Abstract
This short study seeks to highlight the rhetorical use of creation imagery in the sapiential Torah exhortation of Baruch 3:9–4:4. A methodology of rhetorical criticism will principally be used to investigate the style of this “ecologically” insightful part of the poem as well as its function in the wider message of the exhortation. The few short phrases of 3:33–35 effectively bolster the overall exhortation to adhere to the divine commandments as Israel is thereby invited to an imitation of creation in its reverent, unhesitating, joyful and Patriarch-like obedience to the divine will. To paraphrase this idea, “Hear O Israel, be like the light and the stars! Learn from creation and you will live.” Finally, this study seeks to contribute to the more recent attention to the Book of Baruch by commenting further on the previously accentuated unoriginality of this marvelous short work of Second Temple Jewish literature, especially with regard to its employment of some bright “ecological” wisdom.
Within the sapiential exhortation to Israel in Baruch 3:9–4:4 one finds a potential piece of wisdom which can be described as “ecological.” 1 While it ought to be noted at the outset that ecology is not properly the interest of the author of Baruch, 2 one can nevertheless observe ecologically pertinent insights throughout the poem, such as creation’s exploitation at the hands of the wealthy and powerful (3:16–19), and the whole of the created order viewed as God’s domain and possession (3:24). Even the frequently recurring phrase, ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, has been identified as giving a sense of “earthliness” (or “earthiness”) to the exhortation and therefore also a certain limitedness to its human characters portrayed therein. 3 This short study seeks to highlight one particularly insightful case of this “Baruchan ecology” found in 3:33–35. Here, the author seems to be artfully employing ecological imagery of creation at the rhetorical service of a deontological compliment to a consequence-based divine law theory presented in the wider exhortation. Though the distinct unit of Baruch 3:9–4:4 is receiving more needed scholarly attention in recent times, 4 there seems to have been hitherto little close examination of this particular dimension and its literary function. 5 For the limited purposes of this study, our specific portion of text will be treated as a work of Second Temple Jewish Literature, originally composed in Greek. 6
Literary context and analysis
It is first necessary to summarize the literary context of 3:33–35. In a Shema-like summons (3:9), Israel is exhorted to hear the commandments of life in order to learn insight (φρόνησις). Up until 3:33, the tension has been building insofar as Israel was exhorted to learn the location of φρόνησις and σύνεσις (3:14a), but it seems that there is no one in the created realm who knows the way (ὁδός) to its whereabouts (3:15–31). Nevertheless, the clue was cleverly offered throughout the text that it is a divine gift given only to those whom God elects (3:27; cf. 3:37). The negative answers to the questions of “who has found the way” (3:15, 29–30) are dramatically qualified in a contextually unprecedented turn toward the “One who knows all things” in v. 32 (cf. Job 28:24). 7 Thus, it would appear that the deflating response of v. 31, “No one knows the way to it,” is deliberately misleading for rhetorical effect: there is not one human being who knows the way. But by v. 37 it will become clear that even this is not quite true: not one non-Israelite knows the way, since God has given the way to knowledge to beloved Israel. Nevertheless, in light of the assertion that Israel has forsaken this way (3:12–13) it is possible that the sense of collective guilt instilled by the denial that any human being knows the way may be intensified. This way will be revealed as the “book of the divine commandments,” Israel’s illuminating, life-giving and eternal law (4:1–2). Thus, the exhortation is primarily one to Torah obedience as the means to the outcomes of knowledge and life. 8 It is, by in large, to serve this hortatory purpose that creation imagery is impressively employed in the poem. Verse 32 has zoomed tersely in from the divine universal knowledge to the particular—the one who knows all things knows the way (to knowledge). 9 The Omniscient One is, by implication, the Creator who filled the earth with creatures (cf. Gen 1:24–25; Isa 40:28; Amos 9:6). 10
Keeping in mind their embeddedness in this literary context, it is now necessary to examine the focus phrases themselves: 11
These poignant lines colorfully provide additional description of the Omniscient Creator (3:32). He is the Creator whose command even the light 12 obeys with trembling as likewise do the stars with joyful attention (cf. Ps 2:11). The One who knows all things and prepared the earth also commands the obedience of all creation and it unhesitatingly and reverently responds. The use of poetic asyndeton tends to increase the tempo of the text and this artfully gives a greater sense of immediacy to creation’s obedience; he sends it, it goes; he calls, they come. 13 The Creator’s actions are described tersely and swiftly, while the responses of the creatures are illustrated more at length. On the one hand, the overall pattern of command-response may be subtly reversed in 3:34a as ταῖς φυλακαῖς αὐτῶν must imply an authority who placed the stars “on watch.” On the other hand, the explicit response of the stars appointed to their watches is simply one of rejoicing. As in 3:32b, the language is reminiscent of wisdom texts but simultaneously evocative of the Genesis creation narrative but from the perspective of an ongoing state of reality (Gen 1:5; cf. Job 37:11; 28:24–27; 38:35; Sir 43:10). The postpositive particle δέ in 3:34a must function in a simple transitional sense rather than adversatively. 14 On the one hand, the awesome power and commanding authority of the Creator seems to be the emphasis of 3:32–36. 15 On the other hand, in the wider context of the exhortation, the lexical and conceptual correspondence between the obedience of personified creation and that required of Israel becomes clear, thus pointing to an additional emphasis in service of the poem’s main purpose. 16
Let us unpack the particularities of this contrast of creation’s obedience with that of Israel with a view to its function within the wider poem. The φῶς which is sent in 3:33a is distinct from the light of the Torah in 4:2 (cf. 3:14) but is likely the same as that of 3:20. The exhortation in 4:2 to walk toward the shining of the Torah’s light (φῶς) will hearken back to this diligent and fearful obedience by the φῶς here in 3:33. That the light can be called and that it “goes” and “obeys” is clear evidence of personification. Such a technique in context tends to highlight the personal nature of creation’s dutiful obedience with which Israel can therefore more easily identify. Obedience to God with fear is a very common biblical motif but the LXX uses “trembling” (τρόμῳ) more often to communicate the creature’s fearful reaction to the divine workings in the world (e.g. Exod 15:16; Deut 11:25). 17 However, φόβος and τρόμος are in these examples (and others such as in Ps 2:11) used in close parallel and therefore in light of the wisdom-Torah motif of Baruch 3:9–4:4 we can say that 3:33b is reminiscent of the biblical “Fear of the Lord” motif of reverence, especially since in some cases this motif becomes almost coterminous with obedience to the divine law. 18 A further connection is observed by Reiterer which sheds light on the obedient creation-obedient Israel contrast which this study is outlining: In light of obedient creation in Baruch 5:8, the divine command (προστάγματι τοῦ θεοῦ) seems to be presented as absolutely binding, since even nature adheres to it. 19 The whole exhortation has been to learn the “way to wisdom,” that is, the way of the divine commandments (τῶν προσταγμάτων τοῦ θεοῦ) (4:1), which Israel have not followed (πορεύομαι) (1:18; 2:10). The personified light diligently follows (πορεύεται) the “way” implicitly assigned to it by the Creator just as Israel ought to walk in the way of God (ἐπορεύθης) (3:13).
After the light (3:33), the personified stars respond to the divine summons to attention by retorting without hesitation, ad sumus! “Here we are” (3:34–35). This parallels what Israel is exhorted to do (3:9). 20 The stars in the sky are perhaps evocative of the Abrahamic covenant promise of descendants “as numerous as the stars of heaven” (Deut 1:10; cf. Gen 15:15). In fact, their solemn exclamation of attentiveness and availability to God, “here we are,” is intriguingly paralleled in the singular almost exclusively by Israel’s great Patriarchs: Abraham (Gen 22:1), Isaac (Gen 22:7), Jacob (Gen 31:11), Joseph (Gen 37:13), Jacob-Israel (Gen 46:2), Moses (Exod 3:4), Samuel (1 Sam 3:4), but also Isaiah (Isa 6:8). 21 As Israel has been summoned to hear the divine commands (3:9), so the light and the stars are called to attention.
In addition to these suggestions, simply by shining, doing presumably what they were created to do, these stars gladly serve their Creator. This is the case since the expression, τῷ ποιήσαντι likely functions grammatically as a dative of advantage, thus indicating that the creature acts in glad response to the Creator who calls it. The twice repeated joy of the stars brings home the sense that they do not respond reluctantly. Theirs is surely a willing obedience to the divine command. This note of joy is admittedly unique within the exhortation of 3:9–4:4 and introduces a brighter tone hitherto unprecedented also in the previous Penitential section of the whole book (1:15–3:8). In the Psalms, joy is characteristic of the righteous, that is, those obedient to the divine will (e.g. Pss 19:8; 31:11; 32:1; 67:4; 96:11 117:15). The stars’ glad obedience contrasts with the poem’s early assessment of Israel’s disobedience (3:12), a collective disobedience which featured heavily in the Penitential section of Baruch. The stars’ joyful obedience also parallels the fearful obedience of the light and such modalities may be thought of as strangely complementary, especially given the similar exhortation in Psalm 2:11, δουλεύσατε τῷ κυρίῳ ἐν φόβῳ καὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε αὐτῷ ἐν τρόμῳ (cf. Sir 1:11–12). Though it will become clearer by 4:1–2, Israel is implicitly urged to imitate creation in the same reverent, joyful and unhesitating obedience to the eternal commandments. 22 It is also possible that the lexical correspondence of terminology denoting “joy” found frequently in the consolation poem to follow (Bar 4:5–5:9) represents a significant literary hint at the catalyst to Israel’s joyful return to its mother Jerusalem: a return to obedience of the divine commandments. 23 A final related insight alluded to by Nicklas is that the disobedience of Israel brings about the desolation of the land (Bar 2:23; 4:12, 19). 24 Insofar as creation suffers because of human disobedience, it follows that obedient creation (Bar 3:33–35) reminds Israel of its own responsibility toward the land.
The question of originality
At this point it may be asked whether this creation imagery of Baruch 3:33–35 and its proposed function within the wider poem represent anything original. This is a pertinent question, particularly in light of the assertion of Meyer that “no phrase in the book is original.” 25 Let us examine three possible parallels which might clarify Meyer’s claim which is also made by others to varying degrees.
Given Baruch’s apparent use of the Isaiah tradition,
26
these lines may be inspired by Isa 48:12–13: ἄκουέ μου Ιακωβ καὶ Ισραηλ ὃν ἐγὼ
A degree of similarity between these two passages is hard to deny. What is important for this study is that also in Isa 48:12–13, creation’s summons to attention is directly paralleled to that of Jacob and Israel. 27 In fact, Karina Hogan comments on Baruch 3:34 that “it was a common topos in early Jewish literature to contrast the order of creation with human disobedience of the divine statutes.” 28 Nevertheless, despite these similarities, the Isaiah text and context is not so Torah-focused nor quite so sapiential in tone as that of Baruch. 29 Neither fear nor joy have a part to play in this Isaiah parallel.
The joyful obedience of certain creatures can be found in Sirach. In a hymn of divine praise, wild beasts, scorpions and snakes “will rejoice in his commands,” (ἐν τῇ ἐντολῇ αὐτοῦ εὐφρανθήσονται) and “will not transgress his word” (39:31; cf. 16:28). Moreover, from 42:15–43:33, the author extols the omniscient Creator whose glory is seen in his obedient creation (cf. 42:23). The sun (ἥλιος) hastens on its course at its Creator’s words (ἐν λόγοις) (43:5). At the divine words, the stars (ἄστρων) too stand according to the divine decree and do not grow slack in their watches (ἐν φυλακαῖς αὐτῶν) (43:9–10). By implication, their glory is particularly manifest in their divine obedience. Yet unlike the aforementioned Isaiah text, Sirach makes no clear connections between obedient creation-obedient Israel, but simply praises the glory of the Almighty Creator in his glorious works. 30
Some of these ideas found in Sirach and Isaiah may also shed light on the obedient creation-obedient Israel contrast of Baruch. In the final imperative to Israel (Bar 4:3), they are implored not to give their glory to another, their “advantages to an alien people” (cf. Sir 49:4b–5; Isa 42:8; 48:11). The clear parallel in Sir 49:4b–5, as well as the context of our sapiential poem indicate that this glory derives from their adherence to the fount of wisdom, which is found to be the βίβλος τῶν προσταγμάτων τοῦ θεοῦ (4:1). Such glory is entirely congruent with the arguably composite unity of Baruch: The poem of consolation (4:5–5:9) implies that in their restoration, the glory which Jerusalem’s children will “put on” is the “robe of righteousness from God” (5:2), that is, a return to obedience to the divine commandments which they had forsaken (4:12–13), an abandonment for which they have seriously repented (1:15–3:8). It was just noted above how, according to a line of Second Temple Jewish thought, the glory of God is manifest in creation particularly in its obedience (Sir 42:15–43:33). It follows, then, that if the light and the stars of Baruch 3:33–35 are exemplars for Israel’s imitation, it might be speculated that when near-dead Israel has become as willingly obedient as the personified creation is in its unswerving submission, then they will effectively “put on” creation’s glory, the glory which ultimately comes from God (5:1–2).
Finally, the motif of obedient creation is also found in the Epistle of Jeremiah verses 59–61: ἥλιος μὲν γὰρ καὶ σελήνη καὶ
Here, the sun and stars are obedient in their commissioning, the clouds complete their divinely appointed assignment, and fire sent forth from above does the divine bidding However, not only here are we dealing with variant terminology, but an examination of this imagery in context reveals a far less explicit connection to Torah obedience. In context, the message exclusively condemns foreign idols as inanimate and useless because unlike creation which obeys its creator, they can neither hear nor grant the petitions of their supplicants.
Upon closer consideration of these three possible parallels in their respective contexts, Baruch’s use of such creation imagery, therefore, begins to appear as a more original adaptation than perhaps expected. In fact, sophisticated use and adaptation of the tradition certainly aligns more with the character of the Second Temple literature. Based on our own observations, we certainly agree with Meyer that “No statement of the book lacks a link to the canonical tradition” and that “originality is not the goal.” 31 However, there appears to be a some degree of originality here in the specific form of the traditional creation imagery and in its function in the wider poem. 32
Concluding observations
Baruch 3:33–35 features creation imagery artfully employed by the author in order to serve the poem’s main purpose (3:9–4:4). To do justice to the complete poem, the principal goal is to exhort Israel to learn that the way to wisdom is principally the divinely given Torah. It is this Book of the eternal Law (4:1) that Israel are in exile for having forsaken (3:12), and to these divine commandments Israel must adhere if they wish to live. It is primarily the Torah, therefore, rather than the surrounding physical environment from which Israel are to draw wisdom, knowledge and life, at least the kind of life herein described. 33 Hence, one might find here certain insights for an epistemology or a theology of divine revelation. At one and the same time, however, the author reinforces the thrust of the exhortation with rich elements of an “ecology of creation.” To the author of Baruch, there is no understanding of nature without a theology of creation. This is therefore more an insight of theological ecology subordinated to moral exhortation or a divine law theory. Such a theory does not remain in the abstract but relates to the flourishing of both created person and created land (cf. 2:23; 4:12, 19). It might be described as an employment of natural imagery at the service of a creation-theological ethics. The wider poem offers the positive outcomes of knowledge, life (3:8; 4:1b) and divine pleasure (4:4b) as a kind of consequence-based law theory. However, it might be surmised that this imagery is presented in service of a deontology. That is, if the personified light and the stars dutifully obey the divine commands with fear and gladness, then so should beloved Israel adhere unswervingly to the Torah if they wish to obtain the aforementioned outcomes. Though the composers of Second Temple Jewish literature seldom seek to be “original” in any strict sense, this is an impressively creative and original adaptation of traditional creation imagery. It is an adaptation of a tradition echoed in a number of earlier biblical sources. This is an imitatio lucem et stellas, an imitation of the light and the stars. The simplicity and innocence of their existence counters the complexity of human disobedience and waywardness (3:21), as well as the human exploitation of other creatures (3:16–17). Unlike those who hoard up silver and gold nor those who happen to be great in physical stature (3:17–18, 26), the light and the stars are, by implication of the personification, the truly wise in virtue of their Patriarch-like prompt readiness and dutiful obedience. Finally, if the light and stars may be representative of the created order, are readers of Baruch not likewise invited to learn from all creation? The poem portrays an ennobled creation, embellished by its exemplary docility. It might be concluded therefore, that for the sympathetically creationist reader, this requires a respect for creation beyond that of “non-creationist” readers. Readers are being invited to learn from all creation in its docility to the Creator, its reverent obedience, its reminder of human responsibility for the land, its simple gladness in doing what it was created to do and being who it was created to be. As the stars shine with gladness for the One who made them (3:34b), why should not those who are listening do likewise?
Footnotes
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
1.
The classical definition of ecology from Ernst Haeckel is the study of the economy of nature. However, given the obvious theological perspective of Baruch, it may be better to broaden it to the study of the economy of the cosmos or creation which may serve to avoid the exclusion of theological readings.
2.
For the sake of convenience and brevity, herein “author” or “Baruch” simply represent the unknown writer/s and editor/s responsible for this pseudepigraphical composite work.
3.
Gerhardus J. Swart, “Listen, Learn, Live: A Text-Linguistic Analysis of Baruch 3:9-37,” in Weisheit als Lebensgrundlage. Festschrift für Friedrich V. Reiterer zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. Renate Egger-Wenzel, Karin Schöpflin, and Johannes Diehl, DCLS 15 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2013), 352.
4.
Recent noteworthy studies include, R. Henderson, “The Inter-Textual Dialogue between Deuteronomy 4:30 and Job 28:12-20 in Baruch 3:9–4:4,” in Studies on Baruch: Composition, Literary Relations, and Reception, ed. Sean A. Adams, DCLS 23 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2016), 43–59; Nuria Calduch-Benages, “The Baruch Reading at the Easter Vigil (Bar 3:9–15; 3:32–4:4),” in Studies on Baruch: Composition, Literary Relations, and Reception, ed. Sean A. Adams, DCLS 23 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2016), 153–70; Karina M. Hogan, “Elusive Wisdom and the Other Nations in Baruch,” in The “Other” in Second Temple Judaism. Essays in Honor of John J. Collins, ed. Daniel C. Harlow, Karina Martin Hogan, and Matthew Goff (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011), 145–59; Sebastian Grätz, “‘Wisdom’ and ‘Torah’ in the Book of Baruch,” in Wisdom and Torah. The Reception of ‘Torah’ in the Wisdom Literature of the Second Temple Period, ed. Bernd Schipper and D. Andrew Teeter, JSJ. Sup 163 (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 187–201; Francesco Bargellini, “La Torah e la Sapienza in Bar 3,9–4,4: Quale rapporto?,” RivBib 60 (2012): 475–92.
5.
One of the best contributions to date is that of Tobias Nicklas, who carefully examines Baruch 3:32–36 in its function within the composite unity of the Book of Baruch and this provides some useful insight to our study. See Tobias Nicklas, “Schöpfungstheologie im Buch Baruch: Bedeutung und Funktion,” in Theologies of Creation in Early Judaism and Ancient Christianity: In Honour of Hans Klein, ed. Tobias Nicklas and Korinna Zamfir, DCLS 6 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2010), 81–93.
6.
Some who posit a Hebrew Vorlage appear more hesitant to regard Baruch 3:9–4:4 as translation Greek than any other section, such as Emanuel Tov, The Book of Baruch Also Called I Baruch (Greek and Hebrew), ed. R. Kraft (Texts and Translations 8; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1975), and Sean E. Adams, who can be consulted for a recent summary of dating, language and provenance. See Sean A. Adams, Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremia: A Commentary Based on the Texts in Codex Vaticanus (Septuagint Commentary Series; Boston: Brill, 2014), 4–12. The manuscripts testify to a relatively stable text for this section of the Book (cf. A, B, Q, V, and a considerable number of minuscules).
7.
The context implies that the omniscient one is obviously the Divine Creator. See Gerald T. Sheppard, Wisdom as a Hermeneutical Construct. A Study in the Sapientializing of the Old Testament, BZAW 151 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1980), 94–95.
8.
Scholars are not in agreement on whether the focus is on wisdom or law but it seems safe to say that these traditions have been creatively interwoven. See J. C. de Vos, “‘You have Forsaken the Fountain of Wisdom?’. The Function of Law in Baruch 3:9–4:4,” ZABR 13 (2007): 176–86. Some even see the “praise of the laws of God” as the poem’s central theme; see J. Anoz, “Estudio Sobre Baruch 3,9–4,4,” Mayéutica 7 (1981): 161–77.
9.
Scholars differ in how to render the genitives governed by ὁδός (3:20, 23, 27) but in light of the revelation of 4:1 (the Torah), it would appear that the Law is presented as a way to wisdom, as the means to the end.
10.
Though v. 32b may seem to imply the eternity of the created world, it seems more accurate to affirm Moore’s interpretation that the earth is “eternal in comparison with man rather than in any absolute time sense” (cf. Qoh 1:4). See Carey A. Moore, Daniel, Esther, and Jeremiah: The Additions. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB 44 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1977), 300. The phrase αἰῶνα χρόνον is typical of Isaiah where it denotes eternity (cf. 9:6; 13:20; 14:20; 18:7; 33:20; 34:10, 17).
11.
The Greek text is taken from Joseph Ziegler, ed., Ieremias, Baruch, Threni, Epistula Jeremiae (Septuaginta Vetus Testamentum Graecum XV; Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1957) which I have translated.
12.
Interpreters have read this sending and calling in the present tense as a reference to sunrise and sunset, such as Aloysius Fitzgerald, “Baruch,” in The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, ed. Raymond E. Brown, John A. Fitzmyer and Roland E. Murphy (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1990), 566; or as lightning because of the parallel with Job 38:35, such as Moore, Daniel, Esther, and Jeremiah: The Additions, 301. It is unclear why a considerable number of textual witness have πορεύεται in the future tense (Q-V-86′-130-233-239-538-544-613; 87c-91-c). It is perhaps comprehensible if this is a depiction of the sunrise and sunset. Incidentally, the pairing of ἀποστέλλω with φῶς is unparalleled in the LXX.
13.
Scribal difficulty with the exhortation’s frequent poetic asyndeton is likely the reason why various witnesses insert conjunctions at times such as a καί here before ἐκάλεσεν or before ἔλαμψαν. These additions do damage to the heightened sense of urgency and promptness in this section. Such succinct description of command and obedience is also found on the lips of the centurion in Luke 7:8.
14.
That a minor witness (538; also Arab; Arm; Eusebius) has omitted the particle or replaced it with καί is no doubt due to reading it in the adversative sense. The same postpositive particle is used in the adversative sense in vv. 20b and 23b.
15.
After Odil H. Steck, Das apokryphe Baruchbuch: Studien zu Rezeption und Konzentration »kanonischer« Überlieferung, FRLANT 160 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1993), 132, 152; Hogan, “Elusive Wisdom,” 153–54, suggests that 3:32–35 may constitute a “prophetic doxology” in the line of Amos 5:8; Isa 40:25–26. André Kabasele Mukenge, L’unité littéraire du Livre de Baruch, EBib 38 (Paris: Gabalda, 1998), 247, describes vv. 32–35 as a “hymne sur le pouvoir divin.” Such categorizations indicate where these scholars locate the primary emphasis of this particular segment of the poem.
16.
Hogan, “Elusive Wisdom, 154, also points out that “the motif of the obedience of the heavenly luminaries is appropriate in the context of the present poem, since it contrasts with … the Israelites who ‘have forsaken the spring of wisdom’ (3:12).” Nicklas, “Schöpfungstheologie,” 90, can add that “As light and stars willingly respond to the divine Creator’s call, they are deliberately chosen for their role model function for Israel.” This study simply seeks to flesh out this deliberate rhetorical contrast in more detail and to comment further on its function and any possibility of originality.
17.
Isa 64:3 and Sir 16:19 have the mountains tremble from the divine presence and the divine gaze respectively.
18.
According to Stähli, there are cases in which “fear of the Lord” refers exclusively to the law: Pss 19:10; 112:1; 119:63; 128:1; cf. Deut 6:24), see Hans-Peter Stähli, “ירא,” TLOT 2:575–78. See also Sirach 19:20; 21:11; 24:23. Nicklas, “Schöpfungstheologie,” 84, however, holds that here the sense is less about reverence for God (φόβος) but trembling before God’s awesome power over the cosmos but both interpretations can apply given the context of God’s creative power within a sapiential exhortation to Torah obedience. According to 4 Esdras, the earth shook, and the depths trembled when God’s glory entered the world to give the law to Israel (3:18–19).
19.
Friedrich V. Reiterer, “Verstehst du die Tugenden der Klugheit? Anfragen zu Gott und zum Wert der von ihm geschenkten Einsicht,” in Deuterocanonical Additions of the Old Testament Books: Selected Studies, ed. Géza G. Xeravits and József Zsengellér, DCLS 5 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2010), 110. It is perhaps surprising that Reiterer makes this helpful observation in Bar 5:8, but does not seem to do likewise in Bar 3:33–35.
20.
It is also possible that their “watches” (φυλακαῖς) evokes the frequent use in the LXX of the verbal form φυλάσσω in connection with observance of the law (e.g. Deut 6:2, 17; Amos 2:4, Zech 3:7; Sir 21:11). This must remain only a possibility since Baruch does not use this verbal form but only ἀκούω, πορεύομαι and κρατέω. The noun form φυλακή is frequently used in the LXX-Numbers for the Levitical “charges” over the tabernacle.
21.
Judith’s prayer features the personified divine purposes standing to attention: καὶ εἶπαν ἰδοὺ πάρεσμεν (Jdt 9:6), though there is here no connection made with Israel’s obedience. Sir 43:10 says that the stars stand at the words of the Holy One and never grow slack in their watch (φυλακαῖς αὐτῶν) though neither here is there a direct link to Israel’s obedience.
22.
The gladness of creation in response to divine providence is a common biblical motif (cf. Ps 65:13; Is 44:23; 45:8; 49:13; Joel 2:21).
23.
The terms εὐφράνθησαν / εὐφροσύνης correspond to 4:23, 29, 36 (εὐφροσύνη); cf. 4:37; 5:5. The links to the poem of consolation are strengthened also by the divine incomparability motif in 3:36 reminiscent of Second and Third Isaiah from which 4:5 – 5:9 draws extensively. See Sean A. Adams, “Jerusalem’s Lament and Consolation: Baruch 4:5–5:9 and Its Relationships with Jewish Scripture,” in Studies on Baruch: Composition, Literary Relations, and Reception, ed. Sean A. Adams, DCLS 23 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2016), 61–77.
24.
Nicklas, “Schöpfungstheologie,” 90.
25.
Ivo Meyer, “Das Buch Baruch und der Brief des Jeremia,” in Einleitung in das Alte Testament, ed. Erich Zenger, Christian Frevel, Heinz-Josef Fabry, Georg Braulik, and Georg Hentschel, 3rd ed. (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1993), 439. In contrast with more recent studies, other scholars in the past, such as Moore, Crenshaw and Burke have criticised Baruch for an apparent lack of originality. See Moore, Daniel, Esther, and Jeremiah: The Additions, 259, 261; James L. Crenshaw, Old Testament Wisdom: An Introduction (Louisville, KY: John Knox, 1981), 187; David G. Burke, The Poetry of Baruch: A Reconstruction and Analysis of the Original Hebrew Text of Baruch 3:9-5:9, SCSt 10 (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1982), 33.
26.
See Sean A. Adams, “Jerusalem’s Lament and Consolation: Baruch 4:5–5:9 and Its Relationships with Jewish Scripture,” in Studies on Baruch: Composition, Literary Relations, and Reception, ed. Sean A. Adams, DCLS 23 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2016), 61–77.
27.
Isa 45:12 reads, ἐγὼ πᾶσι τοῖς ἄστροις ἐνετειλάμην, yet such assertion of the Creator’s omnipotence is found within a description of King Cyrus of Persia as God’s instrument.
28.
Hogan, “Elusive Wisdom,” 154. Hogan also lists a range of other Second Temple Jewish literature which contain examples of obedient creation.
29.
There are other thought-provoking similarities when comparing Isa 48 with the wider poem of Baruch 3:9–4:4, for example Baruch 4:3a and Isa 48:11b. Though this study is not primarily a source criticism, it might also be noted that Daniel, a key source tradition for Baruch 1:14–3:8, implies that the righteous and wise will shine like the stars (12:3), and creation is exhorted to the divine praises in the additional Song of Azariah and companions (3:52–68). Though likely a later work, in Biblical Antiquities, Philo implies that after death the righteous will be as stars (33.5).
30.
It may be of note that the section comprising 42:15–43:33 concludes with the words, “For the Lord has made all things, and to the godly he has granted wisdom.” A comparison of the Hebrew manuscripts of these parts of Sirach with the LXX do not yield discrepancies pertinent to this study.
31.
Meyer, “Das Buch Baruch,” 439.
32.
Though Hogan, 154, cites a similar contrast in 1 Enoch 2–5, even here the context is not a poem about the way to wisdom which is the Book of the commandments of God and so any originality in Baruch must be located in its function within a uniquely worded context. For example, the “patriarch-like” response of the stars: “Here we are!” which is proposed for imitation certainly seems original.
33.
For an impressive examination of life in Baruch and Sirach, see Shannon Burkes, “Wisdom and Law: Choosing Life in Ben Sira and Baruch,” JSJ 30 (1999): 253–76.