the "better" proverb in rabbinic literature

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ��4 | doi �0.��63/�5700704-��34��60

The “Better” Proverb in Rabbinic Literature

Ariel Ram PasternakBen-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva 84105, Israel

[email protected]

Shamir YonaBen-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva 84105, Israel

[email protected]

Abstract

The “Better Proverb” is a rhetorical form found in ancient Near Eastern literatures, including the Bible, and in Rabbinic literature. In this paper we discuss the use of this form in Rabbinic literature, focusing on the developments and changes that occurred in the later literature. We will show that the rabbis were familiar with biblical rhetori-cal features, used them, and changed them if needed to meet their own rhetorical pur-poses and goals.

Keywords

Rabbinic Literature – Better Proverb – Rhetorical Devices

“Better” Proverbs valorize one action or thing over a different action or thing. As the designation implies, this type of aphorism, which is found widely in the literatures of the ancient Near East, asserts that one thing is better than some other thing. In Egyptian wisdom literature, the pattern frequently appears in the Proverbs of Amenemope,1 whose close relationship to biblical wisdom has

1 Amenemope 9.5–8 [cf. Miriam Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973), vol. 2, p. 152, (hereinafter AEL)]: “Better is poverty in the land of the god than wealth in the storehouse. Better are (mere) loaves of bread when the heart is pleasant than wealth with vexation.” Other examples can be found in 16.11–14 [cf. AEL vol. 2, p. 156]: “Better to be praised when loved by people than to have wealth in the storehouse.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014) 27–40

brill.com/rrj

28 pasternak and yona


been discussed extensively in modern research.2 The pattern occurs also in the Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar3 and, frequently, in the Syriac version of Ahiqar.4 In the Hebrew Ben-Sira, which relies heavily upon the style and the rhetoric of biblical wisdom literature, we find several examples.5 In biblical wisdom litera-ture the pattern is attested in scores of aphorisms, most of them in the Book of Proverbs and the Scroll of Ecclesiastes.6 But beyond the wisdom writings, it is attested also in a number of other biblical books, sometimes in prosaic units. For example in Judg. 8:2 we find: אביעזר מבציר אפרים עללות טוב הלא

Better is bread when the heart is pleasant than wealth with vexation,” and in Amenemope 22.15–16 [cf. AEL vol. 2, p. 159]: “Better off is the man whose speech remains in his belly than one who speaks it to (his) harm.”

2 M.V. Fox, Proverbs 10–31 (AB), (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008), pp. 596–597, 671–672, 705–733, 753–767; N. Shupak, “Some Common Idioms in the Biblical and the Egyptian Wisdom Literatures,” in Shnaton, An Annual for Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies, 1977, pp. 233–236 [Heb.]; N. Shupak, “The Instruction of Amenemope and Proverbs 22:17–24:22 from the perspective of contemporary research”, in R.L. Troxel, et al., eds. Seeking Out the Wisdom of the Ancients (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2005), pp. 203–220; V.A. Hurowitz, Proverbs (Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 2012), vol. 1, pp. 441–448 [Heb.]. See also N. Shupak, “Ancient Egyptian Literature,” in Z. Talshir, ed., The Literature of the Hebrew Bible (Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi Press, 2005), pp. 605–656 [Heb.].

3 In one case (B. Porten and A. Yardeni, Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt (Jerusalem: Hebrew University Press, 1993), vol. 3, p. 36, line 83b), the word ‘tov’, meaning, better, is replaced by the word mighty: “(for) mightier is ambush of mouth than ambush of battle.” On this aphorism see S. Yona, The Aramaic Words of Ahiqar and Biblical Wisdom Literature: Context, Structure and Style (Heb.; unpublished M.A. Thesis; Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1990), pp. 74–76. The second case (ibid., p. 44, line 152) is incomplete: “Better he who masters . . .” Three more examples, all using the same unique pattern A is better than B, C, and anything else, can be found in (ibid.) p. 39, line 89; p. 46, lines 159–160, and see also Prov. 27:3. See also S. Yona, “Shared stylistic patterns in the Aramaic proverbs of Ahiqar and Hebrew wisdom,” in ANES 44 (2007), pp. 29–49.

4 In the Syriac version of Ahiqar (translated into English in 1913 and into Hebrew in 1937; see n. 22), there is a group of ten “better” proverbs, which are similar in content and structure to “better” proverbs from Ecclesiastes and Proverbs; a few of them will be mention below.

5 For example (20:31, all examples are taken from: P.S. Skehan and A.A. di Lella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira (AB) (New York: Doubleday, 1987): “Better the one who hides his folly than the one who hides his wisdom.” In Sir. 40:18–26 we find 10 consecutive verses which use the “better” pattern.

6 Prov. 3:14, 8:10, 8:11, 8:19a, 12:9, 15:16, 15:17, 16:8, 16:16a, 17:1, 19:1, 21:9, 21:19, 25:7, 25:24, 27:5, 27:10, 28:6 and 8:10b, 8:19b, 16:16b; Eccl. 3:22a, 4:6, 4:9, 4:13, 5:4, 6:3b, 6:9, 7:1, 7:2, 7:3, 7:5, 7;8, 7:10. In Prov. 21:3 and 22:1 word ‘better’ is replaced with the words ‘rather than’. In Prov. 3:15a the word ‘better’ is replaced with the word ‘precious’. In Eccl. 10:1a the word ‘better’ is replaced with the word ‘precious’, and in Eccl. 2:24, 3:12, 3:22, 8:15 we find different types of the “better” pattern that use the words ‘not/nothing better’. Some of the variations will be discussed further on.

29the “better” proverb in rabbinic literature


“Are not Ephraim’s gleanings better than Abiezer’s vintage?” Similarly, Exod. 14:12 states: כי טוב לנו עבד את מצרים ממתנו במדבר “Indeed it is better for us to serve the Egyptians than to die in the wilderness.”7 1 Sam. 15:22b offers: הנה שמע -Certainly, obedience is better than sacrifice; com“ מזבח טוב להקשיב מחלב איליםpliance than the fat of rams.” The deep structure of this proverb is “Obedience is better than the fat of rams.”8

It appears that in the “better” proverb, as with many other rhetorical devices, biblical prose narrative borrowed and made use of rhetorical devices that orig-inated in poetry. This supports the idea, demonstrated on more than one occa-sion, that biblical prose is closer to biblical poetry than had been thought a few generations ago.9

Most scholars who have considered the “better” proverb, such as Zimmerli, Hermisson, Bryce, Ogden, Paran, Yona, Forti, and Fox,10 have dealt with its two main forms, which will be explained below. However, a deeper examination of the phenomenon suggests that there are other types of “better” proverb that

7 In this verse we find a comparison between death in the desert to slavery in Egypt. Normally death is considered to be worse than slavery. On the other hand, in this verse the desert, representing the freedom and the independence of the Jewish people after long years as slaves, is preferred to Egypt, which represents the suppression of Jacob’s sons. Apparently, the desert was usually preferable to Egypt but the fear of death tilts the scale in this case in favor of slavery in Egypt. In Ozar Midrashim (ed. J.D. Eisenstein, New York: Eisenstein, 1915), p. 513, Rabbeinu HaKadosh, Perek HaShmona, there is a list of eight situations that are worse than death, including exile, poverty and bereavement. This is to say that sometimes death is not considered to be the worst thing.

8 Similar ideas can be found in Hos. 6:1; Ps. 40:7; Prov. 15:8; Eccl. 4:1; Jer. 7:22–23; Amos 5:21–25.

9 See, for example, J.L. Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981); M. Paran, Forms of the Priestly Style in the Pentateuch (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1989) [Heb.].

10 W. Zimmerli, “Zur Strukter der alttestamentlichen Weisheit”, in ZAW 61 (1933), p. 192; H.J. Hermisson, Studien zur israelitischen Spruchweisheit (WMANT), (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag des Erziehungsvereins, 1968), pp. 155–56; G.E. Bryce, “ ‘Better’-Proverbs: An Historical and Structural Study,” in L.C. McGaughy, ed., SBL Book of Seminar Papers, (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1972), pp. 343–354; idem., A Legacy of Wisdom, (Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press, 1979), pp. 71–75, 223, n. 31; G.S. Ogden, “The “Better”-Proverb (Tôb-Spruch), Rhetorical Criticism, and Qoheleth,” in JBL 96, 4 (1977), pp. 489–505; idem., Qoheleth (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987), pp. 99–110; Paran (see n. 9); S. Yona, “Rhetorical features in Talmudic literature,” in HUCA 77 (2006), pp. 76–77; T. Forti, Animal Imagery in the Book of Proverbs (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2008), pp. 152–153; Fox (see n. 2) pp. 488–489, 595–598, 939. See also C.L. Seow, Ecclesiastes (AB) (New York: Doubleday, 1997), pp. 185–192, 240–251.



developed over the course of time and that are found primarily in Rabbinic literature.

What characteristics define the “better” proverb? By-and-large, as noted already by Hermisson and Ogden,11 the pattern is A is better than B and A + B are better than C + D.12 In most cases, the comparative adjective “better” (‘tov’) is followed by the prefixed particle m. Most of the time the word “bet-ter” appears at the beginning of the first clause of the aphorism, and the pre-fixed particle m at the beginning of the second clause. However, infrequently, as in Eccl. 6:3 and 9:4b, the two elements appear together.13 Moreover, in many examples, such as Prov. 3:15a and 21:3,14 other comparative adjectives appear in place of “better,” while in some cases, for example, Eccl. 8:15, we find the expression ‘eyn tov’ (not better).15 Infrequently, as in Eccl. 4:2,16 the pattern appears without the comparative adjective at all.

Notwithstanding all that we have stated, we can find isolated biblical verses in which there are “better” proverbs that deviate slightly from the patterns listed by Hermisson. Thus, for example, the pattern “A is better than something

11 See Hermisson (see n. 10), pp. 155–156; Ogden, “The ‘Better’-Proverb (Tôb-Spruch), Rhetorical Criticism, and Qoheleth” (see n. 10), pp. 490, 492–494.

12 Irregular cases can be found in Eccl. 7:2, 7:5 in the pattern: A + B is better than A + C; in Eccl. 5:4 the article is built in a model of A is better than B + C; in Eccl. 4:3 which refers to the pervious verse which uses the model of A is better than B and C and in Eccl. 6:3 in which the order of presentation has changed to the model of B is better than A. In this example there is a comparison between stillborn, fetus or dead offspring, and a living human being, while listing five different activities related to the living human. Ogden believes this is a unique example of this structure. In Qoheleth Rabbah 4:1, there are a few comparisons, listings three and four activities accompanying one of the organs or both of them. In Lev. Rab. 3:1, we can find another saying which build upon the “better prov-erb” pattern with complex comparison: “Better is the one who has a vegetable patch and who fertilizes it and hoes and make a living from it than one who goes and undertakes to share-crop the plot of others for half the harvest.” See Ogden, “The ‘Better’-Proverb (Tôb-Spruch), Rhetorical Criticism, and Qoheleth” (see n. 10), pp. 492–493.

13 Eccl. 6:3: “If a man beget a hundred children, and live many years, so that the days of his years are many, but his soul have not enough of good, and moreover he have no burial; I say, that an untimely birth is better than he;” Eccl. 9:4b: “a living dog is better than a dead lion.”

14 Prov. 3:15a: “She is more precious than rubies.” Prov. 21:3: “To do righteousness and justice is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice.”

15 See G.S. Ogden, “Qoheleth’s Use of the ‘Nothing Is Better’ Form,” in JBL 98, 3 (1979), pp. 339–350.

16 Eccl. 4:2: “Wherefore I praised the dead that are already dead more than the living that are yet alive.”



else” appears in the Bible mostly in the negative form using the expression “Not better,” as in Eccl. 3:22a: וראיתי כי אין טוב מאשר ישמח האדם במעשיו “I saw that there is nothing better for a person than that one should enjoy one’s posses-sions.” And in the pattern: “A is better than something else,” where the some-thing else belongs to a specific group of objects, we find the following (Prov. 8:11b): בה ישוו לא חפצים ”And all possessions cannot be compared to it“ וכל where “it,” of course, is wisdom.

In the verses in which we find the compound pattern A + B is better than C + D, the aphorism will always begin with the assertion that C is worth more or is more important than A, and it will continue with the assertion that B is worth more or is more important than D. Because of the greater status of B, it will follow that the entities or qualities mentioned in the first half of the aphorism (A +B) will be better than the entities or qualities mentioned in the second half of the aphorism (C + D).17 This explains the aphorism at Prov. 17:1: טוב פת Better is a dry crust with peace than a house“ חרבה ושלוה בה מבית מלא זבחי ריבfull of feasting with strife.” The dry bread (A) is not by its nature preferable to a large amount (a full house) of choice and fatty meat (C). However, peace (B) is preferable to strife (D). The superiority of peace turns the dry crust, which is accompanied by peace, to something preferable to juicy meat eaten in the midst of strife.18

1 The “Better” Proverb in Rabbinic Literature

In Rabbinic literature in the widest sense the authors of proverbs were not bound by the previously enumerated rhetorical norms. Consequently, the authors of Rabbinic sayings lent to their proverbs greater variety in choice of words, syntax, style, and ideas. In other words, change and variety may be expressed both in the vocabulary of comparison and in the content of the com-parison, which deviate dramatically from the fixed patterns found in biblical literature. The contents of the sayings also change from the contents of biblical

17 Fox (see n. 2), p. 597.18 The term ‘ziḇhey riḇ’ (feasting with strife) is likely not related to sacrifices, and it contains

half of C (house full of sacrifice), that is, a large amount of meat, and D which means contention and quarrel. Fox and others pointed out the resemblance between the verse and Amenemope 9.7–8 [cf. AEL vol. 2, p. 152].This resemblance reinforces the hypothesis that the verse does not deal with sacrifices. Fox, (see n. 2), pp. 623–624 and there further bibliography.



proverbs. For instance, we find in Rabbinic literature “better” sayings in which two objects in daily use are contrasted. B. Ber. 44b is typical:

טבא ביעתא מגולגלתא משיתא קייסי סולתא

Better is an egg that is slightly roasted than six measures of semolina.19

This proverb contrasts the nutritional value of a soft boiled egg with that of six measures of semolina. This proverb is built upon the developed pattern A + B is better than C + D.

Naturally, it is easier to identify the “better” proverb form in sayings that are based upon one of the two structures of “better” proverbs found in Hebrew Scripture, described above. The more a proverb is nuanced and distanced from the basic biblical structures, the harder it is to identify it. In fact, one often finds in Rabbinic literature “better” sayings that feature not a single one of the characteristics of the biblical “better” proverbs. That is, in some sayings the word tov is replaced by another word, and the structure of the saying is not A is better than B or A + B are better than C + D. Still we can define these sayings as developments of the biblical “better” proverbs. As we will see later on, the rab-bis did not hesitate to change the basic patterns of this rhetorical device. They not only duplicate the biblical patterns but also develop and improve them.

One of the things we learn from examining this process is that, contrary to widely held notions about Rabbinic literature vis-à-vis Hebrew Scripture, the rabbis contribute not only new ideas but also new literary devices, which inform us of the yet to be explored interest of and contribution of the rabbis to the realm of aesthetics.

After discussing the “better” proverb in the Bible and in the Near Eastern literature, we will demonstrate the rabbinic use of this rhetorical device. First we present “better” proverbs that are structurally identical, or almost identical, to their parallels in the Bible, but which are not based upon biblical usages of the “better” proverb.20 Then we shall present “better” aphorisms that exhibit obvious features of stylistic or lexical divergence from the biblical patterns.

19 The text is according to MS Paris 671. On this aphorism see S. Yona (see n. 10), pp. 76–77; A.R. Pasternak, “New Jar Full of Old:” Biblical Rhetorical Features in Rabbinic Literature (Heb.; M.A. Thesis, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, 2010), p. 111.

20 Two aphorisms which are based upon biblical use of the “better” proverb can be found in T. Hul. 2:17: “R. Meir says: ‘It is better that you should not vow, than that you should vow and not pay—best of all is that you should not vow at all’. R. Judah says: ‘It is better that you should not vow, than that you should vow and not pay—Better than either is



2 Sophisticated Comparison in a Rabbinic Saying Based upon Models of Comparative Proverbs found in Scripture

The first example to support our thesis is found in Ecclesiastes Rabbah 4 (Vilna edition):

טבא צפרא חדא כפיתא מן מאה פרחין21

Better is one tied bird than a hundred flying birds.

This proverb is based upon the model A (one bird) + B (trapped) is better than C (a hundred birds) + D (flying). The proverb is quoted in the framework of a discussion concerning Eccl. 4:6:

טוב מלא כף נחת ממלא חפנים עמל ורעות רוח

Better is a handful of gratification than two fistfuls of labor that is pursuit of wind.

There are many variations on this proverb in Rabbinic literature and beyond it. Midrash Zuta Qoheleth 4 (ed. S. Buber) quotes a slightly different form of this proverb:

טבא ציפרתא חדא בפח ממאה פרוחין

Better is one bird in a trap than a hundred flying birds.

he who brings his lamb to the courtyard and lays his hands on it and slaughters it’.” Both aphorisms are based on Eccl. 5:4: “Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay.” It is easy to see the development of the pattern from A (do not vow) is better than B (to vow) + C (and not pay), to A (do not vow) is better than B (to vow) + C (and not pay) and D (do not vow at all/to vow and pay your vow) is better than both of them. In R. Judah’s saying there is, probably, en error (omitting of the word ‘pay’, and in some versions of the words ‘it is better that you should not vow, than that you should vow and not pay’). The distorted saying, especially in the first version without the word ‘pay’, is unreasonable, and in our opinion in this case, like many other cases in the bible and in Rabbinic literature, a rhetorical pattern can help us to identify the original version of the text.

21 The text is according to MS Vatican 291/11. According to Buber the word ‘כפיתא’, tied, should be replaced by the word ‘בפחתא’, in a trap. See S. Buber, Midrash Zuta (Lvov, 1895), p. 126, n. 12.



It appears that the difference between the two forms of the proverb is purely a matter of style.

In the Syriac version of Ahiqar we find a series of aphorisms that express the same message; one of them is identical to our Rabbinic aphorism:

(My son), better is a drumstick in thy hand than a wing [?] in the pot of other people; And better is a sheep that is at hand than a heifer that is far off . . .And better one sparrow in thy hand than a thousand on the wing.22

The message of these proverbs is identical: better is a small thing (A, one bird) your possession/ trap (B) than a large quantity (C, many birds) that you are not certain will come into your possession (D, they are flying).23

In B. Hag. 10a we find:

טבא חדא פלפלתא חריפתא ממלי צנא דקרי24

Better is one spicy pepper than an entire basket of pumpkins.

That is to say, a small amount of a vegetable (A) of high quality (B) is better than a large quantity (C) of poor quality or lacking in distinction (D). In other words, there is an advantage to the pepper because it adds taste to the cooked dish.

Other examples appear in Avot de-Rabbi Nathan A, 1:50:

טוב עשרה טפחים ועומד ממאה אמה ונופל25

Better a fence ten handbreadths high (A) that stands (B) than one a hun-dred handbreadths high (C) that falls down (D).

22 The text and translation by F.C. Conybeare, J.R. Harris and A.S. Lewis, The Story of Ahikar (Cambridge: University Press, 1913). A different translation can be found in A. Yellin, The Book of Ahikar the Wise (Jerusalem: Ha-Ma’arav, 1937, 2nd ed.) [Heb.]. Yellin (p. 61) noted the similarity between the words of Ahiqar and the aphorism in Qoheleth Rabbah.

23 One should note the similarity between the aphorisms in discussion and some of Aesop’s Fables, especially the fable about the Lion and the Hare. See S.A. Handford, Fables of Aesop, (Melbourne: Penguin Books, 1954), p. 22; S. Span, Aesopi Fabulae (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1960), pp. 10–11 [Heb.].

24 The text is according to MS Vatican 134. 25 The text is according to MS Oxford Opp. 95.



B. B.Q. 111a:

טב למיתב טן דו מלמיתב ארמלו

It is better [for a woman] to dwell as two than to dwell in widowhood.

Mekhilta according to Rabbi Ishmael, Bahodesh 10:11:

טוב אתה לישראל מגלגל חמה טוב אתה לישראל מטיפה של גשמים טוב אתה לישראל יותר מאב ואם

You are more precious to Israel than the sun’s orb. You are more precious to Israel than the gift of rain. You are more precious to Israel than a father or a mother.

There are many more such examples in Rabbinic literature.

3 Development of the Pattern: Changes in the Structure and Change in the Comparative Adjective

3.1 A is Better than B + CLeviticus Rabbah (Margulies) Parashah A (1:16 ; 32:5 in Margulies):

כל ת”ח (תלמיד חכם) שאין בו דעת נבלה טובה הימנו26

As for every disciple of the wise who has no knowledge, the carcass of an animal is better than he.

26 The whole unit is missing in most Lev. Rab. manuscripts, and it is an addition originating at Seder Eliyahu Rab. A version almost identical to this aphorism can be found at Yalkut Shimoni, Lev., 429. A similar version, which may be the original, can be found at Eliyahu Rab., 7 saying: “every disciple of the wise without knowledge, an animal is better off.” Literally, it seems the statement derives from a discussion in Avot de-Rabbi Nathan (A 13; B 22) recommending “hate office holding,” in which a disciple of the wise is compared with a carcass. See M. Margulies, Midrash Wayyikra Rabbah (Jerusalem: Ministry of Education and Culture of Israel, 1953), pp. 32–33 [Heb.]; M. Kadushin, A Conceptual Commentary on Midrash Leviticus Rabbah, (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987), p. 8; S. Schechter, Avot de-Rabbi Natan (New York: Feldheim, 1967), p. 46.



This saying compares in an unusual manner a disciple of the sages who has no knowledge and the carcass of an animal. The far-reaching conclusion appears to be hyperbolic. In its context, the saying means that a disciple of the Rabbinic sages whose ethical behavior and manners are wanting is not a genuine disci-ple of the wise. The carcass of an animal has greater merit than he.

The saying exhibits a number of innovations with respect to the biblical models of the “better” proverb. First of all, the biblical word tov, which is gen-erally found in Scripture, is replaced by the comparative expression tovah hey-menu. Second is the use of the pattern according to which A (the disciple of the wise) + B (who has no knowledge) is less worthy than C (carcass). Now if we turn around the order of the elements in this Rabbinic aphorism to the norma-tive order of the “better” proverb in Scripture, so that the better thing appears at the beginning of the proverb, we arrive at the pattern A (carcass) is better than B (disciple of the wise) + C (who has no knowledge). Finally, the words of comparison are found in this last Rabbinic aphorism at the end or next to the end, unlike where they appear in the Bible, almost always at the beginning of the verse or in the middle of the verse.

3.2 A is Better than B and Better than CGeneis Rabbati, Lekh Lekha, reads:

חביבה מילה מן התורה ומן השבת27

More precious is circumcision than the Torah and the Sabbath.

According to the literal meaning of these words the importance of circumci-sion is greater than that of the Torah and the Sabbath. The comparison word tov is replaced by havivah, and the preposition min is repeated twice, before each of the items compared to circumcision.28

27 The aphorism is according to C. Albeck’s edition (see n. 28). 28 The saying, relatively new, appears to have been influenced by previous discussion about

the deferral of the Shabbat for circumcision (M. Shab. 19, 2; B. Pes. 66a, etc.), and espe-cially from the discussion in the Y. (Vilna), Ned. 3, 9: אמר ר' אלעזר ביר' אבונא מצוות שבת לשני אותה. משל דוחה והמילה מצוותיה שלתורה כל כנגד להודיעך שהיא שקולה מליא מטרניות שהיו באות זו על גב זו ואין את יודע אי זו גדולה מחבירתה זו שהיא יורדת מפניממנה גדולה יודע שחבירתה את -According to the Yerushalmi, the command .חבירתה ment of Shabbat is as important as any other commandment in the Torah and still, it is set aside for the commandment of circumcision. See C. Albeck, Berešit Rabbati, (Jerusalem: Mekize Nirdamim, 1940), p. 74. [Heb.]



3.3 A is Better than Any Specific Thing Another development in the “better” proverb in Rabbinic literature is the pat-tern A is better than anything, sometimes from among a specific group of things and sometimes among all things. This development is sometimes expressed in a positive manner and sometimes in the negative, by means of the word eyn with the addition of the comparative adjective.

B. Shab. 23a offers:

כל השמנין יפין לנר ושמן זית מן המובחרכל השמנין יפין לדיו ושמן זית מן המובחרכל העשנין יפין לדיו ועשן שמן זית מן המובחר כל השרפין יפין לדיו, ושרף נטף29 יפה מכולם30

All types of oil are fine for the lamp and olive oil is preferable.All types of oil are fine for ink and olive oil is preferable.All types of soot are fine for ink and soot of olive oil is preferable.All types of resin are suitable for ink and balsam resin is better than any of them.

In the first two aphorisms there is a comparison between olive oil and other oils. Using the comparative words min hamuvhar creates a model whereby A (olive oil) is better than any other oil there is. The third aphorism is built in the same way, comparing the smoke of burning olive oil to the smoke of any other burning oils. The fourth and final aphorism compares the different types of resin. This aphorism, like the three that precede it in the literary unit, is also built upon the model A (resin, balsam) is better than any other resins, using the comparative words yaffe mikkulam.

29 It appears that the nataf, kataf and cheri are all the same (in some manuscripts they are used alternatively), and are all different names for the persimmon fruit growing in the Dead Sea area (not related to the modern persimmon). R. Shimon believes (B. Kritut 6a): “the cheri is nothing but resin from the kataf trees.” Rashi, in his commentary on B. Shab. 23a, s.v. ‘kataf ’, identified the ‘kataf ’ with the wild plum ‘prunil’. Ramban in his commen-tary on Exod. 30:34, s.v. ‘nataf ’ identified ‘cheri’ with resin, a kind of oil dripping from the persimmon tree, and called by sages ‘kataf ’. J. Felix, Maroth Hamishnah, (Jerusalem: Midrash Bnei Tzion, 1967), p. 125 [Heb.], identified kataf with the balsam tree, and Z. Amar, The Book of Incense, (Tel Aviv: Eretz, 2002), pp. 58–75 [Heb.], and especially on p. 59, presents a similar opinion.

30 The text is according to MS Munich 95, except “All types of soot are fine for ink and soot of olive oil is preferable” (which are missing in MS Munich 95) that are according to MS Vatican 127.



We can detect a guiding hand when we look at the entire unit. The order of the sentences in this unit is not random. The author or redactor begins with two sayings that deal with oil, and he attaches to them two additional sayings that deal with ink. The author or redactor could have arranged these four sen-tences in any order he wanted, but he chose this order, in our opinion, delib-erately in order to create a structure, which if written out as poetry has the appearance of a geometric figure as follows:

OilOil Ink Ink Ink

The use of graphic images in Rabbinic aphorisms to convey information31 is another piece of evidence that at least some literary structures within Rabbinic literature were created to be read silently and observed, and they were not cre-ated orally.

As we shall see later, the last sentence in the unit under discussion uses dif-ferent comparative words that distinguish it from the other sayings. The order of the sayings in this unit could have been different, and we would like to sug-gest that this order is deliberate.

The first aphorism deals with oils that are suitable for the Hanukkah lights. The following three aphorisms discuss the various components of ink. We can see the same opening formula in all four aphorisms (“All types of X are fine for . . .”). Indeed, the repetition of the formula “All types of X are fine for . . .” constitutes anaphora, a device by which prosaic information is converted into poetry.

In addition, the fourth aphorism exhibits the phenomenon called conclud-ing deviation.32 This refers to the rhetorical device of setting apart the last part of a verse or pericope from the other parts by changing the order of the words,

31 With regard to geometric patterns in Rabbinic sayings, see Yona (see note 10), pp. 98–100.32 Another example of the concluding deviation, in this case by changing to words order,

can be found in Avot 3:13: R. Akiva said: Laughter and levity accustom (a man) to lewdness. Tithes are a fence for Torah Vows are a fence for sanctity A fence for wisdom is silence. For further discussion of this rhetorical feature see Yona (see n. 10), pp. 95–98; Paran

(see n. 9) pp. 179–237.



the number of the words, the place of the verb, etc. In this unit the compara-tive words min hamuvhar are replaced by the words yaffe mikkulam.

3.4 A is Better than Any Specific Thing (Negative Form)An example of a negative comparison can be found in Mekhilta according to Rabbi Ishmael, Beshalah, Vayehi 6:33

אין לך מנוול ומשוקץ יותר מן השור בשעה שהוא אוכל עשב

Nothing is more disgusting and abominable than a bull when he is eating grass.

The saying is structured as “A (bull) + B (when he is eating grass) is good,” or, in this instance specifically, “not good,” as indicated by the comparative language: “there is nothing more disgusting and abominable than.”

By way of conclusion, we supply an example of a Rabbinic saying that is built upon the pattern of the “better” proverb but that deviates from the bibli-cal usage of this pattern in its purpose.

In Sifre Deut. Ekev, 43, we read:34

)נמצינו למידים ש(נבלת יהויקים מלך יהודה שהיתה מושלכת לחורב ביום ולקרחואוכל המלכים כל מעל כסאו שהיה יהודה מלך יהויכין של מחייו חביבה בלילה ושותה בטרקלין של מלכים

We learn that the corpse of Jehoiakim king of Judah that was thrown to the heat during the day and to the cold during the night was greater than the life of Jehoiachin the king of Judah whose throne was exalted over the thrones of all the other kings and who ate and drank in the kings’ reception hall.

The aphorism unquestionably was influenced by Jer. 22:10, 36:30b and 2 Kgs. 24:8–25:30. According to the Rabbinic aphorism, the corpse of Jehoiakim (A), which was not buried but thrown to the heat during the day and to the cold

33 The text is cited according to the Venice Edition (1546) with slightly difference: the word .she, which is also the version in the Horovitz-Rabin edition ,’שהיא‘ he, instead of ,’שהוא‘The aphorism, usually within the whole unit, appears in other rabbinical publications such as Shir Ha-Shirim Rab., 1 (Vilna edition); Ruth Rab., 7 (Vilna edition), and frequently.

34 The text is according to the Venice Edition (1546).



during the night (B), is better than the life of Jehoiachin (C), who ate in the palace of the king of Babylon (D).

It is clear that life (C) is better than death (A), and feasting by kings (D) is better than the abuse that Jehoiakim’s corpse suffered (B). This is to say that according to the literal meaning of this rabbinic text, A is not better than C, and B is not better than D. Therefore A + B together cannot be of greater value than C + D. As we mentioned earlier, when one uses the compound pattern (A + B is better than C + D), C is always worth more or is more important than A, and B is always worth more or is more important than D. In this case C is worth more or is more important than A, but B isn’t worth more or isn’t more important than D. It seems that the author of this saying tried to illustrate how hard and awful was the exile and for that reason he made an extreme compari-son between the sufferings of Jehoiakim’s corpse and the life of Jehoiachin in the palace of the Babylonian king.

In other words, the view that the Exile was a punishment greater than any other punishment, including death, led to the prioritization of Jehoiakim’s corpse over Jehoiachin’s life. It seems that the author of this saying was familiar with the “better” proverb’s “rules.” However, in this case he made a deliberate deviation from the common rhetorical pattern in order to express the severity of the exile.35

4 Conclusion

The “better” proverb was first examined over a century ago. Most of the scholarly attention has been on the use wisdom literature made of this pat-tern. However, it appears that one should reexamine the pattern in light of its repeated use both in wisdom literature and beyond it in other biblical genres.

In respect to the Rabbinic literature, this pattern, like many others found both in Hebrew Scripture and in Rabbinic literature, has not yet been treated to an in-depth study, and we hope that the present discussion may be the tur-tledove that announces the coming of spring.

In our discussion we examined some of the forms of the “better” proverb in the Bible, in the ancient Near East, and in Rabbinic literature, emphasizing the variegated uses of the pattern—stylistic, lexical and content—in the course of the long period when Rabbinic sages made use of this and its sub-patterns.

35 See R. Hammer, Sifrei, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986), p. 414, n. 33; J. Neusner, Sifre to Deuteronomy, vol. 1 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987), p. 145.