Surely the serpent will bite without enchantment; and a babbler is no better.
Jump to: Barnes • Benson • BI • Cambridge • Clarke • Darby • Ellicott • Expositor's • Exp Dct • Gaebelein • GSB • Gill • Gray • Haydock • Hastings • Homiletics • JFB • KD • Kelly • KJT • Lange • MacLaren • MHC • MHCW • Parker • Poole • Pulpit • Sermon • SCO • TTB • WES • TSK
EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)If the serpent bite for lack of enchantment, there is no advantage to the master of the tongue. It seems best to follow the LXX. and other interpreters, and take the “master of the tongue” to mean the snake charmer, who possesses the “voice of the charmer” (Psalm 58:5). The whisperings of the snake charmer, so often described by Eastern travellers, are referred to also in Jeremiah 8:17, and in a passage, probably founded on the present text (Ecclesiasticus 12:13), “Who will pity a charmer that is bitten with a serpent?” The mention of the serpent in Ecclesiastes 10:8 seems to have suggested another illustration of the advantage of wisdom in the different effects of snake-charming, as used by the expert or the unskilful. The phrase, “master of the tongue,” seems to have been chosen in order to lead on to the following verses, which speak of the different use of the tongue by the wise man and the fool.
No better.—No advantage to. (See Note on Ecclesiastes 1:3.)Ecclesiastes 10:11. Surely the serpent will bite without enchantment — Unless it be seasonably prevented by the art and care of the charmer. This is an allusion to the general opinion, then and still prevailing in the eastern countries, that serpents might be charmed so as to be prevented from biting by certain incantations, or by singing and music. See note on Psalm 58:4-5. And a babbler is no better — Hebrew, בעל הלשׁון, the master of the tongue; which may be understood either of a rash, loose talker, a mere babbler, or of a backbiter and slanderer. Each of these is in the habit of using his tongue as if he were lord of it, and often does much mischief thereby, especially the latter, who, by his malicious words, bites secretly like a serpent, and gives deadly wounds to the characters of the absent.Psalm 58:4 note. Without enchantment; if not seasonably prevented by the art and care of the charmer; which practice he doth not justify, but only mention by way of resemblance. See on Psalm 58:5.
A babbler, Heb. a master of the tongue; which may be understood, either,
1. Of the detractor or slanderer, who like a serpent bites secretly; who may be so called, because he takes liberty to use his tongue as he lists, without any regard either to the offence of God, or to the injury of others; like them who said, Our lips are our own; who is lord over us? But I do not see either why this phrase should be limited to the detractor, which equally belongs to all abusers of the tongue in any other way; or how this particular vice of detraction comes to be inserted here among things of a quite differing nature. Or,
2. Of an eloquent person, who may well be called a master of the tongue, or of speech, nothing being more usual in the Hebrew, than to call a man master of that which he excels in, or hath a full and free power to use. And this clause is and may be rendered thus, And there is no excellency or profit to the master of the tongue, i.e. the most eloquent person, who doth not understand and in due time use the charmer’s art, cannot by all his eloquence afterward hinder the biting of the serpent, or mischievous effects of it; and so this agrees with the principal scope of the chapter, which is to show the necessity and usefulness of wisdom, and the mischief of folly. Jeremiah 8:17. Or rather, "without a whisper" (t); without hissing, or any noise, giving no warning at all: so the Vulgate Latin version renders it, "in silence"; some serpents bite, others sting, some both; see Proverbs 23:32; some hiss, others not, as here;
and a babbler is no better; a whisperer, a backbiter, a busy tattling body, that goes from house to house, and, in a private manner, speaks evil of civil governments, of ministers of the word, and of other persons; and; in a secret way, defames men, and detracts from their characters: such an one is like a venomous viper, a poisonous serpent or adder; and there is no more guarding against him than against such a creature that bites secretly.Surely the serpent will bite without enchantment; and a babbler is no better.
EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)11. Surely the serpent will bite without enchantment] Literally, If the serpent will bite without enchantment, i.e. in the absence of skill to charm it. It is hardly necessary to dwell at length on a topic so familiar as the serpent-charming of the East. It will be enough to say that from time immemorial in Egypt, Syria, Persia, India, there have been classes of persons who in some way or other have gained a power over many kinds of snakes, drawing them from their retreats, handling them with impunity, making them follow their footsteps like a tame dog. The power was really or ostensibly connected with certain muttered words or peculiar intonations of the voice. We find the earliest traces of it in the magicians of Pharaoh’s court (Exodus 7:11). So the “deaf adder that cannot be charmed” becomes the type of those whom no appeal to reason or conscience can restrain (Psalm 58:5; Jeremiah 8:17; Sir 12:13). The proverb obviously stands in the same relation to the “breaking down of walls” in Ecclesiastes 10:8, as that of the “blunt axe” did to the “cutting down trees” of Ecclesiastes 10:9. “If a serpent meets you as you go on with your work, if the adder’s poison that is on the lips of the traitor or the slanderer (Psalm 140:3; Romans 3:13) is about to do its deadly work, are you sure that you have the power to charm? If not, you are not likely to escape being bitten.” The apodosis of the sentence interprets the proverb. “If a serpent will bite in the absence of the charmer, there is no profit in a babbler (literally, a lord or master of tongue, see note on ch. Ecclesiastes 5:10), who does not know the secret of the intonation that charms it.” No floods of wind-bag eloquence will-avail in the statesman or the orator if the skill that persuades is wanting.Verse 11. - The last proverb of this little series shows the necessity of seizing the right opportunity. Surely the serpent will bite without enchantment. The Authorized Version is not quite correct. The particle אם, with which the verse begins, is here conditional, and the rendering should be, If the serpent bite, etc.; the apodosis comes in the next clause. The idea is taken up from ver. 8. If one handles a serpent without due precaution or without knowing the secret of charming it, one will suffer for it. The taming and charming of poisonous snakes is still, as heretofore, practiced in Egypt and the East. What the secret of this power is has not been accurately determined; whether it belongs especially to persons of a certain idiosyncrasy, whether it is connected with certain words or intonations of the voice or musical sounds, we do not know. Of the existence of the power from remote antiquity there can be no question. Allusions to it in Scripture are common enough (see Exodus 7:11; Psalm 58:5; Jeremiah 8:17; Ecclus. 12:13). If a serpent before it is charmed is dangerous, what then? The Authorized Version affords no sensible apodosis: And a babbler is no better. The words rendered "babbler" (baul hallashon) are literally "master of the tongue," and by them is meant the ἐπαοιδός, "the serpent-charmer." The clause should run, Then there is no use in the charmer. If the man is bitten before he has time to use his charm, it is no profit to him that he has the secret, it is too late to employ it when the mischief is done. This is to shut the stable door after the steed is stolen. The maxim enforces the warning against being too late; the greatest skill is useless unless applied at the right moment. The Septuagint translates virtually as above, "If a serpent bites when not charmed (ἐν οὐ ψιθυρισμῷ), then there is no advantage to the charmer (τῷ ἐπᾴδοντι)." The Vulgate departs from the context, rendering, Si mordeat serpens in silentio (i.e. probably "uncharmed"), nihil eo minus habet qui occulte detrahit, "He is nothing better who slanders secretly," which St. Jerome thus explains: the serpent and the slanderer are alike, for as the serpent stealthily infuses its poison, so the secret slanderer pours his venom into another's breast. Ecclesiastes 5:12; Ecclesiastes 6:1. Knobel, Hengst., and others give to the כ of כּשׁ the meaning of "according to," or "in consequence of which," which harmonizes neither with ra'ah nor with raithi. Also Kleinert's translation: "There is a misery - I have seen it under the sun - in respect of an error which proceedeth from the ruler," is untenable; for by this translation ra'ah is made the pred. while it is the subj. to ישׁ, and kishgagah the unfolding of this subject. Hitzig also remarks: "as [wie ein] an error, instead of which we have: in respect to [um einen] an error;" for he confounds things incongruous. Hitz., however, rightly recognises, as also Kleinert, the כ as Caph veritatis, which measures the concrete with the idea. Isaiah 13:6, compares the individual with the general which therein comes to view, Ezekiel 26:10; Nehemiah 7:2; cf. 2 Samuel 9:8. Koheleth saw an evil under the sun; something which was like an error, appeared to him altogether like an error which proceedeth from the ruler. If we could translate שׁיּ by quod exiit, then כ would be the usual Caph similitudinis; but since it must be translated by quod exit, וגו כשׁ places the observed fact under a comprehensive generality: it had the nature of an error proceeding from the ruler. If this is correct, it is so much the less to be assumed that by השׁלּיט God is to be understood (Daniel 5:21), as Jerome was taught by his Hebraeus: quod putent homines in hac inaequalitate rerum illum non juste et ut aequum est judicare. It is a governor in a state that is meant, by whom an error might easily be committed, and only too frequently is committed, in the promotion of degradation of persons. But since the world, with its wonderful division of high and low, appears like as it were an error proceeding from the Most High, there certainly falls a shadow on the providence of God Himself, the Governor of the world; but yet not so immediately that the subject of discourse is an "error" of God, which would be a saying more than irreverent. יּצא equals יּצה is the metaplastic form for יּצאה or יּצאת (for which at Deuteronomy 28:57 incorrectly יּצת), not an error of transcription, as Olsh. supposes; vid., to the contrary. מלּפני (Symm. ἐξ ἔμπροστηεν) with יצא is the old usus loq. There now follows a sketch of the perverted world.
LinksEcclesiastes 10:11 Interlinear
Ecclesiastes 10:11 Parallel Texts
Ecclesiastes 10:11 NIV
Ecclesiastes 10:11 NLT
Ecclesiastes 10:11 ESV
Ecclesiastes 10:11 NASB
Ecclesiastes 10:11 KJV
Ecclesiastes 10:11 Bible Apps
Ecclesiastes 10:11 Parallel
Ecclesiastes 10:11 Biblia Paralela
Ecclesiastes 10:11 Chinese Bible
Ecclesiastes 10:11 French Bible
Ecclesiastes 10:11 German Bible