The age of the book has been, and still is, a subject of great controversy. The life-like description of the high-priest Simon, contained in chap. 1, seems to indi- cate that the writer had seen this high functionary of- ficiate in the Temple ; but there were two high priests of the same name, viz. Simon, son of Onias, surnamed the Just, or the Pious, who lived B.C. cir. 370-300, and Simon II, son of Onias, who lived in the reign of Ptolemy Philopator, B.C. 217-195 (3 Mace, i, 2). See Simon. Some interpreters, therefore, are of opinion that Simon I is described by Ben-Sira, whilst others think that Simon II is intended. The lives and acts of these two pontiff's, however, as well as the esteem in which they were respectively held by the peojile, as recorded in their national literature, must show to which of these two high-priests the description of Ben- Sira is applicable. 1. The encomiums show beyond doubt that one of Israel's most renoioned high-priests is described, whereas Simon II was so little distinguish- ed that Joseph us cannot relate a single good thing about him. 2. Bon-Sira characterizes him as the dc liverer of his people from destruction ; whei'eas in the time of Simon II no deliverance of either the people or the Temple was necessary. 3. In the time of Simon II, Hellenism, the great enem}' of Judaism, which was represented by the sons of Tobias, had made great progress ; and if Ben-Sira had written about this time, we should have had some censures from this pious poet of these thoughtless and godless innovations, whereas there is no allusion to these throughout the whole of this book. This appears the more strange when it is borne in mind that Simon II himself sided with these faithless sons of Tobias, as Josephus distinct- 1}' declares (.4?;/. xii, 4, 11). 4. It is utterly impossi- ble that such a man as Simon II should be descriljed in such extraordinary terms in the catalogue of na- tional benefactors, and that Simon I, the personifica- 1 tion of goodness, nobilit}', and grandeur, whom the nation crowned with tiie title the Just, the Pious, should I be passed over with silence. 5. No Jew, on reading so ! sublime a description of the high-priest, would ever I think, with his national traditions before htm, of ap- plying it to any one else but the Simon, unless he were distinctly told that it was intended for another Simon. These considerations, therefore, show that Ben-Sira's life-like description refers to Simon I. Now as Si- mon I died B.C. cir. 300, Ben-Sira must have written his work not earlier than 290-280, as chap. 1 impliei that this high-priest was dead. (See also infra, sec. vi.)
V. The original Language of the BooJc.—'Y\\& trans- lator of this work into Greek most distinctly declares in his preface that it was written in Hebrew, and St. Jerome assures us that he had seen the Hebrew origin- al (vide supra, sec. iii). That liy the term 'EiSpaicTi is meant Hebrew, and not A ramcean, is evident from
ECCLESIASTICUS
44
ECCLESIASTICUS
the numerous quotations made from this book both in the Talmud and tlie Midrashim. Compare
Ben-Hira. Talmud and Mkhashi7n.
Cliap. iii, 20 Chagign, lii ; Hereshitli Kab. 10.
" vi, 10 Sanhed. 10, 100 ; Yebamoth, Co, b ; Erub.
65, a.
" vii, 34 Derek Kret^, 19, c. 4.
" ix, S Sanlied. 100, b ; Yebamoth, 63.
" ix, 12 (Syriac) Abotli, i, 5.
" xi, 1 Jer. Beracli. 29, a ; IS'azir, IS, a ; Beresli.
Kab. 78, 6.
" xi, 27 Sanhed. 100.
" xiii, 15 Baba Kama, 92, 6.
" xiii, 25 Ueresliith Kabba, S2.
" xiii, 31 Benshitli Kabba, 64, 6.
'' xiv, 11 Enibin, 54, a.
"• xiv, 17 Krubin, 71.
'' XV, S Pesachim,C6; Enibin, 55, a.
" xviii, 23 Tanchuma Vayikra, 41, b.
" XXV, 3, 4 Pesacliiin, 113.
" XXV, 13 Sabbath, 11, n.
" xxvi, 1 Sanlied. 100 ; Yebamoth, 63, 6.
" xxvi, 20 Is ida, 70.
"• xxvii, 9 Biiba Kama, 92, 6.
*' xxviii, 14. . . . Vayikra Kab. 153, a.
" XXX, 21 Sanhed. 100, b.
" XXX, 25 Yebamoth, C3, h.
" xxxviii, 1 ... Sanhed. 41; Taanith, 9, a; Shemoth. E.
lOG, b. " xxxviii. 4, S. . Beresh. Kab. S, a; Y'alkut Job, 14S. "•' xxxviii, 16-23 Moed Katon, 27.
" xl. i.S Betza. 32, b ; Yalkut Job, 149.
••' xiii, 9, 10 Sanliedrin, 100, /;.
By some writers, however, it is thought that the Sen- imces of Ben-Slrack, cited in tlie Talmud {Sanhed. Gem. xi, 42 ; Bereschith Rabha, viii, f. 10 ; Baha Kavia, f. 92, c. 2), and published in Latin b}' Paul Fajiius (1542), and in Hebrew, Chaldee, and Latin by Drusius (1597), though so similar to those in Ecclesiasticus, are, upon the whole, a different work (Eichhorn's and Bertholdt".s Introductions).
Almost all of these quotations are in Hebrew, though the works in which they are found are in Aramaan, thus showing bej-ond doubt that the book of Ben-Sira was written in genuine Hebrew. Besides, some of the blunders in the Greek can onlj' be accounted for from the fact that the original was Hebrew. Thus, for example, in xxiv, 25 we read, " He maketh knowl- edge to come forth as light, as Gihon in the days of vintage," where the parallelism r/;wi' = '|in"ri (Gen. ii, 13), wherebj' the Nile was designated in later times, which the Sept. also understands bj' "niT^w^ (Jer. ii, j8), shows that wc (pwc in the first hemistich origina- ted from the translator's mistaking the Hebrew "ilX'^^, like a stream, for "11X3, lilce light. Comp. also xlix, 9, •which is most unintelligilde in the Greek through the translator's mistaking the Hebrew S"T2 for D1T3. Bishop Lowth, indeed, went so far as to assert that the translator "seems to have numbered the words, and exactly to have preserved their order, so that, were it literally and accurate!}' to be retranslated, I have very little doubt that, for the most part, the original diction would lie recovered." The learned prelate has actual- ly retranslated chap, xxiv into Hebrew {llehreio Poet. Ltct. xxiv, Oxford ed. 1«21, p. 254). This retransla- tion is also printed by Fritzsche, who has added some corrections of his own, and who also gives a transla- tion of chap. 1.