A typology of personified wisdom hymns

Biblical Theology Bulletin, Winter, 2004 by Nozomi Miura

The basic texts of the personified Wisdom are Job 28, Proverbs 8, Ben Sira 24, and Wisdom of Solomon 7-9. The following section also includes two texts from apocalyptic literature--Baruch 3:9-4:4 and the Similitudes of Enoch (I Enoch 37-71)--which also deal with Wisdom in a distinctive way. Personified Wisdom carries different meanings according to each sapiential thread--even though the expressions are similar and written within a relatively short time in the post-exilic period. In this sense, the motif of personified Wisdom is polyvalent, having a wide range of meanings and connotation. At least three different lineages in the portrayals of Wisdom, each with a distinct emphasis are recognizable: (1) the hidden Wisdom tradition, (2) the accessible Wisdom tradition, and (3) the apocalyptic Wisdom tradition (Blenkinsopp 1983: 151-82; von Rad 1972: 53-73; Murphy 1996: 41, 76-79, 88-89, 133-47).

The first type stresses the essential hiddenness and inaccessibility of Wisdom to humans. This tradition includes Job 28, Baruch 3:9-4:4, and the Similitudes of Enoch. The unattainable nature of Wisdom underlines the essential "mystery" of Wisdom that only God can grasp, and eventually was linked up with the esoteric "revelation" of mystery in apocalyptic literature. Thus, the first type is further subdivided into the apocalyptic Wisdom tradition which includes Baruch and the Similitudes of Enoch.

The second type, emphasizing the accessibility of Wisdom, embraces Proverbs 8, Ben Sira 24, and Wisdom of Solomon 7-9. Here, personified Wisdom is portrayed as accessible to humans, as having a special role in creation, as declaring her life-giving nature to all humans, and as inviting all to follow her. Actually, these are the texts of personified Wisdom par excellence, which remarkably illustrate the personification of Wisdom. Even though these first two types of characterization are not necessarily mutually exclusive, they certainly do illustrate different perspectives with regard to Wisdom. Also, there is no strict demarcation or rigorous categorization among traditions. In fact, within the same book, different Wisdom traditions coexist (the hidden Wisdom motif is found in Ben Sira 1:6 and Proverbs 30:4 [Sayings of Agur]). Also, Wisdom of Solomon--whose Hellenized liberalism is usually contrasted with the traditional conservatism of Ben Sira--upholds the accessible Wisdom and identifies Wisdom with Torah in a way similar to that of Ben Sira. My intention is not to oversimplify various types of Wisdom traditions, but to differentiate their speculation on the nature of Wisdom.

The difference of emphasis among these traditions seems to reflect their historical/ideological background in the Second Temple period. Behind the development of Wisdom traditions, there existed a kind of "power politics"--a rivalry between the hierocratic movement of Zadokite priests and those who opposed this Zadokite priesthood (Perdue 2000: 55-58; 1997: 78-101; Boccaccini, 2002: 43-75, 203-05; Blenkinsopp 1995: 83-98). The dominant political and religious leaders among the immigrants who returned from Babylonia were the controlling faction of Persian appointed officials and the Zadokite priests. These people promoted the Temple-centered sacrificial hierocracy, legitimated by the Persian authority, with high priests appointed by the Persian authorities. Against these "Powers," a rival movement emerged and challenged the hierocratic party, particularly opposing the Zadokite priesthood and their monopoly over Second Temple Judaism. This rival movement (which was not a unified group, either) was represented by so-called "visionaries" constituted by politically and religiously marginal people and some of the Levitical families subjugated by the Zadokite priests. If one considers the fact that before the exile the priesthood was exercised neither by Zadokites nor by Aaronites, but by Levites (Deut 17:9; 18:1-8), this opposition from the Levites, who were reduced to clerus minor status (lower-order priests, like sacristans), is understandable. "This largely disenfranchised group came to regard the existing temple cult as defiled and its priesthood as corrupt ... [and] argued that Yahweh would establish a new political order" (Perdue 2000: 59). The Zadokite priests endeavored to offer a framework of stability and order centered around the temple sacrificial system. Their passion for order and harmony, beautifully illustrated in the Creation Prologue (Gen 1:1-2:4a), was consequently legitimated ideologically by the institution of Torah. In this sense, the notion of accessible Wisdom mirrors the Weltanschauung of the priests that "all [humans] are in the divine image and all survivors of the Deluge are the recipients of a covenant" (Blenkinsopp 1995: 105). According to this theological speculation, the identification of Wisdom with Torah elucidates the truth that "a crucial moment ... is the revelation of divine name to Moses," which guarantees the divine presence in the institution of Torah (Blenkinsopp 1995:107). In other words, the accessible Wisdom tradition exhibits this universalistic religio-political ideology of the authorities in the Second Temple period.