Pro 11:17 | KD | STEP | Three proverbs regarding benevolence: 17 The benevolent man doeth good to his own soul, And the violent man brings trouble on his own flesh. Many interpreters reverse the relation of subject and predicate (Targ. only in 17b, after the phrase ודמוביד, for which the Syr. has only ומובד): qui sibi ipsi benefacit, is quidem erga alios quoque benignus praesumitur, quum caritas ordinata a se ipsa incipiat; qui vero carnem suam male habet, est crudelis erga alios (Michaelis). But this cannot be established; for certainly it occurs that whoever does good to himself does good also to others, and that whoever is hard against himself also judges and treats others harshly; but in by far the greatest number of cases the fact is this, that he who does not deny anything to himself is in relation to others an egoist, and this is not a “benevolent man;” and, on the contrary, that he who denies to himself lawful enjoyments is in relation to others capable of self-denial and self-sacrifice, and thus is the contrast of a “violent man.” The word of Sirach, 14:5, ὁ πονηρὸς ἑαυτῷ τίνα ἀγαθὸς ἔσται, to which Bertheau appeals, alludes to the niggard, and it is true indeed that this עכר שׁארו, but not every עכר שׁארו, is a niggard. Thus the “benevolent man” and the “violent man” will be the two subject conceptions, and as it is said of the benevolent (חסר as e.g. , Hos 6:6, of a more restricted sense, as ) that he does good (גּמל, viz., טוב, ), so of the violent (unmerciful) (אכזרי as ; ; ) that he brings evil on his own flesh (lxx αὐτοῦ σῶμα); for שׁארו as a parallel word to נפשׁו (cf. p. 141) signifies not blood-relations (Symm., Jerome, Luther, and Grotius), but it has here, as at Mic 3:2, its nearest signification, from which it then comes to signify those who are of our flesh and blood. But for that reason the meaning of the poet cannot be that given by Elster: “he who exercises benevolence toward others creates within himself a determination which penetrates his whole being with generous and fruitful warmth, as on the other hand the feeling of hatred deprives the heart of him who cherishes it of the true fountain of life.” If this were meant, then soul and spirit, not soul and flesh, would stand in parallelism. The weal and woe refers thus to the divine retribution which requites the conduct of a man toward his neighbours, according to its character, with reward or punishment (Hitzig, Zöckler).

‏ Proverbs 11:17

Three proverbs regarding benevolence: 17 The benevolent man doeth good to his own soul, And the violent man brings trouble on his own flesh.

Many interpreters reverse the relation of subject and predicate (Targ. only in 17b, after the phrase ודמוביד, for which the Syr. has only ומובד): qui sibi ipsi benefacit, is quidem erga alios quoque benignus praesumitur, quum caritas ordinata a se ipsa incipiat; qui vero carnem suam male habet, est crudelis erga alios (Michaelis). But this cannot be established; for certainly it occurs that whoever does good to himself does good also to others, and that whoever is hard against himself also judges and treats others harshly; but in by far the greatest number of cases the fact is this, that he who does not deny anything to himself is in relation to others an egoist, and this is not a “benevolent man;” and, on the contrary, that he who denies to himself lawful enjoyments is in relation to others capable of self-denial and self-sacrifice, and thus is the contrast of a “violent man.” The word of Sirach, 14:5, ὁ πονηρὸς ἑαυτῷ τίνα ἀγαθὸς ἔσται, to which Bertheau appeals, alludes to the niggard, and it is true indeed that this עכר שׁארו, but not every עכר שׁארו, is a niggard. Thus the “benevolent man” and the “violent man” will be the two subject conceptions, and as it is said of the benevolent (חסר as e.g., Hos 6:6, of a more restricted sense, as Isa 57:1) that he does good (גּמל, viz., טוב, Pro 31:12), so of the violent (unmerciful) (אכזרי as Pro 12:20; Jer 6:23; Jer 50:42) that he brings evil on his own flesh (lxx αὐτοῦ σῶμα); for שׁארו as a parallel word to נפשׁו (cf. p. 141) signifies not blood-relations (Symm., Jerome, Luther, and Grotius), but it has here, as at Mic 3:2, its nearest signification, from which it then comes to signify those who are of our flesh and blood. But for that reason the meaning of the poet cannot be that given by Elster: “he who exercises benevolence toward others creates within himself a determination which penetrates his whole being with generous and fruitful warmth, as on the other hand the feeling of hatred deprives the heart of him who cherishes it of the true fountain of life.” If this were meant, then soul and spirit, not soul and flesh, would stand in parallelism. The weal and woe refers thus to the divine retribution which requites the conduct of a man toward his neighbours, according to its character, with reward or punishment (Hitzig, Zöckler).