1. Not so he that applieth himself to the fear of God, And to set his mind upon the Law of the Most High; Who searcheth out the wisdom of all the ancients, And is occupied with the prophets of old; 2. Who heedeth the discourses of men of renown, And entereth into the deep things of parables; 3. Searcheth out the hidden meaning of proverbs, And is conversant with the dark sayings of parables.... 6. If it seem good to God Most High, He shall be filled with the spirit of understanding. He himself poureth forth wise sayings in double measure, And giveth thanks unto the Lord in prayer. 7. He himself directeth counsel and knowledge, And setteth his mind on their secrets. 8. He himself declareth wise instruction, And glorieth in the Law of the Lord.... The first thing that must strike us here is that according to Ben-Sira there is no difference between a scribe and a wise man, the two are synonymous (verse 1).[146] The next thing to note is that Ben-Sira recognizes two sources of the scribe’s knowledge, the study of these is what constitutes the scribal activity; the first is described in verse 1, viz., the Law of the Most High, the wisdom of the ancients, and the prophets of old; that is to say, the Pentateuch, the Wisdom books, and the prophetical books.[147] The second is described in verses 2, 3, viz., discourses of men of renown, deep things of parables, hidden meaning of proverbs, and dark sayings of parables; it is difficult to see to what these things can refer unless it is to the discussions, proverbs and aphorisms of the kind which abound in Ben-Sira’s book. That they cannot refer to the oral Law is clear enough from the description itself; for the oral Law cannot be said to have consisted of discourses, hidden meaning of proverbs, or dark sayings of parables. Ben-Sira, though a scribe, has nothing to say about an oral Law, though he must have known of its existence; yet he has a great veneration for the Law, there are abundant indications of that in his book. We have, moreover, seen that there are strong grounds for believing that an oral Law was in existence long before the time of Ben-Sira (_circa_ B.C. 200), and the evidence of somewhat later times points in the same direction. We are, therefore, forced to the conclusion that Ben-Sira represents a type of scribe who venerated the Law as written, but repudiated the oral Law. Further, though Ben-Sira was a good Jew, the Hellenistic influences which are to be found in his book and his generally broader mental outlook make him in some respects the antithesis of Ezra. Ben-Sira thus seems to belong to those, of whom we have made mention above, whose tendency was in an universalistic direction and who could venerate the Law without feeling bound by the inferences which might be drawn from its interpretation.