Understanding Wisdom Literature: Conflict and Dissonance in the Hebrew Text.

• Author: Brown, William P.
• Position: Book review

Understanding Wisdom Literature: Conflict and Dissonance in the Hebrew Text. By DAVID PENCHANSKY. Grand Rapids, Mich.: WILLIAM B. EERDMANS PUBLISHING CO., 2012. Pp. xii + 120. $20 (paper).

David Penchansky's "introduction" explores the internal conflicts within the wisdom literature, from Proverbs to the Wisdom of Solomon ("Pseudo-Solomon"). Accessibly written, this study is designed to provoke discussion in the classroom. "Questions for review" and suggestions for further reading are listed after each chapter. The author encourages his readers to take sides, as he himself does throughout the study.

For Penchansky the wisdom corpus is an arena of conflict, a battlefield no less. The author makes no apologies for using this "combat metaphor" to describe the nature of sapiential discourse. The sages not only clashed among themselves; they clashed with the priests and prophets. Indeed, it was their sacred duty to question authority (p. 9). By preserving the clashing voices of the sages, the wisdom corpus is characterized by ambiguity (p. 113).

Penchansky begins by discussing the great divide between "Hebrew Wisdom" (Proverbs, Job, and Ecclesiastes) and "Greek Wisdom" (Ben Sira and the Wisdom of Solomon). The Hebrew books are "more open"; they fully acknowledge controversy and disagreement, and they cultivate independent thinking. The Greek books, by contrast, are "defensive against strange ideas" and backwardly conservative (p. 2). The Greek wisdom books, in Penchansky's estimation, turn the triumph of Hebrew wisdom into tragedy.

In the traditional order of Proverbs to "Pseudo-Solomon," each wisdom book receives a chapter's worth of discussion. Two additional chapters are devoted to discussing who the sages are and why the Hebrew sages in particular did not discuss covenant in any significant way. Penchansky casts the sages as underdogs (my term) within the larger socio-religious milieu of ancient Israel. Although functioning as advisors to kings, the sages responsible for the Hebrew wisdom corpus were viewed negatively by and large by their religious contemporaries. Whereas the sages relied on observation, the priests drew from sacred tradition and the prophets depended upon divine revelation. With their penchant for open inquiry, the sages posed a threat to the religious establishments.

As for the wisdom corpus itself, Penchansky excels at finding competing voices. In Proverbs, two distinct "groups" of sages can be identified: 1) "Fear of...