Vers. 2-5. Introduction. Very similarly do the elder (in the reign of Jehoshaphat) and the younger Micha (Micah) introduce their prophecies (1 Kings xxii. 28, Mic. i. 2), and Elihu in the Book of Job his didactic discourses (ch. xxxiv. 2, cf. xxxiii. 2). It is an universal theme which the poet intends to take up, hence he calls upon all peoples and all the inhabitants of the *ijn. Such is the word first of all for this temporal life, which glides by unnoticed, then for the present transitory world itself (vid. on xvii. 14). It is his intention to declare to the rich the utter nothingness or vanity of their false ground of hope, and to the poor the superiority of their true ground of hope; hence he wishes to have as hearers both DTK ^a, children of the common people, who are men and have otherwise nothing distinctive about them, and P*$r*pa, children of men, i.e. of rank and distinction (vid. on iv. 3) — rich and poor, as he adds to make his meaning more clear. For his mouth will, or shall, utter ntoan, not: all sorts of wise teachings, but: weighty wisdom. Just in like manner JTOan signifies profound insight or understanding; cf. plurals like ni^a, Isa. xxvii. 11, njRtf^ Ps. xlii. 12 and frequently, n'w', Jer. xxii. 21. The parallel word nuian in the passage before us, and the plural predicate in Prov. xxiv. 7, show that rton, here and in Prov. i. 20, ix. 1, cf. xiv. 1, is not to be regarded, with Hitzig, Olshausen, and others, as another form of the singular moan. Side by side with the speaking of the mouth stands a? nun (with an unchangeable Kametz before the tone-syllable, Ew. § 166, c): the meditation (LXX. fiekerrj) of the heart, and in accordance therewith the well-thought-out discourse. What he intends to discourse is, however, not the creation of his own brain, but what he has received. A?W®, a saying embodying the wisdom of practical life, as God teaches men it, presents itself to his mind demanding to be heard; and to this he inclines his ear in order that, from being a diligent scholar of the wisdom from above, he may become a useful teacher of men, inasmuch as he opens up, i.e. unravels, the divine Mashal, which in the depth and fulness of its contents is a ^y^}, i.e. an involved riddle (from lin, cogn. *UK, ^PV), and plays the cithern thereby (a of the accompaniment). The opening of the riddle does not consist in the solving of it, but in the setting of it forth. n^?> to open = to propound, deliver [of a discourse], comes from the phrase VBTlK nriQ, Prov. xxxi. 26; cf. cxix. 130, where nriQj an opening, is equivalent to an unlocking, a revelation.
Vers. 6-13. First division of the sermon. Those who have to endure suffering from rich sinners have no need to fear, for the might and splendour of their oppressors is hastening towards destruction. JH *pj are days in which one experi- enccs evil, as in xciy. 13, cf. Amos vi. 3. The genitive in is continued in ver. 06 in a clause that is subordinate to the W3 of ver. 6a (cf. 1 Sam. xxv. 15, Job xxix. 2, Ps. xc. 15). The poet calls his crafty and malicious foes ttffi. There is no necessity for reading *3$ as Bottcher does, since without doubt a partieipial noun 3j*y, supplantator, can be formed from 3j?y, tupplantare; and although in its branchings out it coincides with agjf, planta, its meaning is made secure by the connection. To render the passage: u when wickedness surrounds me about my heels," whether with or without changing f\V into |ty (Hupfeld, von Ortenberg), is proved on all sides to be inadmissible: it ought to have been 5>W instead of PV; but even then it would still be an awkward expression, " to surround any one's heels," * and the DTOaf?, which follows, would be unconnected with what precedes. This last word comes after *3j?y, giving minuteness to the description, and is then continued quite regularly in ver. lb by the finite verb. Up to this point all is clear enough; but now the difficulties accumulate. One naturally expects the thought, that the rich man is not able to redeem himself from death. Instead of this it is said, that no man is able to redeem another from death. Ewald, Bottcher, and others, therefore, take n«, as in Ezek. xviii. 10, xxi. 20 (vid. Hitzig), to be a careless form of writing for?]N, and change HW into the reflexive nib); but the thought that is sought thus to be brought out is only then arrived at with great difficulty: the words ought to be tefcu 7Tfo\ *6 V'K 7]K. The words as they stand assert: a brother (nx, as a prominently placed object, with Rebia magnum, = VfiK, cf. Ezek. v. 10, xviii. 18, Mic. vii. 6, Mai. i. 6) can a man by no means redeem, i.e. men cannot redeem one another. Hengstenberg and Hitzig find the thought that is to be expected in ver. 8b: the rich ungodly man can with all his riches not even redeem another (n^), much less then can he redeem himself, offer a "1M for himself.
* This might be avoided if it were possible for i^py f\y to mean " the sin that follows my heels, that follows me at the heels; " but apart from fl]} being unsuitable with this interpretation, an impossible meaning is thereby extorted from the genitive construction. This, however, is perhaps what is meant by the expression of the LXX., q dLvopict rrj; vripwii pov, so much spoken of in the Greek Church down to the present day.
But if the poet meant to be so understood, he must have written N^} and Spm "is*3. Vers. 8a and 85 bear no appearance of referring to different persons; the second clause is, on the contrary, the necessary supplement of the first: Among men certainly it is possible under some circumstances for one who is delivered over to death to be freed by money, but no "^3 (= ^23 JV13, Ex. xxi. 30 and frequently) can be given to God ( DvftV6). *
All idea of the thought one would most naturally look for must therefore be given up, so far as it can be made clear why the poet has given no direct expression to it. And this can be done. The thought of a man's redeeming himself is far from the poet's mind; and the contrast which he has before his mind is this: no man can redeem another, Elohim only can redeem man. That one of his fellow-men cannot redeem a man, is expressed as strongly as possible by the words rna'fcO rna*; the negative in other instances stands after the intensive infinitive, but here, as in Gen. iii. 4, Amos ix. 8, Isa. xxviii. 28, before it. By an easy flight of irony, ver. 9 says that the \vrpov which is required to be paid for the souls of men is too precious, i.e. exorbitant, or such as cannot be found, and that he (whoever might wish to lay it down) lets it alone (is obliged to let it alone) for ever. Thus much is clear enough, so far as the language is concerned yV}\ according to the consec. temp. = 751$), and, although somewhat fully expressed, is perfectly in accordance with the connection. But how is ver. 10 attached to what precedes? Hengstenberg renders it, "he must for ever give it up, that he should live continually and not see the grave." But according to the syntax, W cannot be attached to?irn, but only to the futures in ver. 8, ranking with which the voluntative TTI, et vivat, is equivalent to the consequential ut vivat (Ew. § 347, a). Thus, therefore, nothing remains but to take ver. 9 (which von Ortenberg expunges as a gloss upon ver. 8) as a parenthesis; the principal clause affirms that no man can give to God a ransom that shall pro tect another against death, so that this other should still continue (ity) to live, and that without end (n>*^), without seeing the grave, i.e. without being obliged to go down into the grave. The *? in ver. 11 is now confirmatory of what is denied by its opposite; it is, therefore, according to the sense, imo (cf. 1 Kings xxi. 15):... that he may not see the grave — no indeed, without being able to interpose and alter it, he must see howall men, without distinction, succumb to death. Designedly the word used of the death of wise men is n^D, and of the death of the fool and the stupid man, "HK. Kurtz renders: " together with the fool and the slow of understanding;" but W as a proposition cannot be supported; moreover, tttjn would then have M the wise" as its subject, which is surely not the intention of the poet. Everything without distinction, and in mingled confusion, falls a prey to death; the rich man must see it, and yet he is at the same time possessed by the foolish delusion that he, with his wealth, is immortal. The reading D"J3p (LXX., Targ., Syr.), preferred by Ewald, and the conjecture Dnnp? adopted by Olshausen and Riehm, give a thought that is not altogether contrary to the connection, viz. the narrow grave is the eternal habitation of those who called broad lands their own; but this thought appears here, in view of ver. 12c, too early. 2i\> denotes the inward part, or that which is within, described according to that which encircles or contains it: that which is within them is, " their houses (pronounce battemo) are for ever" (Hengstenberg, Hitzig); i.e. the contents of their inward part is the self-delusion that their houses are everlasting, and their habitations so durable that one generation after another will pass over them; cf. the similar style of expression in x. Aby Esth. v. 7. Hitzig further renders: men celebrate their names in the lands; DBQ sop to call with a name = solemnly to proclaim it, to mention any one's name with honour (Isa. xliv. 5). But it is unlikely that the subject of W}P should now again be any other than the rich men themselves; and ntolK ^V for Hv?"'?? or n^2 is contrary to the usage of the language. n?^ is the earth as tillage, HioiK (only in this passage) in this connection, fields, estates, lands; the proclaiming of names is, according to 2 Sam. xii. 28, 1 Kings viii. 43, Amos ix. 12, equivalent to the calling of the lands or estates after their (the possessors') names (Botteher, Hup f eld, Kurtz). The idea of the rich is, their houses and dwelling-places (and they themselves who have grown up together with them) are of eternal duration; accordingly they solemnly give their own names to their lands, as being the names of immortals. But, adds the poet, man "»(J*3, in the pomp of his riches and outward show, abideth not (non per* noctat = non permanet). -\p*2 is the complement of the subject, although it logically (cf. xxv. 13) also belongs to ivV^S. Bottcher has shown the impropriety of reading f?*" - nere according to ver. 21. There are other instances also of refrains that are not exact repetitions; and this correction is moreover at once overthrown by the fact that *?2 will not suit?2\ it would stamp each man of rank, as such, as one deficient in intelligence. On the other hand, this emotional negative *?2 is admirably suitable to j^: no indeed, he has no abiding. He is compared (^"03 like the New Testament wfiouoOrj), of like kind and lot, to cattle (3 as in Job xxx. 19). *B*u is an attributive clause to ntonsia: like heads of cattle which are cut off or destroyed. The verb is so chosen that it is appropriate at the same time to men who are likened to the beasts (Hos. x. 7, 15, Obad. ver. 5, Isa. vi. 5).
Vers. 14-21. Second part of the discourse, of equal compass with the first. Those who are thought to be immortal are laid low in Hades; whilst, on the other hand, those who cleave to God can hope to be redeemed by Him out of Hades. Olshausen complains on this passage that the expression is abrupt, rugged, and in part altogether obscure. The fault, however, lies not, as he thinks, in a serious corruption of the text, but in the style, designedly adopted, of Psalms like this of a gloomy turn. E3"H n| refers back to ver. 13, which is the proper mashal of the Psalm: this is their way or walk ( "Sp/l as in xxxvii. 5, cf. Hag. i. 5). Close upon this follows to??D3 (their way), of those (cf. lxix. 4) who possess self-confidence; 7D3 signifies confidence both in a good and bad sense, selfconfidence, impudence, and even (Eccles. vii. 25) in general, folly. The attributive clause is continued in ver. 146: and of those who after them (i.e. when they have spoken, as Hitzig takes it), or in a more universal sense: after or behind them (i.e. treading in their footsteps), have pleasure in their mouth, i.e. their haughty, insolent, rash words (cf. Judg. ix. 38). If the meaning were u and after them go those who," etc., then one would expect to find a verb in connection with on^nK (cf. Job xxi. 33). As a collateral definition, " after them = after their death," it would, however, without any reason, exclude the idea of the assent given by their cotemporaries. It is therefore to be explained according to Job xxix. 22, or more universally according to Dent. xii. 30. It may seem remarkable that the music here strikes in forte; but music can on its part, in mournfully shrill tones, also bewail the folly of the world.
Ver. 15, so full of eschatological meaning, now describes what becomes of the departed. The subject of Vlfc? (as in Ixxiii. 9, where it is Milra, for tflg*) is not, as perhaps in the case of dTranovaiv, Luke xii. 20, higher powers that are not named; but rw (here nri£>), as in iii. 7, Hos. vi. 11, Isa. xxii. 7, is used in a semi-passive sense: like a herd of sheep they lay themselves down or they are made to lie down /iNB6 (thus it is pointed by Ben-Asher; whereas Ben-Naphtali points ™wb9 with a silent Shebd), to Hades = down into Hades (cf. lxxxviii. 7), so that they are shut up in it like sheep in their fold. And who is the shepherd there who rules these sheep with his rod? °yT. ™9' Not the good Shepherd (xxiii. 1), whose pasture is the land of the living, but Death, into whose power they have fallen irrecoverably, shall pasture them. Death is personified, as in Job xviii. 14, as the king of terrors. The modus consecutivus, WWj now expresses the fact that will be realized in the future, which is the reverse side of that other fact. After the night of affliction has swiftly passed away, there breaks forth, for the upright, a morning; and in this morning they find themselves to be lords over these their oppressors, like conquerors, who put their feet upon the necks of the vanquished (the LXX. well renders it by Karafcvpievcrovo-ip), Thus shall it be with the upright, whilst the rich at their feet beneath, in the ground, are utterly destroyed. ">i?3p has Rebia magnum, D'HK* has Asla-Legarme; accordingly the former word does not belong to what follows (in the morning, then vanishes...), but to what precedes, "nv or "V? (as in Isa. xlv. 16) signifies a that which is pressed in or pressed out, i.e. primarily something moulded or fashioned by the pressure of the hand (as in the case of the potter, "Vj|*) or by means of some instrument that impresses and cuts the material. Here the word is used to denote materiality or corporeity, including the whole outward appearance (<£ai/Tacrta, Acts xxv. 23). The \b which refers to this, shows that B*^tt is not a contraction of Bfnwi (vid. on xxvii. 5). Their materiality, their whole outward form belonging to this present state of being, becomes (falls away)?\XW r\Xpy?. The Lamed is used in the same way as in "1JD/ rpn, Isa. vi. 13; and /WW is subject, like, e.g., the noun that follows the infinitive in lxviii. 19, Job xxxiv. 22. The same idea is obtained if it is rendered: and their form Hades is ready to consume (consumturus est); but the order of the words, though not making this rendering impossible (cf. xxxii. 9, so far as Viy there means " its cheek "), is, however, less favourable to it (cf. Prov. xix. 8, Esth. iii. 11). n?3 was the most appropriate word for the slow, but sure and entire, consuming away (Job xiii. 28) of the dead body which is gnawed or destroyed in the grave, this gate of the lower world. To this is added S? CTD as a negative definition of the effect: so that there no longer remains to it, i^. to the pompous external nature of the ungodly, any dwelling-place, and in general any place whatever; for whatever they had in and about themselves is destroyed, so that they wander to and fro as bare shadows in the dreary waste of Hades. To them, who thought to have built houses for eternity and called great districts of country after their own names, there remains no longer any P3t of this corporeal nature, inasmuch as Hades gradually and surely destroys it; it is flor ever freed from its solid and dazzling shell, it wastes away lonesome in the grave, it perishes leaving no trace behind. Hup f eld's interpretation is substantially the same, and that of Jerome even is similar: et figura eorum conteretur in infero post habitaculum suum; and Symmachus: to 8e /cparepbv avrwv vraXaicbaet, a8r)<; anro tt)? olKrjaews t?)? evTifiov clvt&v.
Other expositors, it is true, solve the riddle of the half -verse in a totally different way. Mendelssohn refers 0^ to the upright: whose being lasts longer than the grave (survives it), hence it cannot be a habitation (eternal dwelling) to it; and adds, " the poet could not speak more clearly of the resurrection (immortality)." * A modern Jewish Christian, Isr. Pick, looked upon in Jerusalem as dead, sees here a prediction of the breaking through of the realm of the dead by the risen
* In the fragments of a commentary to his translation of Psalm?, contributed by David Friodlander
One: M Their Rock is there, to break through the realm of the dead, that it may no longer serve Him as an abode." * Von llofmann's interpretation (last of all in his Schriftbeweis ii. 2, 499, 2d edition) lays claim to a more detailed consideration, because it has been sought to maintain it against all objections. By the morning he understands the end of the state or condition of death both of the righteous and of the ungodly. " In the state of death have they both alike found themselves: but now the dominion of death is at an end, and the dominion of the righteous begins." But those who have, according to ver. 15, died are only the ungodly, not the righteous as well. Hofmann then goes on to explain: their bodily form succumbs to the destruction of the lower world, so that it no longer has any abode; which is said to convey the thought, that the ungodly, " by means of the destruction of the lower world, to which their corporeal nature in common with themselves becomes subject, lose its last gloomy abode, but thereby lose their corporeal nature itself, which has now no longer any continuance:" a their existence becomes henceforth one absolutely devoid of possessions and of space, [the exact opposite of the time when they possessed houses built for eternity, and broad tracts of country bore their name."] But even according to the teaching of the Old Testament concerning the last things, in the period after the Exile, the resurrection includes the righteous and the unrighteous (Dan. xii. 2); and according to the teaching of the New Testament, the damned, after Death and Hades are cast into the lake of fire, receive another $UT, viz. Gehenna, which stands in just the same relation to Hades as the transformed world does to the old heavens and the old earth. The thought discovered in ver. 15, therefore, will uot bear being put to the proof. There is, however, this further consideration, that nothing whatever is known in any other part of the Old Testament of such a destruction of Sheol; and rriw found in the Psalm before us would be a most inappropriate word to express it, instead of wThich it ought to have been rri???; for the figurative language in cii. 27, Isa. Ii. 6, is worthless as a justification of this word, which signifies a gradual wearing out and
* In a fugitive paper of the so-called Amen Congregation, which now unhappily exists no longer, in Miinchen-Gladbach.
using up or consuming, and must not, in opposition to the usage of the language, be explained according to?? and v3. For this reason we refrain from making this passage a locus classicus in favour of an eschatological conception which cannot be supported by any other passage in the Old Testament. On the other side, however, the meaning of *ip3? is limited if it be understood only of the morning which dawns upon the righteous one after the night of affliction, as Kurtz does. What is, in fact, meant is a morning which not merely for individuals, but for all the upright, will be the end of oppression and the dawn of dominion: the ungodly are totally destroyed, and they (the upright) now triumph above their graves. In these words is expressed, in the manner of the Old Testament, the end of all time. Even according to Old Testament conception human history closes with the victory of good over evil. So far ver. 15 is really a " riddle" of the last great day; expressed in New Testament language, of the resurrection morn, on which ol aycot, 7ov fcocfiov Kpivovai (1 Cor. vi. 2).
With ^]K, in ver. 16 (used here adversatively, as e.g. in Job xiii. 15, and as |3K is more frequently used), the poet contrasts the totally different lot that awaits him with the lot of the rich who are satisfied in themselves and unmindful of God.?JN belongs logically to ^'M, but (as is moreover frequently the case with PI, D|, and H**) is, notwithstanding this relation to a following member of the sentence, placed at the head of the sentence: yet Elohim will redeem my soul out of the hand of Sheol (lxxxix. 49, Hos. xiii. 14). In what sense the poet means this redemption to be understood is shown by the allusion to the history of Enoch (Gen. v. 24) contained in ^nj£ »3. Bottcher shrewdly remarks, that this line of the verse is all the more expressive by reason of its relative shortness. Its meaning cannot be: He will take me under His protection; for np? does not mean this. The true parallels are lxxiii. 24, Gen. v. 24. The removals of Enoch and Elijah were, as it were, fingerposts which pointed forward beyond the cheerless idea they possessed of the way of all men, into the depth of Hades. Glancing at these, the poet, who here speaks in the name of all upright sufferers, gives expression to the hope, that God will wrest him out of the power of Sheol and take him to Himself. It is a hope that possesses no direct word of God upon * hiefa it could rest; it is not until later on that it receives the sup}>ort of divine promise, and is for the present only a u bold flight" of faith. Nor can we, for this very reason, at torn pt to define in what way the poet conceived of this redemption and this taking to Himself. In this matter he himself has no fully developed knowledge; the substance of his hope is only a dim inkling of what may be. This dimness that is only gradually lighted up, which lies over the last things in the Old Testament, is the result of a divine plan of education, in accordance with which the hope of eternal life was gradually to mature, and to be born as it were out of this wrestling faith itself. This faith is expressed in ver. 16; and the music accompanies his confidence in cheerful and rejoicing strains.
After this, in vers. 17 sqq., there is a return from the lyric strain to the gnomic and didactic. It must not, with Mendelssohn, be rendered: let it (my soul) not be afraid; but, since the psalmist begins after the manner of a discourse: fear thou not. The increasing 1i33, i.e. might, abundance, and outward show (all these combined, from "t?3, grave esse), of the prosperous oppressor is not to make the saint afraid: he must after all die, and cannot take hence with him?3n, the all = anything whatever (cf.?2?, for anything whatever, Jer. xiii. 7). *3, ver. 17, like idvy puts a supposable case; *3, ver. 18, is confirmatory; and *3, ver. 19a, is concessive, in the sense of *3"D3, according to Ew. § 362, b: even though he blessed his soul during his life, i.e. called it fortunate, and flattered it by cherished voluptuousness (cf. Deut. xxix. 18, ^^3 spann, and the soliloquy of the rich man in Luke xii. 19), and though they praise thee, O rich man, because thou dost enjoy thyself (Luke xvi. 25), wishing themselves equally fortunate, still it (the soul of such an one) will be obliged to come or pass Vriiatf "ilTiy There is no necessity for taking the noun "ril here in the rare signification dwelling (Arabic ddr, synonym of menzil), and it appears the most natural way to supply i&>23 as the subject to Nian (Hofmann, Kurtz, and others), seeing that one would expect to find T?}i3K in the case of wan being a form of address. And there is then no need, in order to support the synallage, which is at any rate inelegant, to suppose that the suffix V— takes its rise from the formula vna&r^K (^Dga) 603, and is, in spite of the unsuitable grammatical connection, retained, just as n rp and 0^3, without regard to the suffixes, signify u together" and "all together" (Bottcher). Certainly the poet delights in difficulties of style, of which quite sufficient remain to him without adding this to the list. It is also not clear whether ver. 206 is intended to be taken as a relative clause intimately attached to 1^3**, or as an independent clause. The latter is admissible, and therefore to be preferred: there are the proud rich men together with their fathers buried in darkness for ever, without ever again seeing the light of a life which is not a mere shadowy life.
The didactic discourse now closes with the same proverb as the first part, ver. 13. But instead of PrT^ the expression here used is P^J *6l, which is co-ordinate with "iJ^S as a second attributive definition of the subject (Ew. § 351, b): a man in glory and who has no understanding, viz. does not distinguish between that which is perishable and that which is imperishable, between time and eternity. The proverb is here more precisely expressed. The gloomy prospect of the future does not belong to the rich man as such, but to the worldly and carnally minded rich man.
2 Out of Zion, the perfection of beauty, Elohim shineth.
3 Our God will come and shall not keep silence; Fire devoureth before Him,
C) And the heavens proclaim His righteousness, For Elohim purposetli to sit in judgment. (Sela.)
9 I have no need to take bullocks out of thy house, Nor he-goats out of thy folds.
12 If I were hungry I would not tell thee, For Mine is the world and its fulness.
15 And call upon Me in the day of trouble —
17 Whereas thou nevertheless hatest instruction, And castest My words behind thee?!
18 When thou seest a thief, thou takest pleasure in him, And with adulterers dost thou make thyself familiar.
20 Thou sittest and slanderest thy brother, Upon thy mother's son thou bringest reproach.
21 These things doest thou, and, because I keep silence, Thou thinkest I am exactly like thee —
Lest I tear in pieces and there be none to rescue.
With the preceding Psalm the series of the Korahitic Elohim-Psalms of the primary collection (Ps. i.-lxxii.) closes. There are, reckoning Ps. xlii. and xliii. as one Psalm, seven of them (Ps. xlii.-xlix.). They form the principal group of the Korahitic Psalms, to which the third book furnishes a supplement, bearing in part an Elohimic (Ps. lxxxiv.) and in part a Jehovic impress (Ps. Ixxxv., lxxxvii., lxxxviii.). The Asaphic Psalms, on the contrary, belong exclusively to the Elohimic style of Psalms, but do not, however, all stand together: the principal group of them is to be found in the third book (Ps. lxxiii.-lxxxiii.), and the primary collection contains only one of them, viz. Ps. 1., which is here placed immediately after Ps. xlix. on account of several points of mutual relationship, and more especially because the prominent Hear then, My people (1. 7), is in accord with the beginning of Ps. xlix., Hear, all ye peoples.
According to 1 Chron. xxiii. 2-5, the whole of the thirtyeight thousand Levites were divided by David into four divisions (24,000 + 6000 + 4000 + 4000). To the fourth division (4000) was assigned the music belonging to divine worship. Out of this division, however, a select company of two hundred and eighty-eight singers was further singled out, and divided into twenty-four classes. These last were placed under three leaders or precentors (Sangmeister), viz. fourteen classes under Heman the Kehathite and his fourteen sons; four classes under Asaph the Gersonite and his four sons; and six classes under Ethan (Jeduthun) and his six sons (1 Chron. ch. xxv., cf. ch. xv. 17 sqq.). The instruments played by these three leaders, which they made use of on account of their clear, penetrating sound, were the cymbals (1 Chron. xv. 19). Also in 1 Chron. xvi. 5, where Asaph is described as the chief (BWin) of the sacred music in the tent where the Ark was placed, he strikes the cymbals. That he was the chief, first leader, cannot be affirmed. The usual order of the names is u Heman, Asaph, and Ethan." The same order is also observed in the genealogies of the three in
1 Chron. vi. 16-32. Heman takes the prominent place, and at his right hand stands Asaph, and on his left Ethan.
History bears witness to the fact that Asaph was also a Psalm-writer. For, according to 2 Chron. xxix. 30, Hezekiah brought " the words of David and of Asaph the seer" into use again in the service of the house of God. And in the Book of Nehemiah, ch. xii. 46, David and Asaph are placed side by side as Dmfcfon ^Ki in the days of old in Israel.
The twelve Psalms bearing the inscription *]DX? are all Elohimic. The name of God rorp does not occur at all in two (lxxvii., lxxxii.), and in the rest only once, or at the most twice. Side by side with DTita, tfW and b$ are used as favourite names, and especial preference is also given to |iv]>. Of compounded names of God, Hjnj. DWK?K (only besides in Josh. xxii. 22) in the Psalter, and nto¥ Dv6« in the Old Testament Scriptures generally (vid. Symbolce, pp. 14—16), are exclusively peculiar to them. So far as concerns their contents, they are distinguished from the Korahitic Psalms by their prophetically judicial character. As in the prophets, God is frequently introduced as speaking; and we meet with detailed prophetical pictures of the appearing of God the Judge, together with somewhat long judicial addresses (Ps. L, lxxv., lxxxii.). The appellation njhn, which Asaph bears in 2 Chron. xxix. 30, accords with this; notwithstanding the chronicler also applies the same epithet to both the other precentors. The ground of this, as with N33, which is used by the chronicler of the singing and playing of instruments in the service of the house of God, is to be found in the intimate connection between the sacred lyric and prophecy as a whole. The future visionary character of the Asaphic Psalms has its reverse side in the historical past. We frequently meet wTith descriptive retrospective glances at facts of the primeval history (lxxiv. 13-15, lxxvii. 15 sqq., lxxx. 9-12, lxxxi. 5-8, lxxxiii. 10-12), and Ps. lxxviii. is entirely taken up with holding up the mirror of the ancient history of the nation to the people of the present. If we read the twelve Psalms of Asaph in order one after the other, we shall, moreover, observe this striking characteristic, that mention is made of Joseph and the tribes descended from him more frequently than anywhere else (lxxvii. 16, lxxviii. 9, 67 sq., lxxxi. 6, lxxx. 2 sq.). Nor is another feature less remarkable, viz. that the mutual rela- tionsliip of Jahve to Israel is set forth under the figure of the shepherd and his flock rather than any other (lxxiv. 1, lxxvii. 21, lxxviii. 52, cf. lxx.-lxxii., lxxix. 13, lxxx. 2). Moreover these Psalms delight in other respects to vary the designations for the people of God as much as possible.
In Ps. L, Ixxiii.-lxxxiii., we have before us a peculiar type of Psalms. The inscription ^DiO has, so to speak, deep-lying internal grounds in its support. But it does not follow from this inscription that all these Psalms were composed by the aged Asaph, who, as lxxviii. 69 shows, lived until the early part of Solomon's reign. The outward marks peculiar to Asaph were continued in his posterity even into the period after the Exile. History mentions Asaphites under Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. xx. 14), under Hezekiah (2 Chron. xxix. 13), and among the exiles who returned (Ezra ii. 41, cf. iii. 10, one hundred and twentyeight Asaphites; Neh. vii. 44, cf. xi. 22, a hundred and fortyeight of them). Since down to the period after the Exile even the cymbals (DwVD) descended to them from their ancestor, the poetic talent and enthusiasm may also have been hereditary among them. The later "Psalms of Asaph," whether composed by later Asaphites or some other person, are inscribed *)D&6 because, by whomsoever, they are composed in the style of Asaph and after Asaphic models. Ps. 1., however, is an original Psalm of Asaph.
After the manner of the prophets the twofold truth is here advanced, that God has no delight in animal sacrifice without the sacrifice of prayer in which the heart is engaged, and that the confession of His word without a life that accords with His word is an abomination to Him. It is the very same fundamental thought which is expressed in xl. 7-9, lxix. 31 sq., Ii. 18 sq., and underlies Ps. xxiv. (1-6) and xv.; they are all echoes of the grand utterance of Samuel (1 Sam. xv. 22), the father of the poetry of the Psalms. It cannot surprise one that stress is laid on this denunciation of a heartless service of works by so many voices during the Davidic age. The nothingness of the opus operatum is also later on the watchword of the prophets in times when religious observances, well ordered and in accordance with legal prescription, predominate in Judah. Nor should it seem strange that Asaph the Levite, who was appointed to the sanctuary on Zion, expn net himself thus; for Jeremiah was also a Levlte and even a priest (coht')i), and yet no one has spoken a bolder, and more Clltting word against the outward and formal service of sacrifice than he (Jer. vii. 22 sq.). Both these objections being removed, there is nothing else that stands in the way of our ascribing this Psalm to Asaph himself. This is favoured by echoes of the Psalm in the prophets (cf. ver. 2 with Lam. ii. 15, and the verse-ending ver. 8, xxxviii. 18, with Isa. xlix. 16), and there is nothing opposed to it in the form of the language.
Vers. 1-3. The theophany. The names of God are heaped up in ver. 1 in order to gain a thoroughly full-toned exordium for the description of God as the Judge of the world. Hupfeld considers this heaping up cold and stiff; but it is exactly in accordance with the taste of the Elohimic style. The three names are co-ordinate with one another; for OwK b& does not mean " God of gods," which would rather be expressed by D'«?%^ *?£* or DTO b*. h$ is the name for God as the Almighty; DTOK as the Revered One; flVP as the Being, absolute in His existence, and who accordingly freely influences and moulds history after His own plan — this His peculiar proper-name is the third in the triad. Perfects alternate in vers. 1-6 with futures, at one time the idea of that which is actually taking place, and at another of that which is future, predominating. Jahve summons the earth to be a witness of the divine judgment upon the people of the covenant. The addition " from the rising of the sun to its going down," shows that the poet means the earth in respect of its inhabitants. He speaks, and because what He speaks is of universal significance He makes the earth in all its compass His audience. This summons precedes His selfmanifestation. It is to be construed, with Aquila, the Syriac, Jerome, Tremellius, and Montanus, u out of Zion, the perfection of beauty, Elohim shineth." Zion, the perfect in beauty (cf. the dependent passage Lam. ii. 15, and 1 Mace. ii. 12, where the temple is called rj icaXkovr) tj/jlcov), because the place of the presence of God the glorious One, is the bright spot whence the brightness of the divine manifestation spreads forth like the rising sun. In itself certainly it is not inappropriate, with the LXX., Vulgate, and Luther, to take *B*"5>tao as a designation of the manifestation of Elohim in His glory, which is the non plus ultra of beauty, and consequently to be explained according to Ezek. xxviii. 12, cf. Ex. xxxiii. 19, and not according to Lam. ii. 15 (more particularly since Jeremiah so readily gives a new turn to the language of older writers). But, taking the fact into consideration that nowhere in Scripture is beauty (*BJ.) thus directly predicated of God, to whom peculiarly belongs a glory that transcends all beauty, we must follow the guidance of the accentuation, which marks ^"^ao by Mercha as in apposition with PSV (cf. Psychol. S. 49; tr. p. 60). The poet beholds the appearing of God, an appearing that resembles the rising of the sun (5T^n, as in the Asaph Psalm lxxx. 2, after Deut. xxxiii. 2, from JJBJ, with a transition of the primary notion of rising, wsb, *Jj, to that of beaming forth and lighting up far and wide, as in «_!L->); for " our God will come and by no means keep silence." It is not to be rendered: Let our God come (Hupfeld) and not keep silence (Olshausen). The former wish comes too late after the preceding JTDin (K3J is consequently veniet, and written as e.g. in xxxvii. 13), and the latter is superfluous, bit, as in xxxiv. 6, xli. 3, Isa. ii. 9, and frequently, implies in the negative a lively interest on the part of the writer: He cannot, He dare not keep silence, His glory will not allow it. He who gave the Law, will enter into judgment with those who have it and do not keep it; He cannot long look on and keep silence. He must punish, and first of all by word in order to warn them against the punishment by deeds. Fire and storm are the harbingers of the Lawgiver of Sinai who now appears as Judge. The fire threatens to consume the sinners, and the storm (viz. a tempest accompanied with lightning and thunder, as in Job xxxviii. 1) threatens to drive them away like chaff. The expression in ver. 35 is like xviii. 9. The fern. Niph. n"W? does not refer to P*K, but is used as neuter: it is stormed, i.e. a storm rages (Apollinaris, ekaCKaTriaOrj a(j)6Spa). The fire is His wrath; and the storm the power or force of His wrath.
Vers. 4-6. The judgment scene. To the heavens above pyp, elsewhere a preposition, here, as in Gen. xxvii. 39, xlix. 25, an adverb, desuper, superne) and to the earth God calls fa fcO£ as, e.g.. Gen. xxviii. 1), to both toy PT>, in order to sit in judgment upon His people in their presence, and with them as witnesses of His doings. Or is it not that they are summoned to attend, but that the commission, ver. 5, is addressed to them (Olshausen, Ilitzig)? Certainly not, for the act of gathering is not one that properly belongs to the heavens and the earth, which, however, because they exist from the beginning and will last for ever, are suited to be witnesses (Deut. iv. 26, xxxii. 1, Isa. i. 2, 1 Mace. ii. 37). The summons *BDK is addressed, as in Matt. xxiv. 31, and frequently in visions, to the celestial spirits, the servants of the God here appearing. The accused who are to be brought before the divine tribunal are mentioned by names which, without their state of mind and heart corresponding to them, express the relationship to Himself in which God has placed them (cf. Deut. xxxii. 15, Isa. xlii. 19). They are called D*TDn, as in the Asaph Psalm Ixxix. 2. This contradiction between their relationship and their conduct makes an undesigned but bitter irony. In a covenant relationship, consecrated and ratified by a covenant sacrifice ("^ rnr similar to xcii. 4, Num. x. 10), has God placed Himself towards them (Ex. xxiv.); and this covenant relationship is also maintained on their part by offering sacrifices as an expression of their obedience and of their fidelity. The participle Wb here implies the constant continuance of that primary covenant-making. Now, while the accused are gathered up, the poet hears the heavens solemnly acknowledge the righteousness of the Judge beforehand. The participial construction fcttn BBC', which always, according to the connection, expresses the present (Nah. i. 2), or the past (Judg. iv. 4), or the future (Isa. xxv. 31), is in this instance an expression of that which is near at hand (fut, instans). ton has not the sense of ipse (Ew. § 314, a), for it corresponds to the "I" in WW »3N or WW W; and *3 is not to be translated by nam (Hitzig), for the fact that God intends to judge requires no further announcement. On the contrary, because God is just now in the act of sitting in judgment, the heavens, the witnesses most prominent and nearest to Him, bear witness to His righteousness. The earthly music, as the rbo directs, is here to join in with the celestial praise. Nothing further is now wanting to the completeness of the judgment scene; the action now begins.
Vers. 7-15. Exposition of the sacrificial Tora for the good of those whose holiness consists in outward works. The forms strengthened by a7i, in ver. 7, describe God's earnest desire to have Israel for willing hearers as being quite as strong as His desire to speak and to bear witness. 2 TJJfl, obtestari aliquem, to come forward as witness, either solemnly assuring, or, as here and in the Psalm of Asaph, lxxxi. 9, earnestly warning and punishing (cf. j^-i> with c->, to bear witness against any one). On the Dagesli forte conjunctive in ^^, vid. Ges. § 20, 2, a. He who is speaking has a right thus to stand face to face with Israel, for he is Elohim, the God of Israel — by which designation reference is made to the words "prfrK mm '•roK (Ex. xx. 2), with which begins the Law as given from Sinai, and which here take the Elohimic form (whereas in lxxxi. 11 they remain unaltered) and are inverted in accordance with the context. As ver. 8 states, it is not the material sacrifices, which Israel continually, without cessation, offers, that are the object of the censuring testimony. T£?ijJ1, even if it has Mugrash, as in Baer, is not on this account, according to the interpretation given by the accentuation, equivalent to TTl&jr^n (cf. on the other hand xxxviii. 18); it is a simple assertory substantival clause: thy burnt-offerings are, without intermission, continually before Me. God will not dispute about sacrifices in their outward characteristics; for — so vers. 9-11 go on to say — He does not need sacrifices for the sake of receiving from Israel what He does not otherwise possess. His is every wild beast (^n, as in the Asaph Psalm, lxxix. 2) of the forest. His the cattle *l?j$ *!D.(!3, upon the mountains of a thousand, i.e. upon the thousand (and myriad) mountains (similar to "ispp 'Tip or Byp *™), or: where they live by thousands (a similar combination to wy Vn:). Both explanations of the genitive are unsupported by any perfectly analogous instance so far as language is concerned; the former, however, is to be preferred on account of the singular, which is better suited to it. He knows every bird that makes its home on the mountains; J>m, as usually, of a knowledge which masters a subject, compasses it and makes it its own. Whatever moves about the fields is with Him, i.e. is within the range of His knowledge (cf. Job xxvii. 11, x. 13), and therefore of His power; H (here and in the Asaph Psalm Ixxx. 14) from NJNJ = VW9 to move to and fro, like t^D from N^P, to sweep out, cf. KLvwirerov, fcpwhaXov, from Kiptut. Bat just as little as God requires sacrifices in order thereby to enrich Himself, is there any need on His part that might be satisfied by sacrifices, vers. 12 sq. If God should hunger, lie would not stand in need of man's help in order to satisfy Himself; but He is never hungry, for He is the Being raised above all carnal wants. Just on this account, what God requires is not by any means the outward worship of sacrifice, but a spiritual offering, the worship of the heart, ver. 11. Instead of the D^ofe, and more particularly mfol PI3T, Lev. vii. 11-15, and TJJ *??$, Lev. vii. 16 (under the generic idea of which are also included, strictly speaking, vowed thankofferings), God desires the thanksgiving of the heart and the performance of that which has been vowed in respect of our moral relationship to Himself and to men; and instead of the njiy in its manifold forms of devotion, the prayer of the heart, which shall not remain unanswered, so that in the round of this Xoyircy \arpeia everything proceeds from and ends in ev^aptarla. It is not the sacrifices offered in a becoming spirit that are contrasted with those offered without the heart (as, e.g.y Sir. xxxii. [xxxv.] 1-9), but the outward sacrifice appears on the whole to be rejected in comparison with the spiritual sacrifice. This entire turning away from the outward form of the legal ceremonial is, in the Old Testament, already a predictive turning towards that worship of God in spirit and in truth which the new covenant makes alone of avail, after the forms of the Law have served as swaddling clothes to the New Testament life which was coming into being in the old covenant. This u becoming" begins even in the Tora itself, especially in Deuteronomy. Our Psalm, like the Chokma (Prov. xxi. 3), and prophecy in the succeeding age (cf. Hos. vi. 6, Mic. vi. 6-8, Isa. i. 11-15, and other passages), stands upon the standpoint of this concluding book of the Tora, which traces back all the requirements of the Law to the fundamental command of love.
Vers. 16-21. The accusation of the manifest sinners. It is not those who are addressed in vers. 7 sqq., as Hengstenberg thinks, who are here addressed. Even the position of the words "»DK VVTO\ clearly shows that the divine discourse is now turned to another class, viz. to the evil-doers, who, in connection with open and manifest sins and vices, take the word of God upon their lips, a distinct class from those who base their sanctity upon outward works of piety, who outwardly fulfil the commands of God, but satisfy and deceive themselves with this outward observance, p ^'l*?, what hast thou, that thou = it belongs not to thee, it does not behove thee. With nriNl? in ver. 17, an adversative subordinate clause begins: since thou dost not care to know anything of the moral ennobling which it is the design of the Law to give, and my words, instead of having them as a constant test-line before thine eyes, thou castest behind thee and so turnest thy back upon them (cf. Isa. xxxviii. 17). H™ is not from pi (LXX., Targum, and Saadia), in which case it would have to be pointed Yy?\ but from nyj, and is construed here, as in Job xxxiv. 9, with By: to have pleasure in intercourse with any one. In ver. 18a the transgression of the eighth commandment is condemned, in ver. 186 that of the seventh, in vers. 19 sq. that of the ninth (concerning the truthfulness of testimony). Him n3 jw7 to give up one's mouth unrestrainedly to evil, i.e, so that evil issues from it. 3&>n, ver. 20a, has reference to gossiping company (cf. i. 1). ^BJ. signifies a thrust, a push (cf. *)*!?), after which the LXX. renders it irlOei? GttavZaXov (cf. Lev. xix. 14), but it also signifies vexation and mockery (cf. *P_\); it is therefore to be rendered: to bring reproach (Jerome, opprobrium) upon any one, to cover him with dishonour. The preposition 3 with "isn has, just as in Num. xii. 1, and frequently, a hostile signification. "Thy mother's son" is he who is born of the same mother with thyself, and not merely of the same father, consequently thy brother after the flesh in the fullest sense. What Jahve says in this passage is exactly the same as that which the apostle of Jesus Christ says in Rom. ii. 17-24. This contradiction between the knowledge and the life of men God must, for His holiness' sake, unmask and punish, ver. 21. The sinner thinks otherwise: God is like himself, i.e, that is also not accounted by God as sin, which he allows himself to do under the cloak of his dead knowledge. For just as a man is in himself, such is his conception also of his God (yid, xviii. 26 sq.). But God will not encourage this foolish idea: "I will therefore reprove thee and set (it) in order before thine eyes" (rDnjJto, not ^"W^, m order to give expression, the second time at least, to the mood, the form of which has been obliterated by tlio suffix); He will set before the eyes of the sinner, who practically ami also in theory denies the divine holiness, the red state of his heart and life, so that he shall be terrified at it. Instead of tfn, the infin. intensit. here, under the influence of the close connection of the clauses (Ew. § 240, c), is rf*n; the oratio obliqua begins with it, without *3 (quod). ^»3 exactly corresponds to the German deines Gleichen, thine equal.
Vers. 22, 23. Epilogue of the divine discourse. Under the name!?v« TOW are comprehended the decent or honourable whose sanctity relies upon outward works, and those who know better but give way to licentiousness; and they are warned of the final execution of the sentence which they have deserved. In dead works God delighteth not, but whoso offereth thanksgiving (viz. not shelamim-toda, but the toda of the heart), he praises Him* and ^ Eb>. It is unnecessary with Luther, following the LXX., Vulgate, and Syriac versions, to read DK\ The Talmudic remark DBh X^S UW npn bx Tdo not read Ejfc\ but DBh] assumes D85H to be the traditional reading. If we take 7]*n DC> as a thought complete in itself, — which is perfectly possible in a certain sense (vid. Isa. xliii. 19), — then it is best explained according to the Vulgate (qui ordinat viam), with Bottcher, Maurer, and Hupfeld: viam h. e. recta incedere (lege agere) parans; but the expression is inadequate to express this ethical sense (cf. Prov. iv. 26), and consequently is also without example. The LXX. indicates the correct idea in the rendering real i/c€i 6So? fj £etfa> avrco to aarrfpiov Qeov. The "pi tib) (designedly not pointed *I^), which standing entirely by itself has no definite meaning, receives its requisite supplement by means of the attributive clause that follows. Such an one prepares a way along which I will grant to him to see the salvation of Elohim, i.e. along which I will grant him a rapturous vision of the full reality of My salvation. The form *^f5! is without example elsewhere. It sounds like the likewise epenthetical *??*3£!> Prov. i. 28, cf. viii. 17, Hos. v. 15, and may be understood as an imitation of it as regards sound. V?1??* (= *n??D is in the writer's mind as the form out of pause
* In Vedic jag, old Bactrian jaz (whence jagjas, the primitive word of clyio;), the notions of offering and of praising lie one within the other.
Ges. § 58, 4). With ver. 23 the Psalm recurs to its central point and climax, ver. 14 sq. What Jahve here discourses ir a post-Sinaitic appearing, is the very same discourse concerning the worthlessness of dead works and concerning the true will of God that Jesus addresses to the assembled people when He enters upon His ministry. The cycle of the revelation of the Gospel is linked to the cycle of the revelation of the Law by the Sermon on the Mount; this is the point at which both cycles touch.
kindness, According to the greatness of Thy compassion blot out my transgressions!
And in sin did my mother conceive me.
And in the hidden part do Thou make me to know wisdom.
9 Oh purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.
11 Turn again upon me the joy of Thy salvation, And with a spirit of willingness uphold me.
15 Then will I teach transgressors Thy ways, And sinners shall be converted to Thee.
18 For Thou delightest not in sacrifice, else would I give it, Burnt-offering Thou desirest not.
20 Do good in Thy good pleasure unto Zion, Build Thou the walls of Jerusalem;
and whole-burnt-offering; Then shall bullocks be offered on Thine altar.
The same depreciation of the external sacrifice that is expressed in Ps. 1. finds utterance in Ps. li., which supplements the former, according as it extends the spiritualizing of the sacrifice to the offering for sin (cf. xl. 7). This Psalm is the first of the Davidic Elohim-Psalms. The inscription runs: To the Precentor j a Psalm by David, when Nathan the prophet came to himy after he had gone in to Bathsheba, The carelessness of the Hebrew style shows itself in the fact that one and the same phrase is used of Nathan's coming in an official capacity to David (cf. 2 Sam. xii. 1) and of David's going in unto Bathsheba (?K Kte, as in Gen. vi. 4, xvi. 2, cf. 2 Sam. xi. 4). The comparative "1^3, as a particle of time in the whole compass of the Latin quum} holds together that which precedes and that which subsequently takes place. Followed by the perfect (2 Sam. xii. 21, 1 Sam. xii. 8), it has the sense of postquam (cf. the confusing of this "iBto with ipk *nnx, Josh. ii. 7). By Nto3 the period within which the composition of the Psalm falls is merely indicated in a general way. The Psalm shows us how David struggles to gain an inward and conscious certainty of the forgiveness of sin, which was announced to him by Nathan (2 Sam. xii. 13). In Ps. vi. and xxxviii. we have already heard David, sick in soul and body, praying for forgiveness; in Ps. Ii. he has even become calmer and more cheerful in his soul, and there is nothing wanting to him except the rapturous realization of the favour within the range of which he already finds himself. On the other hand, Ps. xxxii. lies even beyond Ps. Ii. For what David promises in li. 15, viz. that, if favour is again shown to him, he will teach the apostate ones the ways of God, that he will teach sinners how they are to turn to God, we heard him fulfil in the sententious didactic Ps. xxxii.
Hitzig assigns Ps. Ii., like Ps. 1., to the writer of Isa. ch. xl.-lxvi. But the manifold coincidences of matter and of style only prove that this prophet was familiar with the two Psalms. We discern in Ps. li. four parts of decreasing length. The first part, vers. 3-11, contains the prayer for remission of sin; the second, vers. 12-15, the prayer for renewal; the third, vers. 16-19, the vow of spiritual sacrifices; the fourth, vers. 20, 21, the intercession for all Jerusalem. The divine name Elohim occurs five times, and is appropriately distributed throughout the Psalm.
Vers. 3, 4. Prayer for the remission of sin. Concerning the interchangeable names for sin, vid. on xxxii. 1 sq. Although the primary occasion of the Psalm is the sin of adultery, still David says W2, not merely because many other sins were developed out of it, as his guilt of blood in the case of Uriah, the scandal put into the mouths of the enemies of Jahve, and his self-delusion, which lasted almost a whole year; but also because each solitary sin, the more it is perceived in its fundamental character and, as it were, microscopically discerned, all the more does it appear as a manifold and entangled skein of sins, and stands forth in a still more intimate and terrible relation, as of cause ami effect, to the whole corrupt and degenerated condition in which the sinner finds himself. In nriE sins are conceived of as a cumulative debt (according to Isa. xliv. 22, cf. xliii. 25, like a thick, dark cloud) written down (Jer. xvii. 1) against the time of the payment by punishment. In ^?33 (from D33, irXuveiVj to wash by rubbing and kneading up, distinguished from frn, \ovew, to wash by rinsing) iniquity is conceived of as deeply ingrained dirt. In '•jnntD, the usual word for a declarative and de facto making clean, sin is conceived of as a leprosy, Lev. xiii. 6, 34. The Keri runs ^D33 nnn (impend. Iliph.^ like ^H, xxxvii. 8), " make great or much, wash me," i.e. (according to Ges. § 142, 3, 6) wash me altogether, penitus et totum, which is the same as is expressed by the Chethib HSin (prop, multum faciendo = multum, prorsus, Ges. § 131, 2). In 3*13 (Isa. lxiii. 7) and 3nn is expressed the depth of the consciousness of sin; profunda enim malitia, as Martin Geier observes, insolitam raramque gratiam postulat.
Vers. 5, 6. Substantiation of the prayer by the consideration, that his sense of sin is more than superficial, and that he is ready to make a penitential confession. True penitence is not a dead knowledge of sin committed, but a living sensitive consciousness of it (Isa. lix. 12), to which it is ever present as a matter and ground of unrest and pain. This penitential sorrow, which pervades the whole man, is, it is true, no merit that wins mercy or favour, but it is the condition, without which it is impossible for any manifestation of favour to take place. Such true consciousness of sin contemplates sin, of whatever kind it may be, directly as sin against God, and in its ultimate ground as sin against Him alone (N^1? w^h • °f the person sinned against, Isa. xlii. 24, Mic. vii. 9); for every relation in which man stands to his fellow-men, and to created things in general, is but the manifest form of his fundamental relationship to God; and sin is " that which is evil in the eyes of God" (Isa. lxv. 12, lxvi. 4); it is contradiction to the will of God, the sole and highest Lawgiver and Judge. Thus it is, as David confesses, with regard to his sin, in order that... This $£? must not be weakened by understanding it to refer to the result instead of to the aim or purpose. If, however, it is intended to express intention, it follows close upon the moral relationship of man to God expressed in T\2b *lf and TJ^a ^1^
— a relationship, the aim of which is, that God, when He now condemns the sinner, may appear as the just and holy One, who, as the sinner is obliged himself to acknowledge, cannot do otherwise than pronounce a condemnatory decision concerning him. When sin becomes manifest to a man as such, he must himself say Amen to the divine sentence, just as David does to that passed upon him by Nathan. And it is just the nature of penitence so to confess one's self to be in the wrong in order that God may be in the right and gain His cause. If, however, the sinner's self-accusation justifies the divine righteousness or justice, just as, on the other hand, all self-justification on the part of the sinner (which, however, sooner or later will be undeceived) accuses God of unrighteousness or injustice (Job xl. 8): then all human sin must in the end tend towards the glorifying of God. In this sense ver. 66 is applied by Paul (Kom. iii. 4), inasmuch as he regards what is here written in the Psalter — ottcos dv 8ifcat,co6fj<; iv toi$ Xoyois o~ov, teal viicrjcrrjs iv Tw KplveaOal o~e (LXX.) — as the goal towards which the whole history of Israel tends. Instead of 11?12 (in/in. like ^jrw, Gen. xxxviii. 17, in this instance for the sake of similarity of sound* instead of the otherwise usual form "^Y in Thy speaking, the LXX. renders iv tol<; \6yot? gov = Tl?*!?; instead of 1BBK>3, iv TO) KptveaOai ere == ^DSBfoa (infin. NipL), provided KpiveaOat, is intended as passive and not (as in Jer. ii. 9 LXX., cf. Matt. v. 40) as middle. The thought remains essentially unchanged by the side of these deviations; and even the taking of the verb nr>T, to be clean, pure, in the Syriac signification vitcav, does not alter it. That God may be justified in His decisive speaking and judging; that He, the Judge, may gain His cause in opposition to all human judgment, towards this tends David's confession of sin, towards this tends all human history, and more especially the history of Israel.
Vers. 7, 8. David here confesses his hereditary sin as the root of his actual sin. The declaration moves backwards from his birth to conception, it consequently penetrates even to the most remote point of life's beginning. ^^n stands instead of
Wgb, perhaps (although elsewhere, e.g. in xc. 2, the idea of painfulness is kept entirely in the background) with reference to the decree, " with pain shalt thou bring forth children," Gen. iii. 16 (Kurtz); and instead of Vlk nnnn^ with still more definite reference to that which precedes conception, the expression is ^nrp.T (for *?£?!£.> following the same interchange of vowel as in Gen. xxx. 39, Judg. v. 28). The choice of the verb decides the question whether by jftXf and Nipn is meant the guilt and sin of the child or of the parents. &rP (to burn with desire) has reference to that, in coition, which partakes of the animal, and may well awaken modest sensibilities in man, without JViy and NDn on that account characterizing birth and conception itself as sin; the meaning is merely, that his parents were sinful human beings, and that this sinful state (habitus) has operated upon his birth and even his conception, and from this point has passed over to him. What is thereby expressed is not so much any self-exculpation, as on the contrary a selfaccusation which glances back to the ultimate ground of natural corruption. He is sinful ^jj? n^ (lviii. 4, Gen. viii. 21), is NEED N£9> an unclean one springing from an unclean (Job xiv. 4), flesh born of flesh. That man from his first beginning onwards, and that this beginning itself, is tainted with sin; that the proneness to sin with its guilt and its corruption is propagated from parents to their children; and that consequently in the single actual sin the sin-pervaded nature of man, inasmuch as he allows himself to be determined by it and himself resolves in accordance with it, becomes outwardly manifest — therefore the fact of hereditary sin is here more distinctly expressed than in any other passage in the Old Testament, since the Old Testament conception, according to its special character, which always fastens upon the phenomenal, outward side rather than penetrates to the secret roots of a matter, is directed almost entirely to the outward manifestation only of sin, and leaves its natural foundation, its issue in relation to primeval history, and its demonic background undisclosed. The?n in ver. 7 is followed by a correlative second \\} in ver. 8 (cf. Isa. lv. 4 sq., liv. 15 sq.). Geier correctly says: Orat ut sibi in peccatis concepto veraque cordis probitate carenti penitiorem ac mysticam largiri velit sapientiam, cujus medio Uberetur a peccati turn reatu turn dominio. ri£N is the nature and life of man as conformed to the nature and will of God (cf. ak^deia, Eph. iv. 21). A^n, wisdom which is most intimately acquainted with (eindringlich weiss) such nature and life and the way to attain it. God delmhts in and desires truth nontax The Beth of this word is not a radical letter here as it is in Job xii. 6, but the preposition. The reins utpote adipe obducti, here and in Job xxxviii. 36, according to the Targum, Jerome, and Parchon, are called rrino {Psychol S. 269; tr. p. 317). Truth in the reins (cf. xl. 9, God's law in visceribus meis) is an upright nature in man's deepest inward parts; and in fact, since the reins are accounted as the seat of the tenderest feelings, in man's inmost experience and perception, in his most secret life both of conscience and of mind (xvi. 7). In the parallel member D*}D denotes the hidden inward part of man. Out of the confession, that according to the will of God truth ought to dwell and rule in man even in his reins, comes the wish, that God would impart to him (i.e. teach him and make his own), — who, as being born and conceived in sin, is commended to God's mercy, — that wisdom in the hidden part of his mind which is the way to such truth.
Vers. 9-11. The possession of all possessions, however, most needed by him, the foundation of all other possessions, is the assurance of the forgiveness of his sins. The second futures in ver. 9 are consequents of the first, which are used as optatives. Ver. 9<z recalls to mind the sprinkling of the leper, and of one unclean by reason of his contact with a dead body, by means of the bunch of hyssop (Lev. ch. xiv., Num. ch. xix.), the fioTavrj KaOapjiicrj (Bahr, Symbol, ii. 503); and ver. 96 recalls the washings which, according to priestly directions, the unclean person in all cases of uncleanness had to undergo. Purification and washing which the Law enjoins, are regarded in connection with the idea implied in them, and with a setting aside of their symbolic and carnal outward side, inasmuch as the performance of both acts, which in other cases takes place through priestly mediation, is here supplicated directly from God Himself. Manifestly 3ilK3 (not 3WN33) is intended to be understood in a spiritual sense. It is a spiritual medium of purification without the medium itself being stated. The New Testament believer confesses, with Petrarch in the second of his seven penitential Psalms: omnes sorties meas tina gutta, ve,l tenuis, sacri sanguinis absterget. But there is here no mention made of atonement by blood; for the antitype of the atoning blood was still hidden from David. The operation of justifying grace on a man stained by the bloodred guilt of sin could not, however, be more forcibly denoted than by the expression that it makes him whiter than snow (cf. the dependent passage Isa. i. 18). And history scarcely records a grander instance of the change of blood-red sin into dazzling whiteness than this, that out of the subsequent marriage of David and Bathsheba sprang Solomon, the most richly blessed of all kings. At the present time David's very bones are still shaken, and as it were crushed, with the sense of sin. IWj is an attributive clause like by& in vii. 16. Into what rejoicing will this smitten condition be changed, when he only realizes within his soul the comforting and joyous assuring utterance of the God who is once more gracious to him! For this he yearns, viz. that God would hide His face from the sin which He is now visiting upon him, so that it may as it were be no longer present to Him; that He would blot out all his iniquities, so that they may no longer testify against him. Here the first part of the Psalm closes; the close recurs to the language of the opening (ver. 3b).
Vers. 12, 13. In the second part, the prayer for justification is followed by the prayer for renewing. A clean heart that is not beclouded by sin and a consciousness of sin (for 2? includes the conscience, Psychology, S. 134; tr. p. 160); a stedfast spirit (p33, cf. lxxviii. 37, cxii. 7) is a spirit certain respecting his state of favour and well-grounded in it. David's prayer has reference to the very same thing that is promised by the prophets as a future work of salvation wrought by God the Redeemer on His people (Jer. xxiv. 7, Ezek. xi. 19, xxxvi. 26); it has reference to those spiritual facts of experience which, it is true, could be experienced even under the Old Testament relatively and anticipatively, but to the actual realization of which the New Testament history, fulfilling ancient prophecy, has first of all produced effectual and comprehensive grounds and motives, viz. fierdvoia (3? = you?), Kawrj ktlgls, Trakvyyeveala koi ava/calvcticns 7rvevjjLaT0$ (Tit. iii. 5). David, without distinguishing between them, thinks of himself as king, as Israelite, and as man. Consequently we are not at liberty to say that EHp? HVl (as in Isa. lxiii. 16), irvevfia ayicoo-vi7)<; = aycovj is here the Spirit of grace in distinction from the Spirit of office. If Jahve should reject David as He rejected Saul, this would be the extreme manifestation of anger (2 Kings xxiv. 20) towards him as king and as a man at the same time. The Holy Spirit is none other than that which came upon him by means of the anointing, 1 Sam. xvi. 13. This Spirit, by sin, he has grieved and forfeited. Hence he prays God to show favour rather than execute His right, and not to take this His Holy Spirit from him.
Vers. 14, 15. In connection with njna nn, the old expositors thought of 2H3, a noble, a prince, and n?*?3, nobility, high rank, Job xxx. 15, LXX. irvev/juaTi fjyefiovifcqj (spiritu principali) <jTrjpL%6v fie, — the word has, however, without any doubt, its ethical sense in this passage, Isa. xxxii. 8, cf. ^13, Ps. liv. 8; and the relation of the two words niHJ nn is not to be taken as adjectival, but genitival, since the poet has just used nn in the same personal sense in ver. 12a. Nor are they to be taken as a nominative of the subject, but — what corresponds more closely to the connection of the prayer — according to Gen. xxvii. 37, as a second accusative of the object: with a spirit of willingness, of willing, noble impulse towards that which is good, support me; i.e. imparting this spirit to me, uphold me constantly in that which is good. What is meant is not the Holy Spirit, but the human spirit made free from the dominion of sin by the Holy Spirit, to which good has become an inward, as it were instinctive, necessity. Thus assured of his justification and fortified in new obedience, David will teach transgressors the ways of God, and sinners shall be converted to Him, viz. by means of the testimony concerning God's order of mercy which he is able to bear as the result of his own rich experience.
Vers. 16-19. The third part now begins with a doubly urgent prayer. The invocation of God by the name Elohim is here made more urgent by the addition of "'TO^n WK; inasmuch as the prayers for justification and for renewing blend together in the u deliver me." David does not seek to lessen his guilt; he calls it in DW by its right name, — a word which signifies blood violently.shed, and then also a deed of blood and blood-guiltiness (ix. 13, cvi. 38, and frequently). We have al*o met with W? construed with p of the sin in xxxix. 9. He bad given Uriah over to death in order to possess himself of Bathsheba. And the accusation of his conscience spoke not merely of adultery, but also of murder. Nevertheless the consciousness of sin no longer smites him to the earth, Mercy has lifted him up; he prays only that she would complete her work in him, then shall his tongue exultingly praise (jjn with an accusative of the object, as in lix. 17) God's righteousness, which, in accordance with the promise, takes the sinner under its protection. But in order to perform what he vowed he would do under such circumstances, he likewise needs grace, and prays, therefore, for a joyous opening of his mouth. In sacrifices God delighteth not (xl. 7, cf. Isa. i. 11), otherwise he would bring some (^J^W, darem, sc. si velles> vid. on xl. 6); whole-burnt-offerinrrs God doth not desire: the sacrifices that are well-pleasing to Him aud most beloved by Him, in comparison with which the flesh and the dead work of the rv6w and the DsmT (D^D^) is altogether worthless, are thankfulness (1. 23) out of the fulness of a penitent and lowly heart. There is here, directly at least, no reference to the spiritual antitype of the sin-offering, which is never called mt. The inward part of a man is said to be broken and crushed when his sinful nature is broken, his ungodly self slain, his impenetrable hardness softened, his haughty vainglorying brought low, — in fine, when he is in himself become as nothing, and when God is everything to him. Of such a spirit and heart, panting after grace or favour, consist the sacrifices that are truly worthy God's acceptance and well-pleasing to Him (cf. Isa. lvii. 15, where such a spirit and such a heart are called God's earthly temple).* Vers. 20, 21. From this spiritual sacrifice, well-pleasing to God, the Psalm now, in vers. 20 sq., comes back to the material sacrifices that are offered in a right state of mind; and this is
* The Talmud finds a significance in the plural TOT- Joshua ben Levi (B. Sanhedrin 436) says: At the time when the temple was standing, whoever brought a burnt-offering received the reward of it, and whoever brought a meat-offering, the reward of it; but the lowly was accounted by the Scriptures as one who offered every kind of sacrifice at once (l^fcO |bl3 nUllpn bl yipri). In Irenseus, iv. 17, 2, and Clemens Alexandrinus, Psedag. iii. 12, is found to Qvoiu. ru Qsu Kocphiot ovvrsTptfipiv/i the addition:
to be explained by the consideration that David's prayer for himself here passes over into an intercession on behalf of all Israel: Do good in Thy good pleasure unto Zion. "AH may be a sign of the accusative, for 3*ip\i (^9?) does take the accusative of the person (Job xxiv. 21); but also a preposition, for as it is construed with? and E>V, so also with DN in the same signification (Jer. xviii. 10, xxxii. 41). P^-PD?? are here, as in iv. 6, Deut. xxxiii. 19, those sacrifices which not merely as regards their outward character, but also in respect of the inward character of him who causes them to be offered on his behalf, are exactly such as God the Lawgiver will have them to be. By?y3 beside njiy might be understood the priestly vegetable whole-offering, Lev. vi. 15 sq. (IT???. ^C1??, Epistle to the Hebrews, ii. 8), since every njfy as such is also <>y2; but Psalm-poetry does not make any such special reference to the sacrificial tora. /yjl is, like Wo in 1 Sam. vii. 9, an explicative addition, and the combination is like ivritt *]V£>\ xliv. 4, ioTfi pK, xc. 2, and the like. A ^y? u?& (Hitzig, after the Phoenician sacrificial tables) is unknown to the Israelitish sacrificial worship. The prayer: Build Thou the walls of Jerusalem, is not inadmissible in the mouth of David; since nja signifies not merely to build up what has been thrown down, but also to go on and finish building what is in the act of being built (lxxxix. 3); and, moreover, the wall built round about Jerusalem by Solomon (1 Kings iii. 1) can be regarded as a fulfilment of David's prayer..
Nevertheless what even Theodoret has felt cannot be denied: to?? iv Bafivkcbvi. •. apfAOTTeu rd prifiara. Through penitence the way of the exiles led back to Jerusalem. The supposition is very natural that vers. 20 sq. may be a liturgical addition made by the church of the Exile. And if the origin of Isa. ch. xl.-lxvi. in the time of the Exile were as indisputable as the reasons against such a position are forcible, then it would give support not merely to the derivation of vers. 20 sq. (cf. Isa. lx. 10, 5, 7), but of the whole Psalm, from the time of the Exile; for the general impress of the Psalm is, according to the accurate observation of Hitzig, thoroughly deutero- Isaianic. But the writer of Isa. xl.-lxvi. shows signs in other respects also of the most familiar acquaintance with the earlier literature of the Shir and the Mashal; and that he is none other than Isaiah reveals itself in connection with this Psalm by the echoes of this very Psalm, which are to be found not only in the second but also in the first part of the Isaianic collection of prophecy (cf. on vers. 9, 18). We are therefore driven to the inference, that Ps. li. was a favourite Psalm of Isaiah's, and that, since the Isaianic echoes of it extend equally from the first verse to the last, it existed in the same complete form even in his day as in ours; and that consequently the close, just like the whole Psalm, so beautifully and touchingly expressed, is not the mere addition of a later age.
Like a sharpened razor, O worker of guile!
7 Thus then will God smite thee down for ever, He will seize thee and pluck thee out of the tent, And root thee out of the land of the living. (Sela.)
place, And boasted of the abundance of his riches, trusted in his self-devotedness!"
10 1, however, am like a green olive-tree in the house of Elohim, I trust in the mercy of Elohim for ever and ever.
plished it; And I will wait on Thy name, because it is so gracious, in the presence of Thy saints.
With Ps. lii., which, side by side with Ps. li., exhibits the contrast between the false and the right use of the tongue, begins a series of Elohimic MasMls (Ps. lii.-lv.) by David. It is one of the eight Psalms which, by the statements of the inscriptions, of which some are capable of being verified, and others at least cannot be replaced by anything that is more credible, are assigned to the time of his persecution by Saul (vii., lix., lvi., xxxiv., lii., lvii., cxlii., liv.). Augustine calls them Psalmos fugitivos. The inscription runs: To the Precentor, a meditation (vid. xxxii. 1), by David, when Doeg the Edomite came and told Saul and said to him: David is gone in to the house of Ahimelech, By 'Nta3, as in li. 2, liv. 2, the writer of the inscription does not define the exact moment of the composition of the Psalm, but only in a general way the period in which it falls. After David had sojourned a short time with Samuel, he betook himself to Nob to Ahimelech the priest; and he gave him without hesitation, as being the son-in-law of the king, the shew-bread that had been removed, and the sword of Goliath that had been hung up in the sanctuary behind the ephod. Doeg the Edomite was witness of this; and when Saul, under the tamarisk in Gibea, held an assembly of his serving men, Doeg, the overseer of the royal mules, betrayed what had taken place between David and Ahimelech to him. Eighty-five priests immediately fell as victims of this betrayal, and only Abiathar (Ebjathar) the son of Ahimelech escaped and reached David, 1 Sam. xxii. 6—10 (where, in ver. 93 ^na is to be read instead of Hay, cf. ch. xxi. 8).
Vers. 3-6. It is bad enough to behave wickedly, but bad in the extreme to boast of it at the same time as an heroic act. Doeg, who causes a massacre, not, however, by the strength of his hand, but by the cunning of his tongue, does this. Hence he is sarcastically called "N23 (cf. Isa. v. 22). David's cause, however, is not therefore lost; for it is the cause of God, whose loving-kindness endures continually, without allowing itself to be affected, like the favour of men, by calumny. Concerning nfon vid. on v. 10. ft Bv is as usual treated as fern.; HJD1 nfety (according to the Masora with Tsere) is consequently addressed to a person. In ver. 5 T\ after ronK has the Dagesh that is usual also in other instances according to the rule of the V1K especially in connection with the letters nM"iia (with which Resh is associated in the Book of Jezira, Michlol 96&, cf. 63£)-* The IP of afc? and W is not meant to affirm tha* he loves good, etc., less than evil, etc., but that he does no* love it at all (cf. cxviii. 8 sq., Hab. ii. 16). The music which comes in after ver. 5 has to continue the accusations con amarezza without words. Then in ver. 6 the singing again takes them up, by addressing the adversary with the words "thou tongue of deceit" (cf. cxx. 3), and by reproaching him with loving only such utterances as swallow up, i.e. destroy without leaving a trace behind (jta, pausal form of jta, like JJVS in cxix. 36, cf. the verb in xxxv. 25, 2 Sam. xvii. 16, xx. 19 sq.), his neighbour's life and honour and goods. Hupfeld takes ver. 66 as a second object; but the figurative and weaker expression would then follow the unfigurative and stronger one, and M to love a deceitful tongue " might be said with reference to this character of tongue as belonging to another person, not with reference to his own.
Vers. 7-9. The announcement of the divine retribution begins with D3 as in Isa. Ixvi. 4, Ezek. xvi. 43, Mai. ii. 9. The?nk is not, as one might suppose, the holy tent or tabernacle, that he has desecrated by making it the lurking-place of the betrayer (1 Sam. xxi. 8), which would have been expressed by k?:!8?i but his own dwelling. God will pull him, the lofty and
* pTDD TIN is the name by which the national grammarians designate a group of two words, of which the first, ending with Kametz or Segol, has the accent on the penult., and of which the second is a monosyllable, or likewise is accented on the penult. The initial consonant of the second word in this case receives a Dagesh, in order that it may not, in consequence of the first ictus of the group of words " coming out of the distance,* i.e. being far removed, be too feebly and indistinctly uttered. This dageshing, however, only takes place when the first word is already of itself M ilel, or at least, as e.g. rp3 riSVD, had a half-accented penult., and not when it is from the very first Milra and is only become Milel by means of the retreating of the accent, as tf!?D Ti&y, lxxviii. 12, cf. Deut. xxiv. 1. The penultima- accent has a greater lengthening force in the former case than in the latter; the following syllables are therefore uttered more rapidly in the first case, and the Dagesh is intended to guard against the third syllable being too hastily combined with the second. Concerning the rule, vid. Baer's Thorath Emeth, p. 29 sq.