Desperate Housewives ante litteram: the אשה זרה in Proverbs 1-9

“At the outset,” says Tova Forti, “I shall state my primary contention, namely that the Strange Woman of Proverbs 1-9 (2:16-22; 5:1-23; 6:20-35; 7:1-27) ought to be identified as a mundane, seductive, adulterous, married woman who threatens the safeguarding of the family nucleus and stability of the social order” (89). I quote from her paper originally presented at the 2006 National Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, now published in Hebrew Studies 48 (2007).

If Tova Forti is right, and I think she is, the expression אשה זרה nonetheless continues to be misunderstood and over-interpreted by a host of commentators, among them Roland Murphy (Roman Catholic; "Dame Folly"), Bruce Waltke (conservative Protestant; "a paradigm for spiritual infidelity against the Lord"), and Carol Newsom (feminist; the "radical other") (survey in Forti, 92-95). The tendency to allegorize the expression has been strong in all periods, as Michael Fox’s surveys demonstrate (134-141; 252-262).

Most modern English translations are more prudent, and render according to אשה זרה’s probable historical sense. For example, in Prov 2:16, two translations hew closely to the Hebrew: ‘the wife of another’ (NAB); ‘the woman who belongs to another’ (NJB). Saadia and Metsudat Zion also so interpret. LXX Prov 5:20 translated the synonymous נכריה along the very same lines, and correctly, with τῆς μὴ ἰδίας ‘someone not your own.’

Two other translations, both supposedly “as literal as possible and as free as necessary” – but not in this case – have ‘a forbidden woman’ (ESV and HCSB). Many other translations capture the literal sense with dynamically equivalent substitutes ‘the loose woman’ (RSV; NRSV); ‘the adulteress’ (REB; NIV); etc. 

Forti issues a timely warning against modern methodological approaches to biblical literature – she cites “inter-textuality, structuralism, and ideological readings” as the chief culprits – insofar as they “disinherit” the אשה זרה pericopes of a “literal reading of their own” (90).

I concur with the warning, though I have no absolute quarrel with overreading approaches which elide the text’s plain sense in favor of a sensus plenior (fuller sense). One just needs to be clear and honest about what one is doing.

For example, if I continue to read Song of Songs as a description of God and his beloved (people) as seen through the eyes of the other, I do so out of respect for and in accordance with a tradition of interpretation with 2000 years of history at its back. On the other hand, the plain sense of Song of Songs is also Scripture for me - though it wasn’t for Akiva and many other Jews and Christians, in various times and places. In a scholarly arena, exposition, I think, ought to begin with the plain sense, not the sensus plenior.

Forti’s chief argument in favor of a plain sense reading of the אשה זרה pericopes is that the book of Proverbs is first and foremost a manual of conduct, in which “rhetorical emphasis is put on the danger of succumbing to various kinds of seduction, such as the warning against consorting with robbers and murderers (1:10-19); avoiding the company of violent gangs (2:12-15), warnings about providing surety (6:5), and against laziness (6:6-12). Thus, the inclusion of warnings against the bad company of the adulterous woman within the same collection (2:16-22; 5:8-23; 6:24-35; 7:18-20) seems to be an additional, essential aspect of safeguarding domestic peace and maintaining society’s order” (96-97).

Indeed. There have always been desperate housewives. The more things change, the more things stay the same.

Here is the text and a translation of one of the relevant passages, Prov 2:16-19:

לְהַצִּילְךָ מֵאִשָּׁה זָרָה       מִנָּכְרִיָּה אֲמָרֶיהָ הֶחֱלִיקָה3:3       

הַעֹזֶבֶת אַלּוּף נְעוּרֶיהָ        וְאֶת־בְּרִית אֱלֹהֶיהָ שָׁכֵחָה3:3       

כִּי־שָׁחָה אֶל־מָוֶת נְתִבָתָהּ*    וְאֶל־רְפָאִים מַעְגְּלֹתֶיהָ3:3         

כָּל־בָּאֶיהָ לֹא יְשׁוּבוּן          וְלֹא־יַשִּׂיגוּ אָרְחוֹת חַיִּים3:3          

Saving you from a woman who is not yours,

         from an interloper whose words are smooth,

who abandons the partner of her youth,

         forgets her covenant with God;

for her path descends to death,

        her course to the Shades;

none who resort to her ever return,

       nor regain the path of life,

 Bibliography

 Tovah Forti, The Isha Zara in Proverbs 1-9: Allegory and Allegorization,” HS 48 (2007) 89-100; Michael Fox, Proverbs 1-9: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 18A; New York: Doubleday, 2000); Roland E. Murphy, Proverbs (WBC 22; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1998) 281-283; Carol A. Newsom, “Proverbs,” The Women’s Bible Commentary (ed. Carol A. Newsom and Sharon H. Ringe; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1992) 148-149; Bruce K. Waltke, The Book of Proverbs Chapters 1-15 (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004) 124-125.

Comments

[dave b]

Thanks for this food for thought.

How does the אשת כסילות of Prov. 9:13 fit into all this? Juxtaposed as this woman is to wisdom personified in 9:1-12 it seems that, at least in this case, something deeper is implied (even in the plain sense). If this is so, perhaps the similarities between the woman in 9:13-18 and the אשה זרה is what have caused commentators, for good or ill, to see the latter as paradigmatic.

I suppose I would also take issue with Forti’s contention that the book of Proverbs is a mere manual of conduct to maintain domestic peace and social order (and I suspect this may explain the position of commentators like Murphy and Waltke on this issue). Of course this is an ongoing debate among wisdom scholars, but it seems that the way the book was composed urges one to read it as instruction on how to live before the face of Yhwh. I suppose this has to do with being honest about how we regard these books and what we are doing with them, as you mention. Read as a whole and within the context of the canon, Proverbs appears to be much more than a manual for healthy and wealthy living.

[JohnFH]

Dave, you are right to draw attention to Dame Folly in Proverbs 9. Passages in Prov 8-9 and elsewhere demonstrate an interest in the metaphysics of wisdom and anti-wisdom, which means that the book of Proverbs is more than - but not less than - a manual of conduct.

But I think it's possible to combine the results of Forti's analysis with the above considerations.