Pro 28:2 | KD | STEP | There now follows a royal proverb, whose key-note is the same as that struck at , which states how a country falls into the οὐκ ἀγαθόν of the rule of the many: Through the wickedness of a land the rulers become many; And through a man of wisdom, of knowledge, authority continues. If the text presented בּפשׁע as Hitzig corrects, then one might think of a political revolt, according to the usage of the word, 1Ki 12:19, etc.; but the word is בּפּשׁע, and פּשׁע (from פּשׁע, dirumpere ) is the breaking through of limits fixed by God, apostasy, irreligion, e.g. , Mic 1:5. But that many rulers for a land arise from such a cause, shows a glance into the Book of Hosea, e.g. , Hos 7:16 : “They return, but not to the Most High ( sursum ); they are become like a deceitful bow; their princes shall then fall by the sword;” and Hos 8:4 : “They set up kings, but not by me; they have made princes, and I knew it not.” The history of the kingdom of Israel shows that a land which apostatizes from revealed religion becomes at once the victim of party spirit, and a subject of contention to many would-be rulers, whether the fate of the king whom it has rejected be merited or not. But what is now the contrast which 2b brings forward? The translation by Bertheau and also by Zöckler is impossible: “but through intelligent, prudent men, he (the prince) continueth long.” For 2a does not mean a frequent changing of the throne, which in itself may not be a punishment for the sins of the people, but the appearance at the same time of many pretenders to the throne, as was the case in the kingdom of Israel during the interregnum after the death of Jeroboam II, or in Rome at the time of the thirty tyrants; יאריך must thus refer to one of these “many” who usurp for a time the throne. בּאדם may also mean, , inter homines ; but אדם, with the adjective following, e.g. , ; ; ; , always denotes one; and that translation also changes the כּן into a “so,” “then” introducing the concluding clause, which it altogether disregards as untranslatable. But equally impossible is Böttcher's: “among intelligent, prudent people, one continues (in the government),” for then the subject-conception on which it depends would be slurred over. Without doubt כּן is here a substantive, and just this subject-conception. That it may be a substantive has been already shown at Pro 11:19. There it denoted integrity (properly that which is right or genuine); and accordingly it means here, not the status quo (Fleischer: idem rerum status ), but continuance, and that in a full sense: the jurisdiction (properly that which is upright and right), i.e. , this, that right continues and is carried on in the land. Similarly Heidenheim, for he glosses כן by מכון הארץ; and Umbreit, who, however, unwarned by the accent, subordinates this כן [in the sense of “right”] to ידע as its object. Zöckler, with Bertheau, finds a difficulty in the asyndeton מבין ידע. But these words also, , stand together as a formula; and that this formula is in the spirit and style of the Book of Proverbs, passages such as ; show. A practical man, and one who is at the same time furnished with thorough knowledge, is thus spoken of, and prudence and knowledge of religious moral character and worth are meant. What a single man may do under certain circumstances is shown in ; Ecc 9:15. Here one has to think of a man of understanding and spirit at the helm of the State, perhaps as the nearest counsellor of the king. By means of such an one, right continues long (we do not need to supply להיות after “continues long”). If, on the one side, the State falls asunder by the evil conduct of the inhabitants of the land, on the other hand a single man who unites in himself sound understanding and higher knowledge, for a long time holds it together.

‏ Proverbs 28:2

There now follows a royal proverb, whose key-note is the same as that struck at Pro 25:2, which states how a country falls into the οὐκ ἀγαθόν of the rule of the many:

Through the wickedness of a land the rulers become many;

And through a man of wisdom, of knowledge, authority continues.

If the text presented בּפשׁע as Hitzig corrects, then one might think of a political revolt, according to the usage of the word, 1Ki 12:19, etc.; but the word is בּפּשׁע, ^{▼▼Thus to be written with Gaja here and at Pro 29:6, after the rule of Metheg-Setzung, §42.} and פּשׁע (from פּשׁע, dirumpere) is the breaking through of limits fixed by God, apostasy, irreligion, e.g., Mic 1:5. But that many rulers for a land arise from such a cause, shows a glance into the Book of Hosea, e.g., Hos 7:16 : “They return, but not to the Most High (sursum); they are become like a deceitful bow; their princes shall then fall by the sword;” and Hos 8:4 : “They set up kings, but not by me; they have made princes, and I knew it not.” The history of the kingdom of Israel shows that a land which apostatizes from revealed religion becomes at once the victim of party spirit, and a subject of contention to many would-be rulers, whether the fate of the king whom it has rejected be merited or not. But what is now the contrast which 2b brings forward? The translation by Bertheau and also by Zöckler is impossible: “but through intelligent, prudent men, he (the prince) continueth long.” For 2a does not mean a frequent changing of the throne, which in itself may not be a punishment for the sins of the people, but the appearance at the same time of many pretenders to the throne, as was the case in the kingdom of Israel during the interregnum after the death of Jeroboam II, or in Rome at the time of the thirty tyrants; יאריך must thus refer to one of these “many” who usurp for a time the throne. בּאדם may also mean, Pro 23:28, inter homines; but אדם, with the adjective following, e.g., Pro 11:7; Pro 12:23; Pro 17:18; Pro 21:16, always denotes one; and that translation also changes the כּן into a “so,” “then” introducing the concluding clause, which it altogether disregards as untranslatable. But equally impossible is Böttcher's: “among intelligent, prudent people, one continues (in the government),” for then the subject-conception on which it depends would be slurred over. Without doubt כּן is here a substantive, and just this subject-conception. That it may be a substantive has been already shown at Pro 11:19. There it denoted integrity (properly that which is right or genuine); and accordingly it means here, not the status quo (Fleischer: idem rerum status), but continuance, and that in a full sense: the jurisdiction (properly that which is upright and right), i.e., this, that right continues and is carried on in the land. Similarly Heidenheim, for he glosses כן by מכון הארץ; and Umbreit, who, however, unwarned by the accent, subordinates this כן [in the sense of “right”] to ידע as its object. Zöckler, with Bertheau, finds a difficulty in the asyndeton מבין ידע. But these words also, Neh 10:29, stand together as a formula; and that this formula is in the spirit and style of the Book of Proverbs, passages such as Pro 19:25; Pro 29:7 ^{▼▼The three connected words ובאדם מבין ידע have, in Löwenstein, the accents Mercha, Mercha, Mugrash; but the Venetian, 1515, 20, Athias, v. d. Hooght, and Hahn, have rightly Tarcha, Mercha, Mugrash, - to place two Merchas in Ben-Naphtali’s manner.} show. A practical man, and one who is at the same time furnished with thorough knowledge, is thus spoken of, and prudence and knowledge of religious moral character and worth are meant. What a single man may do under certain circumstances is shown in Pro 21:22; Ecc 9:15. Here one has to think of a man of understanding and spirit at the helm of the State, perhaps as the nearest counsellor of the king. By means of such an one, right continues long (we do not need to supply להיות after “continues long”). If, on the one side, the State falls asunder by the evil conduct of the inhabitants of the land, on the other hand a single man who unites in himself sound understanding and higher knowledge, for a long time holds it together.