³ tn The referent of “it” must be the tongue, i.e., what the tongue says (= “its use”). So those who enjoy talking, indulging in it, must “eat” its fruit, whether good or bad. The expression “eating the fruit” is an implied comparison; it means accept the consequences of loving to talk (cf. TEV).

¹ tn Heb “discerning mind.” The term לֵב (lev, “mind, heart”) is a synecdoche of part (= heart/mind) for the whole (= person); cf. TEV, NLT “intelligent people.” Placing “heart” and “ear” in parallel encompasses more of the process of acquiring knowledge. The ear listens for and to instruction, and the mind considers what is heard to acquire knowledge.

² sn Poor listening and premature answering indicate that the person has a low regard for what the other is saying, or that he is too absorbed in his own ideas. The Mishnah lists this as the second characteristic of the uncultured person (m. Avot 5:7).

⁴ sn The two lines could be synonymous parallelism, but the second part is being used to show how wrong the first act would be—punishing the righteous makes about as much sense as beating an official of the court for doing what is just.

² tn Heb “to the lip of evil”; ASV, NAB, NASB, NRSV “wicked lips.” The term “lip” is a metonymy of cause for speech (what is said); the term “evil” is an attributive genitive. The same will be true in the parallel line where the expression “to the tongue of destruction” (NASB “a destructive tongue”) means things that are said that destroy others.

³ tn Heb “sweetness of lips.” The term “lips” is a metonymy of cause, meaning what is said. It is a genitive of specification. The idea of “sweetness” must be gracious and friendly words. The teaching will be well-received because it is both delightful and persuasive (cf. NIV “pleasant words promote instruction”).

² tn Heb “in the answer of his mouth” (so ASV); NASB “in an apt answer.” The term “mouth” is a metonymy of cause for what he says. But because the parallelism is loosely synonymous, the answer given here must be equal to the good word spoken in season. So it is an answer that is proper or fitting.

² sn In the Piel this verb has the meaning of “to reproach; to taunt; to say sharp things against” someone (cf. NIV “shows contempt for”). By oppressing the poor one taunts or mistreats God because that person is in the image of God—hence the reference to his/her maker, or “Creator.” To ridicule what God made is to ridicule God himself.

³ sn Tight control over what one says prevents trouble (e.g., Prov 10:10; 17:28; Jas 3:1-12; Sir 28:25). Amenemope advises to “sleep a night before speaking” (5:15; ANET 422, n. 10). The old Arab proverb is appropriate: “Take heed that your tongue does not cut your throat” (O. Zockler, Proverbs, 134).

³ tn Heb “good.” The Hebrew word “good” (טוֹב, tov) refers to what is beneficial for life, promotes life, creates life or protects life. The “good word” here would include encouragement, kindness, and insight—the person needs to regain the proper perspective on life and renew his confidence.

² tn Heb “the hand of the diligent.” The term “hand” is a synecdoche of part (= hand) for the whole (= person): diligent person. The hand is emphasized because it is the instrument of physical labor; it signifies the actions and the industry of a diligent person—what his hand does.

¹ tn Heb “The fool, at once his vexation is known.” This rhetorically emphatic construction uses an independent nominative absolute, which is then followed by the formal subject with a suffix. The construction focuses attention on “the fool,” then states what is to be said about him.

³ sn J. H. Greenstone suggests that when the wicked become involved in contradictions of testimony, the innocent is freed from the trouble. Another meaning would be that the wicked get themselves trapped by what they say, but the righteous avoid that (Proverbs, 131).

¹ tn Heb “are to ambush blood.” The infinitive construct אֱרָב (ʾerov, “to lie in wait”) expresses the purpose of their conversations. The proverb either compares their words to an ambush (cf. NAB, NRSV “are a deadly ambush”) or states what the content of their words is about.

³ tn Heb “mouth.” The term פֶּה (peh, “mouth”) is a metonymy of cause, signifying what the righteous say. The righteous can make a skillful defense against false accusations that are intended to destroy. The righteous, who have gained wisdom, can escape the traps set by the words of the wicked.

² tn Heb “tree of life” (so KJV, NAB, NIV, NRSV). The noun חַיִּים (khayyim, “life”) is genitive of product. What the righteous produce (“fruit”) is like a tree of life—a long and healthy life as well as a life-giving influence and provision for others.

⁴ sn The participle “sowing” provides an implied comparison (the figure is known as hypocatastasis) with the point of practicing righteousness and inspiring others to do the same. What is sown will yield fruit (1 Cor 9:11; 2 Cor 9:6; Jas 3:18).

³ tn Heb “hates.” The term שֹׂנֵא (soneʾ) means “to reject,” and here “to avoid.” The participle is substantival, functioning as the subject of the clause. The next participle, תֹקְעִים (toq^eʿim, “striking hands”), is its object, telling what is hated. The third participle בּוֹטֵחַ (boteach, “is secure”) functions verbally.

¹ tn Heb “the dread of the wicked.” The noun רָשָׁע (rashaʿ, “wicked”) is a subjective genitive. The noun מְגוֹרַת (m^egorat) refers to “the feared thing,” that is, what the wicked dread. The wicked are afraid of the consequences of their sinful actions; however, they cannot escape these consequences.

⁵ tn Heb “like little.” This expression refers to what has little value: “little worth” (so KJV, NAB, NRSV; cf. BDB 590 s.v. מְעַט 2.d). The point of the metaphor is clarified by the parallelism: Silver is valuable; the heart of the wicked is worth little. Tg. Prov 10:20 says it was full of dross, a contrast with choice silver.