaker's Apoc and other comms. for details.
ig) The high priest Simon is said (50 1-13) to have repaired the temple and fortified the city. Edersheim says that the temple and city stood in need of what is here described in the time of Simon
I, but not in the time of Simon II, for Ptolemy I (247-222 BC) in his wars with Demetrius destroyed many fortifications in Pal to prevent their falling into the hands of the enemy, among which Acco, Joppa, Gaza are named, and it is natural to think that the capital and its sanctuary were included. This is, however, but a priori reasoning, and Derenbourg argues that Simon II must be meant, since according to Jos (Ant, XII, iii, 3) Antiochus the Great (223-187 BC) wrote a letter in which he undertakes that the city and temple of Jerus shall be fully restored. This is not, however, to say that Simon II or anyone else did, at that time, restore either.
VIII. Date.—In the book itself there is one mark of definite date (50 1), and in the Prologue there
is another. Unfortunately both are ambiguous. In the Prologue the translator, whose grandfather or ancestor (Gr iraTriros, pdppos) wrote the book (the 3founger Siracides, as he is called), says that he reached Egypt, where he found and tr'' this book in the reign of Euergetes, king of Egypt. But there were two Egyp kings called Euergetes, viz. Ptolemy Euergetes, or Euergetes I (247-222 BC), and Ptolemy VII Physcon, or Euergetes II (218-198 BC). Sir 50 1 mentions, among the great men whom he praises, Simon the high priest, son of Onias, who is named last in the list and hved probably near the time of the elder Siracides. But there were two high priests called Simon and each of them was a son of Onias, viz. Simon I, son of Onias I (c 310-290 BC), and Simon II, son of Onias II (c 218-198 BC). Scholars differ as to which Euergetes is meant in the Prologue and which Simon in 50 1. The conclusions to which the evidence has brought thepresent writer are these: (1) that Simon I (d. 290 BC) is the high priest meant; (2) that
(A) Of the numerous errors in the Gr text some at least seem due to the fact that the VS in that language was made so long after the composition of the original Heb that the sense of several Heb words had become lost among the Alexandrian Jews. If we assume that the Simon of ch 50 was Simon I
(d. 290 BC), so that the Heb work was composed about 250 BC; if we further assume that the Euergetes of the Prologue was Ptolemy VII (d. 198 BC), there is a reasonable space of time to allow the sense of the Heb to be lost in many instances (see Halevy, Rev. Sem., July, 1899). It must be admitted that there is no decisive evidence on one side or the other, but the balance weighs in favor of Simon I in the opinion of the present writer.
1. Most Ptolemy VII Physcon (218-198 BC) is Probable the Euergetes meant. Views (1) In favor of the first proposition are the following:
(2) That the Euergetes of the Prologue in whose reign the translation was made must have been Ptolemy VII Physcon, Euergetes II, seems proved by the translator's statement that he came to Egypt in the 38th year, (ttI toD Eiepyirov (iacriKius, epi lou Euergelou basileos, i.e. almost certainly of the reign of Euergetes, for what reason could the younger Siracides have for giving his own age? Now Euergetes I reigned but 25 j'ears, but Euergetes II
(a) The book must have been written some time after the death of Simon, for in the meantime an
artificial fame had gathered around the name, and the very allusion to him as a hero of the past makes
it clear that he had been long dead. Assuming that Simon had died in 290 BC, as seems likely,
it is a reasonable conclusion that the original Heb work was composed somewhat later than 250 BC.
If Simon II is the man intended, the book could hardly have been composed before 150 BC, an impossible date; see below.
(Physcon) reigned in all 54 years, from 170 to 145 BC as regent with his father, and from 145 to 116 BC as sole monarch. If we accept this interpretation of the above words, the question is settled. Westcott, however {DB, 1863, I, 479, n. c), says "the words can only mean that the translator in his 3Sth year came to Egypt during the reign of Euergetes." The other rendering adopted by Eichhorn is, he adds, "absolutely set at variance with the grammatical structure of the sentence." In the second ed of DB (1893) this note has become expunged, and the article as edited by D. S. Margoliouth (I, 841) teaches the contrary view, which is now accepted by nearly all scholars (Schtirer, etc). We may therefore assume that the original Heb book was composed about 240-200 BC, or some 50 or more years after the death of Simon I, and that the translation was made about 130 BC, for the younger Siracides came to Egypt in 132 BC, and he gives us to understand in the Prologue that he tr** the Heb work of his grandfather almost immediately after reaching that country. If Simon II (d. 198 BC) is meant in ch 60, we are compelled to assume a date for the original work of about 150 BC in order to allow time for the growth of the halo of legend which had gathered about Simon. The trans-
(h) In the list of great men in chs 44-50 the praises of Simon (50 1 ff) are sung after those of Nehemiah (49 1.3), suggesting that the space of time between them was not very great.
(c) The "Simon the Just" of Jos was certainly Simon I, he being so called, this Jewish historian says {Ant, XII, ii, 5), on account of his piety and kindness.
(d) It is probable that the "Simon the Just" of the Mish {'Abh i.2) is also Simon I, though this is not certain. It is said of him that he was one of the
last members of the great synagogue and in the Talm he is the hero of many glorifying legends. The so-called great synagogue never really existed, but the date assigned to it in Jewish tradition shows that it is Simon I that is thought of.
(f) In the Syr VS (Pesh) 50 23 reads thus: "Let it [peace] be established with Simon the Just,"
etc. Some MSS have "Simon the Kind." This text may of cour.se be wrong, but Graelz and Edersheim support it. This is the exact tide given to Simon I by Jos (op. cit.), the Mish and by Jewish tradition generally.
2811 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Sirach, Book of
may be said that in syntax it agrees in the main with
lation must, in that case, have been completed some 20 years after the composition of the Heb, a conclusion which the evidence opposes. The teaching of the book belongs to 200 BC, or slightly earher. The doctrine of the resurrection taught in Dnl (165 BC) is ignored in Sir, as it has not yet become a Jewish doctrine.
the classical Heb of the OT, but its vocabulary hnks it with the latest OT books. Thus we have the use of the "waw-consecutive" with the imperfect
(43 23; 44 9.23; 45 2 f , etc) and with the perfect
(42 1.8.11), though the use of the simple waw with both tenses occurs also. This mixed usage is exactly what meets us in the latest part of the OT
(1) That the Euergetes of the Prologue and the Simon of ch 50 are in both cases the first so called. So Hug, Scholz, Welt, Keil, Edcrsheim (.Speaker's 9 Tlripf Apoc) and many others. The book was %\ "''^^ accordingly written after 290 BC. perhaps btatement in 250 BC, or later, and the translation was of Other made some time after 220 BC. say 200 BC. VipwK (2) That Euergetes II (d. 116 BC) *"='"'• and Simon II (d. 198 BC) are the two persons referred to. So Eicliliorn, De Wette, Ewald, Franz Delitzsch, Hitzig, Schllrer.
(Eccl, Est, etc). As regards vocabulary, the word fSn , Aep/ief, has the sense of "thing," "matter," in 20 9, as in Eccl 3 1; 5 7; 8 6. In general it may be said that the Heb is that of early post-Bib. times. Margoliouth holds that the extant Heb VS is no older than the 11th cent., which is impos.sible. His mistake is due to confounding the age of the MSS with that of the VS they contain.
(3) Hitzig (Psalms, 1836. II, 118) made the original work a product of the Maccabean period—*-an impossible supposition, for the book says nottiing at all about the Maccabees. Moreover, the priestly house of Zadok is praised in this book (chs 50, etc): it was held in little respect during the time of the Maccabean wars, owing to the sympathy it showed toward the Hellenizing party.
(5) It is nevertheless admitted that in some cases the Syr or the Gr or both together preserve an older and correcter text than the Heb, but this because the latter has sometimes been miscopied and intentionally changed.
IX. Original Languages.—Even before the discovery of the substantial fragments of what is probably the original Heb text of this
(6) The numerous Plebraisms in the Gr VS which in the Heb have their original expression point to the same conclusion—that this Heb text is the original form of the book.
1. Combook, nearly all scholars had reached posed in the conclusion that Sir was composed Hebrew in Heb. (1) The fact of a Heb original
Margohouth has been answered by Smend (TLZ, 1889, col. 506), Konig (Expos T, X, XI, 1899-1900), Noldeke (ZATW, XX, 81-94), and by many others. Bickell {Zeilschrift fur katholische Theol, III, 387 ff) holds also that the Heb Sir extant is a tr from the Gr or Syr or both.
is definitely stated in the Prologue.
(2) Jerome (Praef. in vers, libri Sol.) says that he had seen the Heb original—the same text probably that underlies the fragments recently published, though we cannot be sure of this. (3) Citations apparently from the same Heb text are made not seldom in Talmudic and rabbinical literature. (4) There are some word-plays in the book which in the Gr are lost , but which reappear in the discovered Heb
X. Versions.—The LXX tr was made from the Heb direct; it is fairly correct, though in all the extant MSS the text is very corrupt in
1. Greek several places. (1) The book occurs in the uncials B X C and part of A fairly free from glosses, though abounding in obvious errors. (2) The text is found in a much purer form in cod. V and also in N
text, e.g. (43 8) ^ ^V^ Kara rd 6vo^a a^r^s ^anv av^a-
vofj-iv-q (read arnxveoixivri) ^ ho intn katd Id onoma aules
eslin auxanomene (read ananeomene), "the month is
'==' and part of A. All extant Gr MSS except the late cursive 248 seem to go back to one original MS, since in all of them the two sections 30 25—33 15 and 33 16—36 11 have changed places, so that 33 16—36 11 follows 30 24 and 30 2.5—33 15 comes after 36 11. Most scholars accept the explanation of Fritzsche (Exeg. Handbuch zu denApok, V, 21 f) that the two leaves on which these two parts (of similar size) were written got mixed, the wrong one being put first. On the other hand, the cur.sive 248 (14th cent.) has these sections in their proper order, and the same is true of the Syr (Pesh), Lat and Armenian VSS and of the Gr VS of the Complutensian Polyglot (which follows throughout 248 and not the uncials) and EV which
called after her name," irnnnia SIH inffiD TUnn
hodhssh kish'rao hu' milhhadhesh, "the moon according to its name renews itself"; the Heb words for "moon" and "renews itself" come from one root, as if we said in English—what of course is not English "the moon moons itself." There are other cases where mistakes and omissions in the Gr are explained by a reference to the newly found Heb text.
The strongly supported conjecture of former years that the book was composed in Heb was turned
into a practical certainty through the discovery, by
Dr. S. Schechter and others in 1S96 and after, of
the fragments of a (probably the) Heb text called now ABC and D. These contain much over half
the whole book, and that the text in them, nearly always identical when the same passages are given
is made from this Polyglot. The superiority of 248 to the older MS (B S A C V) is seen in o'thcr parts of the Gr text. In the other Gr MSS, 3 25
in more than one, is the original one, is exceedingly
is omitted, as it is by Eder.sheim and most commentators before the discovery of the Heb text. But this last supports 248 in retaining the verse, and
likely, to say the lea-st.
D. S. Margoliouth (Origin of the Original Heb
of Ecclus, 1899) has tried to prove that the Heb
it is now generally kept. In 43 23 "islands" is properly read by 248, Vulg, Syr, 23 and the Heb, but older Gr MSS read "Jesus," making nonsense ("And Jesus planted her" [aur^i', auien] for "he planted islands therein"). The other iVISS have a text which yields no sense in 43 26: EV "By reason of him his end hath success." The Gr of 248 and the Heb give this sense: "The angel is equipped for his task," etc.
text of the fragments is a tr of a Pers
2. MargoliVS which is itself derived from Gr
outh's View and Syr. The proofs he offers have not convinced scholars.
(1) He refers to words in Heb which in that
language are senseless, and he endeavors to show
that they are disguised Pers words. As a matter
of fact, in such cases the copyist has gone wholly wrong or the word is undecipherable.
The Syr (Pesh) VS is now almost universally acknowledged to have been made from the Heb, of
(2) There do appear to be Pers glosses, but they
are no part of the original text, and there can be no
which, on the whole, it is a faithful
reasonable doubt that they are due to a Pers rcvader
2. Syriac rendering. In some i)laces, however,
or copyist.
it agrees with the LXX against the Heb, probably under the influence of the inaccurate idea that the Gr text is the original one. In this VS the two sections 30 25—33 5 and 33 16—36 11
(3) There are many cases in which the Heb can
be proved to be a better and older text than the Gr
or Syr (see Konig, Expos T, XI, 170 ff).
(4) As regards the character of the language, it
I^ch Alphabet rpjjj, INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2812
many of them indecent. Some of the proverbs in the Alphabets are probably genuine compositions by Ben Sira and are quoted as such in the Talm, but in their present form the Alphabets are at least as late as the 11th cent. AD.
are in proper order, as in the Heb, a fresh proof that the Syr is not tr'' from the Gr.
The Vulg agrees with the Old Lat which follows the LXX closely. Lapide, Sabatier and Bengel tried to prove that the Vulg was based on
Literature.—The only complete copy of the text known is in the British Museum, the copy in the Bodleian being defective. Steinschneider has published a reprint of this last with critical notes (Alvhabeticum Syracidis, Berlin, 1854). Cowley and Neubauer {The Original Heb of a Portion of Ecclus), besides giving a general account of this work, add a tr into Eng. of the Aram, proverbs. In his brief but excellent articles in Jew Enc {Ben Sira, The Alphabet of). Dr. Louis Ginzberg (New York) also gives a tr of the 22 Aram, proverbs with useful remarks after each. The work has been tr^ into Lat, Yiddish (often) , Judaeo-Spanish, Pr. and Ger. , but never, so far, completely into English.
3. Latin the lost original Heb, but the evidence they supply falls far short of proof, and recently discovered Heb fragments show that they were wrong. The two sections transposed in the LXX (except 248) are also transposed in the Lat, showing that the latter is based on the Gr text. The Lat text of both Sir and Wisd according to the cod. Amiant is given by Lagarde in his Mitlheilungen, I, 243-84. This closely follows the Gr text. AV follows the cursives and often repeats their errors. RV is based, for the most part, on the unoiaLs
T. WiTTON Davies SIRAH, sl'ra, WELL OF (n")Sn 113 , bor ha-
and thus often departs from the Heb.
4. English 3 19 is retained by AV but omitted by RV. For the latter clause of the verse ("mysteries are revealed unto the meek"), AV is supported by cod. 248, the Syr and the Heb. Both EV should be corrected by the Heb in 7 26 and 38 1. 15. For fuller details concerning VSS see Speaker's Apoc, II, 23-32 (Edersheim); Kautzsch, Die Apok. des AT, I, 242 ff (Ryssel), and the art. by Nestle in HDB, IV, 544 ff. Literature.—In addition to books mentioned under Apoc and in the course of the present art., note the following:
firah, "the pit," "well" or "cistern of Sarah"): The spot from which Abner was enticed back to Hebron to his death (2 S 3 26). Jos (Ant, VII,
i, 5) calls it Br;{p)<TLpii, Be(r)sird, implying that it was a "well." It is possible that this spot ia now 'Ain Sarah, a spring which flows into a little tank near the west side of the road about a mile out of ancient Hebron, on the way to Jerus. There is, however, a curious cistern with steps known as Hamam Sarah ("Sarah's bath") near Ramet el-Khaltl, which is also possibly the site {PEF, 314, Sh XXI).
S I R I O N , sir'i-on (')'l''"lto , siryorv; Savi<ip,
(1) The text of the Heb fragments: For accounts of the discovery and decipherments of these see HDB, IV, 546 f (Nestle); Bible Polyglotle (F. Vigoureujc), V, 4ff; Schiirer; GJVK III, 221 fl. The text of the Heb as yet known is conveniently printed in the following: H. L. Strack, Die SprUche Jesua, etc (with notes and glossary), Leipzig, 1903; Isaac Levi, The Heb Text of Ecclesiasticus (with notes and glossary), Leiden, 1906; Rudolf Smend, Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach, Heb und Deulsch (with notes and glossary), Berlin, 1906. The Heb appears also in the Bible PolygloUe, ed F. Vigom-eux, with the LXX, Vulg and a French translation in II columns. (No other Polyglot has appeared since the discovery of the Heb.) There are II texts in Heb, Syr, Gr and Eng., and also useful notes and tables in The Original Heb of Sir 39 IB—49 11, by Cowles and Neubauer, Oxford, 1897. Still later and fuller is The Wisdom of Ben Sira in Heb and Eng., with notes on the Heb by Schechter and Taylor, Cambridge, 1899.
Sanior): The name of Mt. Hermon among the Phoenicians (Dt 3 9). It is given as "Shirion" in Ps 29 6 (Heb "breastplate" or "body armor"). Here it is named with Lebanon. Sirion therefore probably did not denote a particular part of the Hermon Range, as did Senir, but may have been suggested by the conformation of the range itself, aa seen from the heights above the Phoen coast.
SISAMAI, sis'a-mi. See Sismai.
SISERA, sis'er-a (S?"1tp"'P, ^ifra' , of doubtful meaning; 2[e]io-<lpa, /S[e]isdra)
(1) Given in Jgs 4 as the captain of the army of Jabin, king of Hazor. The accounts given of the battle of Sisera with Barak, as found in Jgs 4 and 5, have important points of difference. The
(2) Commentaries: The works of Fritzsche (1869), who neglects the evidence of the Syr and ignores the Heb idioms in the book, and of Bissell (1880) and Edersheim (1888) appeared before the discovery of the Heb fragments. The last-named shows both learning and ingenuity in tracking the Heb idioms and in explaining difficulties by means of Heb. The following comms. take full note of the Heb text as far as discovered: Israel Levi, U Ecclesiastique ou la sagesse de J^sus fils de Sira: traduit et comments, Paris, 1898, 1901; Ryssel in Kautzsch' s Apok, des AT, I, 280-475, exceedingly valuable, esp. for the text and introduction, but he takes account of the Heb fragments published by Cowley and Neubauer only in this book. To complete his treatment of the Heb _parts published after he wrote, see further articles by him in 5(ud. u, Krit., 1900-1-2; Knabenbaur,
first is a prose, the second a poetic narrative. In the
first only Naphtali and Zebulun are mentioned as being under the command of Barak ; in the second 6 tribes are given as being under his command. In Jgs 4 Sisera is known as the captain of Jabin's forces, while in Jgs 5 he seems to have been an independent leader. There is also a difference as to the scene of the battle and as to the manner in which Sisera met his death at the hand of Jael. Because of these points of difference, added to the fact that this is the only account, in these early times, where a king did not lead his own forces, it is thought by many that there is here the combination of two traditions deahng with different and distinct events.
Commentarius in Ecclesiaslicum, Paris, 1902; Peters, Der jiingst wieder aufgefundene hebrdische Text des Buches Ecclesiasticus, 1902 (of the notice by Smend, TLZ, 1903, 72-77); Smend, Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach erkldrt, 1906 (full discussion of the book in the newest Ught; cf notice by .Tulicher in TLZ, 1908, 323-29). The New Oxford Apoc (Intro and Notes), ed by R. H. Charles (1913), contains a full Intro and Comm. J. H. A. Hart has published separately a critical edition of cod. 248, in which he collates the principal authorities, MS and printed.
Sisera resided in Harosheth of the Gentiles, a place identified with el-Hdrilhlyeh, on the right bank of the Kishon and commanding the way from the Central Plain to the sea. Taking the versions in the two chapters of Jgs as being the account of a single campaign, we find Deborah urging Barak to combine the forces of Israel to wage war with Sisera as the representative of Jabin, the king of Hazor. The scene of the battle was on the plain at the foot of the slopes of Mt. Tabor (4 12-14), or at the foot of the Carmel heights (5 19). The attack of Barak and Deborah was so furious, animated as it was by the hatred of Sisera and the Canaanites, that the hosts of Sisera were put to rout, and Sisera,
Of the Diet, articles those in HDB (Nestle, strong in the critical, but weak and defective on the historical and exegetical side); EB (C. H. Toy, sound and well balanced) ; see also Jeiv Enc (Israel Levi) and Enc Brit (W. Baxendale). For detailed register of the literature see HDB (Nestle); Jew Enc, "Sirach" (Israel Levi); and esp. SchUrer, GJV>, III, 219 ff.
T. WiTTON Da VIES SIRACH, THE ALPHABET OF: Usually called The Alphabet of Ben Sira. The compilation so designated consists of two lists of proverbs, 22 in Aram, and 22 in Heb, arranged in each case as alphabet acrostics. Each of these proverbs is followed by a haggadic comm., with legends and tales,
2813 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA |jf^'=''
Alphabet
deserting his troops, fled on foot to the N.E. He took refuge in the tent of Heber, near Kedesh, and here met death at the hands of Jael, the wife of Heber
the two wells dug by the herdsmen of Isaac, the cause of further "enmity" with the herdsmen of Gerer (Gen 26 21, m "That is. Enmity"). The site
(see Jael). Sisera's name had long produced fear in Israel because of his oppression of the people, his vast army and his 900 chariots of iron. His overthrow was the cause of much rejoicing and was celebrated by tlie song in which Deborah led the people. See Debokah.
is unknown, but Palmer {PEFS, 1871) finds an echo of the name in Shutnet er Ruheibeh, the name of a small valley near Ruheibeh. See Rehoboth.
SITTING, sit'ing {1^1 , yashabh, "to sit down or
still," ^y^ , daghar, "to brood," "hatch"; KaOiJo-
It is interesting to note that the great rabbi Alfiba, who fought so valiantly in the Jewish war for independence as standard bearer to Bar-cocheba, was descended from the ancient warlike Sisera of Harosheth.
("ii, hathezomai, "to sit down," dv<iKci.|jiai, andkeimai, "to lie back," "recline"): The favorite position of the Orientals (Mai 3 3; Mt 9 9; 26 55 [cf 5 1; Lk 4 20; 5 3]; Mk 14 18; Lk 18 35; Jn 2 14, etc).
(2) In Ezr 2 53 and Neh 7 55 the name Sisera,
after a long interval, reappears in a family of the Nethinim. There is no evidence that the latter Sisera is connected by family descent with the former.
"In Pal people sit at all kinds of work; the carpenter saws, planes, and hews with his hand-adze, sitting upon the ground or upon the plank he is planing. The washerwoman sits by the tub, and, in a word, no one stands where it is possible to sit On the low shopcounters the turbaned salesmen squat in the midst ol the gay wares" (LB, II, 144, 275; III, 72, 76).
C. E. SCHENK SISINNES, si-sin'ez (SiorCvviis, Sisinnes) : "The eparcli [governor] of Syria and Phoenicia" under Darius Hystaspis(l Esd 6 3.7.27; 7 1) c520BC = "Tattenai the governor beyond the river" in Ezr 5 3.6; 6 6.13. He took a prominent part in the efforts to prevent the rebuilding of the temple.
Figurative: (1) To sit with denotes intimate fellowship (Ps 1 1; 26 5; Lk 13 29; Rev 3 21);
(2) to sit in the dust indicates poverty and contempt (Isa 47 1), in darkness, ignorance (Mt 4 16) and trouble (Mio 7 8); (3) to sit on thrones denotes authority, judgment, and glory (Mt 19 28). M. O. Evans SrVAN, sS-van', si'van ("T'P , fiwan) : The third month of the Jewish year, corresponding to June (Est 8 9). See Calendar.
, ^ifmay; AV Sisamai)
SISMAI, sis'mi 0T2DD
A Judahite, of the descendants of the daughter of Sheshan and Jarha, his Egyp servant (1 Ch 2 40). Commentators have compared the name to QDD, ^sm, a Phoen god (cf Rudolph Kittel, Comm. ad loc.
BDB, S.V.).
SIXTY, siks'ti (DilBlp, shishshlm; ki,i\Mvra.,
SISTER, sis'ter (HinS , 'ahoih) : Used repeatedly
hextkonia). See Number.
in the OT of a female (1) having the same parents as another; or (2) having one parent in common, with another, half-sister (Gen 20 12; Lev 18 9), and also (3) of a female belonging to the same family or clan as another, so a kinswoman (Gen 24 60; Job 42 11); (4") also of a woman of the same country (Nu 25 18). (5) Figuratively, the two kingdoms,
SKILL, skil, SKILFUL, skil'fool (forms of 7"^
, bin [1 Ch 15 22],
yadha^ [2 Ch 2 14, etc], T"?
bsiB , sakhal [Dnl 1 4, etc]. Tab , lamadh [1 Ch
5 18], nSn, hakham [1 Ch 28 21], ©nn , harash [Ezk 21 3'l], nu;, yaiabh [Ps 33 3]; in Apoc
Israel and Judah, are sisters (Ezk 23 7 ff). (6) Confederate cities are conceived of as sisters (Ezk 16 45 ff). (7) 'Ahoth is used of objects which go
ejiireipta, empeirla [Wisd 13 13], lirio-TTniT), episttme
[Sir 1 19; 38 3.6]; advb. iv^a.9ias,eumathds [Wisd 13
11]): As a vb. "to skill," meaning to have understanding or to be dexterous, common in Elizabethan Eng. and in AV and ERV (1 K 5 6; 2 Ch 2 7 f; 34 12), is obsolete. ARV substitutes such expres-
in pairs, as curtains, each 'coupled to its sister' (Ex
'26 3.6), and of wings in pairs (Ezk 19; 3 13);
(8) of virtues or conditions, with which one is
sions as "knoweth how" (1 K 5 6) and "were skilful with" (2 Ch 34 12). As a noun the word is used
closely related: "Say unto wisdom, thou art my
sister" (Prov 7 4; cf Job 17 14); (9) of a lover concerning his spouse, as a term of endearment (Cant 4 9f; 5 If; 8 8). In the NT, dScX^i}, adelpht, used (1) in sense of
in the sense of "knowledge" (Eccl 9 11), "insight" (Dnl 1 17), and "wisdom" (1 Ch 28 21). The
adj. skilful is used in corresponding senses, esp.
in ARV, where it takes the place of "cunning" (Ex 26 31; 31 4; 35 33.35; 38 23; 2 Ch 2
physical or blood kinship (Mt 12 50; 13 56'
19 29; Lk 10 39 f; 14 26; Jn 11 1 ff; 19 25 Acts 23 16); (2) of fellow-members in Christ "Phoebe, our sister" (Rom 16 1; see also 1 Cor 7
7.13.14; Cant 7 1; Isa 40 20; Jer 10 9) and of "curious" (Ex 35 32), where the Heb hashabh
suggests planning or devising, and thus what we
15; 1 Tim 5 1; Jas 2 1.5); (3) possibly, of a
should call "original" work. Both ERV and ARV
church, "thy elect sister" (2 Jn ver 13). See Relationships, Family.
use the word in place of "eloquent" (Isa 3 3), "right" (Eccl 4 4) and "cunning" (1 Ch 25 7). In the first of these instances the Heb word means "understanding"; in the second, it refers to the manner of doing a thing, and in the third, to the
Edward Baqby Pollard SISTER'S SON: AV translates rightly (1) ininX""!, hen-dhoM (Gen 29 13); and (2) Ms
T^s (i5eX0^s, huids its adelphts (Acts 23 16), and
training that makes one "skilled." RV uses the word "skilled" of those that "took the war upon them" (Nu 31 27 AV). Skilfulness (Ps 78 72)
wrongly, (3) dveif/iis, anepsids (Col 4 10), where, without doubt, the real meaning is "cousin," as in RV. See Relationships, Family.
is used with reference to the hands, not only in their
work, but also in guiding (as, e.g., a pilot). ^ To
SITH, sith: An Anglo-Saxon word meaning
play well (Heb hetlbhU naggen) is rendered play
"afterward," "since" (Ezk 35 6 AV and ERV, ARV "since").
skilfully" (Ps 33 3). "Unskilful" is used with refer-
ence to the uninitiated in the sense of "inexperi-
enced" (He 5 13, drrapos, dpeiros).
SITHRI, sith'ri ClfiP , ?Uhri): A grandson of Kohath (Ex 6 22).
Nathan Isaacs SKIN (liy, 'or, nb3, geledh, "human skin"
[,Job 16 1.5], "li»3, basar, "flesh," in the sense of
SITNAH, sit'na (Hptpto , siinah, "hatred," "hostil-
"nakedness" [Ps 'l02 5 AV]; Up^a., derma):
ity"; f\Bpla, echthria) : The name of the second of
Skin Slave, Slavery THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2814
Literal: The word 'or designates the skin of both men and animals, the latter both raw and in tanned condition: "Jeh God made for Adam and for his wife coats of skins ['or], and clothed them" (Gen 3 21); "She put the skins Cor] of the kids of the goats upon his hands, and upon the smooth of his ueck" (27 16); "Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?" (Jer 13 23). The Heb geledh is found in the sense of human skin: "I have sewed sackcloth upon my skin, and have laid my horn in the dust" (Job 16 15). Figurative: 'To escape by the skin of the teeth'
SKIRT, skiirt: (1) n:3 , kanaph, "wing," "extremity" (Ruth 3 9, etc), is the usual word. But in 1 S 24 4 fi perhaps corner" is the bast tr.
(2) blffl, shul, "loose hanging" (Ex 28 33, etc; in AV often rendered "hem"). (3) H^, peh, "mouth," "opening" (Ps 133 2, "the precious oil .... that came down upon the skirt"). But the "opening" is that for the head, so that RVm "collar" is the correct tr. "Sku't" is frequently used in a euphemistic sense, for which the comms. must be consulted. See Dress; Train.
SKULL, skul (nba^J, gulgolelh; Kpavtov, kra-
is equivalent to a narrow escape (Job 19 20). Satan says in his calumny of Job : "Skin for skin, yea,