WISDOM. - Book of the Old Testament. In Latin it is called Liber Sapientiae, but in the more ancient authors the designation Sapientia Salomonis is also documented, which corresponds to that given by the best Greek manuscripts and writers (Σοφία Σαλαμώνος).
The writing is customarily divided into two great sections, one didactic (1:1 - 9:18) and the other historical (10:1 - 19:22). It opens with a warm invitation to the cult of wisdom, considered the source of every virtue and the means of drawing near to God. Only the foolish and the impious take no heed of it, but they will be punished (1:1 - 2:24). Opposed to their lot is the happiness of the just in this life and in the next (3:1 - 5:23). After a particular invitation to kings to appreciate and love wisdom (6:1-23), the most famous of the wise is presented, Solomon, who weaves the praise of the gift granted to him by a special grace of God: he extols the goods that wisdom brings to men, describing it not so much as a quality of the soul as in its objective beauty as a divine attribute and perfection, whereby the creator governs the world and exercises his providence (7:22 - 8:1). In some verses (7:22-27) wisdom is presented as something intrinsically divine, but at the same time as distinct from Him from whom it proceeds, making manifest to all the glory and greatness of the Almighty: it is hypostatic wisdom.
In the historical part there are described, in broad outline, the true benefits and privileges of the patriarchs as an effect of wisdom (10:1 - 11:4); then the punishments in fact inflicted by God on the Egyptians and the Canaanites are set in contrast, always bringing out the divine justice and clemency in punishing (11:5 - 12:23). In 13:1 - 15:19 idolatry is condemned. The book closes (16:1 - 19:22) with a new comparison between the Israelites and the Egyptians, summarizing the various episodes that preceded and accompanied the liberation of the Hebrews from Egypt: they are signs of God's predilection for the chosen people and of his justice against the idolatrous oppressors.
The book has great doctrinal-dogmatic value. Its unmistakable characteristic, shared in some way only with II Macc., is the insistence on an otherworldly reward reserved for the just, who will live a blessed life with God (3:1-9; 4:7; 5:16), and therefore on the immortality of the soul. Such beatitude is the fruit of wisdom, inasmuch as this is the primary source of justice (1:15; 3:15; 4:2; 5:16). In describing the lot of the wicked, it insists on pointing out their unhappiness in this life (2:21; 3:10; 4:3-6), but it also speaks clearly of their future misery (1:16; 3:19; 4:19 - 5:14). Equally precious are the affirmations on the knowability of God through creation (13:4-9; cf. Rom. 1:20), on the divine power and providence (12:12-15; 15:7; cf. Rom. 9:19-23), on idolatry and on the corruption of paganism.
Often, especially among Protestants, grave errors are pointed out in the book, which would presuppose the pre-existence of souls (8:20) and the eternity of matter (11:18). In reality, in the first case it is a question of a sharp affirmation of the superiority of the soul over the body; in the second the term ἄμαρρος ὕλη is not to be interpreted in the sense of unformed, uncreated matter, from which the world would have originated according to the Greek philosophers, but in that of chaos, which is presented in Gen. 1:2 as the first effect of God's will.
Although notable stylistic similarities with the books of the Hebrew Bible are observed, it is certain that the original language was Greek. The many compound words, certain paronomasias, the often elegant manner used in joining the various clauses, the employment of technical terms of Greek religion or among the philosophers are evident signs that the book was written in that language. Moreover, the ancients were already convinced of this (cf. St. Jerome, Praefatio in libros Salomonis: PL 28, 1307-1308). Since such characteristics extend to the whole book, the various hypotheses concerning a Hebrew original, perhaps only partial, found no following.
The fact that the author presents himself as the famous wise King (7:1 ff.) presents no difficulty. It is a simple literary device, which implies no special conclusion regarding inspiration. Already St. Augustine (De doctrina christiana, II, 8, 13; De civitate Dei, XVII, 20, 1) affirmed that the learned did not even doubt that the writing was not composed by Solomon («non autem esse ipsius, non dubitant doctiores»).
Intrinsic examination shows that the author was an Egyptian Jew and that he wrote for his coreligionists of that region in order to turn them away from idolatry and confirm them in the Mosaic religion, comforting them for the vexations they suffered (cf. 2:10-20; 15:14). This last circumstance suggests the time of Ptolemy IV Philometor (221-204 B.C.) or of Ptolemy VII Physcon (170-163 B.C.), hostile to the Jews. From other indications the second date appears more likely. But a still more recent period is not excluded. The idea, reported by St. Jerome (loc. cit.), according to which the book would be by Philo, can be called improbable, although some modern scholar has revived it. The S. is by no means a philosophical work nor an attempt to reconcile Platonic concepts with the Mosaic. Its rare allusions to Greek philosophy are explained by the cultural environment and by the author's concern to forearm his coreligionists against the dangers inherent in a false doctrine.
The S. belongs to the group of deuterocanonical books (v. BIBBIA), because it was not received into the Hebrew canon, at least in Palestine. It is therefore rejected also by Protestants. In favor of its canonicity stands first of all the infallible authority of the Church and a whole venerable tradition of Fathers and ancient writers. St. Jerome excluded it as a «pseudepigraphon»; for this reason he did not translate it. The Church, therefore, still reads it in the translation of the Vetus Latina. The book is never explicitly cited in the New Testament; but allusions are not lacking (Rom. 1:20; 9:19-23; etc.).