As compared with the later Jewisli literature, i.e., the Talmudim and Midrashim (of which the general antiquity is certified by the Gospels, though the process of oral tradition through many centuries has introduced great modifications), Ben- Sira's book seems to exhibit few of the same interests. He looks forward to the coming of Elijah (48'°- ")> on the faith of the prophecy of Malachi ; but he knows nothing of a Messiah. He does not even mention the Sabbath or the food- legislation (unless 40-'° be a reference to it). His idea of religious obligations consists in otter- ing the prescribed sacrifices and paying tlie priest his dues, which the Greek text assesses more highly than the Syriac (7^"'^')- He thinks of the glyptic art as a normal industry (38-''), not as a violation of the Second Commandment. The pro- found darkness which covers Israelitish afl'airs in the 3rd cent. B.C. renders this phenomenon difficult to explain. The cases in which the formulse of the later Halakhah and Haggadah are suggested are exceedingly rare. In 37^ the irovi^phv ifdv/i-rj/m evi- dently stands for the ynn -la; which was derived from Gn 6°, and this faculty may be what is meant by Sia/SouXiox in 17*, where a rather curious list of faculties is given. In v." the theorj' is stated that every nation has ' a ruler,' i.e. guardian angel, which is worked out in the Midrashim [e.g. Exodus Rabba, 21, 32). In 39'-^ the 'spirits' are identified with forces whereby God wreaks vengeance on evil-doers ; this theme is also worked out in the Midrash (e.g. Genesis Babba, 10). From his ac- count of a banquet (31'^'^-) we should guess that the ' hand - washing ' of which we read in the Gosjiels had not yet been introduced as a religious observance ; the only ceremonial washing men- tioned is after contact with a corpse (34^). The only trace that has been found of Alexandrian exegesis is in 44", where Enoch is said to have been a pattern of repentance to the generations. This is inferred by Philo from the Greek word IxeridriKev used in Gn 5^ for the Hebrew np'7, ' took ' (de Abrahamo, 3), for ' metathesis ' signifies change, in this case cliange of mind. If tlie verse were genuine, we should have to conclude that the author had studied the OT in the LXX version, and that the interpretation found in PhUo was some 200 years earlier than PhUo's time. It seems certain that this verse is an interpolation, not only because it is wanting in the Syriac, hut chiefly because Enoch is mentioned in trie supplementary list of celebrities (49"), where what happened to
SIKACII
SlKACll
CUT
liim is interpreted according to the Hebrew. Tlie interpolation, tlien, is later than the time of Pliilo, but it seems to have found its way into all the Greek MSS.
6. Place of the work in Jewish literature. — The mode wherein 'the Law' is euhi;;ized in the work makes it clear that the canon in the author's time was so well lixed that the admission of any later work would he extremely dilticiilt ; although, then, verses of 15en-Sira are at times cited as from the Hagiographa, it is reasonable to explain tliis as due to defective memory on the part of the Kabbis who cite them, not to tlie work ever having been canonical. It is clear tliat .)ose]>hus was either unacquainted with its existence or did not regard it as sutiiciently important to deserve notice. It is not actually cited in the NT, but the parable in Lk 12""-'" appears to be an amplili- cation of 11"^", which is based on Ec 4'-*; and the doctrine involved in ' forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespass against us ' is so clearly stated in '26''' that we are justified in regarding the latter as the source. Further, the precept against vain repetitions in prayer (Mt tj'), whatever the correct rendering of the phrase in the original, is nearer 7''"', ' repeat not a w ord in thy prayer,' than Ec 5-, the soiirce of the latter. It is probable, then, that Ben-Sira's book was at this time used in the education of the young.
The last person known to have possessed the original appears to be R. Eleazar b. Azariah, of the first half of the 2nd century. For S*"- " are cited on his authority from Ben-Sira in Gen. Babba 8, where the four hemistichs are increased to sLx, and Jerus. Jiagigah, ii. 1, where they are reduced to four, but interpolated from Job II*; in Bab. Hagigah, 13a they are again reduced to four, but by arbitrary omission of two synonymous clauses. The first of these collections comes nearest to the original as certified by the Greek and Syriac together. Naturally the connexion of R. Eleazar with the citation may be inaccurate, but the fact of its occurrence in two separate collections in- spires some confidence. Numerous sayings which approximate more or less closely to verses of the book are to be found in various collections, often wronglj' ascribed; thus in Aboth 4, Sir 7" is quoted according to the text of the Syriac version, and ascribed to R. Levites, a man of Yabneh. Sir 11-' is to be found in the Tanna d'Be Eliahu, i. 61, without sign of quotation. An Aramaic form of 12' is quoted in Gen. llabba 22 as a proverb. Some of these resemblances may be coincidences, but in other cases [e.g. 7") there can be no doubt that verses of the book have been preserved in a mangled form, with erroneous ascriptions. Since the period wherein they were transmitted orally covered several centuries at the least, they furnish a good example of this mode of transmission, whereby accuracy seems always to be lost. The date when any of these collections ceased to he oral cannot now be determined, since Jewish writers invariably falsify the evidence on this subject ; examples will be found in the variants of Yahuda's edition of R. Bachya's Hidayah, Leiden, 1912, pp. 145, 146.