אַל־תִּתֵּ֤ן אֶת־פִּ֨יךָ֙ לַחֲטִ֣יא אֶת־בְּשָׂרֶ֔ךָ וְאַל־תֹּאמַר֙ לִפְנֵ֣י הַמַּלְאָ֔ךְ כִּ֥י שְׁגָגָ֖ה הִ֑יא לָ֣מָּה יִקְצֹ֤ף הָֽאֱלֹהִים֙ עַל־קֹולֶ֔ךָ וְחִבֵּ֖ל אֶת־מַעֲשֵׂ֥ה יָדֶֽיךָ׃
Syntax as Ethics
This verse from Ecclesiastes 5:5 offers a striking ethical imperative—do not let your speech lead to sin, and do not excuse sin before a messenger of God. But more than just a moral maxim, the verse is syntactically intricate, weaving prohibitions, purpose clauses, and rhetorical questions into a finely structured warning. This article will unpack each syntactic layer to show how form intensifies function in Qohelet’s theology of words and consequences.
Coordinated Negative Imperatives
The verse opens with two prohibitions:
אַל־תִּתֵּן אֶת־פִּ֨יךָ֙ לַחֲטִ֣יא אֶת־בְּשָׂרֶ֔ךָ
וְאַל־תֹּאמַר לִפְנֵי הַמַּלְאָךְ כִּי שְׁגָגָה הִיא
Each command uses the negative particle אַל + prefix conjugation (imperfect), a classic Biblical Hebrew prohibitive structure. This syntactic pattern stresses continuing restraint—not just a momentary command, but a perpetual moral attitude.
The verb תִּתֵּן governs a double object construction:
- Direct object: אֶת־פִּיךָ
- Infinitive complement: לַחֲטִיא, with its own direct object: אֶת־בְּשָׂרֶךָ
This nesting of objects creates a tight verbal complex: do not give your mouth to cause your flesh to sin. The indirect causative structure in the infinitive לַחֲטִיא (Hiphil of חטא) foregrounds personal responsibility despite indirect action.
Subordinate Causality: כִּי שְׁגָגָה הִיא
The second clause introduces a pretext one might offer when confronted:
אַל־תֹּאמַר לִפְנֵי הַמַּלְאָךְ כִּי שְׁגָגָה הִיא
“Do not say before the messenger: ‘It was a mistake.’”
Here, כִּי introduces a subordinate reason clause, functioning as direct speech within the larger clause. The nominal sentence שְׁגָגָה הִיא (with subject-first word order) downplays the offense—a common rhetorical excuse. The syntax exposes this evasion as insufficient before divine scrutiny.
Rhetorical Interrogation as Judgment
לָמָּה יִקְצֹף הָאֱלֹהִים עַל־קֹולֶךָ
The rhetorical question introduced by לָמָּה functions as a rebuke: “Why should God be angry at your voice?”
This is not an invitation to answer, but a syntactic device to provoke reflection. The structure is:
- יִקְצֹף: prefix conjugation expressing potential/future
- הָאֱלֹהִים: subject
- עַל־קֹולֶךָ: prepositional phrase denoting cause (“because of your voice”)
The indirect causality matches the earlier clause (תִּתֵּן… לַחֲטִיא), underscoring that speech alone can incite divine anger.
Coordinated Consequence with Waw-Consecutive
The final clause:
וְחִבֵּל אֶת־מַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיךָ
Here the conjunction וְ precedes a perfect verb חִבֵּל, yet the context demands a future or hypothetical nuance: “and (He may) destroy the work of your hands.”
This is a common Hebrew syntactic feature: a waw + perfect used to express consequence or logical result, especially after a rhetorical question or conditional clause. The syntax mirrors a legal verdict—deliberate yet conditional: If you offer false excuses, divine judgment may follow.
Nested Structure and Rhythmic Symmetry
The verse’s structure builds symmetrically:
- Prohibition against sin by speech
- Prohibition against excuse
- Rhetorical consequence
- Divine retaliation
Each element pairs verbal action with divine reaction. The symmetry reflects the theology of measure-for-measure justice, syntactically mirrored through parallel imperative + consequence chains.
Whispers and Warnings in Syntax
Ecclesiastes 5:5/6 is a masterclass in how Hebrew syntax becomes theology. The tight coupling of imperatives, excuses, divine reaction, and consequence forms a chain of accountability. The indirect causation embedded in לַחֲטִיא and יִקְצֹף confronts the reader with the uncomfortable reality that even careless words can have cosmic ramifications.
Like the thread in a tapestry, each clause binds the next, until the hand of God unravels what the tongue has woven.