1. Notwithstanding his many charitable works and his strict observance of the Law, the pious Israelite, Tobias, was soon to be afflicted with grave personal sufferings. Even in the ancient dispensation, God permitted his saints to be overwhelmed with afflictions that they might be more and more purified in the fire of suffering. In the Greek, the circumstances of the ‘festival’ are more detailed: Esarhaddon (681–669) is the Assyrian king, and the festival is the Feast of Pentecost. Such details fill out the narrative, but at least some of them are surely later additions. 4. Tobias acted with great caution lest he should again attract the unfavourable attention of the public authorities. 6. Amos, who prophesied some twenty-five years before the time of Tobias, is here cited freely. More literally the prophecy (Am 8:10) reads: ‘And I will turn your feasts into mourning and all your songs into lamentation’. 10–11. The Greek indicates that Tobias was blinded on the very night of the Feast; it also mentions sparrows rather than swallows, a very unimportant detail.

§ b. 12–18. Of greater importance and interest is the fact that this brief passage is found only in VgVg Vulgate (Sixtine-Clementine Edition). The Greek has details of its own, for example, it relates Tobias’ unsuccessful visits to the physicians, and a further mention of Achikar, who ‘nourished me two years until he went to Elymais’ (cf. § 301h–i). It is extremely difficult to determine the exact form of the original text for this section. The differences in the Greek form are shared substantially by the other forms of the text now extant, and there is no exact agreement. As for the longer form of VgVg Vulgate (Sixtine-Clementine Edition), it is hard to believe that St Jerome simply added his own spiritual reflexions to the text he was translating. He must have had some basis for his rendering, even though it must be admitted that he translated freely. The VgVg Vulgate (Sixtine-Clementine Edition) fragment, at any rate, offers a precious spiritual lesson: the sufferings of Tobias were permitted by God, and this fact was clearly appreciated by the pious Israelite who looked towards a heavenly reward for his fidelity.

§ c. 19–23 Tobias upbraided by his Wife. The Greek makes it clearer why Tobias was worried: the kid was given to Anna by her employer over and above her wages. Hence Tobias, knowing that such a thing was not her ordinary wage, and realizing that it was beyond her simple means to purchase, feared that it had been stolen. 22. The domestic altercation that followed is delightful in its realism: the husband reasonably suspicious; the wife in perfectly good faith, and in no mood for argument after a hard day’s work; both quite blameless; and the wife very angry.

§ d. 3:1–6 Tobias trusts in God. This passage contains one of the five strikingly beautiful prayers quoted in the book: 3:1–6; 3:13–23; 8:7–9; 8:17–19; 13:1–23. These prayers are noticeably similar in form, and they contain several common elements: (1) praise of God; (2) confession; (3) petition; (4) doxology. The doxology is omitted in the first and fourth prayers, and the petitions vary in circumstance, but otherwise the similarity is remarkable. This similarity could easily be due to the fact that the Hebrews of the time used a uniform general formula in their prayers, as well as to the personal touch of a redactor. It is quite probable that the substantial elements of the prayers are due to the original characters themselves, although it is not necessary to attribute to them the exact verbal form. Perhaps the most striking doctrinal note in this first prayer is Tobias’ full submission to the will of God. 4. Just as God had so often promised: If Israel would not remain faithful she would certainly be punished, see 2 Kg 7:14, and passim in the Prophets.

§ e. 7–10a Sara is rebuked by a Maidservant. Previous to this section, in most forms of the book, Tobias has related the story in the first person: ‘I Tobias….’. Henceforward, as in VgVg Vulgate (Sixtine-Clementine Edition), the narrative is in the third person. 7. At the same time that Tobias was being upbraided by his wife, Sara was reproached by one of her father’s maidservants. The city of Sara and Raguel is Ecbatana, not Rages of VgVg Vulgate (Sixtine-Clementine Edition) and DVDV Douay Version. 8. This is the first mention of an episode (cf. 6:14; 7:11; 8:12) which appears altogether incredible to many authors; some even viewing it as absolutely conclusive evidence that the whole book is a fantastic fairy-tale, with certain borrowings from pagan demonology. A more exhaustive study of the question, however, shows that the evidence for such views is far from conclusive. It should be noted in regard to the derivation of the name Asmodeus, that this is quite adequately explained by the Hebrew root šāmaḏ, hence ‘the Destroyer’. Recourse to Persian derivation, v.g. aešma daēva, should be had only when the word cannot be explained through Semitic etymology. It should also be noted that the references to Asmodeus in Tobias are quite different from those on the same subject found in later Jewish extrabiblical literature. These fabulous accounts cannot be used in explanation of our book. Moreover, even if a Persian derivation of the name be granted, a dependence of Tobias on Iranian demonology would not be proved. Asmodeus could have been a name commonly in use in Semitic circles for the devil, somewhat as Beelzebub at the time of Christ, and without any doctrinal implications.

§ f. Nor is there sufficient reason to believe that Sara was a subject of diabolic possession, cf. 6:15. It has been urged, nevertheless, that it is quite incredible that Sara should have had seven successive husbands, and that all these men should have been killed by Asmodeus at the time of their first marital relations with her. Regarding the number seven, it is recognized Hebrew usage (cf. Gen 4:15; Lev 26:28; Deut 28:7; Prov 6:31; Ecclus 35:13; Lk 17:4; etc.) that this number often means ‘several’, ‘a number’, or that it stands for the perfect number, or fullness, without specific designation. So, Sara could easily have had several husbands, not necessarily seven. But were they all killed at the time of their first relations with her? The text does not indicate this with certainty, either here or elsewhere in the book. True, VgVg Vulgate (Sixtine-Clementine Edition) implies it, but the better textual witnesses have simply: ‘before they had been with her as it is appointed for women’, hence before marital congress. So, Sara’s husbands were killed by the devil, with God’s permission, before they had intercourse with her, and due to some guilt on their part. Though extraordinary, such an account is not incredible. Some have seen in this text an argument § g against the sin of Birth Prevention. The argument, based mainly on the assumption that the husbands were killed ‘at their first going in unto her’, is not well-founded in the light of the better reading of the text. If the reasons given for the death of the husbands of Sara in VgVg Vulgate (Sixtine-Clementine Edition) are authentic (see 6:17; 7:12, 14), one might argue thus, a fortiori, against the crime of Birth Prevention: since the husbands were punished by God on account of their lustful approach to matrimony, then the abuse of marriage by the direct interference of contraception would deserve even greater punishment. 9. The rejoinder of the servant is bitter and calumnious, for Sara had no guilt in the matter. The accusation, ‘thou murderer of thy husbands’, is either a gossip report or a purely mischievous invention of the maid.

§ h. 10b–23 Sara’s Confidence in God. The bitterness of the accusation, coupled, no doubt, with the memory of the facts, caused Sara to become greatly upset. Her emotions were in turmoil, she wished to be alone, she would neither eat nor drink. It is even likely that the Greek is correct here in its addition, ‘and (she) desired to hang herself’, for such a temptation could easily arise under great emotional stress. Sara, however, turned to God for help, and the prayer which follows is a model for those in great affliction. It is more extensive, more reasoned, in VgVg Vulgate (Sixtine-Clementine Edition) than in the Greek. The latter seems more primitive. 16. She never desired a husband lustfully. 17. ‘Play’, in the sense of sensual levity. 19. See 7:12, 14. The Greek indicates that Sara was the only heir of Raguel.