Wisdom and wickedness as a ‘Woman’ have always attracted much discussion, especially in the ways that images of the female are presented in wisdom literature.¹ The Qumran texts of 4Q184 and 4Q185, regarded as wisdom texts, also make use of these images, and employ them in a metaphorical manner. In this article, I will analyse these texts by looking at a concept that originates from the side of feminist exegetes, namely the concept of cultural stereotyping. Therefore, it is necessary to begin with an explanation of the theoretical background of what may be understood as cultural stereotyping.

The idea of cultural stereotyping originates from feminist circles. Christl Maier (2014) draws connections between cultural stereotyping and wisdom literature. She (Maier 2014:77) combines the approaches of feminist criticism and ideology criticism and notes the tendency in wisdom literature to generate types of human characters, which she calls cultural stereotypes.² Maier (2014:78) then refers to Lippmann’s (1898–1974) definition of stereotyping: ‘[stereotyping is] an ordered, more or less consistent picture of the world, to which our habits, our tastes, our capacities, our comforts and our hopes have adjusted themselves’. According to Maier (2014:78–79), people need stereotyping in order to cope with the complexities of society, but stereotyping also tends towards ‘othering’ people, ‘that is, distinguishing individuals or a group from oneself through negative assessments … and reduces people to those characteristics’ (Maier 2014:78).

Newsom (1989:148) mentions the patriarchal discourse in which the self is male; the logical consequence is then that the woman becomes the typical ‘other’. The figure of the female functions pretty well for defining the significant ‘other’ because of her ambivalence: ‘… both frightening and attractive. Her words are described as “smooth,” a term that suggests both pleasure and danger’. Thus, the woman as the ‘other’ functions not only to indicate borders but also to detect what must be suppressed and what must be excluded in a particular culture.

Fontaine (2002:12) refers to female stereotypes in the wisdom texts. Women in the wisdom books are stereotypical representations who are: ‘good wives, devoted mothers, wicked prostitutes, slick adulteresses, hard-working slaves and lusty daughters to be controlled’. These stereotypes of women were the topic of conversation among the sages who presumably composed most of the book of Proverbs by gathering and editing oral traditions into a collection of wisdom instructions for young men (cf. Fontaine 2002:12). She (Fontaine 2002:24) then asks the following question: ‘Did our Sages ever recognize their own role – and that of their fellows – in creating the very stereotyped predatory female behaviors that they later decry?’ Words are important, says Fontaine, because we live by words. With words we inflict meaning and construct worlds, and a saying like ‘words do not have meaning’ is only used when someone is desperate in an argument.

Fontaine (2002:97) then touches upon the matter of gender, and remarks that ‘… gender matters for interpretive work because it constitutes a category in those things being interpreted’. ‘Woman Wisdom’ and ‘Woman Stranger’ are such categories. Although they are literary constructs, they also originate from an oral tradition ‘with its tales, lullabies, love songs and proverbial teachings about gender. We should not be inordinately surprised then to find that Wisdom’s ‘story’ is fleshed out along the lines of traditional storytelling, and told largely from the perspective of the male hero!’ (Fontaine 2002:99).

Cultural stereotyping develops from concepts in a particular culture. Fontaine (2002:150) refers to folklore studies and says that the way certain folk genres were used in ‘proverbs, riddles, jokes, legends, etc.,’ portrays true values and ideologies of that culture. She says both the large and small folk genres give an idea of a culture’s way of imposing and giving meaning to their society.

Carol Newsom considers the influence of ideology upon cultural stereotyping. Ideology ‘recruits subjects’, says Newsom (1989:143). Stereotypes are construed by means of a specific ideology. She adds that a specific ideology addresses someone and the moment that that person responds to being addressed, he or she becomes the subject of that ideology. The same applies to a text developed from a specific ideology. She then refers to the symbolic way in which women are portrayed to represent a certain construct in a patriarchal discourse and she emphasises that this construct is confirmed as long as only men carry the society’s discourse. The moment that women enter the discourse, the symbolic representation becomes confused because a woman cannot have ‘the same symbolic relation to herself that she does to a man’ (Newsom 1989:155).

These images of women appear in all wisdom texts and are covered by studies on personified wisdom³ but also its counterpart, namely wickedness or folly.

According to Baumann (2014:57–58), personified wisdom appears in three Old Testament writings, namely Proverbs 1–9, Sirach (Ecclessiasticus) and the Wisdom of Solomon. According to her, Job 28⁴ and Baruch 3:9–4:4 do not qualify as examples of personified wisdom, because in these texts, wisdom appears as an entity without personal characteristics whilst the former texts portray wisdom as a person who can speak and act. The grammatical gender for wisdom in both Hebrew and Greek is feminine, and because of the feminine personification of Wisdom, she is often called ‘Lady Wisdom’. Baumann (2014) says:

Personified wisdom that presents negative images of women seems to occur more frequently in androcentric texts. Baumann (2014:75) then cautions:

Maier (1998:99) agrees that an androcentric stance of a text becomes obvious when the woman is depicted as an adulteress, because in the mind of the (androcentric) author, the woman only belongs (like an item or possession) to one man, first her father and then her husband. Maier (2012:264) also refers to the ‘other’ woman in Proverbs 7 and Proverbs 9 and says that she does not only symbolise a woman who is ethnically different. The reference to adultery as a crime may indicate that the ‘other woman’ characterises every woman who does not keep to social teachings. That ‘[o]ther as a chiffre connotes something mysterious and at the same time nonnormative’ (Maier 2012:264).

Thus, evidently, these androcentric texts originated in an androcentric society where men played a dominant role. Newsom (1989:145–146) concurs with this observation in her discussion of personified wisdom (Ḥokmot) as it appears in Proverbs 1 and 8. She considers this wisdom to be the expansion and consequence of the ‘cultural voice’. The authoritative voice in the family is the father, and personified wisdom is the matching feminine voice in the public sphere (streets, public squares). The places that she resides in (entrance of gates and city) are representative of ‘collective authority and power’ (Newsom 1989:146). In Newsom’s opinion, however, personified wisdom as characterised by a woman is not necessarily destructive. On the more positive side, she also has the power to prevent ruination (Proverbs 1:26–33).

According to Maier (2014:78), wisdom literature was part of a cultural tradition in the ancient Near East that aimed at establishing harmony and order in creation. The sages appropriated a number of literary traditions in their education in order to convey this wisdom to their learners. Maier notes a certain peculiarity in these writings, namely the tendency to make use of binary pairs, ‘such as “wise” and “fool”’. In describing certain deeds and thoughts of a ‘wise’ or a ‘foolish’ person, the proverbial sayings characterise them as types or rather as stereotypes (Maier 2014:78). Such stereotypes become permanent or fixed images in a culture, which Maier (2014:79) defines as cultural stereotypes. She (Maier 2014:92) also refers to the reception history of female characters and says that binary stereotyping and the cultural stereotyping of women eventually led to the polarisation of the ‘whore’ and the ‘holy one’.

It is clear that such standard images existed in the wisdom literature of Judaism. The wisdom writers employed cultural stereotyping to teach or to express a certain message to the readers. Much has been published on the personification of wisdom and/or folly and furthermore the ways in which biblical wisdom literature made use of cultural stereotyping to create metaphors of ‘Lady Wisdom’ or ‘Madame Folly’ with which the readers could associate or disassociate received attention as well. In this article, I want to examine two Qumran texts (4Q184 and 4Q185) that also employed these female figures.

The image of the woman in 4Q184 (this text is commonly known as: ‘the wiles of the wicked woman’) is a very negative image, inclining towards Madame Folly, while the woman in 4Q185 is in general portrayed more positively. 4Q185 is a fairly longer work than 4Q184, with three columns of the text preserved, but for the argument of this article, only 4Q185 Frags 1–2, II: 8–15 will be discussed. Because the attempt of identifying cultural stereotyping depends very much on the wording of the text, I consider it necessary to start by determining the appropriate text and also giving a translation of it.

Both these texts form part of the wisdom corpus at Qumran, even though they are not part of the collection that was named 4QInstruction.⁶ Therefore, it may help to refer briefly to the broad characteristics of the wisdom literature at Qumran in general.

4Q184 and 4Q185 are both reckoned as wisdom literature in the Qumran corpus. They do differ from 4QInstruction, but they also share some general characteristics. The wisdom literature of Qumran shares features with apocalyptic literature as well as with biblical wisdom (Collins 1997a:118).^7,8 ‘These include supernatural revelation, eschatological judgment and a deterministic conception of the cosmos’ (Goff 2009:308).

The wisdom of Qumran, just like any other wisdom literature, is a combination of practical advice, and theoretical and theological reflections. For example, family relations are based on order, and believed to be God-given. Parents are honoured because they revealed the mysteries to their children. However, these insights are augmented with perspectives from apocalypticism and eschatology. A key concept in which both notions of wisdom and apocalypse are contained is raz niyeh. This concept is used not only in 4QInstruction but also in the Book of Mysteries (1Q27) (Harrington 1996:48, 71). Although this term is not used in 4Q184 and 4Q185, it is necessary to reckon it as a fundamental feature of Qumran wisdom thoughts. Collins (1997a:118) also refers to this concept and says that the addressee in the wisdom texts is repeatedly told to ‘gaze at the mystery to be’ (raz niyeh). Collins (1997b:128, 131, 228) emphasises the fact that wisdom literature from Qumran seems to be a combination of apocalyptic literature and wisdom literature. It seems that the addressee in these texts is poor, but unlike 1 Enoch 92–105, there is no anger towards the rich.

Toraweisheit is also considered to be a key aspect of Qumran wisdom,⁹ as well as ye’ser or human inclination.¹⁰ Harrington (1996) summarises Qumran wisdom as follows:

¹[הזון]¹² ה תוציא הבל וב[ ·· . ]א תועות תשחר תמיֹד֗[ ל]שנן¹³דבר֗י֗[ה . ·· ]¹⁴

²וקלס תחל֗[י]ק ולהליץ יחד בש[וא]¹⁵ עול . לבה יכין פחוז¹⁶ וכליותיה מק֗[ ·· . ]¹⁷

³בעול נגעל֗י ה֗וה¹⁸ תמכו שוח . רגליה֗ לה֗ר֗שיע ירדו וללכת בא֗שמות[ פשע¹⁹ ·· . ]

⁴מוסדי חושך רוב²⁰ פשעים בכנפיה [ ]ה תועפות לילה . ומלבשיה[ ·· ]

⁵מכסיה אפלות נשף֗ ועדיה נגועי שח֗ת . ערשיה{{י֗צ֗ו֗ע֗י֗ה֗}} יצועי שח֗ת֗[ ·· ]

⁶מעמקי בור . מלונותיה משכבי חושך ובאישני ליל[ה מם]שלותיה²¹ . ממוסדי אפ֗ל֗ו֗ת֗

⁷תאהל שבת ותש֗כון באהלי דומה בתוך מוקדי עולם . ואין נחלתה בתוך בכול֗

⁸מאזרי²² {{°}}נוגה . וה֗יאה ראש֗ית כ֗וֹל דרכ֗י֗ עול הוי הוה לכול נוחליה ושדדה לכ[ול]

⁹תו֗מכי בה כיא דרכיה דרכי מות ואורחותיה שבילי חטאת מעגלותיה משגות

¹⁰עול ונתיבו[תי]ה֗ אשמות פשע . ש֗עריה שע֗רי מות בפתח ביתה תצעד . שאו֗[לה]²³

¹¹כ֗[ו]ל֗[ ·· ]ישובון²⁴ . וכול נוחליה ירדו שחת . וה֗[י]א֗ במסתרים תארוב °[ ·· ]

¹²כו֗ל֗[ ·· ]ב֗רחובות עיר תתעלף ובשערי֗ קריות תתיצב ואין להרג[יעה . ]

¹³מה[ ]ת֗ ת֗°°°[ ]²⁵ עיניה הנה וה֗נה ישכילו וע֗פעפיה בפחז תרים לראו[ת לא]י֗ש֗

¹⁴צדיק ותשיגהו ואיש֗[ ע]צ֗ום ותכשיל֗הו ישרים להטות דרך ולבחורי צדק֗

¹⁵מנצור מצוה סמוכי °[]°²⁶ להביל בפחז והולכי ישר להשנות ח[וק] להפשיע

¹⁶ענוים מאל ולהטות פעמיהם מדרכי צדק להביא זד֗[ו]ןֹ °[ ]²⁷ ב֗מה בל ע֗רוכי[ם ·· ]²⁸

¹⁷במעגלי יושר֗ להשגות אנוש בדרכי שוחה ולפתות בחלקות בני איש .

(1) [²⁹…] She produces futility and in […] perversions she seeks diligently continually to teach diligently³⁰ the words of [her mouth³¹ (2)] and derision and she smoothens and she derides (the) community³² with worthless iniquity. Her heart prepare his traps and her kidneys [nets. Her eyes³³] (3) are defiled with iniquity. Her hands³⁴ take hold of the pit, her feet go down to act wickedly and to walk in crimes [. Transgression … (4) …] (are) foundations of darkness,³⁵ and a lot of transgressions are in her wings. Her […] are gloom of night and her cloths […] (5) Her veils are shadows of the twilight and her adornments are plagues of the pit. Her beds {her couches} are couches of the pit […] (6) depths of the cistern. Her lodging places are couches of darkness, and in the midst of night is her realm. From the foundations of darkness (7) she pitches to dwell and she dwells in tents of silence in the midst of eternal fire. She has no inheritance among all (8) those who shine³⁶ {.} bright light. And she is the beginning of all the paths of injustice. Alas, she is for all that inherit her and she destroy/ruin all (9) those that grasp her because her roads are roads of death and her ways are paths of sin. Her trails lead astray (10) towards iniquity, and her pathways to the guilt of transgression. Her gates are gates of death in the entrance of her house treads Sheol.³⁷ (11) All those [who go to her will not³⁸] return and all those who inherit her, they will go down to the pit. And she lies awaiting in secret places […] (12) [….]All […] in the city squares she veils herself, at the gates of the city she stations herself and there is no rest for her (13) from (her) incessant [fornicat]ing)³⁹ […] […]her eyes (goes) hither and thither (for) the wise and her eyelids with wantonness she exalts to spot a (14) just ma[n] and to overtake him and a mighty man to make him stumble; the straight to turn (from) the path; and the righteous young man/elect (15) from keeping the commandment; the ones that are steady of [mind]⁴⁰ to let those that walk straight be ridiculous with wantonness and to let them change the ordinance. To let (16) the humble/poor turn against God and to let their steps turn from the paths of justice to bring presumpt[uous]ness [in their hearts⁴¹] so that they do not walk⁴² (17) in the paths of straightness. To let go astray humanity to the paths of the pit and to deceive with smoothness the sons of man.

⁸מה ת°⁴³ [ ]°°[ ·· ]לפניו תצא רעה֗ לכל עם . אשרי אדם נתנה לו

⁹מ֗ן֗ א°[ ·· ]°ד֗⁴⁴. ואל י֗תהלל[ו] ר֗שעים ל֗א֗מור לא י֗מ֗נֹה⁴⁵

¹⁰לי ולא[ ·· .⁴⁶ ]לישראל ומ֗מ֗ד֗[ת ט]ב ימדה֗⁴⁷ ו֗כ֗ל עמו֗ ג֗אל

¹¹והרג ש°°°°[ ·· . ]אב֗[ ·· ]⁴⁸ יאמר המתמ֗°°°⁴⁹בה יש֗א֗נה[ . ]⁵⁰ שה

¹²ומצאה ו֗°[]°⁵¹בה֗ יכ֗יֹלה֗⁵² ועמה[ ·· ]מים⁵³ורשף֗ עי֗נ֗י֗ם⁵⁴ ושמחת לבב ע°[ ·· ]⁵⁵

¹³וחסדיו ע֗למיה ויש֗ו֗עו֗ת °[ ·· ]°° .⁵⁶ אשרי אדם יעשנה ולא יאל על֗[ ]ו[ ]⁵⁷

¹⁴מרמה לא יבקשנה ובחלקות לא֗ י֗ח֗זֹיקנה . כן תתן לאבתיוֹ כן ירשנה֗[ ·· ]°°[ ]⁵⁸

¹⁵בכל עוז כחו ובכל [ ]°ו⁵⁹ לאין חק֗ר֗ . ויורישנה לצאצאיו ידעתי לעמ[ש]וב⁶⁰.

(8) what […] […]. before him (she) evil will go out to the whole nation. Blessed is the man to whom she (wisdom) has been given to, (9)⁶¹ the son of ma[n …]… The wrongdoers/wicked should not boast saying: She has not been given⁶² (10) to me and not[…. God has given her⁶³] to Israel and a good measure he measured. And he saved his whole people (11) but he destroyed (killed) those who hate [his wi]sdo[m…].⁶⁴ Whoever glories in her, should say: One should take her and one should possess/inherit her (12) and find her; and hold her with force and get her as inheritance⁶⁵; because with her there is extended days and fatness of bone⁶⁶ and joy of the heart […] (13) and his mercies are her everlastingness or futurity and his⁶⁷ salvation […] Blessed is the man who does (utilise) her and (who) does not slander against [her] and who [with a spir]it⁶⁸ (14) of deceit does not seek her, nor holds onto her with smoothness or flattery. As she was given to his fathers, so will he inherit her [and he will cling] onto her⁶⁹ (15) with all the might of his strength and with all […] without (any) questioning. And he will let his descendants inherit her. And I know the dist[ress (it takes) to do go]od.⁷⁰

The depiction of the woman in 4Q184 was composed in the shadow of the Foreign Woman in Proverbs 1–9⁷¹; however, there were some modifications. These modifications complicate the text, especially with regard to how it should be understood. Personified wisdom (in this case contra-wisdom) in 4Q184 seems to come and go. There is no clear indication when the woman is physical and when she typifies personified wisdom, and it is quite clear that the image is overall very negative. The female figure in 4Q185 seems to relate to the personified wisdom in Proverbs 9:1–6 and 31:10–31 where she is portrayed in a more positive light. However, whether the portrayal is positive or negative, it is clear that the sages employed certain concepts and images of the feminine in their Judaic culture in order to convey their message. The strong patriarchal and androcentric elements of this culture can be seen in phrases like: ‘inherit/been given/hold/cling/grasp’ (4Q184: 7; 8; 9; 4Q185: 8; 11; 12; 14; 15). These phrases depict the woman as a possession that can be held or inherited. This cultural concept of the feminine became so strongly standardised that the image of a woman as a possession has been applied as a metaphor for wisdom or folly without questioning it.

Certain phrases that were used to depict wisdom or contra-wisdom correlate very much with the stereotyped images that Maier (2014)⁷² has discerned as cultural stereotyping. Negative concepts associated with non-wisdom are found in phrases like: ‘derision’ or ‘smooth words’ (4Q184:1;17; 4Q185:14); ‘traps … nets’ (4Q184:2); ‘defile’ or ‘iniquity’ or ‘crimes’ or ‘transgression’ or ‘injustice’ or ‘wickedness’ (4Q184: 2; 3;4; 8;); ‘destroy’ or ‘ruin’ (4Q184:2; 8; 11; 14); ‘let him stumble’ or ‘turn away from straight road’ or ‘change’ or ‘go astray’ or ‘deceive’ (4Q184: 8–17). The woman is imagined as a temptress who seduces the righteous (4Q184: 11–17) and whose ways are leading to perdition or Sheol (4Q184: 9–11), and therefore the portrayal of such a woman becomes a form of cultural stereotyping of the foolish.

Positive aspects associated with wisdom are concepts like: blessed is the person that she is given to (4Q185:8–10); YHWH saves the people that holds strongly onto her; the ones that glory in her (4Q185:11–15); she is an inheritance (wife) that must not be betrayed or deceived (4Q185: 8–15). These aspects are forms of cultural stereotyping of the wise. Both negative and positive aspects associated with ‘Woman’, are attempts of either instructing or warning the readers.

There is no clear indication whether the female figure(s) in 4Q184 or 4Q185 are physical women or personified wisdom, but most scholars are of the opinion that they are metaphors applied by sages to convey a message. The purpose of the image in 4Q184 within the Qumran community is also not clear. Most scholars agree that the image in 4Q185 is personified wisdom as we find it in Proverbs. I am of the opinion that these texts may have had a purpose of instructing or warning the Yaḥad but cannot say with any clarity what that purpose might have been.⁷³

In these texts, it becomes clear that the sages (authors) were aware of cultural stereotypes and did not hesitate to implement the images and/or symbols from their database, because these images were useful for their purpose. Very subtly they referred to existing texts in the memory base of the community without quoting them verbatim. The ‘Lady’ (whether she is Lady Folly or Lady Wisdom) as a metaphor developed in a process of cultural stereotyping and became a standard image in Judaism. Without any doubt, the sages of both 4Q184 and 4Q185 made use of this standardised image. They adopted the method of binary opposition to stereotype particular female figures and consequently the ‘whore’ and the ‘holy one’ became polarised. Thus, existing cultural stereotypes, those images and/or symbols that were familiar to the community, served in order to convey a poignant message.