*Minor differences ignored. Grouped by changes, with first version listed as example.
The lying tongue hates its victims.
A lying tongue hateth those that are afflicted by it - He that injures another hates him in proportion to the injury he has done him; and, strange to tell, in proportion to the innocence of the oppressed. The debtor cannot bear the sight of his creditor; nor the knave, of him whom he has injured.
A lying tongue hateth those that are afflicted by it,.... That is, a man of a lying tongue, that is given to lying, hates those that are hurt and crushed by his lies; the reason why he hurts them with his lies is because he hates them; and, having hurt them, he hates them, being made his enemies, and from whom he may expect and be in fear of revenge: moreover, he hates those that are troubled at and disturbed with his lies; or the "contrite" (p) and humble men: or those who "smite" or "strike" (q) him, as some render the word, actively; that is, reprove him, and bring him to shame for lying. The words are by some translated, a "contrite" person, or everyone of "the contrite ones, hateth a lying tongue" (r); such as are of a broken and of a contrite spirit, and that tremble at the word of God, or are hurt by lies, these abhor a liar. The Targum is,
"a lying tongue bates the ways of truth;''
and the Septuagint, Syriac, and Arabic versions, render it, "a lying tongue hate truth"; and so the Vulgate Latin version, "a lying tongue loves not truth"; for nothing is more contrary to a lie than truth;
and a flattering mouth worketh ruin; both to itself and to the persons flattered by it: or, "makes an impulse" (s); a pushing, a driving away; it drives away such as cannot bear its flatteries: and pushes on such that are taken with it, both into sin and into ruin.
(p) "contritos suos", Montanus, Michaelis. (q) "Percutientes", Gejerus. (r) "Linguam falsitatis odit quisque contritorum ejus", Cocceius Lexic. col. 158. "quisque contritorum ab ea", ibid. version. (s) "expulsionem", Pagninus, Montanus; "impulsum sive lapsum", Vatablus; "impulsionem", Tigurine version, Mercerus, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Gejerus, Michaelis, Schultens.
There are two sorts of lies equally detestable. A slandering lie, the mischief of this every body sees. A flattering lie, which secretly works ruin. A wise man will be more afraid of a flatterer than of a slanderer.
Men hate those they injure.
A lying tongue--"lips" for the persons (compare Proverbs 4:24; Psalm 12:3).
28 The lying tongue hateth those whom it bruiseth;
And a flattering mouth causeth ruin.
The lxx, Jerome, the Targ., and Syr. render ישׂנא דכיו in the sense of non amat veritatem; they appear by דכיו to have thought of the Aram. דכיא, that which is pure; and thus they gain nothing else but an undeniable plain thought. Many Jewish interpreters gloss: מוכיחיו, also after the Aram.: דּכּיו = מדכּיו; but the Aram. דּכּי does not mean pure in the sense of being right, therefore Elia Wilna understands him who desires to justify himself, and this violent derivation from the Aram. thus does not lead to the end. Luther, translating: "a false tongue hates those who punish it," explains, as also Gesenius, conterentes = castigantes ipsam; but דּך signifies, according to the usage of the language before us, "bruised" (vid., Psalm 9:10), not: bruising; and the thought that the liar hates him who listens to him, leads ad absurdum; but that he does not love him who bruises (punishes) him, is self-evident. Kimchi sees in דּכּיו another form of דּכּא; and Meri, Jona Gerundi in his ethical work (שׁערי תשׁובה = The gates of Repentance), and others, accordingly render דכיו in the sense of ענו (עניו): the lying tongue hates - as Lwenstein translates - the humble [pious]; also that for דכּיו, by the omission of ו, דכּי = זכּי may be read, is supposable; but this does not harmonize with the second half of the proverb, according to which לשׁון שׁקר must be the subject, and ישׂנא דכיו must express some kind of evil which proceeds from such a tongue. Ewald: "the lying tongue hates its master (אדניו)," but that is not in accordance with the Hebrews. style; the word in that case should have been בּעליו. Hitzig countenances this אדניו, with the remark that the tongue is here personified; but personified, the tongue certainly means him who has it (Psalm 120:3). Bttcher's conjecture ישׁנּא דכיו, "confounds their talk," is certainly a curiosity. Spoken of the sea, those words would mean, "it changes its surge." But is it then at all necessary to uncover first the meaning of 28a? Rashi, Arama, and others refer דכּיו to דּכּים = נדכּאים (מדכּים). Thus also perhaps the Venet., which translates τοὺς ἐπιτριμμοὺς (not: ἐπιτετριμμένους) αὐτῆς. C. B. Michaelis: Lingua falsitatis odio habet contritos suos, h. e. eos quos falsitate ac mendacio laedit contritosque facit. Hitzig objects that it is more correct to say: conterit perosos sibi. And certainly this lay nearer, on which account Fleischer remarks: in 28a there is to be supposed a poetic transposition of the ideas (Hypallage): homo qui lingua ad calumnias abutitur conterit eos quos odit. The poet makes ישׂנא the main conception, because it does not come to him so readily to say that the lying tongue bruises those against whom it is directed, as that it is hatred, which is active in this. To say this was by no means superfluous. There are men who find pleasure in repeating and magnifying scandalously that which is depreciatory and disadvantageous to their neighbour unsubstantiated, without being at all conscious of any particular ill-will or personal enmity against him; but this proverb says that such untruthful tongue-thrashing proceeds always from a transgression of the commandment, "Thou shalt not hate thy brother," Leviticus 19:17, and not merely from the want of love, but from a state of mind which is the direct opposite of love (vid., Proverbs 10:18). Ewald finds it incongruous that 28a speaks of that which others have to suffer from the lying tongue, whereas the whole connection of this proverb requires that the tongue should here be regarded as bringing ruin upon its owner himself. But of the destruction which the wicked tongue prepares for others many proverbs also speak, e.g., Proverbs 12:13, cf. Proverbs 17:4, לשׁון הוּת; and 28b does not mention that the smooth tongue (written וּפה־חלק with Makkeph) brings injury upon itself (an idea which must be otherwise expressed; cf. Proverbs 14:32), but that it brings injury and ruin on those who have pleasure in its flatteries (חלקות, Psalm 12:3; Isaiah 30:10), and are befooled thereby: os blandiloquum (blanditiis dolum tegens) ad casum impellit, sc. alios (Fleischer).
*More commentary available at chapter level.