Book of Sirach書Sirach

or Ecclesiasticus或Ecclesiasticus

A book in the Old Testament Apocrypha 一本書,舊約偽經

General Information 一般信息

The Book of Sirach, or the Wisdom of Jesus the son of Sirach, is a book in the Apocrypha.書Sirach ,或智慧的耶穌的兒子Sirach ,是一本書的偽經。 It is also known as Ecclesiasticus ("church book") because of its wide use among Greek and Latin Christians in moral instruction. Classified among the wisdom writings, the book was written in Hebrew at Jerusalem c.它也被稱作Ecclesiasticus ( “教會書” ) ,因為它的廣泛使用希臘文和拉丁文中的基督教徒道德指示。列為智慧的著作,這本書是寫在耶路撒冷希伯來文角 180 BC by a learned teacher, Jesus ben Sirach, and was translated into Greek in Egypt with a preface by his grandson not long after 132 BC. 180年的經驗教訓教師,耶穌本Sirach ,並翻譯成希臘在埃及的前言中他的孫子後不久, 132年。

The wisdom teaching of the book is climaxed by a long eulogy of the heroes of Israelite history.智慧教學的這本書是高潮的一項長期悼詞的英雄以色列人的歷史。 Using the sayings form typical of the Book of Proverbs, the author achieves a fusion of scribal piety, with its high regard for the Jewish law, and traditional wisdom.使用諺語形式典型的圖書諺語,作者實現了融合scribal虔誠,其高度重視猶太法律和傳統智慧。

BELIEVE Religious Information Source web-site相信宗教信息來源
Our List of 2,300 Religious Subjects我們所列出的2300名宗教科目
E-mail電子郵件
Norman K Gottwald諾曼K哥特瓦爾德


Book of Sirach書Sirach

or Ecclesiasticus或Ecclesiasticus

General Information 一般信息

Sirach or Ecclesiasticus is a book of the Old Testament in those versions of the Bible following the Greek Septuagint (generally Roman Catholic and Orthodox versions). Sirach或Ecclesiasticus是一本書舊約在這些版本的聖經,希臘七十以下(通常是羅馬天主教和東正教的版本) 。 It does not appear in the Hebrew Bible, and it is placed with the Apocrypha in Protestant versions of the Bible.它不會出現在希伯來文聖經,並把它放在與偽經在新教版本的聖經。 Also known as "The Wisdom of Jesus, the son of Sirach," the book was written some time between 195 and 171 BC by Jesus the son of Sirach (Hebrew Joshua ben Sira).也被稱為“耶穌的智慧的兒子Sirach , ”這本書是寫了一些時間, 195和171公元前耶穌的兒子Sirach (希伯來文約書亞本特希拉) 。 The author is thought to have been a scholar who taught wisdom in an academy in Jerusalem.作者被認為是一位學者的智慧,誰教學院在耶路撒冷。 He is the only author of an apocryphal book to have attached his own name to his work (50:27).他是唯一一個未經證實的作者本書附上自己的名字,以他的工作( 50:27 ) 。 About 130 BC, a Greek translation was made from the Hebrew original by a person who claimed in an added preface (ever since part of the book) to be a grandson of the author.大約130個,是古希臘的翻譯是由原始的希伯來人誰索賠增加前言(自從這本書的一部分)是一個孫子作者。 Because of the great popularity earned by the book, it was translated subsequently into numerous other languages; the Greek text, however, is the only one to have survived in its entirety.由於受歡迎的程度所賺取的這本書,後來它被翻譯成其他許多語言;希臘文字,但是,是唯一一個倖存的全部內容。

Sirach mainly consists of a series of loosely related maxims and other sayings of a proverbial nature, much in the manner of the Book of Proverbs. Sirach主要包括一系列的鬆散和其他有關格言諺語的諺語性質,很多的方式,對圖書的諺語。 Throughout, the author offers instruction on how to conduct oneself wisely in all areas of life.各地,作者提供了指令就如何做人明智地在生活的各個領域。 He identifies wisdom with the divine law (24:23), but his counsels are more concerned with ethics than they are with divine revelation.他確定了智慧與神法( 24:23 ) ,但他的律師更關心的是比他們道德與天啟。 In addition to its numerous, diverse instructions, Sirach contains several long poems that celebrate wisdom (1:1-20, 24:1-22), praise God and his wonderful works (42:15-43:33), and praise the venerable patriarchs and prophets of Israel (chap. 44-49).除了眾多,不同的指示, Sirach包含幾個長期詩歌慶祝智慧( 1:1-20 , 24:1-22 ) ,讚美上帝和他的精彩作品( 42:15-43:33 ) ,並讚揚尊敬的始祖,並預言以色列(第44-49 ) 。 Noteworthy is chapter 24, introducing uncreated wisdom speaking as a divine person.值得注意的是第24章,介紹uncreated智慧神聖的身份發言的人。 Early Christian writers considered it an anticipation or foreshadowing of the Logos, or word of God, in the opening chapter of John's Gospel.早期基督教作家認為這是期待或預示的標誌或文字的上帝,在開篇約翰福音。 Sirach is classified with the Wisdom literature of the Old Testament, which includes the Books of Ecclesiastes, Job, and Proverbs. Sirach被歸類與智慧文學舊約,其中包括書籍的傳道書,工作,和諺語。 Some scholars regard it as the final outstanding specimen of that form of literature and the first example of the kind of Jewish thought developed subsequently by the Pharisaic and Sadducean schools.一些學者認為這是最後的傑出標本這種形式的文學作品和第一個例子的那種猶太思想發達國家後來Pharisaic和Sadducean學校。

Although highly regarded by early Jewish commentators, who often cited it, Sirach was excluded from the Hebrew canon.雖然高度重視早期猶太評論家,誰經常提到它, Sirach是被排除在希伯來語佳能。 The rabbis who closed the canon felt that the period of divine inspiration had ended soon after the time of the Hebrew priest and reformer Ezra (flourished 5th-4th century BC); thus, Sirach, which clearly was written long after Ezra's time, could not have been divinely inspired.誰的拉比關閉了佳能認為,神聖的靈感期已經結束後不久,當時的希伯來文牧師和改革者以斯拉(繁榮第五,公元前4世紀) ;因此, Sirach ,這顯然是很久以後的書面以斯拉的時間,不能已神聖的。 Early Christians, however, accepted it along with several other books regarded as spurious by the Jews.早期的基督徒,但是,接受它連同其他一些書籍視為虛假的猶太人。 Since then, both the Orthodox church and the Roman Catholic church have decreed it to be canonical, and Protestants, following Martin Luther, consider it apocryphal rather than canonical.自那時以來,雙方的東正教教堂和羅馬天主教會已下令將其規範和新教徒,下面的馬丁路德,認為未經證實,而不是規範。


Ecclesiasticus

Catholic Information 天主教新聞

(Abbrev. Ecclus.; also known as the Book of Sirach.) ( Abbrev. Ecclus 。 ;也稱為書Sirach 。 )

The longest of the deuterocanonical books of the Bible, and the last of the Sapiential writings in the Vulgate of the Old Testament.最長的deuterocanonical的書籍,聖經和最後的Sapiential著作中的拉丁文聖經舊約。

I. TITLE一,標題

The usual title of the book in Greek manuscripts and Fathers is Sophia Iesou uiou Seirach, "the Wisdom of Jesus, the son of Sirach", or simply Sophia Seirach "the Wisdom of Sirach".通常的圖書的書名在希臘手稿和父親是索菲亞Iesou uiou Seirach , “智慧的耶穌的兒子Sirach ” ,或乾脆索菲亞Seirach “智慧的Sirach ” 。 It is manifestly connected with and possibly derived from, the following subscription which appears at the end of recently-discovered Hebrew fragments of Ecclesiasticus: "Wisdom [Hó khmâ ] of Simeon, the son of Yeshua, the son of Eleazar, the son of Sira".這顯然是與可能來自以下訂購這似乎在年底最近發現希伯來語片段Ecclesiasticus : “智慧[ Hó khmâ ]的西蒙的兒子,耶穌的兒子埃萊亞薩的兒子特希拉“ 。 Indeed, its full form would naturally lead one to regard it as a direct rendering of the Hebrew heading: Hokhmath Yeshua ben Sira, were it not that St. Jerome, in his prologue to the Solominic writings, states that the Hebrew title of Ecclesiasticus was "Mishle" (Parabolae) of Jesus of Sirach.事實上,它完全形成自然會促使人們把它作為一個直接渲染的希伯來語標題: Hokhmath耶穌本特希拉,如果不是,聖杰羅姆,他在開場白的Solominic著作,指出希伯來語標題是Ecclesiasticus “ Mishle ” ( Parabolae )耶穌的Sirach 。 Perhaps in the original Hebrew the book bore different titles at different times: in point of fact, the simple name Hokhma, "Wisdom", is applied to it in the Talmud, while Rabbinic writers commonly quote Ecclesiasticus as Ben Sira.也許在最初的希伯來書負有不同的稱呼,在不同的時間:在事實上,簡單的名稱Hokhma , “智慧” ,是適用於在塔木德,而拉比作家普遍報價Ecclesiasticus作為本特希拉。 Among the other Greek names which are given to Ecclesiasticus in patristic literature, may be mentioned the simple title of Sophia, "Wisdom", and the honorary designation he panaretos sophia, "all-virtuous Wisdom".在其他希臘名字是在考慮到Ecclesiasticus教父文學,可提到了簡單標題索菲亞, “智慧” ,並指定他的名譽panaretos索菲亞, “所有善良的智慧” 。

As might well be expected, Latin writers have applied to Ecclesiasticus titles which are derived from its Greek names, such as "Sapientia Sirach" (Rufinus); "Jesu, filii Sirach" (Junilius), "Sapienta Jesu" (Codex Claromontanus); "Liber Sapientiae" (Roman Missal).由於很可能預計,拉丁美洲作家申請Ecclesiasticus冠軍的是來自其希臘名字,如“ Sapientia Sirach ” ( Rufinus ) , “耶穌, filii Sirach ” ( Junilius ) , “ Sapienta耶穌” (法典Claromontanus ) ; “書Sapientiae ” (羅馬彌撒) 。 It can hardly be doubted, however, that the heading "Parabolae Salomonis", which is prefixed at times in the Roman Breviary to sections from Ecclesiasticus, is to be traced back to the Hebrew title spoken of by St. Jerome in his prologue to the Solomonic writings.它幾乎不能懷疑,但是,標題為“ Parabolae Salomonis ” ,這是前綴,有時在羅馬祈禱節由Ecclesiasticus ,要追溯到希伯來語標題談到聖杰羅姆在他的開場白Solomonic著作。 Be this as it may, the book is most commonly designated in the Latin Church as "Ecclesiasticus", itself a Greek word with a Latin ending.是這樣,因為它可能會,這本書是最常見的指定在拉丁美洲教會“ Ecclesiasticus ” ,這本身就是一個希臘詞與拉丁美洲結束。 This last title -- not to be confounded with "Ecclesiastes" (Eccl.) -- is the one used by the Council of Trent in its solemn decree concerning the books to be regarded as sacred and canonical.這最後的冠軍-而不是將要與“傳道書” ( Eccl. ) -是一個使用遄理事會在其莊嚴的法令有關書籍被視為神聖和規範。 It points out the very special esteem in which this didactic work was formerly held for the purpose for general reading and instruction in church meetings: this book alone, of all the deuterocanonical writings, which are also called Ecclesiastical by Rufinus, has preserved by way of pre-eminence the name of Ecclesiasticus (Liber), that is "a church reading book".它指出的非常特殊的尊重,這種教學工作是原先所設想的用途,一般的閱讀和教學中教會會議:這本書本身,所有的deuterocanonical著作,這也要求教會的Rufinus ,保存的方式卓越的名字Ecclesiasticus (書) ,這是“一個教堂閱讀書籍。 ”

II.二。 CONTENTS目錄

The Book of Ecclesiasticus is preceded by a prologue which professes to be the work of the Greek translator of the origional Hebrew and the genuineness of which is undoubted.書Ecclesiasticus是序幕之前,這些自稱是工作的希臘翻譯原始希伯來語和真實性是不容置疑的。 In this preface to his translation, the writer describes, among other things his frame of mind in undertaking the hard task of rendering the Hebrew text into Greek.在這個序他翻譯,作者介紹,除其他外他的心情進行了艱鉅的任務的渲染希伯來文成希臘文。 He was deeply impressed by the wisdom of the sayings contained in the book, and therefore wished, by means of a translation, to place those valuable teachings within the reach of anyone desiring to avail himself of them for living in more perfect accord with the law of God.給他留下了深刻印象的智慧諺語載於本書,因此希望,通過翻譯,把這些寶貴的教義的覆蓋範圍內任何人希望利用他們為自己的生活在更完善的符合國際法上帝。 This was a most worthy object, and there is no doubt that in setting it before himself the translator of Ecclesiasticus had well realized the general character of the contents of that sacred writing.這是一個最值得對象,毫無疑問的是,在確定自己之前的翻譯以及Ecclesiasticus已經實現了一般性質的內容,這種神聖的書面答复。 The fundamental thought of the author of Ecclesiasticus is that of wisdom as understood and inculcated in inspired Hebrew literature; for the contents of this book, however varied they may appear in other respects, admit of being naturally grouped under the genral heading of "Wisdom".最根本的思想作者Ecclesiasticus是智慧的理解和灌輸啟發希伯萊文學;的內容這本書,但是各不相同,他們可能會出現在其他方面,承認被自然歸入genral標題的“智慧” 。 Viewed from this standpoint, which is indeed universally regarded as the author's own standpoint, the contents of Ecclesiasticus may be divided into two great parts: chs.從這個角度來看,這確實是普遍認為是作者的個人觀點來看, Ecclesiasticus的內容可分為兩個大的部分:社區衛生服務。 i-xlii, 14; and xlii, 15-1, 26.一至四十二, 14 ;和四十二, 15-1 , 26 。 The sayings which chiefly make up the first part, tend directly to inculcate the fear of God and the fulfilment of His commands, wherein consists true wisdom.格言這主要彌補第一部分,往往直接灌輸恐懼的上帝和履行他的命令,其中包括真正的智慧。 This they do by pointing out, in a concrete manner, how the truly wise man shall conduct himself in the manifold relationships of practical life.這他們指出,在一個具體的方式,如何真正聰明的人應進行自己的多方面關係的現實生活。 They afford a most varied fund of thoughtful rules for self-guidance他們提供了最周到的各種基金的規則,自我指導

in joy and sorrow, in prosperity and adversity, in sickness and health, in struggle and temptation, in social life, in intercourse with friends and enemies, with high and low, rich and poor, with the good and wicked, the wise and the foolish, in trade, business, and one's ordinary calling, above all, in one's own house and family in connection with the training of children, the treatment of men-servants and maid-servants, and the way in which a man ought to behave towards his own wife and women generally (Schü rer).在歡樂和悲傷,在繁榮和逆境,在疾病和健康,在鬥爭和誘惑,在社會生活中,在交往的朋友和敵人,與高,低,富國和窮國,與良好的和邪惡的,明智的和愚蠢的,在貿易,商業,和一個普通電話,最重要的是,在自己的房子和家庭方面的培訓,兒童,治療男性公務員和傭人,公務員的方式,以及中一名男子的行為應當對他自己的妻子和婦女一般( Schü快線RER ) 。

Together with these maxims, which resemble closely both in matter and form the Proverbs of Solomon, the first part of Ecclesiasticus includes several more or less long descriptions of the origin and excellence of wisdom (cf. i; iv, 12-22; vi, 18-37; xiv, 22-xv, 11; xxiv).連同這些格言,這類似於密切雙方在此事,並形成了諺語所羅門,第一部分的Ecclesiasticus包括幾個或長或短的描述,原產地和卓越的智慧(參見一;四, 12月22日;六, 18-37 ;十四, 22 - 15 , 11 ; XXIV )號決議。 The contents of the second part of the book are of a decidely more uniform character, but contribute no less effectively to the setting forth of the general topic of Ecclesiasticus.內容的第二部分圖書是一個更加統一的性格果斷,但貢獻不亞於有效地列明的一般性議題Ecclesiasticus 。 They first describe at length the Divine wisdom so wonderfully displayed in the realm of nature (xlii, 15-xliii), and next illustrate the practice of wisdom in the various walks of life, as made known by the history of Israel's worthies, from Enoch down to the high priest Simon, the writer's holy contemporary (xliv-1, 26).他們首先描述了詳細的神的智慧,使美妙的境界中所顯示的性質(四十二, 15 XLIII )號,並說明明年的實踐智慧的各個階層的生活,了解了以色列歷史上的worthies ,來自伊諾克到大祭司西蒙,作家的神聖當代(四十四- 1 , 26 ) 。 At the close of the book (1, 27-29), there is first, a short conclusion containing the author's subscription and the express declaration of his general purpose; and next, an appendix (li) in which the writer returns thanks to God for His benefits, and especially for the gift of wisdom and to which are subjoined in the Hebrew text recently discovered, a second subscription and the following pious ejaculation: "Blessed be the name Of Yahweh from this time forth and for evermore."在結束本書( 1 , 27-29 ) ,首先,短期結論,載作者的認購和明確聲明,他一般用途;和未來,一個附錄(李) ,其中作家返回感謝上帝對他的好處,尤其是禮品的智慧和對這些subjoined在最近發現的希伯來文,第二次訂購和下面的虔誠射精: “有福是耶和華的名字從這個時候提出和永。 ”

III.三。 ORIGINAL TEXT原始文本

Until quite recently the original language of the Book of Ecclesiasticus was a matter of considerable doubt among scholars.直到最近的原文書的Ecclesiasticus是一個令人相當懷疑的學者。 They, of course, know that the Greek translator's prologue states that the work was originally written in "Hebrew", hebraisti, but they were in doubt as to the precise signification of this term, which might mean either Hebrew proper or Aramaic.他們當然知道,希臘譯者的前言指出,原先的工作編寫的“希伯來文” , hebraisti ,但他們懷疑的確切意義這個詞,這可能意味著要么希伯來語適當或阿拉姆。 They were likewise aware that St. Jerome, in his preface to the Solomonic writings, speaks of a Hebrew original as in existence in his day, but it still might be doubted whether it was truly a Hebrew text, or not rather a Syriac or Aramaic translation in Hebrew characters.他們同樣知道,聖杰羅姆,他在序言Solomonic著作,講的希伯來語中存在原來在他的一天,但仍可能會懷疑是否有真正的希伯來文,或不只是敘利亞文或阿拉姆翻譯希伯來文字符。 Again, in their eyes, the citation of the book by rabbinical writers, sometimes in Hebrew, sometimes in Aramaic, did not appear decisive, since it was not certain that they came from a Hebrew original.同樣,在他們的心目中,這本書引用的猶太作家,有時在希伯來文,有時在阿拉姆語,似乎沒有決定性的,因為它不能肯定他們是來自希伯來語原始。 And this was their view also with regard to the quotations, this time in classical Hebrew, by the Bagdad gaon Saadia of the tenth century of our era, that is of the period after which all documentary traces of a Hebrew text of Ecclesiasticus practically disappear from the Christian world.這是他們的觀點也有關於報價,這一次是在古典希伯來語,由巴格達gaon Saadia的10世紀,我們的時代,這是這一時期的所有文件後的痕跡希伯來文Ecclesiasticus幾乎消失基督教世界。 Still, most critics were of the mind that the primitive language of the book was Hebrew, not Aramaic.儘管如此,大多數評論家們的注意,原始的語言,這本書是希伯來文,不阿拉姆。 Their chief argument for this was that the Greek version contains certain errors: for example, xxiv, 37 (in Gr., verse 27), "light" for "Nile" (xx); xxv, 22 (Gr. verse 15), "head" for "poison" (xx); xlvi.他們的主要論點是,希臘的版本包含某些錯誤,例如: 24 , 37 (在石墨。 ,詩27 ) , “清淡型”的“尼羅河” (二十) ;二十五, 22 ( Gr.詩15 ) , “頭腦”的“毒藥” (二十) ;四十六。 21 (Gr., verse 18), "Tyrians" for "enemies" (xxx); etc.; these are best accounted for by supposing that the translator misunderstood a Hebrew original before him. 21 ( Gr. ,詩18 ) , “ Tyrians ”為“敵人” (三十) ;等;這些問題最好是佔了假定翻譯誤解希伯來原來在他面前。 And so the matter stood until the year 1896, which marks the beginning of an entirely new period in the history of the original text of Ecclesiasticus.所以這件事,直到今年截至1896年,這標誌著一個全新的歷史時期的原始文本Ecclesiasticus 。 Since that time, much documentary evidence has come to light, and intends to show that the book was originally written in Hebrew.自那時以來,許多書面證據來輕,並打算表明,這本書最初是希伯來文。 The first fragments of a Hebrew text of Ecclesiasticus (xxxix, 15-xl, 6) were brought from the East to Cambridge, England, by Mrs. AS Lewis; they were identified in May 1896, and published in "The Expositor" (July, 1896) by S. Schechter, reader in Talmudic at Cambridge University.第一個片段的希伯來文Ecclesiasticus (第39屆, 15儀, 6 )被從東到英國劍橋,為劉易斯夫人,他們確定了在1896年5月,和出版的“ The Expositor ” ( 7月, 1896年)的S.謝克特,讀者在塔木德在劍橋大學。 About the same time, in a box of fragments acquired from the Cairo genizzah through Professor Sayce for the Bodleian Library, Oxford, nine leaves apparently of the same manuscript (now called B) and containing xl, 9-xlix, 11, were found by AE Cowley and Ad.大約在同一時間,在一個盒子中獲得的碎片從開羅genizzah通過教授Sayce的伯德雷恩圖書館,牛津,九葉顯然相同的時間(現在稱為B )和載儀, 9 xlix , 11日,被發現的聲發射利和廣告。 Neubauer, who also soon published them (Oxford, 1897) Next followed the identification by Professor Schechter, first, of seven leaves of the same Codex (B), containing xxx, 11-xxxi, 11; xxxii, 1b-xxxiii 3; xxxv, 11-xxxvi, 21; xxxvii, 30-xxxviii, 28b; xlix, 14c-li, 30; and next, of four leaves of a different manuscript (called A), and presenting iii, 6e-vii, 31a; xi, 36d-xvi, 26.紐鮑爾,誰也即將出版(牛津, 1897 )之後確定下一步教授謝克特,第一,七葉片同一法典( B組) ,載有三十, 11三十一,第11條;三十二,第1b -三十三3 ;三十五, 11 - 36 , 21 ;三十七, 30三十八, 28B款; xlix , 14C同化物利, 30 ;和明年,四葉的不同時間(稱為一個) ,並提出三, 6e第七, 31A條;十一, 36d - 16 , 26 。 These eleven leaves had been discovered by Dr.. Schechtler in the fragments brought by him from the Cairo genizzah; and it is among matter obtained from the same source by the British Museum, that G. Margoliouth found and published., in 1899, four pages of the manuscript B containing xxxi, 12-xxxii, 1a; xxxvi, 21-xxxvii, 29.這些11葉子發現了博士。 Schechtler中的片段所帶來的他從開羅genizzah ;和它的問題是從同一來源的大英博物館,這灣Margoliouth發現並出版。 ,於1899年,四個頁的手稿乙載有三十一, 12三十二,第1a ;三十六, 21三十七, 29 。 Early in 1900, I. Lé vi published two pages from a third manuscript (C), xxxvi, 29a-xxxviii, la, that is, a passage already contained in Codex Bl and two from a fourth manuscript (D), presenting in a defective manner, vi, 18-vii, 27b, that is, a section already found in Codes A. Early in 1900, too, EN Adler published four pages of manuscript A, vix.早在1900年,一Lé六出版了兩頁的三分之一時間(丙) , 36 , 29A條,三十八,香格里拉,即通過已載於法典天麻和兩個第四稿(四) ,提出了有缺陷的方式,六, 18七,第27B款,也就是說,有一節已經發現碼答:早在1900年,太營養阿德勒發表四頁的手稿甲,波動率指數。 vii, 29-xii, 1; and S. Schechter, four pages of manuscript C, consisting of mere excerpts from iv, 28b-v, 15c; xxv, 11b-xxvi, 2a.七, 29日至十二, 1 ;和S. Schechter已,四頁的手稿裡,由單純的節選第四節, 28B款,五,據悉;二十五, 11B款- 26 , 2A型。 Lastly, two pages of manuscript D were discovered by Dr. MS Gaster, and contain a few verses of chaps.最後,兩頁的手稿D的發現博士質譜法莫替丁,並包含一些詩句章。 xviii, xix, xx, xxvii, some of which already appear in manuscripts B and C. Thus be the middle of the year 1900, more than one-half of a Hebrew text of Ecclesiasticus had been identified and published by scholars. (In the foregoing indications of the newly-discovered fragments of the Hebrew, the chapters and verses given are according to the numbering in the Latin Vulgate).十八,十九,二十,二十七,其中一些已經出現在手稿B和C因此,今年年中, 1900年超過一半的希伯來文Ecclesiasticus已確定並公佈的學者。 (在上述跡象表明,新發現的碎片希伯來語,章節和詩句是根據特定的編號在拉丁語武加大) 。

As might naturally be anticipated, and indeed it was desirable that it should so happen, the publication of these various fragments gave rise to a controversy as to the originality of the text therein exhibited.由於自然會預期可能,而事實上這是可取的,它應該這樣發生,出版這些不同的片段引起了爭議的原創性的案文展出。 At a very early stage in that publication, scholars easily noticed that although the Hebrew language of the fragments was apparently classical, it nevertheless contained readings which might lead one to suspect its actual dependence on the Greek and Syriac versions of Ecclesiasticus.處於非常初期的階段在這一出版物,學者很容易注意到,雖然希伯來語的片段顯然是經典,但它包含讀數可能導致一個懷疑它的實際依賴於希臘和敘利亞的版本Ecclesiasticus 。 Whence it manifestly imported to determine whether, and if so, to what extent, the Hebrew fragments reproduced an original text of the book, or on the contrary, simply presented a late retranslation of Ecclesiasticus into Hebrew by means of the versions just named.何處顯然,以決定是否進口,如果是的話,到什麼程度,希伯來片段複製的原始文字的書籍,或與此相反,簡單地介紹了已故retranslation的Ecclesiasticus到希伯來語通過版本剛剛命名。 Both Dr. G. Bickell and Professor DS Margoliouth, that is, the two men who but shortly before the discovery of the Hebrew fragments of Ecclesiasticus had attempted to retranslate small parts of the book into Hebrew, declared themselves openly against the originality of the newly found Hebrew text.博士灣Bickell教授德尚Margoliouth ,即兩名男子,但不久之前,誰發現了希伯來語片段Ecclesiasticus試圖重譯小部分圖書納入希伯來語,公開宣布自己對創意的新發現希伯來文字。 It may indeed be admitted that the efforts naturally entailed by their own work of retranslation had especially fitted Margoliouth and Bickell for noticing and appreciating those features which even now appear to many scholars to tell in favour of a certain connection of the Hebrew text with the Greek and Syriac versions.它可能確實是承認的努力,自然引起他們自己的工作,特別是retranslation已安裝Margoliouth和Bickell的注意和讚賞這些特點,即使在現在看來許多學者告訴贊成某些方面的希伯來文與希臘和敘利亞的版本。 It remains true, however, that, with the exception of Israel Lé vi and perhaps a few others, the most prominent Biblical and Talmudic scholars of the day are of the mind that the Hebrew fragments present an original text.它仍是真實的,然而,除以色列Lé六,可能還有其他一些,最突出的聖經和猶太法典學者的一天的注意,本希伯來片段的原始文字。 They think that the arguments and inferences most vigorously urged by Professor DS Margoliouth in favour of his view have been disposed of through a comparison of the fragments published in 1899 and 1900 with those that had appeared at an earlier date, and through a close study of nearly all the facts now available.他們認為,該論點和推論最大力敦促教授德尚Margoliouth贊成他的觀點已被棄置通過比較片段發表在1899年和1900年與那些已經出現在一個較早的日期,並通過密切的研究幾乎所有的事實,現已。 They readily admit in the manuscripts thus far recovered, scribal faults, doublets, Arabisms, apparent traces of dependence on extant versions, etc. But to their minds all such defects do not disprove the originality of the Hebrew text, inasmuch as they can, and indeed in a large number of cases must, be accounted for by the very late characrter of the copies now in our possession.他們容易接納的手稿迄今恢復, scribal故障,聯, Arabisms ,明顯痕跡依賴於現存的版本,等等,但他們的頭腦所有這些缺陷沒有反駁的獨創性希伯萊文字,因為它們可以和事實上,在許多情況下,必須加以核算的很晚characrter的副本現在我們掌握的。 The Hebrew fragments of Ecclesiasticus belong, at the earliest, to the tenth, or even the eleventh, century of our era, and by that late date all kinds of errors could naturally be expected to have crept into the origional language of the book, because the Jewish copyists of the work did not regard it as canonical.希伯來片段Ecclesiasticus屬於,最早的第十屆,或什至第十一屆,世紀我們的時代,這晚的各種錯誤,可自然會預計將有悄悄進入了原始語言的書籍,因為猶太copyists的工作並沒有把它作為典型。 At the same time these defects do not disfigure altogether the manner of Hebrew in which Ecclesiasticus was primitively written.與此同時,這些缺陷沒有變醜的方式完全希伯來語中,是一開始Ecclesiasticus書面。 The language of the fragments is manifestly not rabbinic, but classical Hebrew; and this conclusion is decidely borne out by a comparison of their text with that of the quotations from Ecclesiasticus, both in the Talmud and in the Saadia, which have already been referred to.語言的片段顯然不是拉比,但古典希伯來語;和這個結論證實了果斷的比較其文字與引文Ecclesiasticus ,無論是在塔木德和Saadia ,已經提到。 Again, the Hebrew of the newly found fragments, although classical, is yet one of a distinctly late type, and it supplies considerable material for lexicographic research.同樣,希伯來語的新發現的碎片,雖然經典,還沒有一個明顯的後期型,它的材料供應相當字典研究。 Finally, the comparatively large number of the Hebrew manuscripts recently discovered in only one place (Cairo) points to the fact that the work in its primitive form was often transcribed in ancient times, and thus affords hope that other copies, more or less complete, of the original text may be discovered at some future date.最後,相對大量希伯來手稿最近被發現僅在一個地方(開羅)指出,事實上,這項工作在其原始的形式往往是轉錄在遠古時代,從而使希望其他副本,更多的或不完整,原始文本可能會發現在今後的某一天。 To render their study convenient, all the extant fragments have been brought together in a splendid edition.為了使他們的研究方便,所有現存的片段已聚集在一個輝煌版。 "Facsimiles of the Fragments hitherto recovered of the Book of Ecclesiasticus in Hebrew" (Oxford and Cambridge, 1901). “傳真機碎片迄今收回的圖書Ecclesiasticus希伯來文” (牛津大學和劍橋大學, 1901年) 。 The metrical and strophic structure of parts of the newly discovered text has been particularly investigated by H. Grimme and N. Schlogl, whose success in the matter is, to say the least, indifferent; and by Jos.測量和strophic結構的部分新發現的文字一直特別調查閣下Grimme和N. Schlogl ,其成功的問題,至少可以說,漠不關心;和聖何塞 Knabenbauer, SJ in a less venturesome way, and hence with more satisfactory results. Knabenbauer ,律政司司長在一個不太冒險的方法,從而更令人滿意的結果。

IV.四。 ANCIENT VERSIONS古代VERSIONS

It was, of course, from a Hebrew text incomparably better than the one we now possess that the grandson of the author of Ecclesiasticus rendered, the book into Greek.這是當然,從一個希伯來文字無比優於我們現在擁有的孫子作者Ecclesiasticus提供,這本書成希臘文。 This translator was a Palestinian Jew, who came to Egypt at a certain time, and desired to make the work accessible in a Greek dress to the Jews of the Dispersion, and no doubt also to all lovers of wisdom.這是一個翻譯巴勒斯坦猶太人,誰來到埃及在某一時間,並希望使工作可以在一個希臘穿著猶太人的分散,毫無疑問也向所有熱愛智慧。 His name is unknown, although an ancient, but little reliable, tradition ("Synopsis Scripurae Sacrae" in St. Athanasius's works) calls him Jesus, the son of Sirach. His literary qualifications for the task he undertook and carried out cannot be fully ascertained at the present day.他的名字不詳,雖然古老,但沒有可靠的,傳統的( “概要Scripurae Sacrae ”在聖亞他那修的作品)耶穌要求他的兒子, Sirach 。他的文學資格的工作時,他承諾,並進行不能完全確定目前一天。 He is commonly regarded, however, from the general character of his work, as a man of good general culture, with a fair command of both Hebrew and Greek.他是普遍認為,然而,從一般性質的工作,作為一個男人的好一般文化,提供一個公平的指揮兩個希伯來文和希臘文。 He was distinctly aware of the great difference which exists between the respective genius of these two languages, and of the consequent difficulty attending the efforts of one who aimed atgving a satisfactory Greek version of a Hebrew writing, and therefore begs expressely, in his prologue to the work, his readers' indulgence for whatever shortcomings they may notice in his translation.他清楚地知道有很大的差別,這之間存在著各自的天才用這兩種語言,以及由此產生的困難的努力,參加一個旨在atgving誰令人滿意希臘版的希伯來文寫作,並因此引出expressely ,在他的序幕的工作,他的讀者放縱不管什麼缺點,它們可能會發現在他的翻譯。 He claims to have spent much time and labour on his version of Ecclesiasticus, and it is only fair to suppose that his work was not only a conscientious, but also, on the whole, a successful, rendering of the original Hebrew.他聲稱,他們已經花了很多時間和勞力,他的版本Ecclesiasticus ,只有公平的猜想,他的工作不僅是一個有良知的,而且從總體上看,一個成功的,使原來的希伯來文。 One can but speak in this guarded manner of the exact value of the Greek translation in its primitive form for the simple reason that a comparison of its extant manuscripts -- all apparently derived from a single Greek exemplar -- shows that the primitive translation has been very often, and in many cases seriously, tampered with.可以,但說話的方式在這個守衛的確切價值的希臘翻譯在其原始形式,理由很簡單,比較了其現存的手稿-一切顯然來自一個希臘典範-表明,原始的翻譯已經被很多時候,在許多情況下,認真,篡改。 The great uncial codices, the Vatican, the Sinaitic, the Ephraemitic, and partly the Alexandrian, though comparatively free from glosses, contain an inferior text; the better form of the text seems to be preserved in the Venetus Codex and in certain cursive manuscripts, though these have many glosses.偉大的uncial codices ,梵蒂岡的Sinaitic ,該Ephraemitic ,部分的亞歷山大,但相對沒有掩飾,包含一個劣質的文字;更好的形式的文字似乎是保存在Venetus法典,並在某些行草手稿,雖然這些有很多粉飾。 Undoubtedly, a fair number of these glosses may be referred safely to the translator himself, who, at times added one word, or even a few words to the original before him, to make the meaning clearer or to guard the text against possible misunderstanding.毫無疑問,一個公平一些粉飾可安全地提到自己的翻譯,誰,有時候說一句話,甚至是幾句話,原來在他面前,做出更明確的含義,或對後衛的文字可能的誤解。 But the great bulk of the glosses resemble the Greek additions in the Book of Proverbs; they are expansions of the thought, or hellenizing interpretations, or additions from current collections of gnomic sayings.但絕大部分的粉飾類似於希臘補充在這本書中的諺語,它們是擴張的思想,或hellenizing解釋,或補充從目前收集的gnomic諺語。 The following are the best-ascertained results which flow from a comparison of the Greek version with the text of our Hebrew fragments. Oftentimes, the corruptions of the Hebrew may be discovered by means of the Greek; and, conversely, the Greek text is proved to be defective, in the line of additions or omissions, by references to parallel places in the Hebrew.以下是最佳的結果確定流量比較希臘的版本,我們的希伯來文字片段。通常,在腐敗的希伯來語可能發現通過希臘;與此相反,希臘文字證明有缺陷,在網上增加或遺漏的,由地方提到平行的希伯來文。 At times, the Hebrew discloses considerable freedom of rendering on the part of the Greek translator; or enables one to perceive how the author of the version mistook one Hebrew letter for another; or again, affords us a means to make sense out of an unintelligible expressions in the Greek text.有時,希伯來文披露相當自由渲染的一部分,希臘翻譯;或使一個認識到如何的作者之一希伯來語版本誤信他人;或再次,我們提供了一個手段,使意識的一個不知所云表現在希臘文字。 Lastly, the Hebrew text confirms the order of the contents in xxx-xxxvi which is presented by the Syriac, Latin, and Armenian versions, over against the unnatural order found in all existing Greek manuscripts.最後,希伯來文證實秩序的內容,在第三十- 36是由敘利亞,拉丁美洲,和亞美尼亞的版本,在對自然秩序中發現現有的所有希臘手稿。 Like the Greek, the Syriac version of Ecclesiasticus was made directly from the original Hebrew.像希臘,敘利亞版本Ecclesiasticus是直接從原來的希伯來文。 This is wellnigh universally admitted; and a comparison of its text with that of the newly found Hebrew fragments should settle the point forever; as just stated, the Syriac version gives the same order as the Hebrew text for the contents of xxx-xxxvi; in particular, it presents mistaken renderings, the origin of which, while inexplicable by supposing a Greek original as its basis, is easily accounted for by reference to the text from which it was made must have been very defective, as is proved by the numerous and important lacunae in the Syriac translation.這是wellnigh普遍承認;並比較其文字與新發現的希伯來文碎片應該解決點永遠;只是說,敘利亞版本提供相同的命令,希伯來文的內容,三十,三十六;在特別是,它提出了錯誤的效果圖,其中的根源,而令人費解的假設希臘原為基礎,很容易佔參考的文字作了它必須是非常有缺陷的,因為證明了很多,而且重要空白敘利亞文翻譯。 It seems, likewise, that the Hebrew has been rendered by the translator himself in a careless, and at times even arbitrary manner.看來,同樣,希伯萊一直所提供的翻譯在自己不小心,有時甚至武斷的方式。 The Syriac version has all the less critical value at the present day, because it was considerably revised at an unknown date, by means of the Greek translation.敘利亞版本的所有不到臨界值在眼前,因為這是相當修訂日期不詳,通過希臘翻譯。

Of the other ancient versions of Ecclesiasticus, the Old Latin is the most important.其他古代版本的Ecclesiasticus ,老拉丁美洲是最重要的。 It was made before St. Jerome's time, although the precise date of its origin cannot now be ascertained; and the holy doctor apparently revised its text but little, previously to its adoption into the Latin Vulgate.這是聖杰羅姆前的時間,但確切日期的起源現在不能確定;和羅馬的醫生顯然修改了文本,但很少,先前通過的拉丁語武加大。 The unity of the Old Latin version, which was formerly undoubted, has been of late seriously questioned, and Ph. Thielmann, the most recent investigator of its text in this respect, thinks that chs.團結的舊拉美版本,這是不容置疑的前身,已經太晚嚴重質疑,並電話Thielmann ,最近調查的案文在這方面認為,社區衛生服務。 xliv-1 are due to a translator other than that of the rest of the book, the former part being of European, the latter and chief part of African, origin.第四十四- 1是由於翻譯以外的其他書籍,前一部分是歐洲,後者和行政部分非洲,原產地。 Conversely, the view formerly doubted by Cornelius a Lapide, P.相反,認為原懷疑的哥尼流1 Lapide ,第 Sabatier, EG Bengel, etc., namely that the Latin version was made directly from the Greek, is now considered as altogether certain.薩巴蒂爾,乙二醇本格爾等,即拉丁美洲版本是直接從希臘,現在被視為完全確定。 The version has retained many Greek words in a latinized form: eremus (vi, 3); eucharis (vi, 5); basis (vi, 30); acharis (xx, 21), xenia (xx, 31); dioryx (xxiv, 41); poderes (xxvii, 9); etc., etc., together with certain Graecisms of construction; so that the text rendered into Latin was unquestionably Greek, not the original Hebrew. It is indeed true that other features of the Old Latin -- notably its order for xxx-xxxvi, which disagrees with the Greek translation, and agrees with the Hebrew text -- seem to point to the conclusion that the Latin version was based immediately on the original Hebrew.該版本保留了許多希臘文字的latinized形式: eremus (六, 3 ) ; eucharis (六, 5 ) ;基礎(六, 30 ) ; acharis ( 20 , 21 ) ,花粉直感( 20 , 31 ) ; dioryx ( 24 , 41 ) ; poderes (二十七, 9 ) ;等等,以及一些Graecisms建設;使文字變得進入拉美無疑是希臘,而不是原來的希伯來語。的確,其他功能老拉丁美洲-特別是其為了三十,三十六,其中不同意希臘翻譯,並同意希伯來文字-似乎指向一個結論,即拉丁美洲版本的基礎上立即原來希伯來語。 But a very recent and critical examination of all such features in i-xliii has let H. Herkenne to a different conclusion; all things taken into consideration, he is of the mind that: "Nititur Vetus Latina textu vulgari graeco ad textum hebraicum alterius recensionis graece castigato."但是,最近的和嚴格審查所有這些功能的i -四十三讓閣下Herkenne得出不同的結論;所有事情考慮到,他的思想是: “ Nititur Vetus紋理vulgari希臘拉丁廣告textum hebraicum alterius recensionis graece castigato 。 “ (See also Jos. Knabenbauer, SJ, "In Ecclesiaticum", p. 34 sq.) Together with graecized forms, the Old Latin translation of Ecclesiasticus presents many barbarisms and solecisms (such as defunctio, i, 13; religiositas, i, 17, 18, 26; compartior, i, 24; receptibilis, ii, 5; peries, periet, viii, 18; xxxiii, 7; obductio, ii, 2; v, 1, 10; etc.), which, to the extent in which they can be actually traced back to the original form of ther version, go to show that the translator had but a poor command of the Latin language. (另見聖何塞Knabenbauer ,律政司司長, “在Ecclesiaticum ” ,第34頁平方米)一起graecized形式,拉丁美洲的老翻譯Ecclesiasticus提出了許多barbarisms和solecisms (如defunctio ,我, 13歲; religiositas ,我17 , 18 , 26 ; compartior ,我, 24 ; receptibilis ,二,五; peries , periet ,八, 18歲;三十三, 7 ; obductio ,二, 2 ;五, 1 , 10等) ,其中的範圍內,它們實際上可以追溯到最初的形式存在的版本,去表明,翻譯了,但窮人指揮拉丁語。 Again, from a fair number of expressions which are certainly due to the translator, it may be inferred that at times, he did not catch the sense of the Greek, and that at other times he was too free in rendering the text before him.再次,從相當多的表現形式肯定是由於翻譯,可以推論,有時,他沒有聽清的意識,希臘,並在其他時間,他也提供免費的文字在他面前。 The Old Latin version abounds in additional lines or even verses foreign not only to the Greek, but also to the Hebrew text.舊版本比比皆是拉丁美洲增加線路,甚至外國的詩句不僅是希臘,而且也對希伯來文。 Such important additions -- which often appear clearly so from the fact that they interfere with the poetical parallelisms of the book -- are either repetitions of preceding statements under a slightly different form, or glosses inserted by the translator or the copyists.這種重要的補充-這往往出現這樣明顯的事實是,他們干擾詩意並行的書籍-要么重複前面的發言略微不同的形式,或粉飾插入翻譯或copyists 。 Owing to the early origin of the Latin version (probably the second century of our era), and to its intimate connection with both the Greek and Hebrew texts, a good edition of its primitive form, as far as this form can be ascertained, is one of the chief things to be desired for the textual criticism of Ecclesiasticus.由於早期起源拉丁美洲版本(可能是我們的第二個世紀的時代) ,和它的親密聯繫與希臘和希伯來文,一個良好的版本,原始的形式,至於這種形式可以確定,是一個主要的事情有待改進的考證Ecclesiasticus 。 Among the other ancient versions of the Book of Ecclesiasticus which are derived from the Greek, the Ethiopic, Arabic, and Coptic are worthy of special mention.在其他版本的古代書Ecclesiasticus這是來自希臘文,在埃塞俄比亞,阿拉伯語,和科普特是特別值得一提的。

V. AUTHOR AND DATE五,作者和日期

The author of the Book of Ecclesiasticus is not King Solomon, to whom, at St. Augustine bears witness, the work was oftentimes ascribed "on account of some resemblance of style" with that of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Canticle of Canticles, but to whom, as the same holy doctor says, "the more learned" (apparently among the church writers of the time) "know full well that it should not be referred" (On the City of God, Bk. XVII, ch xx).本書的作者的Ecclesiasticus並非所羅門國王,他們在聖奧古斯丁證明,這項工作是經常為其“考慮到一些相似的風格”與諺語,傳道書和頌歌的Canticles ,但人,作為同羅馬教廷的醫生說, “更多的經驗教訓” (顯然是教會作家之間的時間) “清楚地知道,它不應該被稱為” (城市的上帝,淺灘。十七,總二十) 。 At the present day, the authorship of the book is universally and rightly assigned to a certain "Jesus", concerning whose person and character a great deal has indeed been surmised but very little is actually known.目前一天,這本書的作者是普遍的和正確的分配給某些“耶穌” ,關於其人性格大量的確是猜測,但實際上是很少的。 In the Greek prologue to the work, the author's proper name is given as Iesous, and this information is corroborated by the subscriptions found in the original Hebrew: 1, 27 (Vulgate, 1, 29); li, 30.在希臘序幕的工作,作者的正確的名稱是作為Iesous ,並證實了這一信息是由用戶發現在原來的希伯來文: 1 , 27 (武加大, 1 , 29 ) ;李, 30 。 His familiar surname was Ben Sira, as the Hebrew text and the ancient versions agree to attest.那熟悉的姓氏是本特希拉,因為希伯來文和古版本的同意證明。 He is described in the Greek and Latin versions as "a man of Jerusalem" (1, 29), and internal evidence (cf. xxiv, 13 sqq.; 1) tends to confirm the statement, although it is not found in the Hebrew.他所描述的希臘文和拉丁文版的“一個人的耶路撒冷” ( 1 , 29 ) ,和內部的證據(見第24 ,第13 sqq 。 ; 1 )往往以確認聲明,但沒有找到在希伯來文。 His close acquaintance with "the Law, the Prophets, and the other books delivered from the fathers", that is, with the three classes of writings which make up the Hebrew Bible, is distinctly borne witness to by the prologue to the work; and the 367 idioms or phrases, which the study of the Hebrew fragments has shown to be derived from the sacred books of the Jews, are an ample proof that Jesus, the son of Sirach, was thoroughly acquainted with the Biblical text.他的親密朋友“與法,先知,和其他的書籍送父親” ,也就是說,與三類著作構成希伯來聖經明顯見證了序幕工作;和在367成語或詞組,它的研究希伯來語碎片已經證明是來自聖書的猶太人,是一個充分證明耶穌的兒子Sirach ,徹底熟悉聖經經文。 He was a philisophical observer of life, as can be easily inferred from the nature of his thought, and he himself speaks of the wider knowledge which he acquired by traveling much, and of which he, of course, availed himself in writing his work (xxxiv, 12).他是一位哲學觀察員的生活,可以很容易地推斷的性質,他的思想和他本人說的更廣泛的知識,他獲得的旅行了,而他,當然,利用自己在寫作他的工作(三十四, 12 ) 。 The particular period in the author's life to which the composition of the book should be referred cannot be defined, whatever conjectures may have been put forth in that regard by some recent scholars.特定時期的作家的生活而組成的書,應提交不能界定,無論猜測可能已經提出了在這方面最近的一些學者。 The data to which others have appealed (xxxi, 22, sqq.; xxxviii, 1-15; etc.) to prove that he was a physician are insufficent evidence; while the similarity of the names (Jason-Jesus) is no excuse for those who have identified Jesus, the son of Sirach, a man of manifestly pious and honourable character with the ungodly and hellenizing high priest Jason (175-172 BC -- concerning Jason's wicked deeds, see 2 Maccabees 4:7-26).該數據的其他人提出上訴(第31 ,第22 , sqq 。 ;三十八, 1月15日;等) ,以證明他是一個醫生的證據不足;而相似的名稱(賈森耶穌)是沒有任何藉口這些誰已經確定耶穌的兒子Sirach ,一名男子顯然虔誠和體面的性質與ungodly和hellenizing大祭司賈森(公元前175-172 -關於賈森的邪惡行為,見2馬加比4:7-26 ) 。

The time at which Jesus, the author of Ecclesiasticus, lived has been the matter of much discussion in the past.時間,耶穌的作者Ecclesiasticus ,生活一直是許多討論的問題在過去的。 But at the present day, it admits of being given with tolerable precision.但在今天,它正在考慮承認與容忍的精度。 Two data are particularly helpful for this purpose. The first is supplied by the Greek prologue, where he came into Egypt en to ogdoo kai triakosto etei epi tou Euergetou Basileos, not long after which he rendered into Greek his grandfather's work.兩個數據都特別有助於實現這一目的。首先是由希臘的序幕,在那裡他遇到埃及en以ogdoo開triakosto etei計劃免疫頭Euergetou Basileos不久後,他使他的祖父到希臘的工作。 The "thirty-eighth year" here spoken of by the translator does not mean that of his own age, for such a specification would be manifestly irrelevant.該“第三十八今年”這裡談到的翻譯並不意味著自己的年齡,這樣的規範將顯然無關緊要。 It naturally denotes the date of his arrival in Egypt with a reference to the years of rule of the then monarch, the Egyptian Ptolemy Euergetes; and in point of fact, the Greek grammatical construction of the passage in the prologue is that usually employed into the Septuagint version to give the year of rule of a prince (cf. Haggai 1:1, 10; Zechariah 1:1, 7; 7:1; 1 Maccabees 12:42; 14:27; etc.).這自然是指當日在抵達埃及提及多年的統治,當時的國王,埃及托勒密Euergetes ;並在事實上,希臘語法建設的序幕通行的是,通常僱用的七十版本給予一年的第一個王子(參見哈1:1 ,第10條;撒迦利亞1:1 , 7 ; 7:1 ; 1馬加比12點42分; 14:27 ;等等) 。 There were indeed two Ptolemys of the surname Euergetes (Benefactor): Ptolemy III and Ptolemy VII (Physcon).確實有兩個Ptolemys姓Euergetes (恩人) :托勒密三世和托勒密七( Physcon ) 。 But to decide which is the one actually meant by the author of the prologue is an easy matter. As the first, Ptolemy III, reigned only twenty-five years (247-222 BC) it must be the second, Ptolemy VII, who in intended.但是,決定這是一個真正的含義作者的序幕是一件容易的事。第一,托勒密三世統治只有二十五年( 247-222年)它必須是第二次,托勒密第七,誰在意。 This latter prince shared the throne along with his brother (from 170 BC onwards), and afterwards ruled alone (from 145 BC onwards).後者王子共享王位連同他的弟弟(從公元前170起) ,然後排除單獨(從公元前145起) 。 But he was wont to reckon the years of his reign from the earlier date.但他慣於算多年的在位自較早的日期。 Hence "the thirty-eighth year of Ptolemy Euergetes", in which the grandson of Jesus, the son of Sirach, came to Egypt, is the year 132 BC This being the case, the translator's grandfather, the author of Ecclesiasticus, may be regarded as having lived and written his work between forty and sixty years before (between 190 and 170 BC), for there can be no doubt that in referring to Jesus by means of the term pappos and of the definite phrase ho pappos mou Iesous, the writer of the prologue designated his grandfather, and not a more remote ancestor.因此, “第三十八年托勒密Euergetes ” ,其中的孫子耶穌的兒子Sirach ,來到埃及,是公元前132年在這種情況下,譯者的祖父的作者Ecclesiasticus ,可被視為有寫他的生活和工作之間的四十零和六十年前( 190和170之間公元前) ,為毫無疑問,在談到耶穌通過長期pappos和明確的詞語何pappos諒解備忘錄Iesous ,作家指定的序幕,他的祖父,而不是更加遙遠的祖先。 The second datum that is particularly available for determining the time at which the writer of Ecclesiasticus lived is supplied by the book itself.第二個數據,這一點尤其可用於確定在該作家的生活是Ecclesiasticus所提供的書籍本身。 It has long been felt that since the son of Sirach celebrated with such a genuine glow of enthusiam the deeds of "the high priest Simon, son of Onias", whom he praises as the last in the long line of Jewish worthies, he must himself have been an eyewitnes of the glory which he depicts (cf. 1, 1-16, 22, 23).長期以來一直認為,自從兒子Sirach慶祝這樣一個真正的輝光的積極性的事蹟“的大祭司西蒙的兒子Onias ” ,他讚揚作為最後在長期線的猶太worthies ,他必須自己一直是eyewitnes的榮耀,他描繪(見1 , 1月16日, 22日, 23日) 。 This was, of course, but an inference and so long as it was based only on a more or less subjective appreciation of the passage, one can easily undertand why many scholars questioned, or even rejected, its correctness.這是當然,但推斷只要有人僅根據或多或少主觀讚賞通道,人們可以輕鬆地undertand為什麼許多學者提出質疑,甚至反對,其正確性。 But with the recent discovery of the original Hebrew of the passage, there has come in a new, and distinctly objective, element, whcih places practically beyond doubt the correctness of the inference.但是,最近發現原來希伯來語的通道,但在一個新的,明顯的目標,內容,這地方幾乎毫無疑問是正確的推理。 In the Hebrew text, immediatley after his eulogism of the high priest Simon, the writer subjoins the following fervent prayer:在希伯來文的文字,之後立即誄的大祭司西蒙,作家subjoins以下熱切祈禱:

May His (ie Yahweh's) mercy be continually with Simon, and may He establish with him the covenant of Phineas, that will endure with him and with his seed, as the says of heaven (I, 24).可他(即耶和華的)憐憫與西蒙不斷,而且可能他與他建立的菲尼亞斯公約,這將忍受與他和他的種子,因為說的天堂(一, 24 ) 。

Obviously, Simon was yet alive when this prayer was thus formulated; and its actual wording in the Hebrew implies this so manifestly, that when the author's grandson rendered it into Greek, at a date when Simon had been dead for some time, he felt it necessary to modify the text before him, and hence rendered it in the following general manner:顯然,西蒙還活著的時候是這個祈禱因此制定;和其實際的希伯來文中的措詞,這樣顯然意味著,當作者的孫子使它成希臘文,日期時,西蒙已經死了一段時間,他認為,必要修改的案文在他面前,從而使它在下列一般方式:

May His mercy be continually with us, and may He redeem us in His days. Besides thus allowing us to realize the fact that Jesus, the son of Sirach, was a contemporary of the high priest Simon, chap. 5月他憐憫與我們不斷進行,而且可能他兌現我們的日子。除了從而使我們能夠實現的事實,耶穌的兒子Sirach ,是一種當代的大祭司西蒙,第二章。 1 of Ecclesiasticus affords us certain details which enable us to decide which of the two Simons, both high priests and sons of Onias and known in Jewish history, is the one described by the writer of the book. 1 Ecclesiasticus使我們的某些細節,使我們能夠決定哪兩個西門子,高神父和兒子Onias和已知在猶太人的歷史,是一所描述的作家的書。 On the one hand, the only known title of Simon I (who held the pontificate under Ptolemy Soter, about 300 BC) which would furnish a reason for the great ecomium passed upon Simon in Ecclus., l is the surname "the Just" (cf. Josephus, Antiq. of the Jews, Bk.XII, chap. ii, 5), whence it is inferred that he was a renowned high priest worthy of being celebrated among the Jewish heroes praised by the son of Dirach.一方面,目前唯一已知的標題西蒙口(誰下舉行的教皇托勒密索特,約公元前300年)將提供一個很大的原因時ecomium通過西蒙在Ecclus 。 , L是姓“正義” (比照。約瑟夫, Antiq 。猶太人, Bk.XII ,第三章。二, 5 ) ,何處是推斷,他是一個著名的大祭司值得慶祝的猶太英雄稱讚的兒子Dirach 。 On the other hand, such details given in Simon's panegyric, as the facts that he repaired and strengthened the Temple, fortified the city against siege, and protected the city against robbers (cf. Ecclus., 1 1-4), are in close agreement with what is known of the times of Simon II (about 200 BC).另一方面,這種細節在西蒙的頌詞,因為他的事實,修復和加強寺廟,強化對被圍困的城市,並保護城市對搶劫犯(參見Ecclus 。 , 1 1-4 ) ,是密切同意所謂的時代西蒙二世(約公元前200 ) 。 While in the days of Simon I, and immediately after, the people were undisturbed by foreign aggression, in those of Simon II the Jews were sorely harrassed by hostile armies, and their territory was invaded by Antiochus, as we are informed by Josephus (Antiq. of the Jews, Bk. XII, chap. iii, 3).而在兩天的西蒙我和後,人們都在不受干擾的外國侵略,在這些西蒙二是嚴峻的猶太人騷擾敵對軍隊,他們的領土被侵占安提阿哥,因為我們被告知的約瑟夫( Antiq 。猶太人,淺灘。第十二章,第三章。三, 3 ) 。 It was also in the later time of Simon II that Ptolemy Philopator was prevented only by the high priest's prayer to God, from desecrating the Most Holy Place; he then started a fearful persecution of the Jews at home and abroad (cf. III Mach., ii, iii).也有人在稍後時間西蒙二是托勒密Philopator被阻止只能由大祭司的祈禱上帝,來自褻瀆至聖地方;然後,他開始了一個可怕的迫害猶太人在國內和國外(參見三馬赫。 ,二,三) 。 It appears from these facts -- to which others, pointing in the same direction, could easily be added -- that the author of Ecclesiasticus lived about the beginning of the second century BC As a matter of fact, recent Catholic scholars, in increasing number, prefer this position that which identifies the high priest Simon, spoken of in Ecclus., l, with Simon I, and which, in consequence, refers the composition of the book to about a century earlier (about 280 BC)從這些事實-而其他人,指向同一方向,可以很容易地說- ,作者的Ecclesiasticus生活的開始,公元前二世紀事實上,最近的天主教學者,在越來越多,喜歡這一立場,即識別大祭司西蒙,談到在Ecclus 。 , L時,與西蒙一,並,因此,是指組成的書,約在一個多世紀早期(約公元前280 )

VI.六。 METHOD OF COMPOSITION方法成分

At the present day, there are two principal views concerning the manner in which the writer of Ecclesiasticus composed his work, and it is difficult to say which is the more probable.目前一天,有兩個主要的意見的方式,作家組成的Ecclesiasticus他的工作,這是很難說這是更可能的。 The first, held by many scholars, maintains that an impartial study of the topics treated and of their actual arrangement leads to the conclusion that the whole book is the work of a single mind.第一,由許多學者堅持認為,一個公正的專題研究處理,並對其實際安排得出的結論是,整本書的工作是一個單一的想法。 Its advocates claim that, throughout the book, one and the same general purpose can be easily made out, to wit: the purpose of teaching the practical value of Hebrew wisdom, and that one and the same method in handling the materials can be readily noticed, the writer always showing wide acquaintance with men and things, and never citing any exterior authority for what he says.它的倡導者聲稱,在整個這本書,同一個通用可輕易作出的,即:教學的目的的實際價值希伯來智慧,而且是同一個方法處理材料可以很容易發現,作者總是顯示廣交與男子外,並沒有引用任何外部權威他所說的話。 They affirm that a careful examination of the contents disclosed a distinct unity of mental attitude on the author's part towards the same leading topics, towards God, life, the Law, wisdom, etc. They do not deny the existence of differences of tone in the book, but think that they are found in various paragraphs relating to minor topics; that the diversities thus noticed do not go beyond the range of one man's experience; that the author very likely wrote at different intervals and under a variety of circumstances, so that it is not to be wondered at if pieces thus composed bear the manifest impress of a somewhat different frame of mind.他們申明,仔細審查了一個獨特的內容披露團結精神的態度,作者的部分領導對同一主題,對上帝,生活,法律,智慧,等他們並不否認存在差異的語氣本書,但認為他們是在各段的主題有關的未成年人;的多樣性從而發現不超出範圍的一個人的經驗;撰文寫道很可能在不同的時間間隔,並在各種情況下,這樣,這是不知道在如果件組成,承擔因此留下深刻印象的表現略有不同的心境。 Some of them actually go so far as to admit that the writer of Ecclesiasticus may at times have collected thoughts and maxims that were already in current and popular use, may even have drawn material from collections of wise sayings no longer extant or from unpublished discourses of sages; but they, each and all, are positive that the author of the book "was not a mere collector or compiler; his characteristic personality stands out too distinctly and prominently for that, and notwithstanding the diversified character of the apophthegms, they are all the outcome of one connected view of life and of the world" (Schürer). The second view maintains that the Book of Ecclesiasticus was composed by a process of compilation.其中有些人實際上竟然承認的作者Ecclesiasticus有時收集想法和格言是已經在當前和流行的使用,甚至可能引起材料收集明智的諺語不再現存或由未發表的話語聖人,但他們,每個和所有,這些都是積極的,該一書的作者“不是一個單純的收藏家或編譯器;他特有的個性脫穎而出太明顯和突出的是,儘管多元化性質apophthegms ,它們都是結果一個連接人生觀和世界“ ( Schürer ) 。第二種觀點認為這本書組成的Ecclesiasticus進程的彙編。 According to the defenders of this position, the compilatory character of the book does not necessarily conflict with a real unity of general purpose pervading and connecting the elements of the work; such a purpose proves, indeed, that one mind has bound those elements together for a common end, but it really leaves untouched the question at issue, viz.據捍衛這一立場, compilatory性質的書並不一定衝突,一個真正的統一和通用連接普遍存在內容的工作;證明了這樣一個目的,事實上,這種萬眾一心的約束這些因素共同為一個共同的目的,但它真的離開了這個問題觸及問題,即。 whether that one mind must be considered as the original author of the contents of the book, or, rather, as the combiner of pre-existing materials.這是否萬眾一心必須視為原作者的內容,這本書,或者說,作為組合的預先存在的材料。 Granting, then, the existence of one and the same general purpose in the work of the son of Sirach, and admitting likewise the fact that certain portions of Ecclesiasticus belong to him as the original author, they think that, on the whole, the book is a compilation.給予,那麼,是否存在同一個通用的工作,兒子Sirach ,並承認這樣一個事實,即某些部分Ecclesiasticus屬於他為原作者所有,他們認為,從總體上看,這本書彙編。 Briefly stated, the following are their grounds for their position. In the first place, from the very nature of his work, the author was like "a gleaner after the grape-gatherers"; and in thus speaking of himself (xxxiii, 16) he gives us to understand that he was a collector or compiler.簡要地說,以下是他們的理由,他們的立場。首先,從本身的性質的工作,作者就像“一個集錦後葡萄採集” ;和因此在談到自己(三十三, 16 )他使我們明白,他是一個收藏家或編譯器。 In the second place, the structure of the work still betrays a compilatory process.第二,結構的工作仍然暴露了compilatory進程。 The concluding chapter (li) is a real appendix to the book, and was added to it after the completion of the work, as is proved by the colophon in 1, 29 sqq.最後一章(李)是一個真正的附錄書,並給它增加了完成後的工作,證明了colophon在1 , 29 sqq 。 The opening chapter reads like a general introduction to the book, and indeed as one different in tone from the chapters by which its immediately followed, while it resembes some distinct sections which are embodied in furthur chapters of the work.開篇讀起來就像一般性介紹這本書,的確是一個不同的論調的章節是其緊接著,雖然resembes一些獨特的章節,都體現在furthur章節的工作。 In the body of the book, ch.正文中的圖書,甲烷。 xxxvi, 1-19, is a prayer for the Jews of the Dispersion, altogether unconnected with the sayings in verses 20 sqq.三十六, 1月19日,是一個祈禱的猶太人的分散,完全無關的說法在20 sqq詩句。 of the same chapter; ch.同一章;總。 xliii, 15-1, 26, is a discourse clearly separate from the prudential maxims by which it is immediatley preceded; chs.四十三, 15-1 , 26歲,是一個話語明確分開審慎格言由它立即之前;社區衛生服務。 xvi, 24; xxiv, 1; xxxix, 16, are new starting-points, which, no less than the numerous passages marked by the address my son (ii, 1; iii, 19; iv, 1, 23; vi, 18, 24, 33; etc.). and the peculiar addition in 1, 27, 28, tell against the literary unity of the work.十六, 24 ; 24 , 1 ;三十九, 16歲,是新的起點,其中不低於無數通道標誌是解決我的兒子(二, 1 ;三, 19 ;四, 1 , 23日;六, 18 , 24 , 33 ;等等) 。與特殊此外在1 , 27 , 28 ,講團結,對文學的工作。 Other marks of a compilatory process have also been appealed to.其他標誌的compilatory進程也已呼籲。 They consist in the significant repetition of several sayings in different places of the book (cf. xx, 32, 33, which is repeated in xli, 17b, 18; etc.); in apparent discrepancies of thought and doctrine (cf. the differences of tone in chs. xvi; xxv; xxix, 21-41; xl, 1-11; etc); in certain topical headings at the beginning of special sections (cf. xxxi, 12; 41:16; 44:1 in the Hebrew); and in an additonal psalm or canticle found in the newly discovered Hebrew text, between li, 12, and li, 13; all of which are best accounted for by the use of several smaller collections containing each the same saying, or differing considerably in their genral tenor, or supplies with their respective titles.它們包括在一些重要的重複說法在不同的地方的書(見第XX號, 32 , 33 ,這是重複了四十一, 17B條, 18條;等) ;在明顯不一致的思想和學說(見分歧在社區衛生服務的基調。十六;二十五;第29 , 21-41 ;儀, 1月11日;等) ;在某些專題的標題的開頭專門章節(參見第31 ,第12條; 41:16 ; 44:1的希伯來文) ;和在一個額外詩篇或頌歌中發現,新發現的希伯來文,李之間, 12日,李, 13歲;所有這一切都是最好的佔利用幾個較小的集合的每個同說,或不同的大大的genral男高音,或用品各自的冠軍頭銜。 Finally, there seems to be an historical trace of the compilatory character of Ecclesiasticus in a second, but unauthentic, prologue to the book, which is found in the "Synopsis Sacrae Scripturae".最後,似乎是一種歷史痕跡的compilatory性質Ecclesiasticus在第二,但非真實,這本書序幕,這是發現在“概要Sacrae Scripturae ” 。 In this document, which is printed in the works of St.在這份文件,這是中印的作品街 Athanasius and also at the beginning of Ecclesiasticus in the Complutensian Polyglot, the actual redaction of the book is ascribed to the Greek translator as a regular process of compilation detached hymns, sayings, prayers, etc., which had been left him by his grandfather, Jesus, the son of Sirach.亞他那修,並在年初Ecclesiasticus在Complutensian多元,實際編輯的這本書是屬於希臘的翻譯是一個經常性的進程彙編超脫讚美詩,諺語,祈禱等,已經讓他由他的祖父,耶穌的兒子Sirach 。

VII.七。 DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL TEACHING理論和倫理教學

Before setting forth in a summary way the principal teachings, doctrinal and ethical, contained in the Book of Ecclesiasticus, it will not be amiss to premise two remarks which, however elementary, should be distinctly borne in mind by anyone who wished to view the doctrines of the son of Sirach in their proper light.在設置的總結中提出的主要教學方式,理論和道德,在這本書中所載的Ecclesiasticus ,它不會見怪,以前提兩句話,但小學,應該是明顯銘記任何人誰希望查看理論的兒子Sirach在適當的光線。 First, it would be obviously unfair to require that the contents of this Sapiential book should come full up to the high moral standards of Christian ethics, or should equal in clearness and precision the dogmatic teachings embodied in the sacred writings of the New Testament or in the living tradition of the Church; all that can be reasonabley expected of a book composed some time before the Christian Dispensation, is that it shall set forth subsantially good, not perfect, doctrinal and ethical teaching.首先,這將是明顯不公平的,要求的內容,這本書應該Sapiential充分達到極高的道德標準,基督教倫理,還是應該平等的清晰和精確的教條教義中所體現的神聖著作的新約全書或生活的傳統,教會所有,可以reasonabley預期一本書組成,前一段時間基督教配方是,它應當載明subsantially好,並非十全十美,理論和道德教育。 In the second place, both good logic and sound common sense demand that the silence of Ecclesiasticus concerning certain points of doctrine be not regarded as a positive denial of them, unless it can be clearly and conclusively shown that such a silence must be so construed.第二,良好的邏輯和健全的常識要求保持沉默Ecclesiasticus的某些點的理論是不被視為一個積極的拒絕他們,除非它可以清楚地和決定性地表明,這種沉默必須如此解釋。 The work is mostly made up of unconnected sayings which bear on all kinds of topics, and on that account, hardly ever, if ever at all, will a sober critic be able to pronounce on the actual motive which prompted the author of the book either to mention or to omit a particular point of doctrine.這項工作主要是由未諺語負有各種專題,並在此帳戶,幾乎從來沒有,即使在所有,將清醒的評論家能發音的實際動機促使一書的作者要么提及或省略某一特定點的理論。 Nay more, in presence of a writer manifestly wedded to the national and religious traditions of the Jewish race as the general tone of his book proves the author of Ecclesiasticus to have been, every scholar worthy of the name will readily see that silence on Jesus' part regarding some important doctrine, such for instance as that of the Messias, is no proof whatever that the son of Sirach did not abide by the belief of the Jews concerning that doctrine, and, in reference to the special point just mentioned, did not share the Messianic expectations of his time.奈多,在存在明顯拘泥於一個作家的民族和宗教傳統的猶太種族的總的調子證明他的著作的作者Ecclesiasticus已,值得每一個學者的名字將隨時看到,沉默的耶穌'部分就一些重要的理論,例如例如,是弭賽亞,沒有任何證據的兒子Sirach沒有遵守相信猶太人有關的理論,並在提到特別指向剛才提到的,沒有分享彌賽亞期望的時間。 As can readily be seen, the two general remarks just made simply set forth the elementary canons of historical criticism; and they would not have been dwelt on here were it not that they have been very often lost sight of by Protestant scholars, who, biased by their desire to disprove the Catholic doctrine of the inspired character of Ecclesiasticus, have done their utmost to depreciate the doctrinal and ethical teaching of this deuterocanonical book.由於可以很容易地看到,兩名一般剛才的發言只是提出了基本準則的歷史的批評,他們就不會談到這裡,如果不是,他們都非常往往忽略了新教的學者,誰,有偏見他們的願望反駁天主教教義的激勵性質的Ecclesiasticus ,付出了很大的努力貶值的理論和道德教育的deuterocanonical書。

The following are the principal dogmatic doctrines of Jesus, the son of Sirach. According to him, as according to all the other inspired writers of the Old Testament, God is one and there is no God beside Him (xxxvi, 5).以下是主要的教條理論,耶穌的兒子Sirach 。據他說,作為根據所有其他激勵作家舊約,上帝是一個整體,沒有上帝身旁( 36 , 5 ) 。 He is a living and eternal God (xviii, 1), and although His greatness and mercy exceed all human comprehension, yet He makes Himself known to man through His wonderful works (xvi, 18, 23 xviii, 4).他是一個生活和永恆的上帝( 18 , 1 ) ,雖然他的偉大和仁慈超過所有人權的理解,但他讓自己知道的人通過他的精彩作品( 16 , 18 , 23 18 , 4 ) 。 He is the creator of all things (xviii, 1; xxiv, 12), which He produced by His word of command, stamping them all with the marks of greatness and goodness (xlii, 15-xliii ; etc.).他是造物主的一切事物(十八, 1 ; 24 , 12 ) ,這是他的話所產生的命令,沖壓他們所有的商標偉大和善良(四十二, 15四十三;等等) 。 Man is the choice handiwork of God, who made him for His glory, set him as king over all other creatures (xvii, 1-8), bestowed upon him the power of choosing between good and evil (xv, 14-22), and will hold him accountable for his own personal deeds (xvii, 9-16), for while tolerating, moral evil He reproves it and enables man to avoid it (xv, 11-21).人是選擇工藝品的上帝,誰取得了他的榮耀,讓他作為國王的所有其他動物(十七, 1月8日) ,賦予他的權力選擇善惡之間(十五14-22 ) ,並要求他為自己的個人事蹟(十七, 9月16日) ,因為雖然容忍,道德罪惡,他reproves這使男子,以避免它(十五, 11月21日) 。 In dealing with man, God is no less merciful than righteous: "He is mighty to forgive" (xvi, 12), and: "How great is the mercy of the Lord, and His forgiveness to them that turn to Him" (xvii, 28); yet no one should presume on the Divine mercy and hence delay his conversion, "for His wrath shall come on a sudden, and in the time of vengeance He will destroy thee" (v, 6-9).在處理人,上帝是仁慈的比不義: “他是偉大的寬恕” ( 16 , 12 ) ,並: “多大是憐憫的上帝,他的寬恕他們,又對他” (十七, 28 ) ;但任何人都不應推定的神聖慈悲的,因此拖延對他的轉換, “對他的憤怒之日起就突然之間,並在規定的時間內的報復,他將摧毀你的” (五, 6月9日) 。 From among the children of men, God selected for Himself a special nation, Israel, in the midst of which He wills that wisdom should reside (xxiv, 13-16), and in behalf of which the son of Sirach offers up a fervent prayer, replete with touching remembrances of God's mercies to the patriarchs and prophets of old, and with ardent wishes for the reunion and exaltation of the chosen people (xxxvi, 1-19). It is quite clear that the Jewish patriot who put forth this petition to God for future national quiet and prosperity, and who furthermore confidently expected that Elias's return would contribute to the glorious restoration of all Israel (cf. xlviii, 10), looked forward to the introduction of Messianic times.從孩子的男人,上帝為自己選定一個特殊的國家,以色列,處於他的意志,智慧應該居住( 24 , 13日至16日) ,並在代表的兒子Sirach提供了一個熱切的祈禱,充滿了感人的回憶上帝的憐憫的始祖和先知歲,並殷切希望的團聚和提升人民的選擇( 36 , 1月19日) 。很顯然,誰的猶太人愛國者提出這一請求上帝對未來國家平靜和繁榮,以及誰此外預計埃利亞斯自信的回歸將有助於光榮恢復所有以色列(見四十八, 10 ) ,期待著引進彌賽亞次。 It remains true, however, that in whatever way his silence be accounted for, he does not speak anywhere of a special interposition of God in behalf of the Jewish people, or of the future coming of a personal Messias.它仍是真實的,但是,在他的沉默的方式加以說明,他不會說任何一個特別干預上帝代表猶太人民,或未來的未來的個人弭賽亞。 He manifestly alludes to the narrative of the Fall, when he says: "From the woman came the beginning of sin, and by her we all die" (xxv, 33), and apparently connects with this original deviation from righteousness the miseries and passions that weigh so heavily on the children of Adam (xl, 1-11).他的意思顯然說明秋天,當他說: “從女人開始的罪孽,並通過她,我們都死了” ( 25 , 33 ) ,顯然與此相連偏離原義的苦難和激情重量如此嚴重的兒童亞當(儀, 1月11日) 。 He says very little concerning the next life.他說,很少涉及未來的生活。 Earthly rewards occupy the most prominent, or perhaps even the sole, place, in the author's mind, as a sanction for present good or evil deeds (xiv, 22-xv, 6; xvi, 1-14); but this will not appear strange to anyone who is acquainted with the limitations of Jewish eschatology in the more ancient parts of the Old Testament.俗世的獎勵佔據最突出的,甚至唯一的,地點在作者的思想,作為當前良好的制裁或惡行(十四22十五, 6 ;十六, 1月14日) ;但是這將不會出現奇怪的人誰是熟悉的限制猶太末世論中的更古老的部分舊約。 He depicts death in the light of a reward or of a punishment, only in so far as it is either a quiet demise for the just or a final deliverance from earthly ills (xli, 3, 4), or, on the contrary, a terrible end that overtakes the sinner when he least expects it (ix, 16, 17).他描繪死亡鑑於獎勵或處罰,只有在迄今因為它是不是一個安靜的消亡的正義或最後救我們脫離塵世弊病(四十一, 3 , 4 ) ,或與此相反,一可怕的目的,超越了罪人,他不希望它(九, 16 , 17 ) 。 As regards the underworld or Sheol, it appears to the writer nothing but a mournful place where the dead do not praise God (xvii, 26, 27)至於黑社會或Sheol ,覺得作家只是一個悲傷的地方,死者沒有讚美上帝( 17 , 26 , 27 )

The central, dogmatic, and moral idea of the book is that of wisdom.中央,教條和道德觀念的書籍是智慧的。 Ben Sira describes it under several important aspects.本特希拉描述它的幾個重要方面。 When he speaks of it in relation to God, he almost invariable invests it with personal attributes.當他談到了它與上帝,他幾乎不變的投資與個人屬性。 It is eternal (i, 1), unsearchaable (i, 6, 7), universal (xxiv, 6 sqq.).它是永恆的(一, 1 ) , unsearchaable (一,六,七) ,通用( 24 , 6 sqq 。 ) 。 It is the formative, creative power of the world (xxiv, 3 sqq.), yet is itself created (i, 9; also in Greek: xxiv, 9), and is nowhere treated as a distinct, subsisting Divine Person, in the Hebrew text.它的形成,創作力的世界( 24 , 3 sqq 。 ) ,但本身是建立(一, 9 ;也希臘語: 24 , 9 ) ,並沒有被視為一個獨特的,存續的神人,在希伯來文。 In relation to man, wisdom is depicted as a quality which comes form the Almighty and works most excellent effects in those who love Him (i, 10-13).在有關的人,智慧描繪成一個質量這是全能的形式和最優秀的作品在這些影響誰愛他(一, 10月13日) 。 It is identified with the "fear of God" (i, 16), which should of course prevail in a special manner in Israel, and promote among the Hebrews the perfect fulfilment of the Mosaic Law, which the author of Ecclesasticus regards as the living embodiment of God d wisdom (xxiv, 11-20, 32, 33).這是確定的“上帝的恐懼” (一, 16 ) ,這當然應該普遍存在一種特殊的方式在以色列,並促進各希伯來書完美的實現馬賽克,該法的作者Ecclesasticus視為生活體現了上帝d智慧( 24 , 11-20 , 32 , 33 ) 。 It is a priceless treasure, to the acquistion of which one must devote all his efforts, and the imparting of which to others one should never grudge (vi, 18-20; xx, 32, 33).這是無價之寶,對採集的其中一個必須用他的所有努力,並傳授給他人,其中一個永遠不應該怨恨(六, 18日至20日; 20 , 32 , 33 ) 。 It is a disposition of the heart which prompts man to practise the virtues of faith, hope, and love of God (ii, 8-10), of trust and submission, etc. (ii, 18-23; x, 23-27; etc.); which also secures for him happiness and glory in this life (xxxiv, 14-20; xxxiii, 37, 38; etc.).這是一個處理核心提示人執業的美德,信仰,希望,和上帝的愛(二, 8月10日) ,信託和提交等(二, 18日至23日;十, 23日至27日;等) ;這也保證了他的幸福和榮耀在此生活(三十四, 14-20 ;三十三, 37 , 38 ;等等) 。 It is a frame of mind which prevents the discharge of the ritual law, especially the offering of sacrifices, from becoming a heartless compliance with mere outward observances, and it causes man to place inward righeousness far above the offering of rich gifts to God (xxxv). As can readily be seen, the author of Ecclesiasticus inculcated in all this a teaching far superior to that of the Pharisees of a somewhat later date, and in no way inferior to that of the prophets and of the commendable, too, are the numerous pithy sayings which the son of Sirach gives for the avoidance of sin, wherein the negative part of practical wisdom may be said to consist.這是一個的心態妨礙履行儀式國際法,特別是提供的犧牲,成為無情遵守僅僅外向紀念活動,以及它所造成的人將遠遠超過對內righeousness提供的豐富禮品上帝(三十五) 。由於可以很容易地看到,作者Ecclesiasticus灌輸這一切教學遠遠優於法利一個有點日後,絕不低於先知和讚揚,也有許多精闢的諺語其中的兒子Sirach讓,以避免單,其中的負面實際智慧的一部分,可以說組成。 His maxims against pride (iii, 30; vi, 2-4; x, 14-30; etc.), covetousness (iv, 36; v, 1; xi, 18-21), envy, (xxx, 22-27; xxxvi, 22), impurity(ix, 1-13; xix, 1-3; etc.).anger (xviii, 1-14; x, 6), intemperance (xxxvii, 30-34).他的格言反對驕傲(三, 30日;六, 2月4日;第十14-30 ;等) ,貪婪(四, 36 ;五, 1 ;十一, 18日至21日) ,嫉妒, (三十, 22-27 ; 36 , 22 ) ,雜質(九, 1月13日;十九1-3 ;等等) 。憤怒(十八, 1月14日;十, 6人) ,過度(三十七, 30-34 ) 。 sloth (vii, 16; xxii, 1, 2), the sins of the tongue(iv, 30; vli, 13, 14; xi, 2, 3; i, 36-40; v, 16, 17; xxviii, 15-27; etc.), evil company, (xi, 31-36; xxii, 14-18; etc.), display a close observation of human nature, stigmatize vice in a forcible manner, and at times point out the remedy against the spiritual distemper. Indeed, it is probably no less because of the success which Ben Sira attained to in branding vice than because of that which he obtained in directly inculcating virtue, that his work was so willingly used in the early days of Christianity for public reading at church, and bears, down to the present day, the pre-eminent title of "Ecclesiasticus".懶(第七章, 16條;二十二, 1 , 2 ) ,罪孽舌(四, 30 ; vli , 13 , 14 ;十一,二,三,一, 36-40 ;五, 16日, 17日;二十八, 15 -27等) ,邪惡的公司, (十一, 31-36 ;二十二, 14日至18日;等) ,顯示密切觀察人性,侮辱副主席在強迫的方式,有時指出補救犬瘟熱的精神。實際上,它可能是同樣的成功,因為這本特希拉達到副主席在品牌,因為這比他獲得的直接灌輸美德,他的工作是非常願意使用初期基督教供市民閱讀在教堂,和熊,下降到目前的一天,是首要的標題“ Ecclesiasticus ” 。

Together with these maxims, which nearly all bear on what may be called individual morality, the Book of Ecclesiasticus contains valuable lessons relative to the various classes which make up human society.連同這些格言,幾乎所有承擔什麼可稱為個人的道德,這本書的Ecclesiasticus載有寶貴的經驗教訓相對各類構成人類社會。 The natural basis of society is the family, and the son of Sirach supplies a number of pieces of advice especially appropriate to the domestic circles as it was then constituted.自然基礎的社會,家庭,和兒子Sirach用品若干件建議是適當的國內各界因為它然後組成。 He would have the man who wishes to become the head of a family determined in the choice of a wife by her moral worth (xxxvi, 23-26; xl, 19-23). He repeatedly describes the precious advantages resulting from the possession of a good wife, and contrasts with them the misery entailed by the choice of an unworthy one (xxvi, 1-24; xxv, 17-36).他將有男子誰希望成為頭一個家庭在選擇確定的妻子,她的道德價值( 36 , 23日至26日;儀, 19日至23日) 。他反复說明了寶貴的優勢,因藏有一個好妻子,與他們的對比所帶來的痛苦的選擇,一個不值得一( 26 , 1月24日;二十五, 17-36 ) 。 The man, as the head of the family, he represents indeed as vested with more power than would be granted to him among us, but he does not neglect to point out his numerous responsibilities towards those under him: to his children, especially his daughter, whose welfare he might more particularly be tempted to neglect (vii, 25 sqq.), and his slaves, concerning whom he writes: "Let a wise servant be dear to thee as they own soul" (vii, 23; xxxiii, 31), not meaning thereby, however, to encourage the servant's idleness or other vices (xxxiii, 25-30).該名男子,作為一家之主,他代表事實上,賦予更多的權力比將授予他在我們中間,但他並未忽視指出他的許多責任是根據他:他的兒童,特別是他的女兒,他們的福利,他可能更特別受到誘惑而忽視(第七章, 25 sqq 。 ) ,和他的奴隸,關於他寫道: “讓一個明智的僕人是珍視你,他們自己的靈魂” (七, 23歲;三十三, 31 ) ,而不是含義從而然而,鼓勵僕人的閒置或其他惡習(三十三, 25-30 ) 。 The duties of children towards their parents are often and beautifully insisted upon (vii, 29, 30, etc.).兒童的職責,對他們的父母往往是堅持和美麗(七, 29 , 30 ,等) 。 The son of Sirach devoted a variety of sayings to the choice and the worth of a real friend (vi, 6-17; ix, 14, 15; xii, 8, 9), to the care with which such a one should be preserved (xxii, 25-32), and also to the worthlessness and dangers of the unfaithful friend (xxvii, 1-6, 17-24; xxxiii, 6). Sirach的兒子用了各種各樣的說法的選擇和價值的真正的朋友(六, 6月17日,九,十四,十五;十二, 8 , 9 ) ,照顧與這樣的人應該得到維護( 22 , 25-32 ) ,也向毫無價值和危險的不忠朋友(二十七, 1-6 , 17-24 ;三十三, 6 ) 。 The author has no brief against those in power but on the contrary considers it an expression of God's will that some should be in exalted, and others in humble, stations in life (xxxiii, 7-15).作者沒有簡單反對當權者,相反認為它表達了天意,一些應在崇高的,和其他人謙卑,站生活(三十三, 7月15日) 。 He conceives of the various classes of society, of the poor and the rich, the learned and the ignorant, as able to become endowed with wisdom (xxxvii, 21-29).他設想了各種類別的社會,窮人和富人的教訓和無知的,因為能夠成為具有智慧(三十七, 21-29 ) 。 He would have a prince bear in mind that he is in God's hand, and owes equal justice to all, rich and poor (v, 18; x, 1-13).他將有一個王子牢記自己是上帝的手,和欠平等公正的所有國,富國和窮國(五, 18歲;十, 1月13日) 。 He bids the rich give alms, and visit the poor and the afflicted (iv, 1-11; vii, 38, 39; xii, 1-7; etc.), for almsgiving is a means to obtain forgiveness of sin (iii, 33, 34; vii, 10, 36) whereas hardheartedness is in every way hurtful 9xxxiv, 25-29).他的出價豐富施捨,並訪問窮人和受影響(四, 1月11日;七, 38 , 39 ;十二, 1月7日;等) ,用於救濟的一種手段獲得寬恕的罪惡(三, 33 , 34 ;七, 10 , 36 ) ,而hardheartedness正在以各種方式傷害9xxxiv , 25-29 ) 。 On the other hand, he directs the lower classes, as we might call them, to show themselves submissive to those in higher condition and to bear patiently with those who cannot be safely and directly resisted (viii, 1-13; ix, 18-21; xiii, 1-8).另一方面,他所領導的下層階級,因為我們可能會立即打電話給他們,以顯示自己順從的人更高的條件,並承擔耐心與誰不能安全和直接抵制(八, 1月13日;九, 18 - 21 ;十三, 1月8日) 。 Nor is the author of Ecclesiasticus anything like a misanthrope that would set himself up resolutely against the legitmate pleasures and the received customs of social life (xxxi, 12-42; xxxii, 1 sqq.); while he directs severe but just rebukes against the parasite (xxix, 28-35; xi, 29-32).也不是作者Ecclesiasticus東西就像一個憤世嫉俗,設定自己堅決反對legitmate樂趣和收到海關的社會生活(三十一, 12-42 ;三十二, 1 sqq 。 ) ;同時,他指示嚴重只是指責對寄生蟲(第29 , 28-35 ;十一29-32 ) 。 Finally, he has favourable sayings about the physician (xxviii, 1-15(, and about the dead (vii, 37; xxxviii, 16-24); and strong words of caution against the dangers which one incurs in the pursuit of business (xxvi, 28; xxvii, 1-4; viii, 15, 16).最後,他已有利的諺語的醫生(二十八, 1月15日( ,以及對死亡(第七章, 37 ;三十八, 16日至24日) ;和強大的話告誡其中的危險應負在追求企業( 26 , 28 ;二十七, 1月4日,八,十五,十六) 。

Publication information Written by Francis E. Gigot.出版信息作者弗朗西斯大腸桿菌吉戈特。 Transcribed by Beth Ste-Marie. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume V. Published 1909.轉錄的貝絲聖瑪麗。天主教百科全書,體積五發布1909年。 New York: Robert Appleton Company.紐約:羅伯特阿普爾頓公司。 Nihil Obstat, May 1, 1909. Nihil Obstat , 1909年5月1號。 Remy Lafort, Censor.雷米Lafort ,審查。 Imprimatur.認可。 +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York +約翰M法利,大主教紐約

Bibliography參考書目

Catholic authors are marked with an asterik (*) Commentaries: CALMET* (Venice, 1751): FRITZSCHE, (Leipzig, 1859); BISSELL (New York, 1880); LESETRE* (Paris, 1880); EDERSHEIM (London-1888); ZOCKLER, (Munich, 1891); RYSSEL (Tubingen, 1900-1901); KNABENBAUER* (Paris, 1902). Introductions to the Old Testament: RAULT* (Paris, 1882); VIGOUROUX* (Paris, 1886); CORNELY* (Paris, 1886); TRONCHON-LESETRE* (Paris, 1890); KONIG (Bonn, 1893); CORNILL, (Freiburg, 1899); GIGOT* (New York, 1906) Monographs on Ancient Versions: PETERS* (Freiburg, 1898); HERKENNE* (Leipzig, 1899). Literature on Hebrew Fragments: TOUZARD* (Paris, 1901); KNABENBAUER* (Paris, 1902).天主教作者標有asterik ( * )評論: CALMET * (威尼斯, 1751年) :弗里切, (萊比錫, 1859年) ;比斯爾(紐約, 1880年) ; LESETRE * (巴黎, 1880年) ;愛德生(倫敦, 1888 ) ; ZOCKLER , (慕尼黑, 1891年) ; RYSSEL (蒂賓根, 1900年至01年) ; KNABENBAUER * (巴黎, 1902年) 。介紹舊約:曦* (巴黎, 1882年) ; VIGOUROUX * (巴黎, 1886年) ; CORNELY * (巴黎, 1886年) ; TRONCHON - LESETRE * (巴黎, 1890年) ; KONIG (波恩, 1893年) ; CORNILL , (弗賴堡, 1899年) ; GIGOT * (紐約, 1906年)專著古代版本: PETERS * (弗賴堡, 1898年) ; HERKENNE * (萊比錫, 1899年) 。文學對希伯來片段:圖扎爾* (巴黎, 1901年) ; KNABENBAUER * (巴黎, 1902年) 。


Wisdom of Jesus the son of Sirach智慧的耶穌的兒子Sirach

Jewish Perspective Information 猶太透視信息

ARTICLE HEADINGS:文章標題:

Names.的名字。

Author.作者。

Date.日期。

Contents.目錄。

Importance for the History of Thought.重要的思想史。

Possible Traces of Hellenic Influence.可能的痕跡希臘的影響。

Popularity Among the Jews.流行猶太人。

Popularity Among Christians.流行基督徒。

Discovery of Hebrew Fragments.發現希伯來語碎片。

Manuscripts.手稿。

Originality of the Hebrew Fragments.原創性希伯來語碎片。

The Final Hymn.最後的歌。

Critical Value of the Hebrew Text.臨界值的希伯萊文字。

Importance for the History of the Bible.重要的歷史聖經。

The Greek Version.希臘版本。

The Vetus Latina.該Vetus拉丁。

Syriac Version.敘利亞版本。

Names.的名字。

Among the books of the Greek Bible is one entitled Σοφία Ἰησοῦ ϒἱοῦ Σιράχ (Codices Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus) or simply Σοφία Σειρáχ (Codex Vaticanus).在書籍的希臘聖經是題為Σοφία Ἰησοῦ Υἱοῦ Σιράχ ( Codices西奈抄本和頸)或乾脆Σοφία Σειρáχ (法典Vaticanus ) 。 The Greek Church Fathers called it also "The All-Virtuous Wisdom" (Πανάρετος Σοφία; Eusebius, "Chronicon," ed. Schoene, ii. 122; Ἡ Πανάρετος; Jerome, Commentary on Dan. ix.) or "The Mentor" (Παιδαγωγός; Clement of Alexandria, "Pædagogus," ii. 10, 99, 101, 109); while the Latin Church Fathers, beginning with Cyprian ("Testimonia," ii. 1; iii. 1, 35, 51, 95, et passim), termed it "Ecclesiasticus."希臘教會的教父們也呼籲: “全良性智慧” ( Πανάρετος Σοφία ;優西比烏, “ Chronicon ”版。 Schoene ,二。 122 ; Ἡ Πανάρετος ;傑爾姆,評丹。九。 )或“導師” ( Παιδαγωγός ;克萊門特的亞歷山德里亞, “ Pædagogus , ”二。 10 , 99 , 101 , 109 ) ;而拉丁教會教父開始,塞浦路斯( “ Testimonia , ”二。 1 ;三。 1 , 35 , 51 , 95 ,等各處) ,被稱為是“ Ecclesiasticus 。 ” All these names testify to the high esteem in which the book was held in Christian circles.所有這些名稱證明的高度尊重的書是在基督教界。 The Jews, who never admitted its canonicity, called it during the Talmudic period the "Book of Ben Sira" (Ḥag. 13a; Niddah 16b; Ber. 11b; et passim) or the "Books of Ben Sira" (; Yer. Sanh. 28a; Tosef., Yad. ii. 13; possibly a scribal error; comp. the parallel passage of Eccl. R. xii. 11), and a Hebrew copy in the possession of Jerome was entitled "Parabolæ" (= ).猶太人,誰從未承認其正規,要求它在塔木德期間, “本書特希拉” ( Ḥag. 13A條; Niddah 16B款;小蘗鹼。 11B款;等各處)或“本特希拉書” ( ;層。 Sanh 。 28A款; Tosef 。 ,亞德瓦。二。 13個;可能是scribal誤差;補償。平行通過Eccl 。河十二。 11 ) ,和希伯來文複製所擁有的杰羅姆題為“ Parabolæ ” ( = ) 。 However, the fact that the verses of this work cited in the Midrash are preceded by the word "Mashal" or "Matla" does not prove that such was the title of the book, but simply that these verses had come to be accepted as proverbs (contrary to the view of Ryssel in Kautzsch, "Apokryphen," p. 232, where he attributes to Lévi the opinion expressed by Blau in "REJ" xxxv. 22).然而,這樣一個事實,即這項工作的詩句中提到的米德拉士前面加上“馬沙勒”或“馬特拉”並不能證明存在這種圖書的書名,只不過是因為這些經文已經被接受為諺語(相反的觀點, Ryssel在Kautzsch , “ Apokryphen ” ,第232 ,他在那裡屬性Lévi所表達的意見,布勞在“ REJ ”三十五。 22 ) 。 Nor is it possible to draw any inference from the fact that Saadia calls the book in Arabic "Kitab al-Adab"; for he certainly did not give this appellation (which he had no reason to translate) as the title, but, contrary to the opinion of Harkavy ("Studien und Mittheilungen," v. 200) and Blau (lc), merely as a description of the contents of the book.也不可能作出任何推論的事實, Saadia呼籲書的阿拉伯文“基塔鋁文學” ,因為他肯定沒有放棄這一稱謂(這是他沒有理由把)的標題,但相反,認為Harkavy ( “ Studien與Mittheilungen , ”訴200 )和布勞(立法會) ,僅僅作為一種內容的說明這本書。 The Syriac name is "Ḥekmata de-Bar Sira" = "The Wisdom of Bar Sira."敘利亞名稱是“ Ḥekmata去酒吧特希拉” = “的智慧酒吧特希拉。 ”

Author.作者。

The author, who, alone of all Old Testament and Apocryphal writers, signed his work, is called in the Greek text (l. 27) "Jesus the son of Sirach of Jerusalem."作者,誰單獨所有舊約和未經作家,簽署他的工作,被稱為希臘文(湖27 ) “耶穌的兒子Sirach耶路撒冷。 ” The oldest manuscripts (Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Venetus) add to Σειρáχ the name Ἐλεáζαρ or ἘλεΆζαροζ, an error for Ἐλεαζáρου, probably the name of his grandfather.最古老的手稿( Vaticanus ,西奈抄本,頸, Venetus )添加到Σειρáχ名稱Ἐλεáζαρ或ἘλεΆζαροζ ,一個錯誤的Ἐλεαζáρου ,可能的名字,他的祖父。 The copy owned by Saadia (Harkavy, lcp 150) had: = "Simon, son of Jesus, son of Eleazar ben Sira"; and a similar reading occurs in the Hebrew manuscript B, which will be discussed below.複製所擁有Saadia ( Harkavy ,液晶150 )有: = “西蒙的兒子,耶穌的兒子埃萊亞薩本特希拉” ;和類似讀發生在希伯來手稿乙,這將在下文討論。 By interchanging the positions of the names "Simon" and "Jesus," the same reading is obtained as in the other manuscripts. The correctness of the name "Simon" is confirmed by the Syriac version, which has = "Jesus, son of Simon, surnamed Bar Asira."通過交換立場的名字“西蒙”和“耶穌” ,同樣的閱讀中得到的其他手稿。是正確的名稱為“西蒙”也證實了敘利亞文版本,這= “耶穌的兒子西蒙姓酒吧Asira 。 “ The discrepancy between the two readings "Bar Asira" and "Bar Sira" is a noteworthy one, "Asira" (= "prisoner") being a popular etymology of "Sira."之間的差異二讀“酒吧Asira ”和“ bar特希拉”是一個值得注意的, “ Asira ” ( = “囚犯” )是一個受歡迎的詞源的“西拉” 。 The evidence seems to show that the author's name was Jesus, son of Simon, son of Eleazar ben Sira.證據似乎表明,作者的名字是耶穌的兒子西蒙的兒子埃萊亞薩本特希拉。

Every attempt to identify this writer with some member of the high-priestly family has proved a failure, the only basis for the supposition that Ben Sira was a priest being due to a scribal error; for while the Sinaitic manuscript reads ελεαζαροιερευσοσολυμειτης, this is, beyond all question, a scribal error, and should be emended to ελεαςαροιεροσολυμειτης (see盡一切努力查明筆者與一些成員國的高級牧師家庭已被證明是失敗的,唯一的依據是假定本特希拉是一名牧師正在由於scribal錯誤;為而Sinaitic手稿內容ελεαζαροιερευσοσολυμειτης ,這是,毫無疑問,一個scribal錯誤,並應emended以ελεαςαροιεροσολυμειτης (見 ). ) 。 According to the Greek version, though not according to the Syriac, the author traveled extensively (xxxiv. 11) and was frequently in danger of death (ib. verse 12).根據希臘的版本,但不是按照敘利亞文,筆者來到廣泛( xxxiv. 11 ) ,經常處於危險之中的死亡( ib.詩12 ) 。 In the hymn of ch.在聖歌的CH 。 li.李。 he speaks of the perils of all sorts from which God had delivered him, although this is probably only a poetic theme in imitation of the Psalms.他談到的各種危險從上帝交付了他,儘管這可能是只有在模仿詩主題的詩篇。 The calumnies to which he was exposed in the presence of a certain king, supposed to be one of the Lagi, are mentioned only in the Greek version, being ignored both in the Syriac and in the Hebrew text.這是誹謗,他被暴露在存在一定的國王,應該是一個搜索,是只提到在希臘的版本,被忽略在敘利亞和希伯來文。 The only fact known with certainty is that Ben Sira was a scholar, and a scribe thoroughly versed in the Law, and especially in the "Books of Wisdom."唯一的事實確知的是,本特希拉是一個學者,以及編劇徹底精通法律,特別是在“圖書的智慧。 ” He was not, however, a rabbi, nor was he a physician, as has been conjectured (see especially xxxviii. 24 et seq., xlix. 1-5, and the introduction by his grandson).他不是,但是,一位拉比,也不是他一個醫生,因為一直猜想(見特別是三十八。 24起。 , xlix 。 1月5日,並介紹了他的孫子) 。

Date.日期。

The approximate date of the redaction of the book and the period of its author's literary activity are somewhat less doubtful.的大致日期編輯的書籍和作者時期的文學活動是不太令人懷疑。 The Greek translator states in his preface that he was the grandson of the author, and that he came to Egypt in the thirty-eighth year of the reign of Euergetes, an epithet borne by only two of the Lagi, Ptolemy III.希臘翻譯國在他的前言,他的孫子的作者,他來到埃及在第三十八年在位Euergetes ,所承擔的形容詞只有兩個搜索,托勒密三。 (247-222 BC) and Ptolemy VII. ( 247-222年)和托勒密七。 (sometimes reckonedIX.). (有時reckonedIX 。 ) 。 The former monarch can not be intended in this passage; for his reign lasted only twenty-five years.前國王不能打算在這個通道;對他的統治只持續了二十五年。 The latter ascended the throne in the year 170, together with his brother Philometor; but he soon became sole ruler of Cyrene, and from 146 to 117 held sway over all Egypt, although he dated his reign from the year in which he received the crown (ie, from 170).後者即位在一年170 ,連同他的弟弟Philometor ;但他很快就成了唯一的統治者,昔蘭尼,從146至117左右舉行所有埃及,但他在位的日期在這一年中,他獲得冠(即由170 ) 。 The translator must, therefore, have gone to Egypt in 132, and if the average length of two generations be reckoned Ben Sira's date must fall in the first third of the second century.翻譯,因此必須前往埃及,在132個,如果平均長度兩代本特希拉不容忽視的日期必須屬於第一三分之一的第二個世紀。 The result of this reckoning is confirmed by the fact that the author evidently lived before the persecution of Antiochus in 168, since he does not allude to it. Another argument is commonly relied on.這樣做的結果推算,證實了這一事實,作者顯然生活的迫害之前,在168安提阿哥,因為他沒有提到它。另一個論點是普遍依賴。 In ch.在CH 。 l. Ben Sira eulogizes a high priest named Simon, son of Johanan (Onias in G), this laudation being apparently an expression of the admiration aroused by actual sight of the object of his praise.本特希拉eulogizes高牧師名為西蒙的兒子Johanan ( Onias在G ) ,這顯然是讚美正在表達所引起的欽佩實際看不到的對象,他的讚譽。 There were, however, a number of high priests named Simon b.但是,也有一些高級神職人員任命西蒙灣 Onias, one of whom exercised his functions from 300 to 287, and another from 226 to 199. Onias ,其中一人行使其職能從300到287 ,而另一個由226至199 。 The Simon b.西蒙維灣 Johanan mentioned here can only be the second of the name; and as the passage seems to have been written after the high priest's death (l. 1-3), the date of its composition coincides approximately with the period mentioned above (190-170). Johanan這裡所說的只能是第二的名稱;並通過似乎已書面大祭司後死亡(湖1月3日)的日期,其組成恰逢約與上述期間( 190-170 ) 。 The work is in reality a collection of maxims written at various times-a fact which also explains its frequent repetitions and contradictions. Attempts have indeed been made to refute these arguments.這項工作實際上是在收集格言寫在不同的時間,這一事實也說明了它經常重複和矛盾。企圖確實作了反駁這些論點。 According to Josephus, Simon I., the Just (300-287), was the only high priest whom Ben Sira could thus have extolled, and the book would accordingly be a century older; as to the number 38, it might refer to the age of the translator when he arrived in Egypt.據約瑟夫西蒙一,公正( 300-287 ) ,是唯一的大祭司人本特希拉可能因此讚美,和這本書將因此成為一個世紀的老人;至於第38號,它可能指的是年齡翻譯當他抵達埃及。 Indeed, the word πάππο ς does not necessarily mean "grandfather"; it may mean also "remote ancestor."事實上,這個詞πάππο ς並不一定意味著“爺爺” ;這可能意味著還“遙控的祖先。 ” This, it has been held, would account for the translator's frequent miscomprehension of Ben Sira's words, which would be very strange had he actually been the author's grandson. All these quibbles, however, which it would be idle again to refute, have been definitely abandoned.

Ecclesiasticus closely resembles Proverbs, except that, unlike the latter, it is the work of a single author, not an anthology of maxims drawn from various sources.諺語Ecclesiasticus相似,但不同的是後者,它是一個單一的工作的作者,而不是一個選集格言取自各種來源。 Some, it is true, have denied Ben Sira the authorship of the apothegms, and have regarded him as a mere compiler, basing their arguments on his own words: "And I myself, the last, I set myself to watch, like him that gleaneth grapes after the vintage" (xxxiii. 16).有些人來說,這是事實,否認本特希拉作者的apothegms ,並把他作為一個單純的編譯器,根據他們的論點對他自己的話說: “和我本人,最後,我自己看,就像他說, gleaneth葡萄美酒後“ ( xxxiii. 16 ) 。 This, however, is probably a simple expression of modesty.然而,這可能是一個簡單的表達謙虛。 The frequent repetitions and even contradictions only prove that Ben Sira, like all moralists, did not compose the entire work at one time; moreover, the unity of the book, taken as a whole, is remarkable.頻繁的重複,甚至矛盾只能證明本特希拉,像所有說教,沒有撰寫的全部工作在同一時間;此外,統一的書,作為一個整體,是了不起的。

Contents.目錄。

The Book of Ecclesiasticus is a collection of moral counsels and maxims, often utilitarian in character and for the most part secular, although religious apothegms occasionally occur.書Ecclesiasticus是一家集道德律師和格言,往往是功利性,並大部分是世俗的,雖然偶爾會發生宗教apothegms 。 They are applicable to all conditions of life: to parents and children, to husbands and wives, to the young, to masters, to friends, to the rich, and to the poor.它們是適用於所有的生活條件:對父母和孩子,以丈夫和妻子,年輕,美國名人賽,她的朋友,以豐富的,並給窮人。 Many of them are rules of courtesy and politeness; and a still greater number contain advice and instruction as to the duties of man toward himself and others, especially the poor, as well as toward society and the state, and most of all toward God.其中許多是規則的禮貌和禮貌;和更大一些包含諮詢和指導,以人的職責,對自己和他人,特別是窮人,以及對社會和國家,以及最重要的是對上帝。 These precepts are arranged in verses, which are grouped according to their outward form in case their content is not intrinsically coherent.這些規則都被排列在詩句,這是根據他們的外向形式的情況下其內容本質上不是一致的。 The sections are preceded by eulogies of wisdom which serve as introductions and mark the divisions into which the collection falls.這幾節之前如潮的智慧,作為引進和馬克司將其收集瀑布。

Wisdom, in Ben Sira's view, is synonymous with the fear of God, and sometimes is confounded in his mind with the Mosaic law.智慧,在本特希拉的觀點,就是上帝的恐懼,有時甚至是困惑,他的思想與摩西律法。 It is essentially practical, being a routine knowledge; and it would be vain to seek to find in it any hypostasis, since mysticism is utterly opposed to the author's thought.它本質上是切實可行的,是一次例行的知識;和那將是徒勞的,以尋求在任何本質,因為神秘主義是完全反對作者的思想。 The maxims are expressed in exact formulas, and are illustrated by striking images.的格言是表達準確公式,並說明了驚人的圖像。 They show a profound knowledge of the human heart, the disillusionment of experience, a fraternal sympathy with the poor and the oppressed, and an unconquerable distrust of women.他們表現出的淵博知識的人的心臟,理想破滅的經驗,一個兄弟的同情窮人和被壓迫者,和不可戰勝的不信任的婦女。 Throughout the work are scattered pure and elevated thoughts; and the whole is dominated by a sincere, enlightened piety-what is now called a liberalism of ideas.整個工作分散純和高架思想;和整個主要是真誠的,開明的虔誠,什麼是所謂的自由主義思想。 As in Ecclesiastes, two opposing tendencies war in the author: the faith and the morality of olden times, which are stronger than all argument, and an Epicureanism of modern date. Occasionally Ben Sira digresses to attack theories which he considers dangerous; for example, the doctrines that divine mercy blots out all sin; that man has no freedom of will; and that God is indifferent to the actions of mankind, and does not reward virtue. Some of the refutations of these views are developed at considerable length.正如傳道書,兩個對立的傾向戰爭作者:信仰和道德的古代,這是高於一切的論點,和享樂主義的現代日期。偶爾本特希拉digresses攻擊的理論,他認為危險的,例如,該理論認為神恩消滅了所有的罪,這名男子沒有自由意志和上帝是漠不關心,人類的行動,並沒有回報的美德。一些反駁這些觀點是發達國家在相當長。 Through these moralistic chapters runs the prayer of Israel imploring God to gather together His scattered children, to bring to fulfilment the predictions of the Prophets, and to have mercy upon His Temple and His people.通過這些道德章節運行以色列禱告上帝懇求他分散聚集在一起的兒童,把實現的預言的先知,並憐憫他的廟和他的人民。 The book concludes with a justification of the Divinity, whose wisdom and greatness are revealed in all His works (hence is inserted a description of the beauties of creation), and also in the history of Israel; this form of sacred history, however, is little more than a panegyric on the priests, terminating in an enthusiastic delineation of the high priest Simon ben Onias. These chapters are completed by the author's signature, and are followed by two hymns, the latter apparently a sort of alphabetical acrostic.這本書的最後一個理由的神,他們的智慧和偉大的發現在他的所有作品(因此被插入的描述美人的創造) ,並在以色列歷史上;這種形式的神聖的歷史,然而,多頌的神父,終止在熱烈劃定大祭司西蒙本Onias 。這些章節是由作者的簽名,其次是兩個讚美詩,後者顯然是一種字母acrostic 。

Importance for the History of Thought.重要的思想史。

The Wisdom of Jesus marks an epoch in the history of Jewish thought, on account both of what it teaches and of what it silently ignores. While the author advocates the offering of the prescribed sacrifices and the veneration of priests, he condemns all hypocrisy and urges the union of the outward practise of religion with a pure conscience and with the doing of charity.耶穌的智慧標誌著一個時代的歷史上的猶太人認為,在兼顧教什麼和如何默默地忽略。雖然作者主張提供訂明的犧牲和尊敬的神父,他譴責一切虛偽,並敦促聯盟對外奉行宗教與一個純粹的良知與這樣的慈善機構。 However, he never mentions the dietary laws, which are set forth at great length in Daniel and Tobit, and especially in Judith.然而,他從來沒有提到的飲食法,其中規定了很長時間的丹尼爾和托比書,特別是在朱迪。 In like manner, while he awaits the return of Elijah to reassemble the tribes of the past and to reconcile the fatherswith the children, and while he prays for the coming of a time which can be called Messianic, though without a Messiah-when Jerusalem and the Temple shall be restored to the divine favor and Israel delivered forever from the dominion of the stranger-he never alludes to a Messiah who will be the son of David; on the contrary, he asserts that the house of David has rendered itself unworthy of the divine favor, since of all the kings of Judah three alone remained faithful to God.同樣,當他等待返回伊萊賈,重新部落的過去和調和fatherswith孩子,雖然他的祈禱的到來的時候,可以被稱為救世主,但沒有救世主,在耶路撒冷和寺應恢復到神恩和以色列發表的自治領永遠的陌生人,他從來沒有提到一個彌賽亞將是誰的兒子大衛,相反,他聲稱,大衛的房子,使自己不配神聖的青睞,因為所有的猶太國王三個單獨仍然忠實於上帝。 God indeed made a solemn compact with the race of David; but it was one that differed widely from that into which He entered with Aaron, and which alone was to endure for eternity.上帝確實取得了一個莊嚴的契約的種族大衛;但它是一個有很大差異從他進入到與亞倫,其中單是要忍受的永恆。 Ben Sira never speaks of the resurrection of the dead nor of the immortality of the soul, but, on the contrary, declares that in Sheol there will be no joy, wherefore man should taste delight in this world in so far as it is compatible with an upright life.本特希拉從來沒有講,死人復活,也不是永生的靈魂,但與此相反,在Sheol宣布,將不會有歡樂,何故人應口味高興在這個世界上,只要它符合一個正直的生活。

Possible Traces of Hellenic Influence.可能的痕跡希臘的影響。

The view has been expressed that this work, early in date as it is, bears traces of Hellenic influence.該有人認為這項工作,年初至今,因為它是,熊的痕跡希臘的影響。 The author, in his travels, may possibly have come in contact with Greek civilization, since he speaks of foreign poets and moralists whose fame was spread abroad. The customs which he describes are taken from Greek rather than from Hebrew society; thus he mentions banquets accompanied by brilliant conversation, at which musical instruments were heard, and over which presided "the masters [of the feasts]"; and the customs of the Sybarites also aroused his interest.該文件的作者,在他的旅行,可能有接觸的希臘文明,因為他講的外國詩人和道德的名氣是在國外傳播。海關介紹,他是從希臘,而不是從希伯來語社會;因此,他提到宴會伴隨著燦爛的談話,在聽取了樂器,並在其中主持“大師[的節日] ” ;和海關的Sybarites也引起他的興趣。 The fatalistic philosophers whose opinions he contests were doubtless the Stoics; and the philosophical discussions instituted by him were innovations and probably borrowed.宿命論哲學家的意見,他的比賽無疑Stoics ;和哲學討論提起由他借來的創新和可能。 His criticisms of skeptics and would-be thinkers are further evidences of his knowledge of Hellenism; and some of his views find close analogues in Euripides.他的批評,懷疑和可能的思想家,進一步證明他的知識希臘;和他的一些意見,找到密切類似物在歐裡庇得斯。 Not only does he share characteristic ideas with the Greek tragedians and moralists, but he even has the same taste for certain common topics, such as false friendship, the uncertainty of happiness, and especially the faults of women.不僅僅是他的想法共享特性與希臘tragedians和說教,但他也有同樣的味道某些共同的主題,如虛假的友誼,幸福的不確定性,特別是婦女的故障。 The impression of Greek influence is strengthened by the presence of a polish quite foreign to Hebrew literature.希臘的印象影響力得到加強的情況,在場的一位波蘭相當陌生的希伯萊文學。 The author composes his aphorisms with care; he makes his transitions with skill; and he inserts the titles of chapters, such as "Concerning Shame," "Proper Deportment at Table," and "The Hymn of the Patriarchs"; and the signing of his own name in full is a usage theretofore absolutely unknown.作者撰寫的警句與護理;他讓他的轉變與技能;和他插入章節的標題,如“關於羞恥” , “正確的儀態在表”和“讚美詩的始祖” ;並簽署他自己的名字完全是一個使用theretofore絕對下落不明。

The exclusion of Ecclesiasticus from the Hebrew canon was due in part to this imitation of the Greeks and these literary affectations.排除Ecclesiasticus從希伯來語佳能的部分原因是這個仿製的希臘人和這些文學裝腔作勢。 According to R. Akiba (Yer. Sanh. 28a), those who have no part in the world to come include the readers of foreign works, such as the books of Ben Sira; while Tosef., Yad.據河秋葉( Yer. Sanh 。 28A款) ,這些誰沒有參加世界來的讀者包括外國作品,如書籍,本特希拉;而Tosef 。 ,亞德瓦。 ii.二。 13 merely states that the writings of Ben Sira do not defile the hands, or, in other words, that they are uncanonical, so that they are ranked with the works of "minim" (heretics). 13僅僅是國家的著作本特希拉不弄髒的手,或者,換句話說,他們是uncanonical ,使他們的排名,是與作品的“微量” (異教徒) 。 Eccl. Eccl 。 R. xii.河十二。 11, which is based on Yer. 11 ,這是基於層。 Sanh. Sanh 。 28a, contains a prohibition against having this work in one's house. 28A款,包含了禁止了這項工作在自己的房子。 R. Joseph, a Babylonian rabbi of the fourth century, in commenting on the view of R. Akiba, adds, "It is also forbidden to read the works of Ben Sira" (Sanh. 100c), although this prohibition, judging from the remainder of the passage, may have been restricted to reading in public.約瑟夫河一個巴比倫拉比4世紀,在評論的觀點,河秋葉,補充說, “這也是被禁止的作品閱讀本特希拉” ( Sanh. 100c ) ,儘管這一禁令,從其餘的通道,可能已被限制在公共閱讀。 In his questions to R. Joseph (ib.), R. Abaye indicated some of the reasons for the exclusion of Ecclesiasticus from the canon.在他的問題,河約瑟夫( ib. ) ,河Abaye指出一些原因排除Ecclesiasticus從佳能。

"Why this prohibition?" “為什麼這一禁令? ” he asked.他問道。 "Is it on account of such and such verses?" “這是考慮到這樣或那樣的詩? ” With the exception of two verses written in Aramaic and which are not by Ben Sira at all, all of R. Abaye's citations are distinctly frivolous, being those relating to the anxiety caused by a young girl before and after her marriage, the uselessness of repining, and the danger of introducing strangers too freely into one's home.除了兩個亞拉姆語寫的詩句,並沒有由Ben特希拉所有,所有河Abaye的引用明顯瑣碎的,被那些與焦慮所造成的一個年輕的姑娘前後結婚,無用論repining ,並介紹了危險的陌生人過於自由進入自己的家。 Abaye then condemns the misanthropy, misogyny, and Epicureanism of the author. Abaye然後譴責misanthropy , misogyny和享樂主義的作者。 To Ben Sira's Epicurean tendency must be attributed his denial of a future life, and, perhaps, also his pre-Sadducean spirit of reverence for the priesthood, with which the panegyric on his brethren is animated.到本特希拉的伊壁鳩魯傾向必須歸功於他拒絕未來的生活,或許,也是他的前Sadducean精神敬畏鐸,與該頌他的兄弟是動畫。

Popularity Among the Jews.流行猶太人。

Curiously enough, the book retained its popularity among the Jews despite its exclusion from the canon.奇怪的是,這本書保留了深受猶太人儘管它排除在佳能。 It was cited at a very early period: the Book of Tobit reproduces a number of passages word for word; while the Book of Enoch (Charles, "The Book of the Secrets of Enoch," p. 96; Index, pi), the Psalms of Solomon (Ryle and James, "The Psalms of Solomon," pp. lxiii. et seq.), and even the Talmud, the Midrashim, the Derek Ereẓ, and similar productions show decided traces of its influence.它被認為在一個非常早期階段:圖書的托比書抄錄一些段落逐字逐句;而書伊諾克(查爾斯, “這本書的秘密伊諾克, ”第96頁;指數)中,詩篇所羅門(賴爾和詹姆斯, “所羅門的詩篇, ”頁。 lxiii 。起。 ) ,甚至塔爾穆德的米大示,在德里克埃雷茲和類似產品的痕跡表明決定的影響。 With the last-named work it has many points in common; and it is frequently quoted in the Talmud; passages from it are introduced by the formula reserved for the Biblical writings (Ḥag. 12a; Niddah 16b; Yer. Ber. 11c); and one verse is even referred to as if it belonged to the Hagiographa (B. Ḳ. 92a).最後命名的工作有許多共同點,這是經常在塔爾穆德;段落介紹了它的公式保留聖經著作( Ḥag. 12A條; Niddah 16B款;層。小蘗鹼。 11C條) ;一詩,甚至被稱為如果它屬於Hagiographa (灣K表。 92a ) 。 It is cited by name in Sanh.這是引用的名稱Sanh 。 100b (= Yeb. 63c), where also a series of verses from it is given; and single verses appear in the following treatises and other works: Yer. 100B蛋白( = Yeb 。 63c ) ,其中也有一系列的詩句是考慮;和單一的詩句出現在下面的論文和其他作品:層。 Ber.誤碼率。 11b; Yer. 11B款;層。 Ḥag.女巫。 77c; Yer. 77c ;層。 Ta'an. Ta'an 。 66d; Ḥag. 66d ;女巫。 13a; Niddah 16b; Gen. R. viii., x., lxxiii.; Lev. 13A條; Niddah 16B款;將軍河八。 ,十, lxxiii 。 ;列夫。 R. xxxiii.; Tan., Wayishlaḥ, 8; ib.河三十三。 ;談。 , Wayishlaḥ , 8 ;國際文憑。 Miḳḳeẓ, 10; ib. Miḳḳeẓ , 10 ;國際文憑。 Ḥuḳḳat, 1; a midrashic passage preserved in the "Shibbole ha-Leḳeṭ," ed. Ḥuḳḳat , 1 ; 1 midrashic通過保存在“ Shibbole河Leḳeṭ , ”版。 Buber, p.布伯,第 23a; "Pirḳe de-Rabbenu ha-Ḳadosh," ed. 23A條; “ Pirḳe去Rabbenu河卡多什” ,教育署。 Schönblum, 14a; Baraita Kallah (ed. Coronel, 7c, and in the Wilna edition of the Talmud). Schönblum , 14A條; Baraita Kallah (編輯科羅內爾, 7C條,並在Wilna版塔爾穆德) 。 It is cited also by R. Nissim ("Sefer Ma'asiyyot ha-Ḥakamim wehu Ḥibbur Yafeh meha-Yeshu ah"), and especially by Saadia in the preface to his "Sefer ha-Galui" (Harkavy, lc).它是引也河Nissim ( “ Sefer Ma'asiyyot夏Ḥakamim wehu Ḥibbur Yafeh meha -椰樹啊” ) ,特別是Saadia序言中他的“ Sefer河Galui ” ( Harkavy ,立法會) 。 In his commentary on the "Sefer Yeẓirah" the latter author quotes verbatim two verses of Ben Sira, although he attributes them to one Eleazar b.在他的評注“ Sefer Yeẓirah ”的作者,後者的報價逐字兩個詩句本特希拉,儘管他的屬性他們一個埃萊亞薩灣 Irai, of whom nothing is known.伊拉伊,其中沒有人知道。 In another part of this work (p. 178) he cites the same text, again attributing it to that author.在另一項是這項工作的一部分(第178頁)他引用了相同的文字,再次歸於它的作者。 This is the more remarkable since Saadia speaks of Ben Sira in his introduction, and cites no less than seven of his maxims.這是更為顯著,因為Saadia談到本特希拉在他的介紹,並指出不低於7的格言。 The "Sefer ben Irai" contained also passages (two of them copied by Saadia) not found in Ecclesiasticus, and which were totally dissimilar to it both in form and in content.該“ Sefer本伊拉伊”還載有通道(其中兩個複製Saadia )中找不到Ecclesiasticus ,這是完全不同,它無論在形式和內容。 As Saadia himself says: "The book of Ben Sira is a work on ethics, similar in form to Proverbs, while that of Ben Irai is a book of Wisdom, bearing an external resemblance to Ecclesiastes."作為Saadia他說: “這本書的本特希拉是一種工作倫理,其形式類似諺語,而本伊拉伊是一本書的智慧,同時外部相似傳道書。 ” The "Sefer ben Irai" was probably a collection of maxims and sayings taken from various sources.該“ Sefer本伊拉伊”可能是一個收集格言和諺語採取從各種來源。

Quotations from Ben Sira without mention of his name are found also in the, "Mibḥar ha-Peninim," attributed to Solomon ibn Gabirol (for citations of this type see Zunz, "GV" p. 110; Reifmann, in "Ha-Asif," iii. 271; Schechter, in "JQR" iii. 682; Neubauer and Cowley, in their edition of Ecclesiasticus, pp. xix. et seq. [certain of their comparisons must be discarded]; the commentaries of Schechter and Lévi, especially on the Derek Ereẓ; Lévi, in "REJ" xliv. 291).語錄本特希拉沒有提及他的名字也被發現的, “ Mibḥar河Peninim , ”由於所羅門伊Gabirol (為引用這種類型見Zunz , “顆粒”第110頁; Reifmann ,在“夏阿西夫“三。 271 ; Schechter已在” JQR “三。 682 ;紐鮑爾和考利,在他們出版的Ecclesiasticus頁。十九。起。 [某些比較必須丟棄] ;的評論,謝克特和Levi ,特別是在德里克艾雷茲;列維在“ REJ ”四十四。 291 ) 。 The popularity of Ecclesiasticus among the Jews of the Talmudic period is shown by the citation of a number of verses in Aramaic, with an allusion to Ben Sira, which proves that it must have been translated into that dialect, this Aramaic collection being subsequently enriched with numerous additional aphorisms in that language (Sanh. 100b = Yeb. 63b).受歡迎的程度Ecclesiasticus猶太人之間的塔木德期間所表現出的引用一些詩句在阿拉姆,並針對本特希拉,這證明,它必須被翻譯成說方言,這阿拉姆收集被隨後豐富許多額外的警句該語言( Sanh. 100B蛋白= Yeb 。 63b ) 。 The Baraita Kallah even restricts its citations from Ben Sira to Aramaic verses which are not found in Ecclesiasticus.該Baraita Kallah甚至限制其引用本特希拉向阿拉姆詩句未發現Ecclesiasticus 。 Another proof of his popularity is found in the two alphabets ascribed to him (see Ben Sira, Alphabet of), especially the second, in which he is the hero of a series of marvelous events.再次證明了他的聲望,發現在這兩個字母賦予他(見本特希拉,英文的) ,尤其是第二,他是英雄了一系列精彩活動。

Popularity Among Christians.流行基督徒。

The Book of Ecclesiasticus has been honored still more highly among the Christians, being cited in the Epistle of James (Edersheim, in Wace, "Apocrypha," p. 21), the Didache (iv. 5), and the Epistle of Barnabas (xix. 9), while Clement of Alexandria and Origen quote from it repeatedly, as from a γραφή, or holy book.書Ecclesiasticus已榮幸,更高度的基督徒,被引用的使徒詹姆斯(愛德生,在Wace , “偽經” ,第21頁) ,在十二使徒遺訓( iv. 5 ) ,和使徒巴納巴斯(十九。 9 ) ,而克萊門特亞歷山大和奧利多次引用它,因為從γραφή ,或聖經。 In the Western Church, Cyprian frequently appeals to it in his "Testimonia," as does Ambrose in the greater number of his writings.在西方教會,塞浦路斯經常呼籲在他的“ Testimonia ”一樣劉漢銓在更多的他的著作。 In like manner the Catalogue of Cheltenham, Damasus I., the Councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397), Pope Innocent I., the second Council of Carthage (419), and Augustine all regard it as a canonical book.同樣目錄切爾滕納姆,達馬蘇一,安理會的河馬( 393 )和迦太基( 397 ) ,教皇英諾森一,第二次理事會的迦太基( 419 ) ,和奧古斯丁所有方面,它作為一個典型的書。 This is contrary, however, to the opinions of the Council of Laodicea, of Jerome, and of Rufinus of Aquileia, which authorities rank it among the ecclesiastical books.這是相反的,但是,到的意見,安理會的老底嘉的杰羅姆和Rufinus的阿奎,其中當局之間的軍銜它教會書籍。 It was finally declared canonical by the Council of Trent; and the favor with which the Church has always regarded it has preserved it in its entirety.這是最後宣布典型理事會的遄;和青睞與該教會一直把它保留了它的全部內容。

Discovery of Hebrew Fragments.發現希伯來語碎片。

Until recent years Ecclesiasticus was known only from the Greek and Syriac versions-the sources of all other translations-and from the Hebrew quotations already mentioned.直到最近幾年Ecclesiasticus被稱為只能從希臘和敘利亞版本,來源的所有其他翻譯和由希伯來報價已經提到。 At present the greater part of the original is known.目前,大部份原來是眾所周知的。 In 1896 Agnes Smith Lewis and Margaret Dunlop Gibson brought from the East a sheet of parchment covered with comparatively antiquated Hebrew characters.阿格尼絲史密斯於1896年劉易斯和瑪格麗特鄧洛普吉布森來自東方一張羊皮覆蓋著比較陳舊的希伯來文字符。 At Cambridge this was shown to S. Schechter, who recognized in it Ecclus.在劍橋,這是由Schechter已證明,誰承認它Ecclus 。 (Sirach) xxxix. 15-xl. ( Sirach )第39屆。 15儀。 7, and who published the decipherment, which was by no means easy. 7 ,誰出版了解密,這是絕非容易。 Almost simultaneously Sayce presented to the Bodleian Library, Oxford, a collection of fragments of Hebrew and Arabic manuscripts, among which Neubauer and Cowley found nine leaves of the same volume to which the Lewis-Gibson leaf had belonged, and following immediately after it.幾乎同時Sayce提交伯德雷恩圖書館,牛津,收集碎片的希伯來文和阿拉伯文手稿,其中紐鮑爾和利發現九葉相同體積的劉易斯吉布森葉屬於,並立即執行下列操作後。 These various fragments having come from the Genizah at Cairo, Schechter at once went to that city, and obtained the necessary authority to examine the contents of the collection, with the result that he found not only the final portion of the manuscript, but also xxx.這些不同的碎片有來自Genizah在開羅, Schechter已立即前往該城,並獲得必要的授權,審查的內容,收集,結果,他發現不僅最後部分手稿,而且也三十。 11, xxxii. 11 ,三十二。 1b-xxxiii. 1B款,三十三。 3, xxxv. 3 ,三十五。 9-xxxvi. 21, and xxxvii. 9 - 36 。 21 ,三十七。 27-xxxviii. 27三十八。 27. 27 。 Two additional fragments of the same manuscript, called B by Schechter, and containing xxxi.另外兩個片段相同時間,所謂的B的謝克特,並載有三十一。 12-31 and xxxvi. 12月31日和36 。 24-xxxvii. 24三十七。 26, have been secured by the British Museum. 26日,已擔保的大英博物館。 A second manuscript (A) was found by the same scholar in the collection brought by him from Egypt, containing iii.第二稿(一)被發現在同一學者在收集了他從埃及,含有三。 6-xvi. 6十六。 26, with a hiatus from vii. 26日,以中斷從七。 29 to xi. 29日至十一。 34, the missing pages of which subsequently came into the possession of Elkan Adler. 34 ,失踪頁隨後走進擁有埃爾肯阿德勒。 A fresh discovery was made when the remaining contents of the genizah were offered for sale, and Israel Lévi secured a leaf from a third copy (C), containing xxxvi.新鮮時,發現了剩餘的內容genizah被出售,以色列Lévi擔保葉由第三方版權所有( C ) ,載有三十六。 24-xxxviii. 24三十八。 1. 1 。 This fragment is especially valuable, since it serves as a check on the manuscript B, which likewise includes these verses.該片段是特別寶貴,因為它作為一個檢查手稿乙,這同樣包括這些經文。 The importance of this discovery is shown below.的重要性,這一發現顯示如下。 Finally, Schechter, Gaster, and Lévi found in consignments from the same genizah the following fragments of an anthology of the Wisdom of Jesus: iv.最後,謝克特,法莫替丁,和Levi發現來自同一genizah以下片段選集的智慧耶穌:四。 23b, 30-31; v. 4-8, 9-13; vi. 18-19, 28, 35; vii. 23b , 30-31 ;五, 4月8日, 9月13日;六。 18-19 , 28 , 35 ;七。 1, 4, 6, 17, 20-21, 23-25; xviii. 1 , 4 , 6 , 17 , 20-21 , 23-25 ;十八。 30-31; xix. 1-2; xx. 30-31 ;十九。 1-2 ;二十。 4-6, 12 (?); xxv. 4月6日, 12 ( ? ) ;二十五。 7c, 8c, 8a, 12, 16-23; xxvi. 7C條, 8c , 8A條, 12 , 16-23 ;二十六。 1-2; xxxvi. 16; xxxvii. 1月2日;三十六。 16 ;三十七。 19, 22, 24, 26. 19日, 22日, 24日, 26日。

There are, therefore, now in existence: (a) in one manuscript: iii. 6-16, 26; xviii.還有,因此,目前存在: ( a )在一個時間:三。 6月16日, 26日;十八。 30-31; xix. 30-31 ;十九。 1-2; xx. 1月2日;二十。 4-6, 12 (?); xxv. 4月6日, 12 ( ? ) ;二十五。 7c, 8c, 8a, 12, 16-23; xxvi. 7C條, 8c , 8A條, 12 , 16-23 ;二十六。 1-2; xxvii. 1月2日;二十七。 5-6, 16; xxx. 5月6日, 16日;三十。 11-xxxiii. 11三十三。 3; xxxv. 9-xxxviii. 3 ;三十五。 9三十八。 27; xxxix. 27 ;三十九。 15-li. 15李。 30; (b) in two manuscripts: iv. 30 ; ( b )在兩個手稿:四。 23b, 30-31; v. 4-8, 9-13; vi. 23b , 30-31 ;五, 4月8日, 9月13日;六。 18-19, 28, 35; vii. 18-19日,第28 , 35 ;七。 1, 4, 6, 17, 20-21, 23-25; xxxvi. 1 , 4 , 6 , 17 , 20-21 , 23-25 ;三十六。 16, 29-31; xxxvii. 16日, 29日至31日;三十七。 complete; xxxviii.完成;三十八。 1; (c) in three manuscripts: xxxvii. 1 ; ( c )在三個手稿:三十七。 19, 22, 24, 26. 19日, 22日, 24日, 26日。

These manuscripts contain also some passages that are lacking in the translations, including a psalm fifteen lines in length inserted after li.這些手稿包含段落,也有一些缺乏翻譯,包括詩篇15線的長度後插入李。 12. 12 。

Manuscripts.手稿。

Manuscript A: 18 × 11 cm.; 28 lines per page.手稿答: 18 × 11厘米。 ;每頁28行。 The verses are generally marked by a double point; and certain ones are punctuated and accented, thus confirming certain statements of Saadia.的詩句,一般特點是雙點;和某些的是間斷和重音,從而確認某些報表Saadia 。 "Matres lectionis" abound. “ Matres lectionis ”比比皆是。 The scribe has been guilty of the grossest errors, in addition to abbreviating some verses and omitting others.在抄寫犯了最嚴重的錯誤,除了一些詩句和縮寫省略等。

Manuscript C: 16 × 12 cm.手稿ç : 16 × 12厘米。 Certain words and entire verses are vocalized and accented; the script shows cursive tendencies, although of an early type.某些詞和整個詩句是vocalized和重音;腳本顯示行草的傾向,雖然早期類型。 In the margin is given a variant verse which represents the original text, corrupted even in the days of Ben Sira's grandson.在差額是一個變種詩句代表原始文字,損壞,即使在兩天的本特希拉的孫子。

Manuscript D: 143 × 100 mm.; 12 lines per page.作者D組: 143 × 100毫米。 ;每頁12行。 The text is often preferable to that of A, and offers variants agreeing with the Greek version, while the readings of A correspond to the Syriac.案文往往是最好的一名,並提供變種同意希臘版本,而讀一種對應於敘利亞。

Manuscript B: 19 × 17 cm.; 22 lines per page.手稿B組: 19 × 17厘米。 ;每頁22行。 This is the most curious and interesting of all, as it contains certain peculiarities which are probably unique among all known Hebrew manuscripts.這是最好奇和有趣的是,因為它包含一些特點可能是獨一無二的所有已知的希伯來手稿。 The lines are written with a stylus, as in the Torah scrolls; and, as in some copies of Proverbs and the Book of Job, a space is left between the hemistichs of each verse, so that the pages are divided into two columns; and the "sof pasuḳ" is placed at the end of the verse.線路書面與手寫筆,在律法春聯;並在一些副本諺語和約伯記,剩下的空間之間的hemistichs每一詩句,使網頁分為兩列;和在“軟pasuḳ ”是放在最後的詩句。 This corroborates Saadia's assertion that the book of Ben Sira resembled Proverbs in its division into chapters and verses.這證實Saadia聲稱這本書的本特希拉相似諺語在其劃分章節和詩句。 The chapters are sometimes indicated by the initial letter (= ) and sometimes by a blank space.章節有時所指出的初步信( = ) ,有時是一個空格。 The most remarkable peculiarity consists in the chapter headings or titles, such as ("Instruction as to Shame"), ("Rules for Proper Deportment at Table"), and ("Hymn of the Patriarchs"), although in the Greek version these rubrics were regarded as scribal interpolations.最顯著的特點包括一章中的標題或名稱,如( “指令,以恥辱” ) , ( “規則進行適當的舉止上表” ) ,和( “讚美詩的始祖” ) ,儘管在這些版本的希臘標題被視為scribal插值。 Another noteworthy feature of this manuscript is its marginal Masorah, containing variants, some of which represent differences merely in orthography, while others are in synonyms or even words with totally different meanings.另一個值得注意的特點,這手稿是其邊際Masorah ,含有變種,其中一些代表分歧只是在拼寫法,而另一些的同義詞,甚至話完全不同的含義。 These glosses are the work of a Persian Jew, who in several marginal notes in Persian stated that he had used two manuscripts in addition to his principal one.這些粉飾的工作波斯猶太人,誰在幾個旁注波斯語說,他用了兩個手稿除了他的主要一個。 Such care is indicative of the esteem in which Ben Sira's text was held.這種護理表明了自尊,其中本特希拉的案文舉行。 The marginal readings present an interesting problem.邊際讀了一個有趣的問題。 As a rule, the body of the text corresponds to the Greek version, and the glosses in the margin to the Syriac; but occasionally the reverse is the case.作為一項規則,正文相當於希臘版本,並掩蓋了利潤的敘利亞文;但偶爾相反的情況。

Originality of the Hebrew Fragments.原創性希伯來語碎片。

Prof. S. Margoliouth, noticing the decadent character of the language, the number of rabbinisms, and the derivatives from the Arabic and Aramaic, regarded the Hebrew text as a reconstruction of the lost original on the basis of the Greek and Syriac versions, the variants representing different attempts at retranslation.教授南Margoliouth ,發現腐朽性質的語言,一些rabbinisms ,以及衍生工具從阿拉伯文和阿拉姆語,把希伯來文作為重建失去原有的基礎上,希臘和敘利亞版本中,變體代表著不同的嘗試retranslation 。 The discovery of manuscript C, however, disproved this hypothesis, since this manuscript reproduces with exactness the greater part of the variants of B, even when they are obviously false, while the transcriber of this latter manuscript discharged his task with such scrupulous care that he even recorded variants which were meaningless.發現的手稿裡,然而,反駁這一假設,因為這與精確再現原稿的較大部分的B的變種,即使他們顯然是虛假的,而後者transcriber本手稿履行其承擔的任務,例如,他一絲不苟地照顧即使記錄變種是毫無意義的。 If, therefore, the difference between the text and the marginal glosses corresponds to the difference between the two translations, this only shows that there were two recensions of the original.因此,如果文本之間的差異和邊際粉飾相當於兩者之間的差額翻譯,這只能說明,有兩個recensions原始。 It is clear, moreover, that these fragments are not the work of some medieval scholar, but are more or less perfect copies of the Hebrew text, as a single example will show.很明顯,此外,這些碎片是不工作的一些中世紀的學者,但或多或少完美副本希伯來文,作為一個單獨的例子將顯示。 In xxxii.在三十二。 22 the Hebrew version has . 22希伯來文版。 For the latter word the Syriac text substitutes (= "thy way"), which the context shows to be faulty, the reading being due to a confusion of with .對於後者字敘利亞文字替代品( = “你的方式” ) ,其中的背景顯示是錯誤的,讀的是由於混淆了。 The Greek version reads "thy children," the meaning attributed to in several passages of the Bible.希臘版內容為“你的孩子”的含義,以在一些段落的聖經。 But had the Jewish scribe used the Greek version, he would never have found beneath τῶν τέκνων σου the Hebrew , the correctness of which is attested by the Syriac.但猶太文士使用希臘的版本,他決不會發現下面τῶν τέκνων σου的希伯來語,是正確的,這是證明了這敘利亞文。 There are numerous examples of a similar nature.有許多例子類似性質的。

Although Margoliouth's theory must be rejected as a whole, certain details indicate that both A and B are derived from a copy characterized by interpolations due to a retranslation from Syriac into Hebrew.雖然Margoliouth的理論必須予以駁斥作為一個整體,某些細節表明, A和B是來自一份拷貝特點插值由於retranslation從敘利亞進入希伯來文。 In a number of passages the same verse is given in two distinct renderings, one of which usually corresponds to the Syriac, even when this text represents merely a faulty or biased translation of the original.在一些段落相同的詩句是在兩個不同的透視圖,其中一個通常對應於敘利亞,甚至在這一案文只是一個翻譯錯誤或有偏見的原始。 These verses, moreover, in their conformity to the Syriac, become at times so meaningless that they can be explained only as incorrect translations from that language.這些經文,此外,在其符合敘利亞,成為毫無意義的時候,使他們不僅可以解釋不正確的翻譯語言。 Such suspicious passages are characterized by a comparatively modern style and language, by a commonplace phraseology, and by a break in the parallelism which is affected by Ecclesiasticus.這類可疑通道的特點是比較現代風格和語言,由一個普通的用語,並在搶七中並行是受Ecclesiasticus 。 It may therefore be safely concluded that these doublets are merely additions made to render the Syriac version more intelligible.因此,可以安全地得出結論認為,這些聯只是增補使敘利亞版本更可理解。 The same statement holds true of certain textual emendations made by the glossarist.同一份聲明中擁有真正的某些文字emendations所作的註解。 In this, however, there is nothing strange, since it is a well-known fact that the Jews of certain sections were familiar with Syriac, as is shown by the quotations made by Naḥmanides from the Wisdom of Solomon, from Judith, and from Bel and the Dragon, and also by the introduction of the Peshiṭta of Proverbs into the Targum of the Hagiographa.在這方面,但是,沒有什麼奇怪的,因為它是一個眾所周知的事實,即猶太人的某些部分熟悉敘利亞文一樣,所表現出的報價作出Naḥmanides的智慧所羅門群島,由朱迪,從貝爾與龍,同時也引進了Peshiṭta的諺語到根的Hagiographa 。

The Final Hymn.最後的歌。

But the glossarist did not restrict himself to these slight additions and modifications, for he added to his copy a translation of the final hymn, basing this version also on the Syriac.但是,註解並沒有限制他本人對這些輕微的補充和修訂,對他說,他的翻譯文本的最後讚美詩,根據此版本還對敘利亞。 This canticle, as Bickell has clearly shown, is an alphabetical acrostic, which may still be traced in the Syriac version, on account of the similarity between that language and Hebrew.這頌歌,因為Bickell清楚地表明,是一個字母acrostic ,這仍可能追溯到在敘利亞的版本,考慮到之間的相似性,語言和希伯來語。 There are lacunæ, however, in the Syriac text which are supplied in the Greek, even though these passages are lacking in the Hebrew.有缺陷,但是,在敘利亞提供的案文是在希臘,即使這些段落缺乏在希伯來文。 In the Hebrew some traces of the acrostic remain in cases where the Syriac was translatable only by a Hebrew word beginning with the same letter; but elsewhere all vestiges of it have disappeared.在希伯來文的一些痕跡acrostic繼續的情況下,敘利亞是唯一的翻譯希伯來字開頭的同一封信中,但其他地方的所有殘餘它已經消失。 The Syriac version, moreover, shows evidences of corruptions and innovations, which are reproduced by the Hebrew.敘利亞版本,此外,證據顯示腐敗和創新,轉載的希伯來文。 The Syriac occasionally corresponds to the Greek, but tends toward a confusion of sense which eventually alters the meaning, these modifications being also reproduced in the Hebrew text.敘利亞有時對應於希臘,但傾向的混亂感覺,最終改變的意義,這些修改也被轉載於希伯來文。 The hymn, which follows the Syriac version closely throughout, is evidently a retranslation from the latter.的讚美,它遵循了密切合作,在整個敘利亞文版本,顯然是retranslation由後者。 These opinions have been championed especially by Israel Lévi, and are accepted by Ryssel and other scholars, although they are not universally held.這些意見已經倡導特別是以色列列維和所接受Ryssel和其他學者,儘管他們沒有得到普遍舉行。

The Hebrew version contains an entire canticle which does not appear in either the Greek or the Syriac text.希伯來文版包含整個頌歌沒有出現在希臘或敘利亞的案文。 This, however, is of doubtful authenticity, although one may cite in its favor the sentence "O give thanks unto Him that chose the sons of Zadok to be priests," alluding to the pre-Maccabean high priests who were descended from Zadok; while another possible argument is furnished by the absence of any reference to ideas essentially Pharisaic, such as the resurrection of the body.不過,這是令人懷疑的真實性,但可援引的青睞一句“啊,感謝你們選擇了他的兒子扎多克是神職人員, ”暗指前Maccabean誰是高牧師扎多克的後裔,而另一個可能的論點是由其沒有提到的想法基本上Pharisaic ,如復活的身體。 Against the genuineness of the psalm may be urged: (1) its omission in the versions; (2) the sentence "O give thanks unto Him that maketh the horn of the house of David to bud," which is directly opposed in sentiment to ch. xxxvi.對真實性的詩篇可敦促: ( 1 )它遺漏的版本; ( 2 )該句“啊,感謝你們他maketh非洲之角眾議院大衛芽” ,這是直接反對情緒總。三十六。 and to the entire "Hymn of thePatriarchs"; and (3) the remarkable similarity of the hymn to the "Shemoneh 'Esreh" together with the prayers which precede and follow the "Shema'."和整個“讚美詩thePatriarchs ” ;及( 3 )顯著相似的聖歌的“ Shemoneh ' Esreh ”一起祈禱這之前,並按照“射麻' 。 ” The question has not yet been definitely settled.這個問題尚未得到明確解決。

Critical Value of the Hebrew Text.臨界值的希伯萊文字。

Despite the corrections and interpolations mentioned, however, the originalty of the text in these fragments of Ben Sira can not be denied.儘管更正和插值提到,但是, originalty文字在這些碎片本特希拉不能否認的。 Besides the fact that many scholars deny the existence of any interpolations, there are portions in which it is easy to recognize the author's hand; for he has a characteristic technique, style, vocabulary, and syntax which are evident in all the versions. It may safely be said that in the main the work of Ben Sira has been preserved just as it left his hands, while the chief variant marginal readings recorded in the fragments and confirmed by the translations may be regarded as evidences of the existence of two separate editions written by Ben Sira himself.另外一個事實,即許多學者否認存在任何插值,有部分中,很容易認識到作者的手,因為他有一個特點的技術,風格,詞彙和語法,這是顯而易見的所有版本。這可能安全地說,在主要的工作,本已保存特希拉一樣,離開了他手中,而行政變邊緣讀數記錄在片段並確認了翻譯可視為證據存在兩個不同的版本書面由Ben特希拉本人。 It is self-evident, moreover, that Ecclesiasticus has undergone some alterations at the hands of scribes, but it would have been strange indeed if this book alone should have wholly escaped the common lot of such writings.這是不言自明的,此外,經歷了一些Ecclesiasticus改建的手中文士,但它本來確實如果這本書應該有單獨的全躲過了大量的這種共同的著作。 No more conclusive proof could be found, were any necessary, of the fidelity of the Hebrew version than its frequent agreement, in citations from the Bible, with the text on which the Septuagint is based rather than with the Masorah, as in the case of I Sam.沒有確鑿的證據可以找到,是必要的,對忠誠的希伯來文版本比它經常協議,在引用聖經上的文字的譯本為基礎,而不是Masorah ,如餘三。 xii.十二。 3 as compared with Ecclus. 3相Ecclus 。 (Sirach) xlvi. ( Sirach )四十六。 19, or Isa. 19 ,或ISA 。 xxxviii.三十八。 17 with Ecclus. 17 Ecclus 。 (Sirach) l. ( Sirach )湖 2. 2 。

Importance for the History of the Bible.重要的歷史聖經。

Even before the discovery of these fragments the Book of Ecclesiasticus was regarded as a unique document of priceless value; but the account which it gives of the status of the Bible in its author's dayhas gained additional importance, now that the greater part of the original itself is known.甚至在發現這些碎片書Ecclesiasticus被視為一個獨特的文件無價的價值,但它的帳戶提供的地位聖經在其作者的dayhas獲得額外的重要性,現在大部份的原始本身是眾所周知的。 The "Hymn of the Patriarchs," which has been preserved in its entirety, shows that the canon of the Law and of the Prophets was closed, as the author's grandson expressly states.在“歌的始祖, ”一直保存在整個顯示,佳能法律和先知被關閉,因為作者的孫子明確規定。 The Prophets were arranged in the order generally adopted in the Hebrew Bible, as follows: Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings ("Nebi'im Rishonim"), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve Minor Prophets ("Nebi'im Aḥaronim"); and the expression "the Twelve Prophets" was sanctioned by usage.先知排列順序一般通過在希伯來文聖經,具體情況如下:約書亞,法官,塞繆爾,國王( “ Nebi'im Rishonim ” ) ,以賽亞,耶利米,以西結書,並有12個小先知( “ Nebi'im Aḥaronim “ ) ;和表達”十二先知“被認可的使用。 The greater portion of the Hagiographa was already considered canonical, including the Psalms attributed nominally to David, Proverbs, Job (the Greek translator has made a gross blunder here), and possibly the Song of Solomon, Nehemiah, and Chronicles.更大的一部分Hagiographa已經審議規範,包括詩篇歸咎於名義上大衛,諺語,工作(希臘翻譯提出了嚴重的錯誤在這裡) ,並有可能雅歌,尼希米記,和編年史。 The author's silence regarding some of the other Hagiographa proves nothing; since he intended, as has already been said, to eulogize the priesthood in this section, and all who were not included in his scheme were passed over without notice. In addition to this statistical information, Ben Sira furnishes other points of interest.作者的沉默有關的其他一些Hagiographa證明什麼,因為他打算,已經說過,稱頌鐸在本節中,和所有誰,沒有被列入他的計劃獲得通過的,恕不另行通知。除此之外統計資料,本特希拉提供其他興趣點。 The frequency with which he avails himself of Job and Proverbs proves that both these books had been long in circulation, although the divergence between the original and his quotation is very great.的頻率,他利用自己的職位和諺語證明,這些書籍都已經長期在流通,但原有的分歧和他的報價是非常大的。 Furthermore, the labored attempt to imitate the literary style previously affected in didactic poetry was a failure, and radical changes had been introduced even as early as the time of the author.此外,工人試圖模仿文體以前影響教學詩歌是失敗的,急劇的變化提出了甚至早在時間上的作者。 While he still availed himself of parallelism and employed verses symmetrically divided into two hemistichs, he introduced into this work on wisdom concepts thitherto excluded, such as allusions to sacred history and exhortations to fulfil the duty of religious worship.雖然他仍然利用自己的平行處理與就業詩句對稱分為hemistichs ,他介紹到這項工作的智慧概念thitherto排除,如神聖的歷史典故和規勸履行義務的宗教崇拜。 Mention has already been made of literary innovations which characterize the work.提及已經取得的文學創新特點的工作。 It is no less significant that the diction employed is essentially imitative, being a mixture of Biblical centos and reminiscences, yet marking a stage unattained by any analogous work. Still untouched by Hellenisms, the lexicography is characterized by rabbinisms and derivatives from the Aramaic and the Arabic.但同樣重要的是,文辭就業基本上是模仿,是一個混合的聖經centos和回憶,但標誌著一個階段沒有實現任何類似的工作。 Hellenisms仍然無動於衷,該詞典的特點是rabbinisms和衍生工具的阿拉姆語和阿拉伯語。 The style is decadent, showing a curious mixture of prolixity and conciseness, daring constructions, the repetition of certain figures, imitation, and false elegance, side by side with felicity of phraseology and imagery.作風是腐朽,顯示一個奇怪的混合羅唆和簡潔,大膽建設,重複某些數字,模仿,虛假優雅,並肩與幸福的用語和圖像。 These qualities denote a period when spontaneity and originality were replaced by pedantry, conventionality, and artificiality.這些素質指一個時期自發性和原創性,取而代之的學究氣,套子,和矯揉造作。 Henceforth a thorough knowledge of Ecclesiasticus will be indispensable for any who wish to study the analogous portions of the Bible, although it has thus far been impossible to determine the relation of Ecclesiastes and Ecclesiasticus from a mere comparison of the two books, despite their frequent points of contact.從此徹底了解Ecclesiasticus將是必不可少的任何誰希望研究類似部分的聖經,但迄今無法確定的關係,傳道書和Ecclesiasticus由單純比較兩本書,儘管他們經常點的聯繫。

It is self-evident that the Hebrew fragments will aid in the reconstruction of the original of those portions for which no basal text has yet been found.這是不言自明的,希伯萊碎片將有助於重建原來的那些部分,這些地區沒有基底文字尚未找到。 These fragments, moreover, reveal the relative value of the Greek and Syriac texts, the two versions based on the Hebrew original.這些片段,此外,揭示的相對價值,希臘和敘利亞的案文,兩個版本的基礎上希伯來語原始。

The Greek Version.希臘版本。

The Greek text, as noted above, is the work of the author's grandson, who went to Egypt in 132.希臘文字,如上所述,是工作的作者的孫子,誰曾前往埃及,在132個。 A prologue to the "Synopsis" of Athanasius gives his name as Jesus; but this passage is spurious. Although the translator may have gone to Egypt in 132, it does not necessarily follow that he entered upon his work in that year; indeed he himself says that he spent some time there before beginning his task.阿序幕的“概要”的亞他那修讓他的名字是耶穌,但這段話是虛假的。雖然翻譯可能已前往埃及,在132個,這不一定意味著他進入他的工作在這一年,實際上他自己說,他花了一些時間才開始他的任務。 The theory has been advanced that he did not begin it until 116, since ἐπί ("in the time of"), which he uses in connection with Ptolemy Euergetes, is employed only after the death of the monarch whose name it precedes (Deissmann, in "Theologische Literaturzeitung," 1904, p. 558); but the incorrectness of this deduction has been demonstrated by Schürer.該理論已被先進的,他沒有開始,直到116 ,因為ἐπί ( “時代” ) ,這是他利用與托勒密Euergetes ,只僱用去世後,國王的名義先( Deissmann ,在“神Literaturzeitung , ” 1904年,第558 ) ;但不正確的扣除表明了Schürer 。 The translator, in the introduction, requests the indulgence of his readers, a precaution not without justification, since his rendering leaves much to be desired, sometimes straining the meaning of the text, and again containing crass blunders, so that the text must be freed from the numerous errors of the scribes before it can be fairly judged (see Lévi, "L'Ecclésiastique," p. xl.).翻譯,在引進,請放縱他的讀者,防範措施不無理由,因為他的渲染很不理想,有時緊張的含義,案文,並再次載愚鈍失誤,使案文必須被釋放從許多錯誤的文士才能公平地判斷(見列維“歐萊雅Ecclésiastique , ”山口儀。 ) 。

The Hebrew version shows that the Greek manuscript which has best preserved the wording of the original is No. 248 of Holmes and Parsons, which was used in the Complutensian Polyglot.希伯來文版表明,希臘手稿已保存最好的措辭,原來是第248號的霍姆斯和帕森斯,這是用於Complutensian多元。 Yet even after a rigid purification of the text, Ben Sira contains many blunders, due to overhasty reading (Lévi, lc pp. xliii. et seq.). While the translator generally adhered closely to the original, he sometimes added comments of his own, but seldom abridged, although he occasionally slurred over a passage in which the imagery was too bold or the anthropomorphism too glaring.然而,即使嚴格的淨化後的案文,本特希拉包含了許多失誤,由於overhasty閱讀(列維信用證頁。四十三。起。 ) 。雖然翻譯一般嚴格遵守原來,他有時說自己的意見,但很少刪節,但他偶爾含糊了通道中的圖像過於大膽,或擬人太明顯。 Moreover, he frequently substituted for the translation of one verse another already given for a passage of similar content.此外,他還經常取代翻譯一個詩另一個已經給出了一段類似的內容。 The version used by him was not always identical with that contained in the Hebrew fragments. Sometimes he has verses which are missing in the Hebrew; but many of those mentioned by Fritzsche in his notes are found in the fragments.在他所使用的版本並非總是一致的,其中載在希伯來文的碎片。有時,他已失踪詩句是在希伯來文,但是許多人提到了弗里切在他的筆記中發現的碎片。 A revision of the Greek text is attested by the quotations in the "Pædagogus" of Clement of Alexandria.修訂的希臘文字的報價證明了在“ Pædagogus ”的克萊門特亞歷山大。

An accident has disarranged the pages of the parent manuscript of all the copies thus far known, two sheets, containing respectively xxx.事故紊亂的網頁母公司的所有手稿副本迄今已知的,兩張,分別三十載。 25-xxxiii. 25三十三。 13a and xxxiii. 13A條和三十三。 13b-xxxvi. 13B條,三十六。 16b, having been interchanged. 16B款,已互換。 The Itala and the Armenian versions, however, avoided the error.該伊泰萊和亞美尼亞的版本,但是,避免了錯誤。 The conjectural restoration of the order of the chapters should be made, according to Ryssel, on the basis of manuscript No. 248, which also avoided this inversion.該推測恢復秩序的章節應根據Ryssel的基礎上,手稿第248號,這也避免這一反轉。 On the Greek manuscripts and their individual and general value as regards the history of this version, see Ryssel in Kautzsch, "Apokryphen," i.希臘手稿和他們個人和一般價值至於歷史的這個版本,見Ryssel在Kautzsch , “ Apokryphen , ”一 244 et seq. 244起。 It may be said that the Greek version offers the most reliable material for the reconstruction of those portions of the original which have not yet been discovered.可以說,希臘版本提供了最可靠的材料,用於重建的部分原始尚未被發現。

The Vetus Latina.該Vetus拉丁。

As Jerome himself says, the Latin version contained in the Vulgate is not his work, but was the one generally used in the African churches during the first half of the third century (see Thielmann in "Archiv für Lateinische Lexicographie und Grammatik,"viii.-ix.); and the truth of this statement is proved beyond question by the quotations of Cyprian.他說,作為杰羅姆,拉丁美洲版本載於拉丁文聖經是不是他的工作,但是是一個通常用於在非洲教會上半年三世紀(見Thielmann在“檔案館f黵Lateinische Lexicographie和語法, ”八。至第九。 ) ;和真相的這種說法是毫無疑問的證明了報價的塞浦路斯。 This text is characterized by a number of interpolations of a biased trend, although it is in general a slavish and sometimes awkward translation from the Greek (comp. Herkenne, "De Veteris Latini Ecclesiastici Capitibus i.-xliii." Leipsic, 1899); but it also contains deviations from the Greek which can be explained only on the hypothesis of a Hebrew original.此文字的特點是,一些有偏見的插值的趨勢,雖然總體上達到盲從,有時尷尬的翻譯從希臘( comp. Herkenne “者Veteris拉提尼Ecclesiastici Capitibus島,四十三。 ” Leipsic , 1899年) ;但也包含偏離希臘這可以解釋只能在假設希伯來語原始。 These divergences are corrections made on the basis of a Hebrew manuscript of the same recension as B and C, which were taken from a text that had already become corrupt.這些分歧是更正的基礎上作出的希伯來手稿同recension的B和C ,這是從一個文本已經成為腐敗。 Such changes were made, therefore, prior to the third century.這種變化了,因此,前3世紀。 The corrections peculiar to the Itala are attested by the quotations of Cyprian, and may have been derived from a Greek manuscript taken to Africa.更正特有的伊泰萊都證明了這引文塞浦路斯,並可能已被來自希臘手稿帶到非洲。 They may be divided into two groups: cases in which the corresponding passage of the Hebrew is placed beside the ordinary text of the Greek, and passages in which the Hebrew rendering is substituted for the Greek reading (comp. Lévi, lc, introduction to part ii., and Herkenne, lc). After ch.他們可能被分為兩組:在何種情況下通過了相應的希伯來放在旁邊的普通文字,希臘,並在該段落希伯來渲染取代希臘閱讀( comp.列維立法會,介紹了部分二。 ,並Herkenne術) 。後總。 xliv.四十四。 the Vulgate and the Itala coincide.的武加大和伊泰萊一致。 The other versions based upon the Greek are the Syriac Hexaplar, edited by Ceriani ("Codex Syro-Hexaplaris Ambrosianus Photolithographice Editus," Milan, 1874); the Coptic (Sahidic), edited by Lagarde ("Ægyptiaca," Göttingen, 1883; see Peters, "Die Sahidisch-Koptische Uebersetzung des Buchs Ecclesiasticus auf Ihren Wahren Werth für die Textkritik Untersucht," in Bardenhewer, "Biblische Studien," 1898, iii. 3); the Ethiopic, edited by Dillmann ("Biblia Veteris Testamenti Æthiopica," 1894, v.); and the Armenian, sometimes used to verify the reading of the Greek.其他版本根據希臘是敘利亞Hexaplar ,編輯Ceriani ( “法典Syro - Hexaplaris Ambrosianus Photolithographice Editus , ”米蘭, 1874年) ;的哥普特( Sahidic ) ,編輯拉嘉德( “ Ægyptiaca , ”哥廷根, 1883年;見彼得斯, “模具Sahidisch - Koptische Uebersetzung萬布克斯Ecclesiasticus奧夫Ihren手沃斯f黵死於Textkritik Untersucht , ”在Bardenhewer , “ Biblische Studien , ” 1898年,三。 3 ) ;的衣索比亞,編輯Dillmann ( “聖經Veteris Testamenti Æthiopica ” 1894年,五) ;和亞美尼亞,有時被用來確認讀希臘。

Syriac Version.敘利亞版本。

While the Syriac version does not possess the importance of the Greek, it is equally useful in the reconstruction of the Hebrew on which it was directly based, as has been clearly shown by the discovery of the fragments.雖然敘利亞的版本不具備的重要性,希臘,這是同樣有用的重建工作希伯來語關於它的直接依據,因為已經清楚地表明所發現的碎片。 As a rule the translator understood his text; but his blunders are innumerable, even making allowance for scribal errors, which are not infrequent.作為一項規則理解他的翻譯文本,但他的失誤是不計其數,甚至使津貼scribal的錯誤,這並不少見。 Unfortunately, his copy was incomplete, so that his version contains numerous lacunæ, one of which (xliii. 1-10) was filled by a passage borrowed from the Syriac Hexaplar.不幸的是,他本是不完整的,所以,他的版本有許多缺陷,其中之一( xliii. 1月10日)是由一名通過借用敘利亞文Hexaplar 。 This entire translation is a puzzle.這整個翻譯是一個謎。 In some chapters it follows the original exactly, in others it is little more than a paraphrase, or even a mere epitome.在某些章節遵循原來的準確,這是在其他國家多一點解釋,甚至是僅僅縮影。 In places the translation shows very few errors, in others it betrays total ignorance of the meaning of the text.在地方的翻譯顯示極少數的錯誤,在另一些國家,背叛完全不了解的含義文字。 It is possible that the Syriac version was the work of several translators.有可能是敘利亞版本的工作,幾個翻譯。 Some of its repetitions and corrections betray a Christian bias; and it even bears traces of a revision based on the Greek.它的一些重複和更正背叛基督教偏見;甚至熊痕跡的基礎上修訂的希臘。 As already noted, it contains many variants which the Hebrew fragments show to represent the original readings.正如已經指出的,它載有許多變種的希伯來文片段顯示代表原始讀數。 Despite its numerous defects, it is a valuable check upon the Greek text, even where it diverges widely, except in passages where it becomes fantastic.儘管許多缺陷,這是一個有價值的檢查後,希臘文,即使它偏離廣泛,除了在通道成為夢幻般的地方。 It therefore deserves to be carefully studied with the assistance of the commentaries on it and the citations from it by Syriac authors, as has been done for the glosses of Bar Hebræus by Katz in his "Scholien des Gregorius Abulfaragius Bar Hebræus zum Weisheitsbuche des Josua ben Sira" (Halle, 1892).因此,它值得仔細研究的協助下,評注,並在引用它的敘利亞文作者,已經這樣做的粉飾的酒吧Hebræus的卡茲在他的“ Scholien萬Gregorius Abulfaragius酒吧Hebræus zum Weisheitsbuche萬Josua本特希拉“ (哈雷, 1892年) 。 The Arabic translation included in the London Polyglot and based upon the Syriac version is likewise a valuable adjunct to the "apparatus criticus."阿拉伯文翻譯包括在倫敦多元,並根據敘利亞文版本是同樣寶貴的輔助手段的“儀器criticus 。 ”

Crawford Howell Toy, Israel Lévi克勞福德霍威爾玩具,以色列Lévi

Jewish Encyclopedia, published between 1901-1906.猶太百科全書出版01年至1906年之間。

Bibliography:參考書目:

Editions of the Hebrew text, in chronological order: Schechter, Ecclesiasticus xxxix.希伯來文版的文字,按時間順序為:謝克特, Ecclesiasticus三十九。 15-xl. 15儀。 8, in Expository Times, July, 1896, pp. 8 ,在解釋時, 7月, 1896年,頁。 1-15; Cowley and Neubauer, The Original Hebrew of a Portion of Ecclesiasticus (xxxix. 15-xlix. 11), Together with the Early Versions and an English Translation, Followed by the Quotations from Ben Sira in Rabbinical Literature, Oxford, 1897; Halévy, Etude sur la Partie du Texte Hébreu de l'Ecclésiastique Récemment Découverte [xxxix. 1月15日;利和紐鮑爾,原來希伯來語的部分Ecclesiasticus ( xxxix. 15 xlix 。 11 ) ,連同早期版本和英文譯本,其次是語錄本特希拉在猶太教文學,牛津, 1897年;哈萊維,練習拉河畔一方杜文本Hébreu法國Ecclésiastique Récemment Découverte [三十九。 15-xlix. 15 xlix 。 11], in Rev. Sém. 11 ] ,在牧師語義。 v. 148, 193, 383; Smend, Das Hebräische Fragment der Weisheit des Jesus Sirach, in Abhandlungen der Göttinger Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, 1897, ii.五, 148 , 193 , 383 ; Smend ,達斯Hebräische片段之智慧之耶穌Sirach ,在Abhandlungen之Göttinger協會之學問, 1897年,二。 2 (containing the same text); Collotype Facsimiles of the Oxford Fragment of Ecclesiasticus, Oxford, 1897; Israel Lévi, L'Ecclesiastique ou la Sagesse de Jesus, Fils de Sira, Texte Original Hébreu, Traduit et Commenté, in Bibliothèque de l'Ecole des Hautes Etudes, Sciences Réligieuses, x., No. i., Paris, 1897 (part ii., ib. 1901); Schlatter, Das Neugefundene Hebräische Stück des Sirach, Güterslohe, 1897; Kohn, same text, in Ha-Shiloaḥ, iii. 2 (含相同的文字) ;珂羅傳真機牛津片段Ecclesiasticus ,牛津, 1897年;以色列列維歐萊雅Ecclesiastique歐香格里拉智慧德赫蘇,菲斯日特希拉,文本原件Hébreu , Traduit等Commenté ,在圖書館阿扎瓦克巴黎高等,科學Réligieuses ,十號一,巴黎, 1897年(第二部分。 ,國際文憑。 1901年) ;施拉特,達斯Neugefundene Hebräische卡住萬Sirach , Güterslohe , 1897年;科恩,相同的文字,在哈Shiloaḥ ,三。 42-48, 133-140, 321-325, 517-520; Schechter, Genizah Specimens: Ecclesiasticus [xlix. 42-48 , 133-140 , 321-325 , 517-520 ;謝克特, Genizah標本: Ecclesiasticus [ xlix 。 12-1. 12月1日。 22], in JQR x. 22 ] ,在JQR十 197; Schechter and Taylor, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, Cambridge, 1899; Halévy, Le Nouveau Fragment Hébreu de l'Ecclésiastique [xlix. 197 ; Schechter已與泰勒的智慧本特希拉,劍橋, 1899年;哈萊維,新世界片段Hébreu法國Ecclésiastique [ xlix 。 12-1. 22], in Rev. Sém. 12月1日。 22 ] ,在牧師語義。 vii.七。 214-220; Margoliouth, The Original Hebrew of Ecclesiasticus xxxi. 214-220 ; Margoliouth ,原來希伯來語的Ecclesiasticus三十一。 12-31 and xxxvi. 12月31日和36 。 22-xxxvii. 22三十七。 26, in JQR xii. 26日,在JQR十二。 1-33; Schechter, A Further Fragment of Ben Sira [iv. 1-33 ;謝克特,進一步片段本特希拉[四。 23-v. 23五。 13, xxv. 8-xxvi. 13 ,二十五。 8 - 26 。 2], ib. 2 ] ,國際文憑。 pp.頁。 456-465; Adler, Some Missing Fragments of Ben Sira [vii. 456-465 ;阿德勒,一些失踪的碎片本特希拉[七。 29-xii. 29十二。 1]. 1 ] 。 ib.國際文憑。 pp. 466-480; Lévi, Fragments de-Deux Nouveaux Manuscrits Hébreux de l'Ecclésiastique [xxxvi.頁。 466-480 ;列維片段的默契和新時代Manuscrits Hébreux近Ecclésiastique [三十六。 24-xxxviii. 24三十八。 1; vi. 1 ;六。 18-19; xxviii. 18-19 ;二十八。 35; vii. 1, 4, 6, 17, 20-21, 23-25], in REJ xl. 35 ;七。 1 , 4 , 6 , 17 , 20-21 , 23-25 ] ,在REJ儀。 1-30; Gaster, A New Fragment of Ben Sira [xviii. 1月30日;法莫替丁,一種新的片段本特希拉[十八。 31-33; xix. 31-33 ;十九。 1-2; xx. 1月2日;二十。 5-7; xxvii. 5月7日;二十七。 19. 19 。 22, 24, 26; xx. 22 , 24 , 26 ;二十。 13], in JQR xii. 13 ] ,在JQR十二。 688-702; Ecclesiasticus: The Fragments Hitherto Recovered of the Hebrew Text in Facsimile, Cambridge and Oxford, 1901; Schlögel, Ecclesiasticus xxxix. 688-702 ; Ecclesiasticus :碎片到目前為止恢復的希伯來文中的文字傳真,劍橋和牛津大學, 1901年; Schlögel , Ecclesiasticus三十九。 12-xlix. 12 xlix 。 16, Ope Artis Criticœ et Metricœ in Formam Originalem Redactus, 1901; Knabenbauer, Commentariusin Ecclesiasticum cum Appendice: Textus Ecclesiastici Hebrœus Descriptus Secundum Fragmenta Nuper Reperta cum Notis et Versione Litterali Latina, Paris, 1902; Peters, Der Jüngst Wiederaufgefundene Hebräische Text des Buches Ecclesiasticus, etc., Freiburg, 1902; Strack, Die Sprüche Jesus', des Sohnes Sirach, der Jüngst Wiedergefundene Hebräische Text mit Anmerkungen und Wörterbuch, Leipsic, 1903; Lévi, The Hebrew Text of the Book of Ecclesiasticus, Edited with Brief Notes and a Selected Glossary, Leyden, 1904, in Semitic Study Series, ed. 16 ,操作阿爾迪斯帕Criticœ等Metricœ在Formam Originalem Redactus , 1901年; Knabenbauer , Commentariusin Ecclesiasticum暨Appendice : Textus Ecclesiastici Hebrœus Descriptus孔型Fragmenta Nuper Reperta暨Notis等Versione Litterali加拉加斯,巴黎, 1902年;彼得斯,明鏡Jüngst Wiederaufgefundene Hebräische文字萬Buches Ecclesiasticus等等,弗賴堡, 1902年;施特拉克,模具Sprüche耶穌,萬國Sohnes Sirach報Jüngst Wiedergefundene Hebräische文字麻省理工學院Anmerkungen與Wörterbuch , Leipsic , 1903 ;列維希伯來文字的圖書的Ecclesiasticus ,編輯的簡短說明和一選定的詞彙,萊頓, 1904年,在猶太人的研究叢書,教育署。 Gottheil and Jastrow, iii.; La Sainte Bible Polyglotte, ed. Gottheil和賈斯特羅,三。 ;聖聖經Polyglotte ,教育署。 Viguroux, vol. Viguroux ,第二卷。 v., Paris, 1904; Peters, Liber Iesu Filii Sirach sive Ecclesiasticus Hebraice Secundum Codices Nuper Repertos, Vocalibus Adornatus Addita Versione Latina cum Glossario Hebraico-Latino, Freiburg, 1905.五,巴黎, 1904年;彼得斯,書Iesu Filii Sirach性Ecclesiasticus Hebraice孔型Codices Nuper Repertos , Vocalibus Adornatus Addita Versione拉丁暨術語表Hebraico ,拉丁,弗賴堡, 1905年。

On the question of the originality of the book: Margoliouth, The Origin of the "Original Hebrew" of Ecclesiasticus, London, 1899; Bacher, in JQR xii.關於這個問題的獨創性的書籍: Margoliouth ,的起源“原件希伯來語”的Ecclesiasticus ,倫敦, 1899年;巴切爾,在JQR十二。 97-108; idem, in Expository Times, xi. 97-108 ;同上,在說明性時報十一。 563; Bickell, in WZKM xiii. 563 ; Bickell ,在WZKM十三。 251-256; Halévy, in Rev. Sém. 251-256 ;哈萊維,在牧師語義。 viii.八。 78-88; König, in Expository Times, x.七十八至八十八;柯尼格,在說明性時報十 512, 564; xi. 512 , 564 ;十一。 31, 69, 139-140, 170-176, 234-235; idem, Die Originalität des Neulich Entdeckten Hebräischen Sirachtextes, Tübingen, 1900; idem, in Neue Kirchliche Zeitung, xi. 31 , 69 , 139-140 , 170-176 , 234-235 ;同上,模具Originalität萬Neulich Entdeckten Hebräischen Sirachtextes ,蒂賓根大學, 1900 ;同上,在新Kirchliche日報,十一。 60, 67; idem, in Theologische Rundschau, iii. 60 , 67 ;同上,在神學評論報,三。 19; idem, in Evangelische Kirchen-Zeitung, lxxiv. 19同上,在Evangelische興報, lxxiv 。 289-292; Lévi, in REJ xxxix. 289-292 ;列維在REJ三十九。 1-15, xl. 1月15日,儀。 1-30; Margoliouth, in Expository Times, xi. 1月30日; Margoliouth ,在說明性時報十一。 90-92, 191, 427-429, 521; xii. 45, 95, et passim; Ryssel, in Theologische Studien und Kritiken, lxxv. 90-92 , 191 , 427-429 , 521 ;十二。 45 , 95 ,等各處; Ryssel ,在神學Studien與Kritiken , lxxv 。 406-420; Schechter, in Expository Times, xi. 406-420 ; Schechter已在說明性時報十一。 140-142, 382, 522; Selbie, ib. 140-142 , 382 , 522 ; Selbie ,國際文憑。 127, 363, 378, 446, 494, 550; Tyler, in JQR xii. 127 , 363 , 378 , 446 , 494 , 550 ;泰勒,在JQR十二。 555-562. 555-562 。

Studies on the Hebrew text, exclusive of the editions and commentaries mentioned above: Bacher, in JQR ix.研究希伯來文,獨家的版本和評論上述:巴切爾,在JQR九。 543-562, xii. 272-290; idem, in Stade's Zeitschrift, xx. 543-562 ,十二。 272-290 ;同上,在體育場的雜誌,二十。 308; idem, in REJ xl. 308 ;同上,在REJ儀。 253; Blau, ib. 253 ;布勞,國際文憑。 xxxv.三十五。 25-29; Büchler, ib. 25-29 ; Büchler ,國際文憑。 xxxviii.三十八。 137-140; Chajes, ib. 137-140 ; Chajes ,國際文憑。 xl.儀。 31-36; Cheyne, in JQR x. 31-36 ;進益,在JQR十 13, xii. 13 ,十二。 554; Cowley, ib. 554 ;利,國際文憑。 xii.十二。 109-111; Cowley and Neubauer, ib. 109-111 ;利和紐鮑爾,國際文憑。 ix.九。 563-567; Frankel, in Monatsschrift, xiii. 563-567 ;弗蘭克爾,在月刊,十三。 380-384, xliii. 380-384 ,四十三。 481-484; Ginsburger, in REJ xlii. 481-484 ; Ginsburger ,在REJ四十二。 267; Grimme, in Orientalistische Literaturzeitung, ii. 267 ; Grimme ,在Orientalistische Literaturzeitung ,二。 213, 316; idem. 213 , 316 ;同上。 in La Revue Biblique, ix.在雜誌Biblique ,九。 400-413; x. 400-413 ;十 55-65, 260-267, 423-435; 55-65 , 260-267 , 423-435 ;

Gray, in JQR ix.灰色,在JQR九。 567-572; Halévy, in Journal Asiatique, 1897, x. 567-572 ;哈萊維,雜誌亞細亞, 1897年,十 501; Herz, in JQR x. 501 ;赫茲,在JQR十 719-724; Hogg, in Expositor, 1897, pp. 719-724 ;霍格,在Expositor , 1897年,頁。 262-266; idem, in American Journal of Theology, i. 262-266 ;同上,在美國雜誌神學島 777-786; Houtsma; in Theologisch Tijdschrift, xxxiv. 777-786 ; Houtsma ;在Theologisch Tijdschrift ,三十四。 329-354; Jouon, in Zeitschrift für Katholische Theologie, xxvii. 329-354 ; Jouon ,在雜誌天主教神學,二十七。 583 et seq.; Kaufmann, in JQR xi. 583起。 ;考夫曼,在JQR十一。 159-162; idem, in Monatsschrift, xi. 159-162 ;同上,在月刊,十一。 337-340; Kautzsch, in Theologische Studien und Kritiken. 337-340 ; Kautzsch ,在神學Studien與Kritiken 。 lxxi. lxxi 。 185-199; Krauss, in JQR xi. 185-199 ;克勞斯在JQR十一。 156-158; Landauer, in Zeitschrift für Assyriologie, xii. 156-158 ;蘭,在雜誌Assyriologie ,十二。 393-395; Lévi, in REJxxxiv. 393-395 ;列維在REJxxxiv 。 1-50, 294-296; xxxv. 1-50 , 294-296 ;三十五。 29-47; xxxvii. 29-47 ;三十七。 210-217; xxxix. 210-217 ;三十九。 1-15, 177-190; xl. 1月15日, 177-190 ;儀。 253-257; xlii. 253-257 ;四十二。 269; xliv. 269 ;四十四。 291-294; xlvii. l-2; idem, in JQR xiii. 291-294 ;四十七。升- 2 ;同上,在JQR十三。 1-17, 331; Margolis, in Stade's Zeitschrift, xxi. 1月17日, 331 ;馬戈利斯,在體育場的雜誌,二十一。 271; Margoliouth, in Athenœum, July, 1897, p. 271 ; Margoliouth ,在Athenœum , 7月, 1897年,第 162; Méchineau, in Etudes. 162 ; Méchineau ,在練習曲。 lxxviii. lxxviii 。 451-477, lxxxi. 451-477 , lxxxi 。 831-834, lxxxv. 693-698; Müller, in WZKM xi. 831-834 , lxxxv 。 693-698 ;穆勒,在WZKM十一。 103-105; Nöldeke, in Expositor, 1897, pp. 103-105 ; Nöldeke ,在Expositor , 1897年,頁。 347-364; Peters, in Theologische Quartalschrift, lxxx. 347-364 ;彼得斯,在神學Quartalschrift , lxxx 。 94-98, lxxxii. 180-193; idem, in Biblische Zeitschrift, i. 94-98 , lxxxii 。 180-193 ;同上,在Biblische雜誌島 47, 129; Rosenthal, in Monatsschrift, 1902, pp. 47 , 129 ;羅森塔爾在月刊, 1902年,頁。 49-52; Ryssel, in Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 1900, pp. 49-52 ; Ryssel ,在神學Studien與Kritiken , 1900年,頁。 363-403, 505-541; 1901, pp. 363-403 , 505-541 ; 1901年,頁。 75-109, 270-294, 547-592; 1902, pp. 75-109 , 270-294 , 547-592 ; 1902年,頁。 205-261, 347-420; Schechter, in JQR xii. 205-261 , 347-420 ; Schechter已在JQR十二。 266-274; Schlögel, in ZDMG liii. 266-274 ; Schlögel ,在ZDMG liii 。 669-682; Smend, in Theologische Literaturzeitung, 1897, pp. 669-682 ; Smend ,在神學Literaturzeitung , 1897年,頁。 161, 265; Steiniger, in Stade's Zeitschrift, xxi. 161 , 265 ; Steiniger ,在體育場的雜誌,二十一。 143; Strauss, in Schweizerische Theologische Zeitung, xvii. 143 ; Strauss表示,在瑞士神學報,十七。 65-80; Taylor, in JQR x. 65-80 ;泰勒,在JQR十 470-488; xv. 470-488 ;十五。 440-474, 604-626; xvii. 440-474 , 604-626 ;十七。 238-239; idem, in Journal of Theological Studies, i. 238-239 ;同上,在神學研究雜誌,一 571-583; Touzard, in Revue Biblique, vi. 571-583 ;圖扎爾,在雜誌Biblique ,六。 271-282, 547-573; vii. 271-282 , 547-573 ;七。 33 58; ix. 45-67, 525-563. Principal editions of the Greek text: Fritzsche, Libri Apocryphi Veteris Testamenti Grœce, Leipsic, 1871; Holmes and Parsons, Vetus Testamentum Grœcum cum Variis Lectionibus, iv., Oxford, 1827; Swete, The Old Testament in Greek, ii., Cambridge, 1891. Of the Syriac text: Lagarde, Libri Veteris Testamenti Apocryphi Syriace, Leipsic, 1861; Ceriani, Codex Syro-Hexaplaris Ambrosianus Photolithographice Editus, Milan, 1874. On the other translations derived from the Greek: Peters, Der Jüngst Wiederaufgefundene Hebräische Text des Buches Ecclesiasticus, pp. 33 58 ;九。 45-67 , 525-563 。主版希臘文:弗里切,利布里Apocryphi Veteris Testamenti Grœce , Leipsic , 1871年; Holmes和帕森斯, Vetus Testamentum Grœcum兼說不同Lectionibus ,四。 ,牛津, 1827年; Swete ,舊約中希臘,二。 ,劍橋, 1891年。其中敘利亞文文字:拉嘉德,利布里Veteris Testamenti Apocryphi Syriace , Leipsic , 1861年; Ceriani ,法典Syro - Hexaplaris Ambrosianus Photolithographice Editus ,米蘭, 1874年。論其他翻譯來自希臘文:彼得斯,明鏡Jüngst Wiederaufgefundene Hebräische文字萬Buches Ecclesiasticus ,頁。 35 et seq.; Herkenne, De Veteris Latini Ecclesiastici Capitibus i.-xliii., Leipsic, 1899; Ryssel, in Kautzsch, Apokryphen, i. Chief general commentaries: Fritzsche, Die Weisheit Jesus Sirach's Erklärt und Uebersetzt (Exegetisches Handbuch zu den Apokryphen), Leipsic, 1859; Edersheim, in Wace, Apocrypha, ii., London, 1888; Ryssel, in Kautzsch, Apokryphen, i. Special studies (following Schürer's list): Gfrörer, Philo, ii. 18-52, Stuttgart, 1831; Dähne, Geschichtliche Darstellung der Jüdisch-Alexandrinischen Religionsphilosophie, ii. 35起。 ; Herkenne ,者Veteris拉提尼Ecclesiastici Capitibus島,四十三。 , Leipsic , 1899 ; Ryssel ,在Kautzsch , Apokryphen ,一,總務科科長的評注:弗里切,模具智慧耶穌Sirach的Erklärt與Uebersetzt ( Exegetisches手冊楚蘭旦Apokryphen ) , Leipsic , 1859年;愛德生,在Wace ,偽經,二。 ,倫敦, 1888年; Ryssel ,在Kautzsch , Apokryphen島專項研究的報告(以下Schürer的名單) : Gfrörer ,斐羅,二。 18-52 ,斯圖加特, 1831年; Dähne , Geschichtliche Darstellung之Jüdisch - Alexandrinischen Religionsphilosophie ,二。 126-150, Halle, 1834; Winer, De Utriusque Siracidœ Ætate, Erlangen, 1832; Zunz, GV pp. 126-150 ,哈雷, 1834年;納,德Utriusque Siracidœ Ætate埃爾蘭根, 1832年; Zunz菌頁。 100-105 (2d ed., pp. 106-111); Ewald, Ueber das Griechische Spruchbuch Jesus' Sohnes Sirach's, in Jahrbücher der Biblischen Wissenschaft, iii. 100-105 (二維版。頁。 106-111 ) ;埃瓦爾德,論之Griechische Spruchbuch耶穌的Sohnes Sirach的,在年鑑之Biblischen科學,三。 125-140; Bruch, Weisheitslehre der Hebräer, pp. 125-140 ;布魯赫, Weisheitslehre之Hebräer ,頁。 266-319, Strasburg, 1851; Horowitz, Das Buch Jesus Sirach, Breslau, 1865; Montet, Etude du Livre de Jésus, Fils de Sirach, au Point de Vue Critique, Dogmatique et Moral, Montauban, 1870; Grätz, in Monatsschrift, 1872, pp. 266-319 ,斯特拉斯堡, 1851年;霍洛維茨,達斯圖書耶穌Sirach ,布雷斯勞, 1865年; Montet ,練習杜書耶穌,菲斯日Sirach , 1.00點觀點的批判, Dogmatique與道德,曼托邦, 1870年;格拉茨,在月刊, 1872年,頁。 49, 97; Merguet, Die Glaubens- und Sittenlehre des Buches Jesus Sirach, Königsberg, 1874; Sellgmann, Das Buch der Weisheit des Jesus Sirach in Seinem Verhältniss zu den Salomon. 49 , 97 ; Merguet ,模具Glaubens ,與Sittenlehre萬Buches耶穌Sirach , Königsberg , 1874年; Sellgmann ,達斯圖書之智慧之耶穌Sirach在Seinem Verhältniss楚蘭旦所羅門。 Sprüchen und Seiner Historischen Bedeutung, Breslau, 1883; Bickell, Ein Alphabetisches Lied Jesus Sirach's, in Zeitschrift für Katholische Theologie, 1882, pp. Sprüchen與Seiner Historischen意義,布雷斯勞, 1883年; Bickell ,艾因Alphabetisches歌耶穌Sirach的,在雜誌天主教神學, 1882年,頁。 319-333; Drummond, Philo Judœus, 1888, i. 319-333 ;德拉蒙德,斐羅Judœus , 1888年,島 144-155; Margoliouth, An Essay on the Place of Ecclesiasticus in Semitic Literature, Oxford, 1890; idem, The Language and Metre of Ecclesiasticus, in Expositor, 1890, pp. 144-155 ; Margoliouth ,論地點Ecclesiasticus在猶太人文學,牛津, 1890年;同上,語言和米Ecclesiasticus ,在Expositor , 1890年,頁。 295-320, 381-391; Bois, Essai sur les Origines de la Philosophie Judéo-Alexandrine, pp. 295-320 , 381-391 ;木材Essai要件起源哲學猶太教和亞歷山大,頁。 160-210, 313-372, Paris, 1890; Perles, Notes Critiques sur le Texte de l' Ecclésiastique, in REJ xxxv. 160-210 , 313-372 ,巴黎, 1890年;珍珠,筆記批判河畔樂文本阿扎瓦克Ecclésiastique ,在REJ三十五。 48-64; Krauss, Notes on Sirach, in JQR xi. 48-64 ;克勞斯,附註Sirach ,在JQR十一。 150; Müller, Strophenbau und Responsion, Vienna, 1898; Gasser, Die Bedeutung der Sprüche Jesu ben Sira für die Datierung des Althebräischnen Spruchbuches, Güterslohe, 1904; comp. 150 ;穆勒, Strophenbau和應答,維也納, 1898年;加瑟,模具意義之Sprüche本特希拉f黵耶穌死於Datierung萬Althebräischnen Spruchbuches , Güterslohe , 1904年;補償。 also Schürer, Gesch.還Schürer , Gesch 。 iii.三。 157-166; André, Les Apocryphes de l' Ancien Testament, pp. 157-166 ;安德烈,法國Apocryphes阿扎瓦克舊全書,頁。 271-310, Florence, 1903; Toy, in Cheyne and Black, Encyc. 271-310 ,佛羅倫薩, 1903年;玩具,在陳和黑色, Encyc 。 Bibl. Bibl 。 sv Ecclesiasticus and Sirach; Nestle, Sirach, in Hastings, Dict.西沃特Ecclesiasticus和Sirach ;雀巢, Sirach ,在黑斯廷斯,快譯通。 Bible.TIL


This subject presentation in the original English language本主題介紹在原來的英文


Send an e-mail question or comment to us: E-mail發送電子郵件的問題或意見給我們:電子郵箱

The main BELIEVE web-page (and the index to subjects) is at主要相信網頁(和索引科目),是在