A confession of ignorance, with which compare the saying of Socrates that he was wise only so far as he knew that he knew nothing, or that of Asaph Psalm 73:22.

Surely I am more brutish - These words can in no sense, nor by any mode of speech, be true of Solomon: for while he was the wisest of men, he could not have said that he was more brutish than any man, and had not the understanding of a man. It is saying nothing to the purpose, to say he was so independently of the Divine teaching. Had he put this in, even by innuendo, it might be legitimate: but he does not; nor is it by fair implication to be understood. Solomon is not supposed to have written the Proverbs after he fell from God. Then indeed he might have said he had been more brutish than any man. But Agur might have used these words with strict propriety, for aught we know; for it is very probable that he was a rustic, without education, and without any human help, as was the prophet Amos; and that all that he knew now was by the inspiration of the Almighty, independently of which he was rustic and uneducated.

Surely I [am] more (c) senseless than [any] man, and have not the understanding of a man.
(c) In this he declares his great humility who would not attribute any wisdom to himself but all to God.

Surely I am more brutish than any man,.... "Every man is become brutish in his knowledge"; man in his original state was a knowing creature but sinning lost his knowledge, and "became like the beasts that perish"; hence we read of the "brutish among the people": but Agur thought himself not only brutish among the rest, but more brutish than any. So Plato (o) says of some souls living on earth, that they are of a brutish nature; see Jeremiah 10:14. Or I think the words may be rendered, "a brute am I rather than a man" (p); have more of the brute than of the man, especially in the sight and presence of God; a very beast before him, or in comparison of other wise, holy, and good men; or with respect to the knowledge of spiritual, divine, and heavenly things, Psalm 73:22; or "a brute was I from the time", or "ever since I was a man" (q); as soon as be was born, being born in sin, and like a wild ass's colt, Job 11:12;
and have not the understanding of a man; or "of Adam" (r); who was made after the image of God, which consisted in knowledge as well as holiness; who knew much of God, his nature, perfections, and persons; of the creatures, and the works of his hands and of all things in nature; but affecting more knowledge than he should lost in a great measure what he had, and brought his posterity in and left them in a state of blindness and ignorance, one of whose sons Agur was: or his meaning is, that he had not the understanding, as not of Adam in innocence, and of prophets and other eminent men of God, so not of ordinary men of those who had, he least share of the knowledge of divine things. Aben Ezra, who takes Ithiel and Ucal to be scholars or companions of Agur, supposes, that they asked him questions concerning the divine Being, nature, and perfections, to which he answers in this strain; showing his insufficiency to give them any instruction or satisfaction in such matters, or to discourse on such sublime subjects: or rather his view was to show the blindness and ignorance of human nature with respect to divine things he was about to treat of; and particularly to observe, that the knowledge of a Saviour, and salvation by him, were not from nature, and attainable by that; and that a man must first know himself, his own folly and ignorance, before he can have any true knowledge of Ithiel and Ucal, the mighty Saviour and Redeemer; of the need of him, and of interest in him. Some think his view is to prove that his words, his prophecy, or what he was about to say, or did say, must be owing entirely to divine inspiration; since he was of himself; and without a divine revelation, so very blind, dark, and ignorant; it could not be owing to any natural sagacity of his, who was more brutish than any; nor to any acquired knowledge, or the instruction of men, since he had none, as follows; and so with which the words begin, may be rendered "for" or "because" (s), as it usually is, "for I am more brutish, than any man", &c.
(o) De Leg. l. 10. p, 959. (p) "bardus sum prae viro", Mercerus; "brutus ego prae viro", Cocceius, Schultens. (q) "Nam brutus sum ex quo vir sum", Junius & Tremellius, so Cartwright. (r) "Nec est mihi intelligentia Adami", Cartwright. (s) "nam", Junius & Tremellius; "quia", Pagninus, Montanus; "quoniam", Michaelis.

brutish--stupid, a strong term to denote his lowly self-estimation; or he may speak of such as his natural condition, as contrasted with God's all-seeing comprehensive knowledge and almighty power. The questions of this clause emphatically deny the attributes mentioned to be those of any creature, thus impressively strengthening the implied reference of the former to God (compare Deuteronomy 30:12-14; Isaiah 40:12; Ephesians 4:8).

The כי now following confirms the fruitlessness of the long zealous search:
2 For I am without reason for a man,
And a man's understanding I have not.
3 And I have not learned wisdom,
That I may possess the knowledge of the All-Holy.
He who cannot come to any fixed state of consecration, inasmuch as he is always driven more and more back from the goal he aims at, thereby brings guilt upon himself as a sinner so great, that every other man stands above him, and he is deep under them all. So here Agur finds the reason why in divine things he has failed to attain unto satisfying intelligence, not in the ignorance and inability common to all men - he appears to himself as not a man at all, but as an irrational beast, and he misses in himself the understanding which a man properly might have and ought to have. The מן of מאישׁ is not the partitive, like Isaiah 44:11, not the usual comparative: than any one (Bttcher), which ought to be expressed by מכּל־אישׁ, but it is the negative, as Isaiah 52:14; Fleischer: rudior ego sum quam ut homo appeller, or: brutus ego, hominis non similis. Regarding בּער, vid., under Proverbs 12:1.
(Note: According to the Arab. בעיר is not a beast as grazing, but as dropping stercus (ba'r, camel's or sheep's droppings); to the R. בר, Mhlau rightly gives the meanings of separating, whence are derived the meanings of grazing as well as of removing (cleansing) (cf. Pers. thak karadn, to make clean = to make clean house, tabula rasa).)
Proverbs 30:3 now says that he went into no school of wisdom, and for that reason in his wrestling after knowledge could attain to nothing, because the necessary conditions to this were wanting to him. But then the question arises: Why this complaint? He must first go to school in order to obtain, according to the word "To him who hath is given," that for which he strove. Thus למדתּי refers to learning in the midst of wrestling; but למד, spiritually understood, signifies the acquiring of a kennens [knowledge] or knnens [knowledge = ability]: he has not brought it out from the deep point of his condition of knowledge to make wisdom his own, so that he cannot adjudge to himself knowledge of the all-holy God (for this knowledge is the kernel and the star of true wisdom). If we read 3b לא אדע, this would be synchronistic, nesciebam, with למדתי standing on the same line. On the contrary, the positive אדע subordinates itself to ולא־למדתי, as the Arab. fâa' lama, in the sense of (ita) ut scirem scientiam Sanctissimi, thus of a conclusion, like Lamentations 1:19, a clause expressive of the intention, Ewald, 347a. קדשׁים is, as at Proverbs 9:10, the name of God in a superlative sense, like the Arab. el-kuddûs.

Surely - This he utters from a modest and humble apprehension of his own ignorance.