Nuria Calduch-Benages

Ben Sira’s Teaching on Prayer: The Example

of the Generations of Old
Abstract: Prayer is an important theme in Ben Sira’s teaching. Our aim is not to
offer a comprehensive view of his teaching on prayer but to study one of its
many aspects more deeply. In the present article, we wish to show that in Ben
Sira’s “school of prayer” the example of the generations of old plays a funda-
mental role. In this connection, we consider four texts where the verb ‫ קרא‬/
ἐπικαλέομαι (“call on/beseech”) is used in a context of prayer: Sir 2:10d; 46:5a;
46:16a and 47:5a.

Keywords: Prayer; example; generations of old; Joshua; Samuel; David

1 Introduction
Prayer is an important theme in the work of Ben Sira.1 The sage often speaks of
it, much more than both his predecessors and also the author of the book of
Wisdom. Along with some concrete examples of prayer, both individual (Sir
22:27–23:6; 51:1–12) and communal (Sir 36:1–17), Sirach contains numerous
reflections and practical advice on prayer. In the words of Maurice Gilbert, for
Ben Sira, “prayer is first of all a matter of teaching. Even the three explicit pray-
ers we read in his book are strictly related to the context in which he teaches.”2
Our aim here is not to offer an overall view of Ben Sira’s teaching on prayer,
something which has already been done,3 but to study more deeply one of its
many aspects. In 2002, Stefan Reif tackled the relationship between prayer, cult
and liturgy in Ben Sira and Qumran;4 in 2012, Werner Urbanz focused on the
study of the emotions in the passages on prayer in the sage’s work;5 and, in

||
I am delighted to offer this article in celebration of Stefan C. Reif’s 75th anniversary. I met him
for the first time at the initial Ben Sira international conference in Soesterberg (1996) when I
had just defended my doctoral dissertation. After listening to his magisterial paper I said to
myself, “This is a model to follow!” Thank you, Stefan.
||
1 See the monograph of Urbanz, Gebet im Sirachbuch.
2 Gilbert, “Prayer,” 117. Cf. also idem, “Prière,” 236–39.
3 Gilbert, “Prayer,” 117–35; Urbanz, “Gebetsschule,” 31–48.
4 Reif, “Prayer,” 321–41.
5 Urbanz, “Emotionen,” 133–58.

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110630282-004
38 | Nuria Calduch-Benages

2017, Judith Newmann examined the central role of prayer in the formation of
the scribal identity in Ben Sira, taking her cue from cognitive neuroscience and
anthropological studies on prayer.6 In the present article, we intend to show
that in Ben Sira’s “school of prayer,”7 as, moreover, in all his teaching, the ex-
ample of the generations of old plays a fundamental role. To this end, we shall
consider four texts where the verb ‫ קרא‬/ ἐπικαλέομαι (“call on/beseech”) is
employed in a context of prayer: Sir 2:10d; 46:5a; 46:16a and 47:5a.8

2 The appeal to tradition (Sir 2:10–11)

Our study takes its inspiration from Sir 2 which, together with Sir 1, constitutes
the portico of the whole work. In these two chapters Ben Sira expounds the
theological foundation of his own teaching, namely, the relationship between
wisdom and the fear of the Lord. Sir 2 is an exhortation addressed to the disciple
who freely decides for the Lord or—and this is the same thing—for wisdom. The
sage opens his discourse with a specific warning: “My son, if you decide to serve
the Lord, prepare your soul for the testing” (Sir 2:1). This could seem an exces-
sively severe introduction, especially if we think of the youth in his audience.
However, this warning has all the irresistible flavour of difficult ventures, of a
goal that is almost impossible to attain. Actually, this is like the leitmotiv of
chapter 2 and of the book as a whole. The personal relationship with God is
developed and strengthened in the concrete experience of testing.
We are particularly interested in Sir 2:10–11,9 and, more specifically, 2:10. In
this verse, the sage appeals to the authority of previous generations with the
aim of strengthening his own argument. By contrast with 2:1–6, where the ad-
dressee is the individual disciple, here the discourse is addressed to “you” (2nd
person plural), that is, to you who fear the Lord, οἱ φοβούμενοι (τὸν) κύριον (cf.
vv. 7a, 8a, 9a).10 We are thus dealing with a group of disciples who have already

||
6 Newmann, “Formation,” 227–38.
7 Expression borrowed from Urbanz, “Gebetsschule,” 31.
8 We pass over the following texts: Sir 13:14, attested only in Gk. II (recensions of Origen and
Lucian) and in the Vetus Latina; Sir 51:10 because of its autobiographical character; Sir 48:20a
because, in our opinion, the subject of ἐπεκαλέσαντο is the inhabitants of Jerusalem. For some
authors, however, the verb refers also to Isaiah and Hezekiah. Cf. Urbanz, Gebet, 66–67.
9 For a detailed analysis of these verses, cf. Calduch-Benages, Crisol, 123–48.
10 According to Haspecker, the change of the addressee, both in the form and content, is due
to the fact that the author wishes to clarify the gradual maturing of the disciple until he reaches
 Ben Sira’s Teaching on Prayer: The Example of the Generations of Old | 39

decided to serve the Lord despite innumerable and weighty difficulties. The
formula “you who fear the Lord” makes us think, by contrast, of the existence of
a group who do not form part of this typology, that is, those who do not fear the
Lord and, perhaps, are opposed to the sage’s teaching.11
Since the Hebrew is missing, we record the Greek text of Sir 2:10 according
to Joseph Ziegler’s edition,12 followed by our translation and some textual notes:

10a ἐμβλέψατε εἰς ἀρχαίας γενεὰς καὶ ἴδετε·

10b τίς ἐνεπίστευσεν κυρίῳ καὶ κατῃσχύνθη;13
10c ἢ τίς ἐνέμεινεν τῷ φόβῳ αὐτοῦ14 καὶ ἐγκατελείφθη;15
10d ἢ τίς ἐπεκαλέσατο αὐτόν, καὶ ὑπερεῖδεν αὐτόν;16

Consider the generations of old and observe:

Whoever trusted in the Lord and remained disappointed?
or whoever persevered in his fear and was abandoned?
Or whoever called on him and was ignored?17

In the summons to consult the tradition, the authority being appealed to is men-
tioned, that is, “the generations of old.” These generations of old are made up
first and foremost of the ancestors of the people of Israel. But who are these
ancestors? According to the sage, they are the “fathers”18 of the people (cf. Sir
44:1b: “our fathers in their generations”). Men of mercy (Heb.), glorious men
(Gk.), whose experiences are an inexhaustible source of teaching and, at the
same time, an effective incentive for the new generations (Sir 44:1–8, 16–

||
the fullness of the fear of God. In his words, this stylistic innovation highlights that faith in God
is more important than the undergoing of testing (cf. Haspecker, Gottesfurcht, 241 n. 1).
11 Cf. Crenshaw, “Theodicy,” 47–48.
12 Ziegler, Sapientia, 134–35.
13 In Syr., the verb is active: “and abandoned him?” For Syr., we follow Calduch-Benages et
al., Wisdom.
14 Lat.: in mandatis eius.
15 In Syr., the verb is active: “and rejected him?”
16 Syr.: “and did not answer him?”. On the one hand, Syr. seems better suited to the context
(calling/answering), but, on the other hand, the use of the conventional “answer” takes away
expressive force from the question.
17 Lit.: “and he has overlooked him.”
18 And where are the mothers of Israel? Cf., in this connection, Calduch-Benages, “Absence,”
301–17.
40 | Nuria Calduch-Benages

50:21).19 Together with this illustrious list of very well-known national heroes,
there is also an endless parade of the anonymous faithful. In Di Lella’s words,
they are “the[se] ‘forgotten’ heroes of the faith,”20 men and women who, in the
silence of their daily life have woven together the threads of that same history
(Sir 44:9–15). Both groups, the famous heroes and the unknown heroes, form
part of Israel’s past, a past which the young student must constantly recall if he
wishes to understand the present and the future of the people to whom he be-
longs (cf. Deut 32:7; 4:32).
Instead of employing a significant passage of scripture or referring explicit-
ly to the biblical text, the sage prefers to appeal to tradition, making use of a
more suggestive method than the preceding ones, that is, the rhetorical ques-
tion. In this case, there is a series of three rhetorical questions linked by the
same disjunctive conjunction “or” and arranged in parallel form.
In the face of the first question (“Whoever trusted in the Lord and remained
disappointed?”), there is no room for doubt. The response which arises immedi-
ately: “No one!” is confirmed by the history of Israel. Psalm 22 opens the road to
the past (vv. 5–6): “Our fathers trusted (‫ )בטח‬in you, they trusted (‫ )בטח‬in you,
and you delivered them. They called on you and were saved, they trusted (‫)בטח‬
in you and were never confounded.” These verses form part of the prayer which
the psalmist, perhaps a just man, a prisoner and threatened with death, in the
face of imminent danger, raises to the Lord imploring salvation. Submerged in
despair, he intends to move the Lord by reminding him of his salvific interven-
tions on Israel’s behalf. In the expression “our fathers,” it is not difficult to
glimpse the figures of the patriarchs (Abraham, Jacob, Joseph) and of Moses
guiding the people through the desert.21 In their lives, all passed through tribu-
lation and testing. All trusted in the Lord, and no one remained cheated. The
Lord’s action was decisive: he saved them from all their dangers.
So then, in the light of Ps 22:5–6, in the person “who trusts in the Lord” (Sir
2:10), we see the face of the patriarchs of Israel whose experiences and exam-
ples were handed down from fathers to sons, from generation to generation (cf.
Ps 78:3–4); and, through these famous figures, we discover the paradigmatic
experience of human suffering embodied in the person of the psalmist. The
pain, the danger, the injustice, the disaster and the trials do not destroy the
unshakable certainty that the Lord never abandons people.

||
19 The opposite opinion is held by Minissale, Siracide (Ecclesiastico), 47.
20 Skehan and Di Lella, Wisdom, 501.
21 Cf. Ravasi, Salmi, 1:412.
 Ben Sira’s Teaching on Prayer: The Example of the Generations of Old | 41

We pass on now to the second question (“Or, whoever persevered in his fear
and was abandoned?”). Two scriptural texts express the same idea implicit in
this question. The first is Ps 37:25. In instructing the young man on the lot of the
just and the ungodly, the psalmist— an experienced elder—has recourse to his
personal experience: “I was young, now I am old, and I never saw a just man
forsaken” (‫זדיק נעזב‬, δίκαιον ἐγκαταλελειμμένον). His long life has proved that
the Lord never abandons the just (cf. vv. 28, 33). On the contrary, as a reward for
his faithfulness, the Lord assures him and his descendants the possession of the
land. The second text is Job 4:7. Eliphaz replies to Job’s excruciating lament and
reminds him, naively, of the validity of the classical doctrine of retribution:
“Recall: which innocent person ever perished? And where were the just de-
stroyed?”.
These two texts present us, through contrast, with the drama of Job.
“Through contrast” because the experience of Job challenges the theory of the
old teacher of the psalm and of Eliphaz the Temanite. A just and honest man
(Job 12:4),22 Job suffers atrociously in his own flesh his abandonment by his God.
Are the example of Job and Sir 2:10 really on the same wavelength? Ben Sira
himself gives us the answer. In his Praise of the Ancestors, he speaks of Job as of
“the one who observed all the ways of justice” (Sir 49:9). He compares him with
Noah and Daniel, two well-known models of integrity. According to the prophet
Ezekiel (cf. Ezek 14:14, 20), Noah, Daniel and Job were able to be saved on ac-
count of their justice.23 Like Noah in the flood (Gen 7) and Daniel in the lions’
den (Dan 6), Job had to endure so terrible a test that it led him to rebel against
the Creator and curse the day of his own birth. However, in the end, although
engulfed by such a calamity and, especially, despite the silence of God, Job
accepts his suffering as a supreme manifestation of the divine will and observes
with amazement that, in truth, God has not abandoned him at any stage. Alt-
hough his nature is mysterious and incomprehensible to the human mind, God
remained at Job’s side throughout the time of his tribulation. This is precisely
the teaching which Ben Sira instils into his disciples: the Lord never abandons
the just. He subjects them to trials and tribulations, but, at the appropriate mo-
ment, he puts out his hand to restore them to freedom, unharmed and enriched
(cf. Sir 2:1–6; 36[33]:21).24
The third and last question of the series (“Or, whoever called on him and
was ignored?”) finds an echo in the Praise of the Ancestors (Sir 46:1–47:11). In

||
22 Cf. Gen 6:9 where the same things are claimed for Noah.
23 Wahl, “Noah, Daniel und Hiob,” 542–53.
24 Calduch-Benages, “Trial Motif,” 135–51.
42 | Nuria Calduch-Benages

these chapters, the sage traces the figure of three historical characters who, in
moments of great tribulation, “called on the Lord (Most High).” None of their
prayers was ignored; on the contrary, all had a favourable response. We refer to
Joshua, Samuel and David. We should note that the passages devoted to these
figures of people praying have been the object of a careful analysis in the doc-
toral thesis of Andrzej Demitrów (2011).25 In what follows, we shall dedicate
special attention to each of these passages.

3 Joshua (Sir 46:4–6d)

The first person praying mentioned in the Praise of the Ancestors is Joshua. In
Sir 46:1–10, Ben Sira describes him not only as someone who prays but also as a
prophet and warrior. According to Jeremy Corley—the scholar who has dealt
with this passage several times— “The poem on Joshua and Caleb occurs at a
significant place within Ben Sira’s Praise of the Ancestors (Sir 44:1–50:24).”26 It
is precisely this passage which sees the beginning of Sir 46:1–49:16, known as
the prophetic section of the Praise of the Ancestors. As Alon Goshen-Gottstein
has aptly noted, this section is in contrast with Sir 44:17–45:26 (the Torah sec-
tion). Whereas, in the latter section, the emphasis is placed on the gifts which
God has made to Israel, in the former, special attention is given to the response
of the prophets and kings to the divine call.27 Moreover, it is to be noted that Sir
46:1–49:16 refers to the eight books of the former and latter prophets in their
canonical order.28
As we have indicated above, the portrait of Joshua offered by Ben Sira is not
monochrome. Different aspects of his personality are pointed out. In the first
verse, Joshua, son of Nun (‫)יהושע בן נון‬, is described both as a mighty warrior
(lit.: ‫ )גבור בן חיל‬and as a prophet;29 a prophet, however, whose words are not

||
25 Demitrów, Quattro oranti.
26 Corley, “Warrior,” 212. By the same author, cf. “Assimilation,” 57–77; “Difference,” 30–55.
See also Elßner, Josua und seine Kriege, 22–56; idem, “Josua bei Jesus Sirach,” 77–95; Kosken-
niemi, Miracle-Workers, 26–31; Farber, Images, 142–48 and the unpublished thesis of Teresa
Brown, Sinners, 74–80.
27 Goshen-Gottstein, “Praise,” 250 cited in Corley, “Warrior,” 212.
28 Joshua (46:1–10), Judges (46:11–12), Samuel (46:13–47:11), Kings (47:12–49:6), Isaiah
(48:20–25), Jeremiah (49:7), Ezekiel (49:8–9) and the Twelve Prophets (49:10), cf. Corley, “As-
similation,” 69.
29 Cf. Josephus, Ant. 4.165.
 Ben Sira’s Teaching on Prayer: The Example of the Generations of Old | 43

recalled, only his miracles. The Hebrew text of MS B employs a particular ex-
pression to refer to his prophetic activity, that is, “servant of Moses in prophecy
(‫)משרת משה בנבואה‬.”30 However, despite this apparent attempt at equality in
describing Joshua’s double role, “the rest of the passage”—asserts Zev Farber—
“deals almost exclusively with Joshua’s role as conqueror, emphasizing his
military persona.”31 His name (‫יהושע‬, “God saves”) defines his function as liber-
ator and conqueror. The following verses (vv. 2–3) contain a kind of summary of
Joshua’s victories. In v. 2, Ben Sira refers to the conquest of Ai which is narrated
in ch. 8 of the book of Joshua, and, in v. 3, the hero is presented as one who
fought the battles of the Lord. On the one hand, the phraseology is similar to
that employed in Josh 10:14, where the one who fights against Israel’s enemies
is not Joshua but God; on the other hand, the expression “the battles of the
Lord” refers to 1 Sam 18:17; 25:28 in connection with David.32
The theological reason for Joshua’s military success is made clear in vv. 4a–
6d; and it is precisely in these verses that our hero assumes the characteristic
features of one who prays. Since the Hebrew text of MS B is very fragmentary,
we shall make use (with a single exception) of Segal’s reconstruction33 which is
made basically on the back of the Greek version.

[‫יום אחד ]היה לשנים‬ ‫הלא בידו עמד השמש‬ 4ab

[‫כאכפה ל]ו אויבים מסביב‬ ‫כי קרא אל אל עליון‬ 5ab
34‫באבני‬
[‫]ברד וא[ל]גביש‬ ‫ויענהו אל עליון‬ 5cd
[‫ובמורד האביד קמים‬ ‫]וישלך ע[ל ]עם אויב‬ 6ab
‫כי צופה ייי מלחמתם‬ ‫למען ]דע[ת כל גוי חרם‬ 6cd

4a Was it not by his hand that the sun stopped?

4b One day [lasted like two]!
5a He called on God the Most High,35

||
30 Gk. reads καὶ διάδοχος (“successor”) Μωυσῆ ἐν προφητείαις and Syr. creates a paraphrase:
“according to the prophecy, he was preserved to be the great Moses.” According to Corley
(“Warrior,” 218), in the place of ‫משרת משה‬, Gk. would have read ‫( משנה משה‬cf. 2 Chr 28:7).
31 Farber, Images, 142.
32 Cf. Elßner, Josua und seine Kriege, 38.
33 Segal, Sēper, 317–18 (we record the text without vocalization).
34 In MS B, ‫( באבני‬construct form) is the last word in 5c. (Contra Segal), we shift it to the be-
ginning of 5d.
35 For the divine name, Gk. reads τὸν ὕψιστον δυνάστην (the powerful Most High); Syr. simply
“the Lord.”
44 | Nuria Calduch-Benages

5b when he was pressed, surrounded by enemies.36

5c And the Lord the Most High answered him37
5d with stones [of hail and crystals of ice].38
6a [And he threw himself on the enemy people]
6b [and destroyed the rebels in the descent],
6c so that every nation vowed to extermination might know
6d that Yhwh watched over their battles.39

The episode described in v. 4 evokes one of Joshua’s four miracles narrated in

the book that bears his name,40 only two of which are recorded in Ben Sira’s
text. Here we have the miracle of the sun which stops at Joshua’s command and
enables the Israelites to win the battle of Gibeon (Josh 10:12–13). However, Ben
Sira does not confine himself to reporting the episode just as it is presented in
the book of Joshua; he rereads it in order to offer a new interpretation. Firstly,
he changes the order of events. Whereas in Josh 10, the miracle of the hail is
mentioned first (v. 11) and then that of the sun (v. 12), in Sir 46, the miracle of
the sun (v. 4ab) precedes that of the hail (v. 5d). Secondly, the sage makes a
summary of Josh 10:12–14, taking up only the essential items (he omits, for ex-
ample, the mention of the moon) and emphasising the depredations of the ene-
mies. Thirdly, he places Joshua’s prayer between the two miraculous interven-
tions (v. 5a), thus awarding it a central position in the account. In this way, Ben
Sira discovers a new face of Joshua, one hitherto hidden. The warrior strong in
battle suddenly becomes a man of prayer.
The picture of Joshua in an attitude of prayer is rare in the book of Joshua.
The only exception comes in Josh 7:6–9,41 where, on the occasion of Achan’s
sin, Joshua intercedes for the people before God. In Josh 10, on the other hand,
there is no explicit mention of any intercession by Joshua in the battle of Gibe-
on. Nevertheless, it is probable, as Corley observes, that Ben Sira interpreted

||
36 Gk.: ἐν τῷ θλῖψαι αὐτὸν ἐχθροὺς κυκλόθεν (“when his enemies pressed around him”).
Taking account of the dimensions of the lacuna in the manuscript, Morla prefers to read ‫מסביב‬
(cf. Smend, Weisheit, 441) or else ‫( איבים מסביב‬Morla, Manuscritos, 302).
37 Because of the suspected repetition of ‫( אל עליון‬cf. 5a), Morla hypothesises an original:
‫ויענהו באבני ברד‬, cf. Syr. (Manuscritos, 303).
38 Syr.: “and he made sulphur come down from heaven.” According to Morla, the original text
of 5d would be: ‫“( ובגבורת אלגביש‬and with the violence of the hail”), which would fit well in
the damaged space of the manuscript (Manuscritos, 303).
39 Lat. seems a little disorientated: quia contra Deum pugnare non est facile and Syr. translates
freely: “that their own Lord fought with them.”
40 Cf. Koskenniemi, Miracle-Workers, 27.
41 Cf. also 4 Ezra 7:107 and the following Qumran texts: 4QTest 21 (4Q175) and the “Psalms of
Joshua” (4Q378; 4Q379).
 Ben Sira’s Teaching on Prayer: The Example of the Generations of Old | 45

Josh 10:12 (“Then Joshua spoke to the Lord…”) “as a sign of Joshua’s intercesso-
ry activity.” Be that as it may, the motif of prayer before battle, introduced by
the sage in Sir 46:5, recalls the stories of King Asa (2 Chr 14:10) and King Je-
hoshaphat (2 Chr 20:6–12),42 who address fervent prayers to the Lord before
facing their powerful enemies in battle.43
Thus, Ben Sira’s rereading places the account of Joshua in a new perspec-
tive, i.e., the perspective of one oppressed by enemies whose prayer is heard by
the Lord. In Sir 46:5, Joshua’s prayer is arranged in three stages: the calling on
God (v. 5a), formulated with the technical term ‫ קרא אל‬followed by the divine
name (‫אל )עליון‬, the situation of oppression caused by the enemy (v. 5b), and
God’s response (v. 5cd). The same structure is found in the psalms of individual
supplication where the worshipper, threatened by mortal danger, seeks support
in a cry addressed to the Lord (cf. Pss 3; 4; 22; 35; 83; 102, among many others).
In these psalms, the certainty that only God offers salvation is found every-
where. In fact, God never withdraws himself from the supplications or the des-
perate cry of the worshipper. On the contrary, he hears it, responds to it and
comes to help with his action of deliverance.44
This spiritual experience was not foreign to Ben Sira. Two examples of this
will be sufficient: in Sir 35:14–26, there is a prominent picture of a merciful God
who extends his ear to the cry of the poor and oppressed (for example, the or-
phan and widow) and promptly gives them the justice denied to them by the
cruel and violent; in Sir 51:1–12, full of gratitude, the same Ben Sira recalls that
the Lord listened to his desperate prayer while he struggled between life and
death, freeing him from the tenacious adversaries who wished to kill him. Josh-
ua’s prayer was also heard, and he was freed from his enemies thanks to a mi-
raculous hailstorm ordered by God who enabled him to win the battle and bring
salvation to Israel (Sir 46:6a-d).

4 Samuel (Sir 46:16–18)

The second praying figure mentioned in the Praise of the Ancestors is Samuel.
Like Joshua, Samuel too is a person with many faces. Ben Sira presents him as

||
42 Cf. Corley, “Warrior,” 229; idem, “Assimilation,” 65–66.
43 According to Farber, “the element of Joshua’s calling out to God is added by Ben Sira,
perhaps in order to paint a picture of control. Joshua invites God into the battle, or, at least,
requests God’s assistance” (Images, 145).
44 Cf. Demitrów, Quattro oranti, 73–75.
46 | Nuria Calduch-Benages

prophet, Nazirite, priest, judge, military leader and intercessor. His portrait
appears in the brief section devoted to the Judges which follows the description of
Joshua and Caleb (Sir 46:1–10). After a brief collective elogium where no particular
name is mentioned (Sir 46:11–12), the memory of the Judges is expanded through
Samuel (Sir 46:13–20),45 the last (and most famous) of this group of figures who,
arising after the death of Joshua, governed the tribes of Israel before the monarchy.
Samuel’s portrait is made up of three sections: vv. 13–15 present him as a
prophet and judge of Israel; vv. 16–18 describe him as one who prayed; and,
finally, vv. 19–20 summarise his exceptional activity on behalf of Israel which
continued even after his physical death (this was his last miracle!). “Lover of his
people and pleasing to his Creator” (v. 13).46 Thus begins the elogium of Samuel.
Right from the beginning, Ben Sira indicates the two fundamental features of
our character, that is, his relationship with God and with his people. According
to Renzo Petraglio, Samuel’s prophetic and priestly functions, his role as judge
and all his activity connected with the establishment of the monarchy and the
anointing of the princes have their roots in his relationship with God.47 The
following verses (vv. 14–15) are a kind of commentary on the summary present-
ed in the opening verse. The image of Samuel as judge is illustrated in v. 14
through the allusion to 1 Sam 7:15–17, a brief and schematic summary of Samu-
el’s judging activity at Bethel, Gilgal and Mizpah. In v. 15, Samuel’s prophetic
function, carried out with fidelity and authenticity, echoes the language of 1
Sam 3:19–20 and 1 Sam 9:9, 11, 18–19. In the former text, Samuel is accredited as
a prophet of God, and, in the second, he is presented as a seer.
We would now like to pause on vv. 16–18. Situated exactly at the centre of the
passage, these verses give particular prominence to Samuel’s prayers and God’s re-
sponse. In the following table, we record the Hebrew text of MS B. Where the damaged
parts are concerned, above all in v. 16, we always follow Segal’s retroversion48.

‫]כאכפה לו איבי[ו מסביב‬ ‫וגם ה]וא קרא א[ל ]א[ל‬ 16ab

[‫בעלתו ]טלה ח[ל]ב‬ 16c49

||
45 On this pericope, cf. Petraglio, “Siracide,” 287–302; Marböck, “Samuel,” 205–17; Corley,
“Portrait,” 31–56; idem, “Assimilation,” 57–77.
46 For the different reconstructions of 13a, Corley, “Portrait,” 33, esp. n. 11.
47 Petraglio, “Siracide,” 294.
48 Segal, Sēper, 321 (we record the text without vocalization).
49 Basing himself on the conjecture of Smend (Weisheit, 446), Corley reconstructs 16d (which
is lacking also in the versions) with a phrase taken from 1 Sam 7:9: ‫“( עלה כליל לייי‬as a whole
burned offering to YHWH”), cf. Corley, “Portrait,” 43.45.
 Ben Sira’s Teaching on Prayer: The Example of the Generations of Old | 47

‫בפקע אדיר נשמע קולו‬ [‫]וירעם משמים ייי‬ 17ab

‫ויא]בד את כל[ סרני פלשתים‬ ‫ויכנע נציבי צר‬ 18ab

16a And he also50 called on God,

16b when he was in tribulation, with his enemies around him,51
16c offering in sacrifice a sucking lamb.
17a And the Lord thundered from heaven,
17b his voice was heard52 with a powerful clamour.
18a And he subdued the leaders of his enemies
18b and made all the princes of the Philistines to perish.53

In Petraglio’s words, “L’art narratif de notre auteur est très efficace.”54 He begins
the elogium of Samuel with a standard expression standard (“And he also called
on God”) which he had already employed in connection with Joshua (Sir 46:5)
and which he is to use again in the poem on David (Sir 47:5). The only difference
to be noted is the omission of the divine attribute “Most High” in our passage. In
this way, the sage establishes a close connection among the three figures. To
these texts, we could add Sir 48:20 where Ben Sira transforms the prayer of
Hezekiah—or of the king along with the prophet Isaiah—into a prayer of the
entire community of Jerusalem.
The situation of extreme danger and the sacrifice of a sucking lamb men-
tioned in v. 16bc obviously refer to the events recounted in 1 Sam 7:7–14: in the
face of the looming threat of a Philistine attack at Mizpah, the Israelites beg
Samuel to intercede for them with the Lord. His prayer, together with the offer-
ing of a holocaust, ensures that Israel prevails over its enemies. Samuel’s prayer
of intercession is distinguished from that of Joshua (and also from those of the
other worshippers) on account of its cultic dimension.55 This is its novelty and,

||
50 The words “he also,” present in Syr. but not in Gk., refer to Sir 45:5a in connection with
Joshua.
51 In the light of Prov 16:26 (‫)אכף־כי עליו פיהו‬, Morla proposes, in addition to that of Segal, the
following reconstruction of the stich: ‫( באכף עליו אויביו מסביב‬Manuscritos, 308). In Syr. Samuel
becomes the subject of the action: “and also he beat the enemies from all the surrounding
area.”
52 Obviously, Gk.: ἀκουστὴν ἐποίησεν (“made hear”) has read ‫ הישמע‬instead of ‫( נשמע‬cf.
Morla, Manuscritos, 308).
53 The expression “leaders of his enemies” has been read by Gk. as a reference to the city of
Tyre, probably because of the orthographical likeness of the two words: enemy (‫ ) ַצר‬and Tyre
(‫)צֹר‬. Syr. actually reads: “all the leaders of Tyre.”
54 Petraglio, “Siracide,” 295. ET: “The narrative art of our author is very effective.”
55 Cf. Marböck, “Samuel,” 210; Urbanz, Gebet, 64; Demitrów, Quattro oranti, 191–92.
48 | Nuria Calduch-Benages

at the same time, its power. According to Werner Urbanz, “Das Gebet, begleitet
von einem Opfer, erscheint hier effektiv zu sein.”56 In fact, the Lord’s reaction is
not slow and the fervent prayer receives a devastating response (v. 17). Petraglio
comments, “Le seul élément qu’on ne retrouve pas dans la Bible est le ‘déchi-
rement’ dans le quel la voix de Dieu se fit entendre. […]. Ce qui est important,
c’est Dieu qui se manifeste dans ce déchirement; le reste, les ennemis et leur
puissance (v.16b), ce n’est qu’un détail pour donner du relief à l’action de Dieu
qui répond à son prophète.”57
Once again, the scheme “prayer of the worshipper – situation of oppression
– God’s response” worked, and Samuel, in his role of powerful intercessor,
managed to crush the enemies of his people (v. 18).

5 David (Sir 47:4–5)

In the spirit of Joshua and Samuel, King David is presented as the third great
praying figure in the Praise of the Ancestors. Practically ignoring Saul, and after
a quick mention of the prophet Nathan (Sir 47:1), Ben Sira concentrates on the
figure of David (Sir 47:2–11).58 We should note that his story is recalled by leav-
ing out the various vicissitudes which he suffered on account of the hostility of
Saul (1 Sam 18:8–30) and the revolt of his son Absalom (2 Sam 15–19). Even his
notorious sin, his adultery with Bathsheba (2 Sam 11), is recalled only indirectly
by means of a mild generic expression: “The Lord pardoned his sins” (Sir 47:11).
Thus, by silencing the less noble aspects in the king’s life, Ben Sira has painted
an overall positive picture.
The poem begins with an introductory verse in which the choice of David is
compared to the separation of the fat of the sacrificed animals (Sir 47:2) to signi-
fy David’s total belonging to the Lord.59 This cultic metaphor marks the tone of
the entire composition right from the beginning. In the words of Beentjes, “The

||
56 Urbanz, Gebet, 64. ET: “The prayer accompanied by an offering appears to be effective.”
57 Petraglio, “Siracide,” 296. ET: “The only element which one does not find in the Bible is the
‘tearing sound’ in which God’s voice makes itself heard. [...] What is important is that it is God
who manifests himself in this tearing sound; the rest, the enemies and their power (v. 16b) is
only a detail to give relief to the action of God who responds to his prophet.”
58 Cf. the following studies: Marböck, “Davids Erbe,” 43–49; Kleer, Sänger, 131–77; Xeravits,
“Figure,” 27–38; Wright, “Use,” 201–5; Beentjes, “Portrayals,” 167–69; Demitrów, Quattro
oranti, 229–365; Marttila, “David,” 29–48, and, recently, Rose, “Lob,” 351–73.
59 Palmisano, Siracide, 449.
 Ben Sira’s Teaching on Prayer: The Example of the Generations of Old | 49

real intention of Ben Sira’s portrayal of David is already revealed in the second
line where the election of David is worded in cultic terminology.”60 In fact, in-
stead of exalting the military ability and political astuteness of the monarch,
Ben Sira prefers to emphasise his contribution to the organisation of the cult,
especially as author of the psalms, as well as his faith and piety (Sir 47:8–10).
According to Xeravits,61 vv. 3–7 recount “David’s prehistory.” They focus on his
victories over his enemies (human and animals), highlighting his “playful” way
of attaining them. Of particular interest for our argument are vv. 4–5 which we
record in the following table according to the text of MS B. Here too, we make
use of Segal’s reconstruction62 in cases where the text is damaged, though, by
contrast with the passages studied earlier, this part of the manuscript is fortu-
nately found in better condition.

‫ויסר ]חרפת[ עולם‬ ‫בנעוריו הכה ]ג[בור‬ 4ab

‫וישבר ]תפא[רת גלית‬ ‫בהניפו ידו על קלע‬ 4cd
‫ויתן בימינו עז‬ ‫כי קרא אל אל עליון‬ 5ab
‫ולהרים את קרן עמו‬ ‫להדף את איש יודע מלחמות‬ 5cd

4a In his youth he killed the giant63

4b and took away the shame of his people,64
4c while he put his hand to the sling
4d and shattered the pride of Goliath.
5a Since he called on the Lord, the Most High,
5b and he gave power to his right hand,
5c to kill the veteran warrior
5d and raise again the horn65 of his people.

Following the account of 1 Sam 17 chronologically,66 Ben Sira rereads the epi-
sode of the fight between the giant, Goliath, and David when the latter was a

||
60 Beentjes, “Portrayals,” 167.
61 Xeravits, “Figure,” 29.
62 Segal, Sēper, 323 (we record the text without vocalization).
63 In Gk., the whole of v. 4 is formulated as a rhetorical question introduced by οὐχί.
64 With Gk. and Syr., we read ‫ עם‬instead of ‫עולם‬. See also Alonso Schökel, Eclesiástico, 315;
Skehan and Di Lella, Wisdom, 522, 524; Marböck, “Davids Erbe,” 43; Zapff, Jesus Sirach, 346;
Marttila, “David,” 33, 34; Rose, “Lob,” 355. However, Kleer (Sänger, 132.134) and Demitrów
(Quattro oranti, 237–38, 279–82) follow MS B.
65 The raised horn is a symbol of power and glory (cf. 1 Sam 2:1; Ps 18:3).
66 For the terminological contacts between the two texts, cf. Kleer, Sänger, 150.
50 | Nuria Calduch-Benages

young shepherd. As expected, he reads it in his own way. Without recounting

the details of the story, he mentions only some elements (and adds others) in
view of the message which he intends to transmit. For example, from the very
beginning (v. 4a), the reader is informed of the final outcome of the struggle:
paradoxically, the young lad prevails against the giant. After this information,
which is a little hurried, v. 4b reveals the significance of the deed achieved by
the shepherd boy. Instead of benefiting the glory of David, the slaying of the
giant freed Israel from the shame (‫ )חרפה‬which it would have otherwise in-
curred at the hand of the Philistines. Verse 4c then hints at the way in which he
destroyed Goliath. With the sling and with the stone, that is, with a simple
weapon, David overcame the Philistine. Consequently, the pride/glory (‫)תפארת‬
of Goliath ended in pieces. Kleer comments, “Das Zerbrechen (‫ )שבר‬des Rhums
Goliats nimmt bereits das Zerbrechen (‫ )שבר‬des Horner der Philister vorweg,
was wiederum dem Erhöhen des Hornes des Volkes Israel in V 5d und dem
Erhöhen des Hornes Davids (V 11b) korrespondiert.”67
Having reached this point, the reader could have understood that David
managed to beat the giant thanks to his own powers alone. However, in reality,
it was not so. The victory is not to be attributed to his shrewdness or his greater
agility but, as we shall see, to the intervention of the Lord. Verse 5, considered
by several scholars as the theological centre of 47:3–7,68 offers the key to under-
standing Ben Sira’s interpretation of the event. Linking up with a previous text
through a causal ‫כי‬, he offers his explanation. The text says that David “called
on the Lord the Most High.”69 So then, in the eyes of Ben Sira, the extraordinary
defeat of Goliath is God’s response to the prayer which David made to him be-
fore the battle. By putting David’s prayer at the centre of the account, the sage
shifts the attention of the reader (who is probably more interested in the course
of the fight) towards the personal relationship of the future king with God.70 In
the words of Kleer, “Hier zeichnet Ben Sira in seinem Davidbild einen Zug, der

||
67 Kleer, Sänger, 150. ET: “The shattering of Goliath’s fame already anticipated the shattering
of the horn/might of the Philistines which, on the other hand, corresponded to the increase in
the horn of the people of Israel in v. 5d and the increase of the horn of David (v. 11b).”
68 Cf. Marböck, “Davids Erbe,” 45; Demitrów, Quattro oranti, 285; Marttila, “David,” 38.
69 However, as Benjamin Wright notes, “he actually never prays in the narrative [i.e., in 1 Sam
17]; he simply claims in his speech to Goliath that God will enable him to defeat the giant”
(“Use,” 230). Cf. also Demitrów, Quattro oranti, 286–87 and Marttila, “David,” 38–39.
70 Cf. Demitrów, Quattro oranti, 286.
 Ben Sira’s Teaching on Prayer: The Example of the Generations of Old | 51

ihm wichtiger ist als die bloß äußere Ruhmestat, nämlich Davids Gottesverhält-
nis und seine Frömmigkeit.”71
As happened previously with Joshua and Samuel, the Lord heard David’s
prayer and strengthened his right hand so that he could not only defeat Goli-
ath—no longer called by name but as a “man expert in war” (‫—)איש יודע מלחמות‬
but also and above all restore power to his people (v. 5cd). Thus, it was not Da-
vid’s strength which procured him the victory but the power which God gave in
response to his prayer.

6 Conclusion
Ben Sira’s teaching about prayer is not the exclusive fruit of personal experience
(Sir 39:5; 51:1–12) as it is guaranteed and supported by a long tradition of pray-
ing figures who serve as models to be followed by his young students. Recourse
to the generations of old responds to a pedagogic objective, that is, to encourage
his disciples to persevere tirelessly in faith. In fact, they must always remember
that the Lord does not disappoint those who trust in him, does not abandon
those who fear him, and does not ignore those who call upon him (cf. Sir 2:10).
The three figures from the past presented by Ben Sira as practitioners of
prayer are Joshua, Samuel and David (we have deliberately left out Hezeki-
ah/Isaiah/the inhabitants of Jerusalem). Taking his inspiration from the ancient
accounts which he knew really well, the sage reread the past through new spec-
tacles. With great freedom and skill, he modified his sources and handled their
language creating new texts that were able to transmit his teaching with author-
ity (whether the teaching of tradition or his own contribution). “By a process of
canonical assimilation”— Corley’s words72—Ben Sira employs the same formula
“calling on God, (the Most High)” followed by a divine response in his presenta-
tion of Joshua, Samuel and David. All three heroes find themselves in a situa-
tion of grave danger but, following their request for help, this is overturned
thanks to divine intervention. Even with variations in form (the hail for Joshua,
the thunder for Samuel, and the gift of strength for David), God’s response was
always effective.

||
71 Kleer, Sänger, 151. ET: “Here, in his picture of David, Ben Sira paints a feature which is
more important to him than mere external fame, namely, David’s relationship with God and his
piety.”
72 Corley, “Assimilation,” 64.
52 | Nuria Calduch-Benages

In conclusion, the example of the generations of old indicates, on the one

hand, the importance of calling on God in trust in the circumstances of life,
especially in situations of danger, and, on the other hand, the certainty that the
worshipper’s prayer will not be wasted; on the contrary, it will he heard by God
and receive an actual response. This is what happened to Joshua, Samuel and
David, and this is what will happen to every disciple who follows their example.

Bibliography
Alonso Schökel, Luis. Proverbios y Eclesiástico. Los Libros Sagrados 8.1. Madrid: Cristiandad,
1968.
Beentjes, Pancratius C. “Portrayals of David in Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature.”
Pages 165–81 in Biblical Figures in Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature. Edited by
Hermann Lichtenberger and Ulrike Mittmann-Richert. Deuterocanonical and Cognate Lit-
erature Yearbook 2008. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2009.
Brown, Teresa R. “Sinners, Idols-Worshippers and Fools among the Men of Hesed: Ben Sira’s
Pedagogy in Praise of the Fathers (Sir 44–50)”. Ph.D. diss., Graduate Theological Union,
Berkeley, CA, 1998.
Calduch-Benages, Nuria. En el crisol de la prueba. Estudio exegético de Sir 2,1–18. ABE 32.
Estella (Navarra): Verbo Divino, 1997.
Calduch-Benages, Nuria. “Trial Motif in the Book of Ben Sira, with Special Reference to 2,1–6.”
Pages 135–51 in The Book of Ben Sira in Modern Research. Proceedings of the First Inter-
national Ben Sira Conference 29–31 July 1996 Soesterberg, Netherlands. Edited by Pancra-
tius C. Beentjes. BZAW 255. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1997.
Calduch-Benages, Nuria. “The Absence of Named Women from Ben Sira’s Praise of the Ances-
tors.” Pages 301–17 in Rewriting Biblical History. Essays on Chronicles and Ben Sira in
Honor of Pancratius C. Beentjes. Edited by Jeremy Corley and Harm van Grol. DCLS 7. Ber-
lin: de Gruyter, 2011.
Calduch-Benages, Nuria, Joan Ferrer, and Jan Liesen. La sabiduría del escriba. Edición diplo-
mática de la Peshitta del libro de Ben Sira según el Códice Ambrosiano, con traducción
española e inglesa. The Wisdom of the Scribe. Diplomatic Edition of the Peshitta of the
Book of Ben Sira according to Codex Ambrosianus, with Translations in Spanish and Eng-
lish. Rev. 2nd ed. Biblioteca Midrásica 26. Estella (Navarra): Verbo Divino, 2015.
Corley, Jeremy. “Joshua as a Warrior in Hebrew Ben Sira 46:1–10.” Pages 207–48 in Visions of
Peace and Tales of War. Edited by Jan Liesen and Pancratius C. Beentjes. Deuterocanoni-
cal and Cognate Literature Yearbook 2010. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2010.
Corley, Jeremy. “Canonical Assimilation in Ben Sira’s Portrayal of Joshua and Samuel.” Pages
57–77 in Rewriting Biblical History. Essays on Chronicles and Ben Sira in Honour of Pan-
cratius C. Beentjes. Edited by Jeremy Corley and Harm van Grol. DCLS 7. Berlin: de Gruyter,
2011.
Corley, Jeremy. “The Portrait of Samuel in Hebrew Ben Sira 46:13–20.” Pages 31–56 in Biblical
Figures in Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature. Edited by Hermann Lichtenberger and
 Ben Sira’s Teaching on Prayer: The Example of the Generations of Old | 53

Ulrike Mittmann-Richert. Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook 2008. Berlin:

de Gruyter, 2009.
Corley, Jeremy. “No Small Difference when Introducing Samuel in Sirach 46,13.” Pages 30–55
in Figures who Shape Scriptures, Scriptures that Shape Figures. Essays in Honour of Ben-
jamin G. Wright III. Edited by Géza G. Xeravits and Greg Schmidt Goering. DCLS 40. Berlin:
de Gruyter, 2018.
Demitrów, Andrzej. Quattro oranti nell’Elogio dei Padri (Sir 44–49). Studio dei testi e delle
tradizioni. Theological Collection of Opole 124. Opole: University of Opole, 2011.
Elßner, Thomas R. Josua und seine Kriege in jüdischer und christlicher Rezeptionsgeschichte.
Theologie und Friede 37. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2008.
Elßner, Thomas R. “Zu Josua bei Jesus Sirach. Der erste Vers im Lob auf dem Sohn Nuns (Sir
46,1–8).” Pages 77–95 in Gewalt im Spiegel alttestamentlichen Texte. Edited by Norbert
Clemens Baumgart and Martin Nitsche. ETS 43. Würzburg: Echter, 2012.
Farber, Zev. Images of Joshua in the Bible and Their Reception. BZAW 457. Leiden: Brill, 2016.
Gilbert, Maurice. “La prière des sages d’Israël.” Pages 227–43 in L’expérience de la prière dans
les grandes religion. Edited by Henri Limet and Julien Ries. Homo religiosus 5. Louvain-La-
Neuve: Centre d’Histoire des Religions, 1980.
Gilbert, Maurice. “Prayer in the Book of Ben Sira. Function and Relevance.” Pages 117–35 in
Prayer from Tobit to Qumran. Inaugural Conference of the ISDCL at Salzburg, Austria, 5–9
July 2003. Edited by Renate Egger-Wenzel and Jeremy Corley. Deuterocanonical and Cog-
nate Literature Yearbook 2004. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2004.
Goshen-Gottstein, Alon. “Ben Sira’s Praise of the Fathers: a Canon-Conscious Reading.” Pages
235–67 in Ben Sira’s God. Proceedings of the International Ben Sira Conference, Durham –
Ushaw College 2001. Edited by Renate Egger-Wenzel. BZAW 321. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2002.
Haspecker, Josef. Gottesfurcht bei Jesus Sirach. Ihre religiöse Struktur und ihre literarische und
doktrinäre Bedeutung. AnBib 30. Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1967.
Kleer, Martin. “Der liebliche Sänger der Psalmen Israels“. Untersuchungen zu David als Dichter
und Beter der Psalmen. BBB 108. Bodenheim: Philo, 1996.
Koskenniemi, Erkki. The Old Testament Miracle-Workers in Early Judaism. WUNT 2.206. Tübin-
gen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005.
Marböck, Johannes. “Davids Erbe in gewandelter Zeit (Sir 47,1–11).” TQ 139 (1980): 43–49.
Marböck, Johannes. “Samuel der Prophet, sein Bild im Väterlob Sir 46,13–20.” Pages 205–17
in Ein Herz so weit wie der Sand am Ufer des Meeres. Festschrift für Georg Hentschel. Edi-
ted by Susanne Gillmayr-Bucher, Annett Giercke, and Christina Niessen. ETS 90. Würz-
burg: Echter, 2008.
Marttila, Marko. “David in the Wisdom of Ben Sira.” SJOT 25 (2011): 29–48.
Minissale, Antonino. Siracide (Ecclesiastico). Versione, introduzione, note. Nuovissima ver-
sione della Bibbia 23. Rome: Paoline, 1980.
Morla, Víctor. Los manuscritos hebreos de Ben Sira. Traducción y notas. ABE 59 Monografías.
Estella: Verbo Divino, 2012.
Newman, Judith H. “The Formation of the Scribal Self in Ben Sira.” Pages 227–38 in «When the
Morning Stars Sang». Essays in Honor of Choon Leong Seow on the Occasion of his Sixty-
Fifth Birthday. Edited by Scott C. Jones and Christine Roy Yoder. BZAW 500. Berlin: de
Gruyter, 2017.
Palmisano, Maria Carmela. Siracide. Introduzione, traduzione e commento. Nuova versione
della Bibbia dai testi antichi 34. Cinisello Balsamo (Milan): San Paolo, 2016.
54 | Nuria Calduch-Benages

Petraglio, Renzo. “Le Siracide et l’Ancien Testament: Relectures et tendances.” Apocrypha 8

(1997): 287–302.
Ravasi, Gianfranco. Il libro de Salmi. Commento e attualizzazione 1: Salmi 1–50. Repr. Bologna:
Centro Editoriale Dehoniano, 2015.
Reif, Stefan C. “Prayer in Ben Sira, Qumran and Second Temple Judaism.” Pages 321–41 in Ben
Sira’s God. Proceedings of the International Ben Sira Conference Durham - Ushaw College
2001. Edited by Renate Egger-Wenzel. BZAW 321. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2002.
Rose, Martin. “David im Lob der Väter (Sir 47,1–11). Ein «Spiel» mit Manuskripten.” Pages 351–
73 in Nächstenliebe und Gottesfurcht. Beiträge aus alttestamentlicher, semitischer und
altorientalischer Wissenschaft für Hans-Peter Mathys zum 65. Geburtstag. Edited by Han-
na Jenni and Markus Saur in collaboration with Oskar Kaelin, Samuel Sarasin, and Steph-
anie Zellweger. AOAT 439. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2016.
Segal, Moshe Z. Sēper ben-Sîrā' haššālēm. 4th ed. Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1997.
Skehan, Patrick W., and Alexander Di Lella. The Wisdom of Ben Sira. A New Translation with
Notes, Introduction and Commentary. AB 39. New York: Doubleday, 1987.
Smend, Rudolf. Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach erklärt. Berlin: Reimer, 1906.
Urbanz, Werner. Gebet im Sirachbuch. Zur Terminologie von Klage und Lob in der griechischen
Texttradition. Herders Biblische Studien 60. Freiburg: Herder, 2009.
Urbanz, Werner. “Die Gebetsschule des Jesus Sirach. Bemerkungen zu Inhalten, Subjekten und
Methoden des Gebets im Sirachbuch.” PzB 18 (2009): 31–48.
Urbanz, Werner. “Emotionen mit Gott – Aspekte aus den Gebetsaussagen im Sirachbuch.”
Pages 133–58 in Emotions from Ben Sira to Paul. Edited by Renate Egger-Wenzel and Jer-
emy Corley. Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook 2011. Berlin: de Gruyter,
2012.
Wahl, Harald Martin. “Noah, Daniel und Hiob in Ezechiel XIV,12–20 (21–3). Anmerkungen zum
traditionsgeschichtlichen Hintergrund.” VT 42 (1992): 542–53.
Wright, Benjamin G. “The Use and Interpretation of Biblical Tradition in Ben Sira’s Praise of the
Ancestors.” Pages 183–207 in Studies in the Book of Ben Sira. Papers of the Third Interna-
tional Conference on the Deuterocanonical Books, Shime‘on Centre, Pápa, Hungary, 18–20
May, 2006. Edited by Géza G. Xeravits and József Zsengellér. JSJSup 127. Leiden: Brill,
2008.
Xeravits, Géza G. “The Figure of David in the Book of Ben Sira.” Hen 23 (2001): 27–38.
Zapff, Burkard M. Jesus Sirach 25–51. Die Neue Echter Bibel. Kommentar zum Alten Testament
mit der Einheitsübersetzung, Würzburg: Echter, 2010.
Ziegler, Joseph, ed. Sapientia Iesu Filii Sirach. Septuaginta. Vetus Testamentum Graecum 12.2.
Rev. 2nd ed. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1980.