“A Good Name Lasts Forever”: Onomastic Immortality and Divine Retribution in Sirach

During the Second Temple period, Jews became increasingly interested in the prospect of life after death, with beliefs in resurrection and immortality attested across literary genres and geographic provenances. Their experiences of exile and imperial domination caused Second Temple Jewish authors to formulate new theories of cosmic justice in which the afterlife played a central role.^[1] For many of these authors, God’s righteousness could only be vindicated in light of some notion of resurrection and eschatological postmortem judgment.^[2] Despite this, Jewish beliefs about the afterlife were far from monolithic; not only did Jews envision the details of resurrection and eschatological judgment in diverse ways, but some even denied them altogether.^[3] This article examines one such example, namely, the Wisdom of Sirach.^[4]

Ben Sira’s statements about death and the afterlife reflect his larger rhetorical goal of theological preservation. Ben Sira sought to preserve the basic framework of the Deuteronomic theory of divine retribution that posits that God distributes rewards and punishments on earth rather than in heaven or hell.^[5] At a time when beliefs in resurrection and eschatological judgment were becoming increasingly widespread, Ben Sira renegotiated the Deuteronomic view by emphasizing the notion of onomastic immortality: God rewards the righteous by preserving and honoring their name after death, either through prestige in corporate memory or through the prosperity of their progeny.^[6] I advance two arguments regarding Ben Sira’s notion of onomastic immortality: (1) onomastic immortality allows him to affirm that justice is not always executed during an individual’s lifetime but that God still distributes rewards and punishments on earth and (2) prestige and progeny represent two distinct paths to achieving onomastic immortality, which roughly correspond with social class. After providing a brief survey of important postexilic developments in theories of divine retribution, I discuss Ben Sira’s understanding of death and divine retribution. I then examine his theory of onomastic immortality in light of this historical context.

Divine Retribution in the Hebrew Bible

The Hebrew Bible widely conceives of divine retribution as occurring on earth and taking the form of material and social prosperity or ruin.^[7] While this understanding of God’s justice is implicitly assumed in most places, two texts in particular explicitly discuss the logic behind it: Deuteronomy and Proverbs. In Deuteronomy 28, Moses explains to the Israelites the consequences of obedience and disobedience to God’s law. Obedience to God brings “blessings” (בְּרָכוֹת); disobedience brings “curses” (קְלָלוֹת). Blessings range from militaristic victory over foreign enemies and national safety to abundant agricultural produce, thriving livestock, and personal well-being, whereas curses include defeat in battle, famine, disease, and social upheaval, reflecting the comprehensive scope of divine favor or punishment.^[8] Verse 11 summarizes the Deuteronomist’s notion of blessing well: “The Lord will make you abound in prosperity (וְהוֹתִרְךָ יְהוָה לְטוֹבָה),^[9] in the fruit of your womb, in the fruit of your livestock, and in the fruit of your ground in the land that the Lord swore to your ancestors to give you.”^[10] The Deuteronomist uses the hiphil stem of the root יתר to indicate God’s active role in causing their prosperity as a result of their obedience. Indeed, the notion of earthly reward and punishment is so engrained in Deuteronomy that many scholars refer to this idea as the Deuteronomic view of divine retribution.

Proverbs reveals a similar understanding. Proverbs 3:1–2 states, “My child, do not forget my teaching, but let your heart keep my commandments; for length of days and years of life and abundant welfare they will give you (וְשָׁלוֹם יוֹסִיפוּ לָךְ).”^[11] Similar to Deuteronomy 28:11, this author uses the hiphil stem of יסף to demonstrate the causative relationship between adherence to commandments and divine blessing. While the focus of Proverbs is more individualistic than Deuteronomy, the terms of blessing remain the same. Those who follow the way of wisdom will live long lives full of peace (שָׁלוֹם), a term that refers to holistic prosperity and completeness in the Hebrew Bible.^[12] Overall, these texts are clear on what rewards and punishments look like for the righteous and the wicked: success or destruction on earth.

Because these texts assume that God’s justice will be administered prior to death, there is no need for postmortem judgment or hell. Scholars have long noticed the absence of these concepts throughout the Hebrew Bible.^[13] Instead, the Hebrew Bible posits the existence of Sheol (שְׁאוֹל), where both the righteous and wicked reside after death.^[14] Importantly, Sheol is not a place of reward or punishment; it is simply the realm of the dead. Descriptions of Sheol in the Hebrew Bible seem to indicate that the deceased are conscious but experience a shadowy existence.^[15] While some texts may express a hope that God can redeem people from Sheol,^[16] most assume that no one returns from Sheol after their death.^[17]

Divine Retribution in Ben Sira’s Sapiential Predecessors

The harsh experiences of exile and foreign domination caused many Jews to rethink their understanding of divine retribution, death, and the afterlife. Postexilic wisdom literature expresses an increased dissatisfaction with the Deuteronomic view of divine retribution; these authors renegotiated and nuanced the Deuteronomic theory to better fit their rhetorical and existential exigencies.^[18]

One example of such an attempt is found in the book of Job.^[19] This book’s retribution theology is innovative in several ways. First, it raises the possibility that spiritual, angelic beings may be able to cause suffering. As the book’s prologue makes clear, Job’s unjust suffering is not caused directly by God himself but by a secondary angelic figure, the Satan (הַשָׂטָן, literally “the adversary”).^[20] Additionally, the Satan inflicted Job as a test of his righteousness, not as a punishment for sin. These two moves not only distance God from evil but also semantically transform suffering by indicating that it does not necessarily equal punishment.

The book of Job also questions humanity’s ability to evaluate God’s justice. The characterization of Job’s friends — Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar — is significant. While each friend represents a unique perspective, their advice to Job assumes standard Deuteronomic reasoning.^[21] Although their theological logic appeared to meet Deuteronomic expectations, at the end of the narrative God condemns them for speaking falsely. By having these characters represent Deuteronomic retribution theology, the book of Job subtly critiques the naive application of retributive justice to human experiences, exposing its failure to account for the nuanced and often inscrutable nature of divine will.

Last, and perhaps most importantly, at the end of the narrative Job is rewarded materially and socially for his righteousness.^[22] God not only restores Job with everything he lost — wealth, property, health, and family — but he doubles it. In other words, the book of Job portrays God as repaying Job on earth. This final move clarifies the book’s orientation toward Deuteronomic retribution theology; while it nuances the timing of divine retribution by asserting the possibility of delay, it still affirms that rewards and punishments will happen in the present life.

An extreme example of a text’s interaction with Deuteronomic retribution theology is Qoheleth. Qoheleth entirely denies the observability of divine justice, positing instead that God’s righteous providence, if operative at all, goes unrecognized by humankind: “He has made everything suitable for its time; moreover, he has put a sense of past and future into their minds, yet they cannot find out what God has done from the beginning to the end” (3:11). For Qoheleth, this fact means that human experience is subject to futility (הֶבֶל), where the righteous often receive no reward, and the wicked go unscathed (8:14). Even the memory of the righteous is forgotten by future generations (1:11). The solution, then, is for humanity to enjoy the pleasurable things in life while they still can (2:24–25; 3:12–13; 5:18–20; 8:15; 9:7–10). Qoheleth thus rejects the Deuteronomic scheme of observable rewards and punishments in the present life, opting instead for an outlook of skepticism in which he questions the value of wisdom and righteousness for obtaining favorable outcomes in life.

Divine Retribution in Early Apocalyptic Literature: 1 Enoch

During the Second Temple period, Jewish apocalypticism was emerging and becoming popularized. One of the most characteristic features of apocalyptic thought is the notion of the day of judgment and the resurrection of the dead.^[23] Apocalyptic Jewish authors envisioned the exact details of these events in diverse ways, but they generally agreed that on this day, God would execute perfect justice, rewarding the righteous in paradise and punishing the wicked. Until then, however, the righteous would have to wait patiently for their vindication.

One example of an apocalyptic text predating Ben Sira is the section of 1 Enoch (chapters 1–36) known as the Book of the Watchers, which was composed sometime during the latter half of the third century BCE.^[24] This text describes how fallen angels (the Watchers) rebelled by descending to earth, teaching humanity forbidden knowledge, and producing gigantic offspring with human women. God judges these angels and their angelic-human descendants and promises eventual cosmic restoration. The text also details Enoch’s visionary journeys, where he witnesses the heavens, the dwelling places of the dead, and the divine plan for final judgment. For this author, the corrupting influence of the Watchers damaged creation such that ultimate justice is postponed to the eschatological future.

In 1 Enoch 22, for example, Raphael, the angel in charge of the souls of the dead, shows Enoch the dwelling places where disembodied souls reside until the final judgment. Raphael takes Enoch to a great and tall mountain that contains four chambers where different categories of souls dwell, one chamber reserved for righteous souls but the other three for wicked souls. Importantly, the three chambers designated for wicked souls serve different purposes. The first chamber contains wicked souls for whom “judgment has not been executed on them in their life” (22:10).^[25] These souls await their future resurrection and punishment at the final judgment when they will face God’s justice. The other two chambers are designed for wicked souls who either died an unjust death on earth or already received adequate punishment for their sins during their lifetime.^[26] These souls will not be resurrected and punished at the final judgment because they have already received adequate punishment.

This chapter in 1 Enoch evidences complex reflection on the relationship between divine retribution and the fates of the dead in the afterlife. For the author of this text, God exercises his justice by resurrecting every righteous person for eternal life, whereas the wicked can be punished by (1) receiving suffering throughout the course of their life, (2) experiencing a harsh death on earth, or (3) being resurrected and tormented at the final judgment. Rather than portraying a simple binary in which the righteous go to heaven and the wicked go to hell, this text envisions a nuanced system where the fate of each soul is determined by the nature of their deeds, their earthly experiences, and the degree of justice already administered on earth.

As an educated scribe and leader of a scribal school in Jerusalem, Ben Sira would have been familiar with many of the ideas expressed in texts like Job, Qoheleth, and the Book of the Watchers. Many scholars have noted apologetic undertones behind many passages in Sirach, especially the ones that discuss theodicy and divine retribution.^[27] Within this context, Ben Sira sought to preserve a more conservative interpretation of divine retribution that adhered more closely to the Deuteronomic view by maintaining the earthly nature of rewards and punishments.

The Finality of Death in Sirach

Several passages in Sirach indicate that Ben Sira subscribed to the view of death attested to throughout the Hebrew Bible. In 17:25–32, for example, Ben Sira praises and elevates repentance because it restores one’s proper relationship with God. He encourages sinners to repent while they still can because, “Who will sing praises to the Most High in Hades (ἐν ᾅδου) in place of the living who give thanks?^[28] From the dead, as from one who does not exist, thanksgiving has ceased; those who are alive and well sing the Lord’s praises . . . For not everything is within human capability, since human beings are not immortal” (17:27–28, 30).^[29] This passage reflects themes found in Psalm 6:5 and Isaiah 38:18.^[30] Rather than offering a negative motivation for his audience to repent by appealing to the notion of postmortem punishment as a threat, he utilizes positive motivation: after death, no one is able to worship God, so people should worship him while they still have the opportunity.^[31] For Ben Sira, repentance is motivated not by fear of postmortem punishment but by the opportunity to be blessed by God in the present life. His statement presupposes that there is no heaven or paradise in which the righteous will continue to praise God after death.

Ben Sira also discusses the finality of death in 38:16–23. Here, Ben Sira instructs his audience on how to properly mourn for the dead. Ritual mourning for the dead was an established practice in Ben Sira’s day, with some people even hiring professional mourners at funerals. The purpose of mourning rites was to show the deceased the proper respect he or she deserved.^[32] Although Ben Sira approves of these rites (38:16–17), he advises mourners not to be overly troubled by grief because “grief may result in death, and a sorrowful heart saps one’s strength” (38:18). Being excessively grieved for the dead, says Ben Sira, makes little sense because “there is no coming back; you do the dead no good, and you injure yourself. Remember his fate, for yours is like it; yesterday it was his, and today it is yours” (38:21–22). Once again, Ben Sira clarifies that death is everyone’s ultimate, irreversible end. Keeping one’s mortality in mind, according to Ben Sira, helps one grieve appropriately for the dead.

Last, in 41:1–4, Ben Sira provides a brief meditation on the nature of death that also emphasizes its finality. He instructs his audience not to fear death because it is “the Lord’s decree for all flesh; why, then, should you reject the will of the Most High? Whether life lasts for ten years or a hundred or a thousand, there are no questions asked in Hades” (41:4). This passage highlights a significant difference between Ben Sira’s understanding of death and that of other Second Temple Jewish authors; he believes that death is part of God’s design in creation, not the result or consequence of human sin.^[33] Death is not a corruption of God’s design but an inherent part of it.^[34] Because death is not viewed as an assault on God’s righteousness, there is no need to appeal to the notion of an afterlife as a means of theodicy. Death equalizes the fates of the rich and the poor and of the righteous and the wicked, requiring no further action from God to rectify the situation.

Divine Retribution as Earthly in Sirach

Other passages demonstrate that Ben Sira thinks about divine retribution as occurring on earth. In 39:16–35, Ben Sira praises God for the inherent goodness of his created order: “All the works of the Lord are very good, and whatever he commands will be done at the appointed time . . . No one can say, ‘What is this?’ or ‘Why is that?’ — for everything has been created for its own purpose” (39:16, 21). For Ben Sira, everything in the world has been created by God for a good purpose, even the things that appear to be bad or harmful. He believes that the bad things in the world were created as a means of punishing the wicked: “From the beginning good things were created for the good, but for sinners good things and bad” (39:25).^[35] He further elaborates on this point in verses 28–31. He states that the natural world itself carries out God’s judgment upon the wicked, including phenomena like violent winds, fire, hail, famine, pestilence, and dangerous animals. The natural world, then, operates not according to a series of impersonal causes but according to God’s personal will: “They take delight in doing his bidding, always ready for his service on earth; and when their time comes they never disobey his command” (39:31).^[36] His allusion to the exodus in verse 17 reveals that he has in mind historical examples of God using nature as a tool of retribution.^[37] In Ben Sira’s worldview, God has ingrained retribution into the workings of the natural world, executing justice on the wicked as soon as God demands it.

Sirach 11:7–28 includes several references to divine retribution on earth. Verses 14 and 17, for example, state, “Good things and bad, life and death, poverty (πτωχεία) and wealth (πλοῦτος), come from the Lord . . . The Lord’s gift remains with the devout, and his favor brings lasting success.” In these verses, Ben Sira portrays God as the ultimate source of blessing and curses, formulating them in terms of wealth (πλοῦτος) and poverty (πτωχεία).

Interestingly, however, in Sirach 11:18–19, Ben Sira seemingly subverts the Deuteronomic ideology around the value of riches. In a tone reminiscent of Qoheleth, he considers the example of a frugal man who, despite having diligently acquired wealth over the course of his life, dies before he enjoys the fruits of his labor: “One becomes rich through diligence and self-denial, and the reward allotted to him is this: when he says, ‘I have found rest, and now I shall feast on my goods!’ he does not know how long it will be until he leaves them to others and dies.”^[38] Moreover, in verse 21, Ben Sira seems to implicitly acknowledge that an unrighteous person can possess riches, denying the naive equation of possession of wealth with righteousness.^[39] Despite this, he maintains that God’s blessing takes the form of material prosperity: “Do not wonder at the works of a sinner, but trust in the Lord and keep at your job; for it is easy in the sight of the Lord to make the poor rich suddenly, in an instant. The blessing (εὐλογία) of the Lord is the reward of the pious, and quickly his blessing flourishes” (verses 21–22).

Ben Sira solves the tension between these ideas in a manner similar to Job; that is, he posits that divine retribution can be postponed or delayed. This theme of delay is especially evident in verses 26–28: “For it is easy for the Lord on the day of death (ἡμέρᾳ τελευτῆς) to reward individuals according to their conduct. An hour’s misery makes one forget delights, and at the close of one’s life one’s deeds are revealed. Call no one happy before his death; by how he ends, a person becomes known.” This notion of the “day of death” (ἡμέρᾳ τελευτῆς) also occurs in 1:13, “Those who fear the Lord will have a happy end; on the day of their death they will be blessed.” Unfortunately, Ben Sira does not elaborate on what divine retribution on the day of one’s death looks like. His general point, however, is that while the wicked may at times prosper and the righteous may be temporarily destitute, God can postpone judgment until the day a person dies.

In 40:1–11, Ben Sira may shed some light on how a person could receive retribution on the day of their death. He explains that fear and anxiety about death is humanity’s common lot: “Perplexities and fear of heart are theirs, and anxious thought of the day of their death (ἡμέρᾳ τελευτῆς)” (40:2). This universal anxiety concerning death affects both rich and poor (verses 3–4). Moreover, this fear even torments people in their sleep, causing them to have nightmares and refusing to give them rest (verses 5–7). Ben Sira concludes by saying, “To all creatures, human and animal, but to sinners seven times more, come death and bloodshed and strife and sword, calamities and famine and ruin and plague” (verses 8–9). James Crenshaw notes that while the references to bloodshed, sword, calamities, famine, and so on, seemingly refer to external ailments, the overall context of the passage focuses on internal human anxiety about death. According to Crenshaw, Ben Sira implies that God can punish the wicked by increasing their psychological torments. Crenshaw believes that Ben Sira’s appeal to the psychological “break[s] new ground in the long-standing debate [of theodicy] in ancient Israel.”^[40] This psychological form of divine punishment also explains Ben Sira’s statements about the day of death in 11:26–28. Although a wicked person may experience material prosperity throughout their life, psychological misery on the day of death nullifies any enjoyment they experienced from it. Or, in Ben Sira’s own words, “An hour’s misery makes one forget delights” (11:27).^[41]

Onomastic Immortality in Sirach

The above passages indicate that Ben Sira locates divine retribution in the earthly realm, aligning him with the Deuteronomic theology of divine retribution. While he does make some innovations, such as the notion of psychological punishment for the wicked, they do not change his fundamentally conservative orientation. However, it would be inaccurate to say that Ben Sira does not posit some form of postmortem judgment. Several passages demonstrate that he believes God continues executing justice on the wicked even after their death. Moreover, Ben Sira also claims that people can achieve a form of immortality through prestige in corporate memory and the prosperity of their progeny. Ben Sira formulates this idea in onomastic terms; while the individual person does not achieve immortality, their name (ὄνομα; שֵׁם) does. Although many scholars have noticed this feature of the text, few have recognized it as a legitimate afterlife motif.^[42] I also advance the argument that the means by which one acquires onomastic immortality depends on the social class to which one belongs.^[43]

One example of onomastic immortality occurs in 37:25–26. In this passage, Ben Sira describes the life of the wise person. The wise person will be praised by many, “and all who see him will call him happy” (37:24). He continues, “The days of a person’s life are numbered, but the days of Israel are without number. Those who are wise among their people (ὁ σοφὸς ἐν τῷ λαῷ αὐτοῦ; חכם עם) will inherit honor, and their names (ὄνομα; שׁם) will live forever” (37:25–26). Ben Sira’s message is clear: while the wise may die, Israel will always survive and continue to remember them throughout their history. The deceased wise (σοφὸς; חכם) become immortalized through corporate memory. Ben Sira’s statement here contradicts the sentiment expressed in Qoheleth 2:16, “For there is no enduring remembrance of the wise or of fools, seeing that in the days to come all will have been long forgotten. How can the wise die just like fools?” Importantly, Ben Sira specifies that only the wise among the people are the ones who will receive immortality. In other words, immortality is a special privilege for a subgroup of the people. Verse 23 identifies the wise as those who “instruct their own people (τὸν ἑαυτοῦ λαὸν παιδεύσει; לעמו יחכם),” indicating that they serve a pedagogical role within the community. The wise, then, are not those who simply observe the precepts of wisdom but those who teach these precepts to others: the scribe-sage leaders of the community.

This point becomes clearer in 39:1–11 where Ben Sira praises the activity of the scribe. These activities include interpreting ancient prophecies and proverbs, studying God’s law, advising rulers, and traveling the world to acquire wisdom. The scribe will receive publicly recognized honor from his community for sharing his wisdom with others: “Many will praise their understanding; it will never be blotted out. Their memory will not disappear (οὐκ ἀποστήσεται τὸ μνημόσυνον αὐτοῦ), and their names will live through all generations (καὶ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ζήσεται εἰς γενεὰς γενεῶν)” (39:9). Once again, the scribe receives a kind of immortality through the community’s continued appreciation of his wisdom after his death. For Ben Sira, the scribal vocation provides a unique opportunity for immortalization. The priority he gives to scribal work becomes especially apparent when this passage is read in its immediate literary context. In 38:24–25, Ben Sira discusses the work of artisans and tradesmen, saying, “The wisdom of the scribe (σοφία γραμματέως) depends on the opportunity of leisure; only the one who has little business can become wise. How can one become wise who handles the plow, and who glories in the shaft of a goad, who drives oxen and is occupied with their work, and whose talk is about the offspring of bulls?” While the rest of the passage makes clear that Ben Sira attributes great value to those who work with their hands, he nonetheless ascribes greater glory to scribes.^[44] This contrast underscores Ben Sira’s belief that the scribal vocation holds a superior and enduring role in preserving wisdom and achieving a form of immortality through prestige.

The two passages above focus specifically on the ability of “the wise” (i.e., the scribe-sage leaders of the community) to achieve immortality through prestige. Is there any indication that everyday people, the non-elites, can achieve immortality? Several passages might suggest so. In 41:5–14, Ben Sira uses the example of the wicked person’s fate as a rhetorical strategy to encourage law obedience among his audience. Interestingly, rather than depicting God as directly punishing the wicked individual, he focuses instead on what happens to their descendants after the wicked die. He claims that their children will be cursed and their inheritance will perish (41:6). Their children will “blame an ungodly father, for they suffer disgrace because of him” (41:7). In good Hebrew antithetical parallelism, he changes his focus in verses 11–13 to the fate of the righteous. He says, “The breath of humans is in their bodies, but a virtuous name (שׁם חסד) will never be blotted out.^[45] Have regard for your name, since it will outlive you longer than a thousand hordes of gold. The days of a good life are numbered, but a good name lasts forever.” Importantly, Ben Sira’s focus in this passage is not on the scribal occupation but on the general differences between wickedness and righteousness. This passage, therefore, seems to focus more broadly on anyone who is righteous and has a “virtuous name” (שׁם חסד), rather than just scribal leaders.

Ben Sira clearly did not think that scribes were the only members of Judean society capable of living righteously. How, then, could someone achieve immortality who did not belong to Ben Sira’s privileged scribal group? The answer seems to be implicit in 41:5–10. If God punishes the wicked after their death by causing disaster to fall upon their children, then perhaps God immortalizes the “virtuous name” by providing longevity and success to the righteous person’s progeny. If this is true, Ben Sira posits a difference between how scribes and regular people attain immortality. While he does not explicitly say this, his underlying logic appears to be that whereas scribes can achieve immortality through their prestige, the righteous am ha-aretz can only achieve immortality through their progeny.^[46]

Other passages further confirm this theory, such as in 30:1–13 where Ben Sira addresses how to properly raise children. The most important statement is in verses 4–6: “When the father dies he will not seem to be dead, for he has left behind him one like himself, whom in his life he looked upon with joy and at death, without grief. He has left behind him an avenger against his enemies, and one to repay the kindness of his friends.” Ben Sira depicts a father’s son as an extension of his personhood and agency.^[47] The continuation between them is so strong that the father will not even appear to be dead. Moreover, the son continues to uphold the father’s honor and relationships after his father’s death, punishing his father’s enemies and maintaining his friendships. All of this, however, is conditioned upon the father properly disciplining his son.^[48] Given that Ben Sira sees fatherly discipline as prescribed by the law, the father who disciplines his son would be acting righteously and simultaneously increasing his chances at immortalization through his future obedient son.

One passage that clearly distinguishes between two types of immortalization is the encomium in chapters 44–50, which is known as the Praise of the Ancestors. Starting with Enoch and ending with Simon ben Onias, Ben Sira lists the accomplishments of the influential characters throughout Israel’s history. He begins, “Let us now sing the praises of famous (ἐνδόξους; חסד) men, our ancestors in their generations” (44:1). In verses 3–6, Ben Sira references the various ways these figures acquired prestige, including actions like political rule, acts of valor, intelligence and wisdom, prophecy, riches, and musical ability. Regarding these types, he claims that they have been properly recognized — they have received the praise they were due.

However, he concedes that others have been forgotten through time: “But of others there is no memory; they have perished as though they had never existed; they have become as though they had never been born, they and their children after them. But these also were men of compassion (ἐλέους; חסד), whose righteous deeds have not been forgotten” (44:9–10).^[49] Ben Sira recognizes that many righteous people throughout Israel’s history have, in a certain sense, been forgotten because they did not accomplish mighty acts. However, their righteous actions have given them a type of immortality: “their wealth will remain with their descendants, and their inheritance with their children’s children. Their descendants stand by the covenants; their children also, for their sake. Their offspring will continue forever, and their glory will never be blotted out. Their bodies are buried in peace, but their name lives on generation after generation” (41:11–14). In verse 13, “offspring” and “glory” are set in synonymous parallelism, further strengthening the connection between progeny and immortality.^[50] This passage further evidences that Ben Sira acknowledges two means by which one can acquire immortality: through prestige, reserved for the elites within the Judean temple-state, including Ben Sira’s scribal class, and through progeny.^[51] Both involve the continuation of one’s “name,” although Ben Sira means this more literally in the case of the former and more figuratively in the latter.

Before concluding, I must comment on the relationship between onomastic immortality and the issue of gender. As indicated in several of the passages above, Ben Sira frames onomastic immortality in exclusively masculine terms; the “name” that gets immortalized through either prestige or progeny is that of the privileged male.^[52] Likewise, only sons are able to achieve immortality for their fathers, not daughters (Sir. 22:3). Ben Sira’s framework thus entirely excludes women from the possibility of attaining immortality; although Ben Sira considers the non-elite in his class-based theory of onomastic immortality, women remain entirely absent from his scope. In Ben Sira’s framework, the boundaries of immortality are drawn along both class and gender lines.

Conclusion

How does Ben Sira’s theory of onomastic immortality orient him in relation to the Deuteronomic theory of divine retribution and within the context of Second Temple Jewish retribution theologies? Ben Sira sought to preserve the basic framework of the Deuteronomic view. He unambiguously portrays divine justice as occurring on earth. Despite this, he expresses discomfort with too simplistic an interpretation of the Deuteronomic perspective. To account for this, he accepts the possibility of delayed retribution, aligning him with the view of Job, and invents ideas like psychological torment for the wicked. Ben Sira’s theory of onomastic immortality also seems to have been fundamentally concessive; aware that divine justice does not always occur during the life of the righteous or wicked individual, he postulated that God would administer justice after death. However, his theory of immortality differs significantly from the apocalyptic notion that was becoming increasingly popular. For Ben Sira, a person could achieve immortality by either (1) accomplishing some great task that brought oneself prestige or (2) living righteously, which caused one’s progeny to flourish and continue the legacy of their deceased parents and ancestors. Both types, however, resulted in the longevity of one’s name. Ultimately, Ben Sira’s nuanced vision of onomastic immortality was overshadowed by the rising allure of apocalyptic theologies that promised a more personal and dramatic resolution through resurrection and eschatological judgment.