Pro 23:8 | KD | STEP | There now follows a proverb with unequally measured lines, perhaps a heptastich: 6 Eat not the bread of the jealous, And let not thyself lust after his dainties; 7 For as one who calculates with himself, so is he: “Eat and drink,” saith he to thee; But his heart is not with thee. 8 Thy morsel which thou hast enjoyed wilt thou cast up, And hast lost thy pleasant words. As טוב עין, , benignus oculo , denotes the pleasantness and joy of social friendship; so here (cf. ; ) רע עין, malignus oculo , the envy and selfishness of egoism seeking to have and retain all for itself. The lxx ἀνδρὶ βασκάνῳ, for the look of the evil eye, עין רע, עינא בישׁא ( cattivo occhio ), refers to enchantment; cf. βασκαίνειν, fascinare , to bewitch, to enchant, in modern Greek, to envy, Arab. 'an, to eye, as it were, whence ma‛jûn, ma‛ı̂n, hit by the piercing look of the envious eye, invidiae , as Apuleius says, letali plaga percussus (Fleischer). Regarding תּתאו with Pathach , vid ., the parallel line 3a. 7a is difficult. The lxx and Syr. read שׂער [hair]. The Targ. renders תּרעא רמא, and thus reads שׁער [fool], and thus brings together the soul of the envious person and a high portal, which promises much, but conceals only deception behind (Ralbag). Joseph ha-Nakdan reads שׂער with sîn ; and Rashi, retaining the schîn , compares the “sour figs,” Jer 29:17. According to this, Luther translates: like a ghost (a monster of lovelessness) is he inwardly; for, as it appears in שׂער, the goat-like spectre שׂעיר hovered before him. Schultens better, because more in conformity with the text: quemadmodum suam ipsius animam abhorret ( i.e. , as he does nothing to the benefit of his own appetite) sic ille ( erga alios multo magis ). The thought is appropriate, but forced. Hitzig for once here follows Ewald; he does not, however, translate: “like as if his soul were divided, so is it;” but: “as one who is divided in his soul, so is he;” but the verb שׁער, to divide, is inferred from שׁער, gate = division, and is as foreign to the extra-bibl. usus loq . as it is to the bibl. The verb שׁער signifies to weigh or consider, to value, to estimate. These meanings Hitzig unites together: in similitudinem arioli et conjectoris aestimat quod ignorat , perhaps meaning thereby that he conjecturally supposes that as it is with him, so it is with others: he dissembles, and thinks that others dissemble also. Thus also Jansen explains. The thought is far-fetched, and does not cover itself by the text. The translation of the Venet . also: ὡς γὰρ ἐμέτρησεν ἐν ψυχῇ οἱ οὕτως ἐστίν (perhaps: he measures to others as penuriously as to himself), does not elucidate the text, but obscures it. Most moderns (Bertheau, Zöckler, Dächsel, etc.): as he reckons in his soul, so is he (not as he seeks to appear for a moment before thee). Thus also Fleischer: quemadmodum reputat apud se, ita est ( sc. non ut loquitur ), with the remark that שׁער (whence שׁער, measure, market value, Arab. si'r), to measure, to tax to as to determine the price, to reckon; and then like חשׁב, in general, to think, and thus also Meîri with the neut. rendering of ita est . But why this circumlocution in the expression? The poet ought in that case just to have written כי לא למו דבּר בשׂפתיו כן הוא, for he is not as he speaks with his mouth. If one read שׁער (Symmachus, εἰκάζων), then we have the thought adapted to the portrait that is drawn; for like one calculating by himself, so is he, i.e. , he is like one who estimates with himself the value of an object; for which we use the expression: he reckons the value of every piece in thy mouth. However, with this understanding the punctuation also of שׁער as finite may be retained and explained after : for as if he reckoned in his soul, so is he; but in this the perf. is inappropriate; by the particip. one reaches the same end by a smoother way. True, he says to thee: eat and drink (Sol 5:1), he invites thee with courtly words; but his heart is not with thee (בּל, like ): he only puts on the appearance of joy if thou partakest abundantly, but there lurks behind the mask of liberal hospitality the grudging niggardly calculator, who poisons thy every bite, every draught, by his calculating, grudging look. Such a feast cannot possibly do good to the guest: thy meal (פּת, from פּתת; cf. κλᾶν τὸν ἄρτον, Aram. פּרס לחמא, to divide and distribute bread, whence פּרנס, to receive aliment, is derived) which thou hast eaten thou wilt spue out, i.e. , wilt vomit from disgust that thou hast eaten such food, so that that which has been partaken of does thee no good. פּתּך is also derived from פּתּה: has he deceived thee (with his courtly words), but with this אכלתּ, which, as the Makkeph rightly denotes, stands in an attributive relation to פתך, does not agree. תקיאנּה is Hiph . of קוא, as transitive: to make vomiting; in Arab. the fut. Kal of ka terminates in î . The fair words which the guest, as the perf. consec . expresses, has lavished, are the words of praise and thanks in which he recognises the liberality of the host appearing so hospitable. Regarding the penult . accenting of the perf. consec . by Mugrasch , as , vid ., under Psa 27:1. Pinsker ( Babyl.-Hebr. Punktationssystem , p. 134) conjectures that the line 8b originally formed the concluding line of the following proverb. But at the time of the lxx (which erroneously expresses ושׁחת) it certainly stood as in our text.

‏ Proverbs 23:8

There now follows a proverb with unequally measured lines, perhaps a heptastich: 6 Eat not the bread of the jealous, And let not thyself lust after his dainties; 7 For as one who calculates with himself, so is he: “Eat and drink,” saith he to thee; But his heart is not with thee. 8 Thy morsel which thou hast enjoyed wilt thou cast up, And hast lost thy pleasant words.

As טוב עין, Pro 22:9, benignus oculo, denotes the pleasantness and joy of social friendship; so here (cf. Deu 15:9; Mat 15:15) רע עין, malignus oculo, the envy and selfishness of egoism seeking to have and retain all for itself. The lxx ἀνδρὶ βασκάνῳ, for the look of the evil eye, עין רע, עינא בישׁא (cattivo occhio), refers to enchantment; cf. βασκαίνειν, fascinare, to bewitch, to enchant, in modern Greek, to envy, Arab. 'an, to eye, as it were, whence ma‛jûn, ma‛ı̂n, hit by the piercing look of the envious eye, invidiae, as Apuleius says, letali plaga percussus (Fleischer). Regarding תּתאו with Pathach, vid., the parallel line 3a. 7a is difficult. The lxx and Syr. read שׂער [hair]. The Targ. renders תּרעא רמא, and thus reads שׁער [fool], and thus brings together the soul of the envious person and a high portal, which promises much, but conceals only deception behind (Ralbag). Joseph ha-Nakdan reads ^{▼▼In an appendix to Ochla We-Ochla, in the University Library at Halle, he reads שׂער, but with פליגא [doubtful] added.} שׂער with sîn; and Rashi, retaining the schîn, compares the “sour figs,” Jer 29:17. According to this, Luther translates: like a ghost (a monster of lovelessness) is he inwardly; for, as it appears in שׂער, the goat-like spectre שׂעיר hovered before him. Schultens better, because more in conformity with the text: quemadmodum suam ipsius animam abhorret (i.e., as he does nothing to the benefit of his own appetite) sic ille (erga alios multo magis). The thought is appropriate, but forced. Hitzig for once here follows Ewald; he does not, however, translate: “like as if his soul were divided, so is it;” but: “as one who is divided in his soul, so is he;” but the verb שׁער, to divide, is inferred from שׁער, gate = division, and is as foreign to the extra-bibl. usus loq. as it is to the bibl. The verb שׁער signifies to weigh or consider, to value, to estimate. These meanings Hitzig unites together: in similitudinem arioli et conjectoris aestimat quod ignorat, perhaps meaning thereby that he conjecturally supposes that as it is with him, so it is with others: he dissembles, and thinks that others dissemble also. Thus also Jansen explains. The thought is far-fetched, and does not cover itself by the text. The translation of the Venet. also: ὡς γὰρ ἐμέτρησεν ἐν ψυχῇ οἱ οὕτως ἐστίν (perhaps: he measures to others as penuriously as to himself), does not elucidate the text, but obscures it. Most moderns (Bertheau, Zöckler, Dächsel, etc.): as he reckons in his soul, so is he (not as he seeks to appear for a moment before thee). Thus also Fleischer: quemadmodum reputat apud se, ita est (sc. non ut loquitur), with the remark that שׁער (whence שׁער, measure, market value, Arab. si'r), to measure, to tax to as to determine the price, to reckon; and then like חשׁב, in general, to think, and thus also Meîri with the neut. rendering of ita est. But why this circumlocution in the expression? The poet ought in that case just to have written כי לא למו דבּר בשׂפתיו כן הוא, for he is not as he speaks with his mouth. If one read שׁער (Symmachus, εἰκάζων), then we have the thought adapted to the portrait that is drawn; for like one calculating by himself, so is he, i.e., he is like one who estimates with himself the value of an object; for which we use the expression: he reckons the value of every piece in thy mouth. However, with this understanding the punctuation also of שׁער as finite may be retained and explained after Isa 26:18 : for as if he reckoned in his soul, so is he; but in this the perf. is inappropriate; by the particip. one reaches the same end ^{▼▼We may write כּן הוּא: the Mehuppach (Jethîb) sign of the Olewejored standing between the two words represents also the place of the Makkeph; vid., Thorath Emeth, p. 20.} by a smoother way. True, he says to thee: eat and drink (Sol 5:1), he invites thee with courtly words; but his heart is not with thee (בּל, like Pro 24:23): he only puts on the appearance of joy if thou partakest abundantly, but there lurks behind the mask of liberal hospitality the grudging niggardly calculator, who poisons thy every bite, every draught, by his calculating, grudging look. Such a feast cannot possibly do good to the guest: thy meal (פּת, from פּתת; cf. κλᾶν τὸν ἄρτον, Aram. פּרס לחמא, to divide and distribute bread, whence פּרנס, to receive aliment, is derived) which thou hast eaten thou wilt spue out, i.e., wilt vomit from disgust that thou hast eaten such food, so that that which has been partaken of does thee no good. פּתּך is also derived from פּתּה: ^{▼▼Immanuel makes so much of having recognised the verb in this פּתּך (and has he persuaded thee), that in the concluding part of his Divan (entitled Machberoth Immanuel), which is an imitation of Dante’s Divina Commedia, he praises himself on this account in the paradise of King Solomon, who is enraptured by this explanation, and swears that he never meant that word otherwise.} has he deceived thee (with his courtly words), but with this אכלתּ, which, as the Makkeph rightly denotes, stands in an attributive relation to פתך, does not agree. תקיאנּה is Hiph. of קוא, as transitive: to make vomiting; in Arab. the fut. Kal of ka terminates in î. The fair words which the guest, as the perf. consec. expresses, has lavished, are the words of praise and thanks in which he recognises the liberality of the host appearing so hospitable. Regarding the penult. accenting of the perf. consec. by Mugrasch, as Pro 30:9, vid., under Psa 27:1. Pinsker (Babyl.-Hebr. Punktationssystem, p. 134) conjectures that the line 8b originally formed the concluding line of the following proverb. But at the time of the lxx (which erroneously expresses ושׁחת) it certainly stood as in our text.