Property: Discussion
From Psalms: Layer by Layer
P
*'''v.8a.''' Reference to Yahweh's חֶסֶד in this Davidic prayer (לדוד) recalls the covenant between Yahweh and David (2 Sam. 7:15)
*'''v.9ab.''' Reference to Yahweh's pathway (דרך) as a figure for his righteousness (צדקה) may point to Gen. 18:19, where walking on Yahweh's path (דרך) by doing righteousness (צדקה) is said to be the prerequisite for receiving the Abrahamic blessings. The king in Psalm 5, knowing that the righteous will receive Yahweh's blessing (תברך צדיק, v.13a), asks to be guided down the path of Yahweh's righteousness.
+
*'''v.8a.''' צֹנֶה: "orthographic variant of צאנה (as in some MSS): צֹאן: either with fem. ending ''-eh'' (Bauer-L. ''Heb.'' 546m; cf. R Meter ''Gramm.'' 42.5) or archaic ending ''-ay'' > ''-eh'' (KBL; cf. Bauer-L. ''Heb.'' 587k) Ps. 8:8; perhaps a by-form of צֹנָא sf. צֹנַאֲכֶם Num. 32:24, or rd. with MSS, SamP. צאנכם (KBL; BHS): '''flocks'''.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000F1E-QINU`"'
+
*'''v.8b.''' The definite article on לַמָּרוֹם may signal uniqueness and have a superlative sense ("the highest place").'"`UNIQ--ref-00000E28-QINU`"'
+
*'''v.9.''' The psalmist turns to address his enemies in the final climactic section of the psalm. "The subsequent context shows the language to be that of defiance and triumph. He orders them off with all their menaces and taunts and disheartening speeches. He says, I will listen to you no longer; I will be distressed by you no more; you have tormented me long enough; I am myself again; take yourselves off; ''for the Lord hath heard the voice of my weeping.'''"`UNIQ--ref-00000D75-QINU`"'
+
*'''v.9ab.''' The image of a [[Image::pathway]] (דֶּרֶךְ) maps onto Yahweh's righteousness. This metaphorical mapping is suggested by the parallelism (בצדקתך // דרכך). Yahweh's pathway (=lifestyle) is characterized by righteousness and justice (cf. Gen. 18:19). The psalmist (the king) asks to be guided along this pathway (=that his life and reign would align with Yahweh's characteristic righteousness), because it is the righteous (צדיק) whom Yahweh blesses. The pathway imagery here at the heart of Psalm 5 forges one of several links with Psalm 1.
*'''v.10b.''' The image of "destructive ruin" (הַוּוֹת) maps onto the "insides" (קרב) of the psalmist's enemies.
*'''v.10c.''' The image of an open grave (קבר פתוח), an image that connotes death, ritual uncleanness, and a foul stench, maps onto the "throat" (גרון) of the psalmist's enemies. Their words are thus like the unclean odor exuded by a rotting corpse.
*'''v.12''' Yahweh is a refuge (v.12ac).
+
*'''v.9b.''' ''Qere'': הַיְשַׁר / ''Kethiv'': הוֹשַׁר
*'''v.13b.''' The ancient versions (LXX, Aquila, Symmachus, Vulgate, Targum) along with some medieval Hebrew manuscripts support the vocalization of the final verb of the psalm (תעטרנו) as a ''Piel'' (תְּעַטְּרֶנּוּ).
+
*'''v.9b.''' The verb ישׁר is one of seven original I-''yod'' verbs that occur in the Bible. The expected form for the ''Hiphil'' imperative would be הֵישַׁר. Both the ''qere'' and the ''kethiv'' readings differ from this expected reading. The ''qere'' reading gives an uncontracted form (הַיְשַׁר, cf. Prov. 4:25), while the ''kethiv'' reading gives a form for I-''waw'' verbs (הוֹשַׁר). (See Isa. 45:2 for a similar problem.)'"`UNIQ--ref-00000CDF-QINU`"' The ''kethiv'' form (הוֹשַׁר) makes for a closer phonological correspondence with שׁוֹרְרַי in the previous line, as repetition of the long o-vowel combines with the alliteration of the consonants שׁ and ר.
*'''v.13b.''' "The choice for ''Piel'' may be supported in two additional ways. Within v.13, this form is the ocunterpart to ''tbrk'', another ''Piel'', which contributes to a chiastic word order in the verse. There is also a supporting pattern: in the poem there is a balance of seven ''Piel'' and seven ''Hiphil'' forms. Of each of these root formations there are four forms occurring as pairs, for the purpose of a regular (horizontal ''parallelismus membrorum'' and of a vertical parallelism. In the same way as the ''Piel'' forms of v.13 find their counterparts in v.7, so do the two ''Hiphil'' forms in v.11 have their opposite numbers in vv.2a/3a."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000CE0-QINU`"'
+
*'''v.9b.''' כִּכְלִי יוֹצֵר – before the Davidic king’s awesome power, backed by almighty Yahweh, the rebellious nations are like fragile pottery, ready to be smashed to pieces if they persist in their rebellion.
+
*'''vv. 1-2.''' In v. 1, the a-line verb is qatal while the b-line verb is yiqtol, and in v. 2 the order is reversed: the a-line verb is yiqtol and the b-line verb is qatal. Thus, with respect to verb morphology, these two verses form a chiasm: A (רָגְשׁוּ – qatal), B (יֶהְגּוּ – yiqtol) // B’ (יִתְיַצְּבוּ – yiqtol), A’ (נֽוֹסְדוּ – qatal). The chiastic parallel structures in these first verses develop key “thoughts” in an aesthetically pleasing manner.
*'''v. 1.''' Bicolon. Lines 1ab are parallel syntactically (Q – V – S // S – V – O), morphologically (רָגְשׁוּ [QPf3mp] // יֶהְגּוּ [QImpf3mp]; גוֹיִם [mpl]// לְאֻמִּים [mpl]), and semantically (גוֹיִם ≈ לְאֻמִּים; רָגְשׁוּ ≈ יֶהְגּוּ־רִיק), and together form a chiasm (a b // b’ a). The initial interrogative word לָמָּה is implicit in line B.
{| style="margin: auto; text-align:right;"
|-
| <span style="color:#FF0000"><sup>c</sup>גוֹיִ֑ם</span> || <span style="color:#A52A2A"><sup>b</sup>רָגְשׁ֣וּ</span> || <span style="color:#FFA500"><sup>a</sup>לָ֭מָּה</span>
|-
| <span style="color:#A52A2A"><sup>b'</sup>יֶהְגּוּ־רִֽיק</span> || <span style="color:#FF0000"><sup>c'</sup>וּ֜לְאֻמִּ֗ים</span> || <span style="color:#FFA500"><sup>a'</sup>⟨⟩</span>
|}
*'''v. 2.''' Tricolon (A/A'/B). Lines 2ab are parallel syntactically (V – S // S – V – M), morphologically (יִ֥תְיַצְּבוּ [DtImpf3mp] // נֽוֹסְדוּ [NPf3mp]; מְלָכִים [mpl]// רוֹזְנִים [mpl]), and semantically (יִתְיַצְּבוּ ≈ נֽוֹסְדוּ־יָחַד; מַלְכֵי־אֶרֶץ ≈ רוֹזְנִים), also forming a chiastic construction (ab // b’a’) that highlights the adversarial actions in this verse.
{| style="margin: auto; text-align:right;"
|-
| <span style="color:#FF0000"><sup>b</sup>מַלְכֵי־אֶ֗רֶץ</span> || <span style="color:#A52A2A"><sup>a</sup>יִ֥תְיַצְּב֙וּ׀</span>
|-
| <span style="color:#A52A2A"><sup>a'</sup>נֽוֹסְדוּ־יָ֑חַד</span> || <span style="color:#FF0000"><sup>b'</sup>וְרוֹזְנִ֥ים</span>
|}
:*'''v. 2c''' The two parallel noun phrases at the end of this verse (יהוה, משׁיח) are critical to the Psalm. "The extra cola in v. 2 in the first strophe should be retained and read as a foundation for the theological development in this psalm. In the first strophe, vv. 1-3 each has two cola except v. 2 (cf. vv. 7, 8, 12). The extra cola in v. 2, על יהוה ועל משיחו is not in sync with the rest and hence is suggested to be a gloss, which by implication should be deleted. Yet this extra cola is the key that unlocks the rest of Psalm 2. It sets the stage for the text portraying these two characters, Yahweh and the messiah, interactively with each other and with the kings and the nations."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A10-QINU`"'
{| style="margin: auto; text-align:right;"
|-
| <span style="color:#008000">עַל־יְ֜הוָה וְעַל־מְשִׁיחֽוֹ׃</span>
|}
*'''v. 3.''' Bicolon. Syntax: (V – O // V – M – O); Morphology: (נְנַתְּקָה [DCoh1cp] // נַשְׁלִיכָה [HCoh1cp]; מוֹסְרוֹתֵימוֹ [mpl + מוsfx] // עֲבֹתֵימוֹ [mpl + מוsfx]); Lexical Semantics: (נְנַתְּקָה ≈ נַשְׁלִיכָה; מוֹסְרוֹתֵימוֹ ≈ עֲבֹתֵימוֹ). These lines are parallel though not chiastic.
{| style="margin: auto; text-align:right;"
|-
| <span style="color:#DAA520"><sup>b</sup>אֶת־מֽוֹסְרוֹתֵ֑ימוֹ</span> || <span style="color:#A52A2A"><sup>a</sup>נְֽ֭נַתְּקָה</span>
|-
| <span style="color:#DAA520"><sup>b'</sup>עֲבֹתֵֽימוֹ</span> || <span style="color:#A52A2A"><sup>a'</sup>וְנַשְׁלִ֖יכָה מִמֶּ֣נּוּ</span>
|}
*'''v.4.''' Bicolon. Like verse 3, verse 4 consists of two parallel lines which are not chiastic. The parallelism is semantic (paradigmatic), lexical, syntactic, and morphological.
{| style="margin: auto; text-align:right;"
|-
| <span style="color:#0000FF"><sup>b</sup>יִשְׂחָ֑ק</span> || <span style="color:#800080"><sup>a</sup>יוֹשֵׁ֣ב בַּשָּׁמַ֣יִם</span>
|-
| <span style="color:#0000FF"><sup>b'</sup>יִלְעַג־לָֽמוֹ׃</span> || <span style="color:#800080"><sup>a'</sup>אֲ֜דֹנָ֗י</span>
|}
*'''v. 5.''' Bicolon. Verse 5 features another chiastic construction that syntactically puts the protagonists in angry, antithetical opposition: V-PP / PP- V.
{| style="margin: auto; text-align:right;"
|-
| <span style="color:#FF4500"><sup>b</sup>בְאַפּ֑וֹ</span> || <span style="color:#0000FF"><sup>a</sup>יְדַבֵּ֣ר אֵלֵ֣ימוֹ</span> || אָ֤ז
|-
| <span style="color:#0000FF"><sup>a'</sup>יְבַהֲלֵֽמוֹ׃</span> || <span style="color:#FF4500"><sup>b'</sup>וּֽבַחֲרוֹנ֥וֹ</span> ||
|}
*'''v. 6.''' Bicolon. The two poetic lines of v. 6 are syntactically dependent; together they form a single (7 word) clause. The prepositional phrase in the second half corresponds to the prepositional phrase in v. 2c: both begin with על (the only two occurrences of this preposition in the psalm) and both consist of four words.
{| style="margin: auto; text-align:right;"
|-
| <span style="color:#4682B4">מַלְכִּ֑י</span> || <span style="color:#0000FF">נָסַ֣כְתִּי</span> || <span style="color:#800080">וַ֭אֲנִי</span>
|-
| <span style="color:#008000">עַל־צִ֜יּ֗וֹן הַר־קָדְשִֽׁי׃</span> || ||
|}
*'''v. 7.''' Tetracolon/two bicola. Verse 7 has two parallel statements: "You are my Son // I am your Father." The correspondences among the various constituents form a chiasm (see the colored text below). One may perhaps identify another set of parallelisms in 7ab (אֲסַפְּרָ֗ה אֶֽ֫ל חֹ֥ק יְֽהוָ֗ה // אָמַ֨ר אֵלַ֥י). Each of these lines has two constituents, both of which find parallels in the corresponding line: verbs indicating speech (אֲסַפְּרָ֗ה // אָמַ֨ר) and indirect objects marked by the same preposition (אֶֽ֫ל חֹ֥ק יְֽהוָ֗ה // אֵלַ֥י).
{| style="margin: auto; text-align:right;"
|-
| <span style="color:#32CD32"><sup>b</sup>אֶֽ֫ל חֹ֥ק יְֽהוָ֗ה</span> || <span style="color:#7B68EE"><sup>a</sup>אֲסַפְּרָ֗ה</span>
|-
| <span style="color:#32CD32"><sup>b'</sup>אֵלַ֥י</span> || <span style="color:#7B68EE"><sup>a'</sup>אָמַ֨ר</span>
|-
| <span style="color:#808000"><sup>d'</sup>אַ֑תָּה</span> || <span style="color:#4682B4"><sup>c</sup>בְּנִ֥י</span>
|-
| <span style="color:#4682B4"><sup>c'</sup>יְלִדְתִּֽיךָ׃</span> || הַיּ֥וֹם <span style="color:#808000"><sup>d'</sup>אֲ֜נִ֗י</span>
|}
*'''v. 8.''' Tricolon (A/B/B'). The use of a tricolon at the center of Yahweh's 7-line decree may function to mark a climax.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A11-QINU`"'
:*Lines 8bc, related to 8a syntagmatically (action/result) are parallel syntactically (V O OC // OC O [gapped V]), morphologically (נַחֲלָתֶךָ [fs noun / 2ms suffix] // אֲחֻזָּתְךָ [fs noun / 2ms suffix]), and semantically (נַחֲלָה ≈ אֲחֻזָּה) and form a chiasm (a b // b’ a’). There is gapping of the verb in 8c. Colon 8c is semantically heightened and a chiastic reversal of nominal expressions from 8b underscores the LORD’s promise.
{| style="margin: auto; text-align:right;"
|-
| || || || שְׁאַ֤ל מִמֶּ֗נִּי
|-
| <span style="color:#B22222"><sup>c</sup>נַחֲלָתֶ֑ךָ</span> || <span style="color:#FF0000"><sup>b</sup>ג֭וֹיִם</span> || <span style="color:#0000FF"><sup>a</sup>וְאֶתְּנָ֣ה</span> ||
|-
| <span style="color:#FF0000"><sup>b'</sup>אַפְסֵי־אָֽרֶץ׃</span> || <span style="color:#B22222"><sup>c'</sup>וַ֜אֲחֻזָּתְךָ֗</span> || <span style="color:#0000FF"><sup>a'</sup>⟨⟩</span> ||
|}
*'''v. 9.''' Bicolon. Lines 9ab are parallel syntactically (V+o M // M V+o), morphologically (תְּרֹעֵם/תִּרְעֵם [D/QImpf2ms / 3mp suf] // תְּנַפְּצֵם [DImpf2ms / 3mp suf]), and semantically (תְּרֹעֵם ≈ תְּנַפְּצֵם). The couplet forms a chiasm (a b // b’ a’).
{| style="margin: auto; text-align:right;"
|-
| <span style="color:#DAA520"><sup>b</sup>בְּשֵׁ֣בֶט בַּרְזֶ֑ל</span> || <span style="color:#4682B4"><sup>a</sup>תְּ֭רֹעֵם</span>
|-
| <span style="color:#4682B4"><sup>a'</sup>תְּנַפְּצֵֽם׃</span> || <span style="color:#DAA520"><sup>b'</sup>כִּכְלִ֖י יוֹצֵ֣ר</span>
|}
*'''v. 10.''' Bicolon. Lines 10ab are parallel syntactically (S[voc] V // V S[voc]), morphologically (מְלָכִים [voc.n.mp] // שֹׁפְטִים [voc.n.mp]; הַשְׂכִּילוּ [H.Impv.2.m.pl.] // הִוָּסְרוּ [N.Impv.2.m.pl.]), and semantically (מְלָכִים ≈ שֹׁפְטֵי אָרֶץ; הַשְׂכִּילוּ ≈ הִוָּסְרוּ) and together form a chiasm (Voc. + Impv. // Impv. + Voc), thus observing the poet’s preference for chiastic arrangements.
{| style="margin: auto; text-align:right;"
|-
| <span style="color:#A52A2A"><sup>b</sup>הַשְׂכִּ֑ילוּ</span> || <span style="color:#FF0000"><sup>a</sup>מְלָכִ֣ים</span> || וְ֭עַתָּה
|-
| <span style="color:#FF0000"><sup>a'</sup>שֹׁ֣פְטֵי אָֽרֶץ׃</span> || <span style="color:#A52A2A"><sup>b'</sup>הִ֜וָּסְר֗וּ</span> ||
|}
*'''v. 11.''' Bicolon. Lines 11ab are parallel syntactically (V O M // V M), morphologically (עִבְדוּ [Q.Impv.m.pl] // גִילוּ [Q.Impv.m.pl]; בְּיִרְאָה [prep. בְּ + n.f.s.] // בִּרְעָדָה [prep. בְּ + n.f.s.]), and semantically (בְּיִרְאָה ≈ בִּרְעָדָה).
{| style="margin: auto;"
|-
| <span style="color:#FF4500"><sup>b</sup>בְּיִרְאָ֑ה</span> || אֶת־יְהוָ֣ה || <span style="color:#A52A2A"><sup>a</sup>עִבְד֣וּ</span>
|-
| <span style="color:#FF4500"><sup>b'</sup>בִּרְעָדָֽה׃</span> || || <span style="color:#A52A2A"><sup>a'</sup>וְ֜גִ֗ילוּ</span>
|}
*'''v. 12abc'''' Tricolon? The lineation of this verse is difficult since there is no clear parallelism. The text below has thus been delineated syntactically.
{| style="margin: auto; text-align:right;"
|-
| נַשְּׁקוּ־בַ֡ר
|-
| פֶּן־יֶאֱנַ֤ף׀ וְתֹ֬אבְדוּ דֶ֗רֶךְ
|-
| כִּֽי־יִבְעַ֣ר כִּמְעַ֣ט אַפּ֑וֹ
|}
*'''v. 12e''' Monocolon. According to Watson, a monocolon may function structurally to "close a stanza or poem."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A12-QINU`"'
{| style="margin: auto;"
|-
| אַ֜שְׁרֵ֗י כָּל־ח֥וֹסֵי בֽוֹ׃
|}
*'''vv. 2b-3a.''' Are the participles in 2b (קָמִים) and 3a (אֹמְרִים) grammatical subjects or predicates? Either option is possible.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A96-QINU`"' If subjects, then the adjective רַבִּים is the predicate in both clauses and both clauses are nominal, sentences of the type S-V-SC. If, however, the participles are grammatical predicates, then the adjective רַבִּים is the subject in both clauses. This is apparently the interpretation of the LXX, which translates רַבִּים in the nominative case (πολλοί) and the participles as present-tense verbs (ἐπανίστανται / λέγουσιν).
*'''v. 5.''' The prefixed verbal form in line [5]a could be an imperfect, yielding the translation “I cry out,” but the verb form in the next line (a ''vav'' consecutive with the preterite, “and he answered me”) suggests this is a brief narrative of what has already happened. Consequently the verb form in v. [5]a might be understood as a preterite, “I cried out” (see Ps 30:8).'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A97-QINU`"' This appears to be the interpretation of the LXX, which translates both verbs as past-perfectives (ἐκέκραξα καὶ ἐπήκουσέν).
:However, the strict identification of ''wayyiqtol'' with preterite (past-perfective) semantics is unlikely given the many counter examples.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A98-QINU`"' According to ''BHRG'', "in poetry, a ''wayyiqtol'' sometimes refers to an actual present."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A99-QINU`"' Similarly, Waltke and O'Connor cite examples (including Ps. 3:5) where "after regular ''yiqtol'' referring to a present-time situation, ''wayyiqtol'' represents a (con)sequential or explanatory situation in the same time frame."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A9A-QINU`"' ''GKC'' allows for an even broader interpretation, noting that "the ''imperfect consecutive'' may represent all varieties in the relations of tense and mood, which... follow from the idea of the imperfect."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A9B-QINU`"' This would include "''future'' actions" (cf. Ps. 49:15; 94:22f).'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A9C-QINU`"' Indeed, ''wayyiqtol'' seems "capable of expressing nearly any combination of tense, mood and aspect."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A9D-QINU`"' Interpreting the verbs in Psalm 3:5 as expressing future tense ("to Yahweh I will call, and he will answer") may thus be one way to make sense of this verse. David's confident declaration that Yahweh will answer his call harmonizes well with the notes of assurance that sound throughout vv. 4-7.
*'''v.6a.''' The three verbal forms that appear in succession here (perfect + ''vav'' consecutive with preterite + perfect) are most naturally taken as narrational (compare NIV).'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A9E-QINU`"'
*'''v.6b.''' Because the LORD was protecting him, he awoke safely from his sleep. “Protects”—or “supports”; “sustains”; in this explanatory causal clause the imperfect verbal form probably has a habitual or present progressive nuance, for the psalmist is confident of God’s continual protection.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A9F-QINU`"'
*'''v. 8cd.''' The ''qatal'' verbs in this verse may refer to gnomic events.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000AA0-QINU`"' The Psalmist grounds (כִּי) his petition (8ab) in Yahweh's characteristic behavior. Alternatively, "''IBHS'' 30.5.4cd argues that after the imperatives the ''qatal'' verbs in v. 7 are precative (cf. DG 60c; NIVI).'"`UNIQ--ref-00000AA1-QINU`"' But the contextual argument can work either way: a restatement of the basis for the prayer is quite appropriate and means the כִּי can have its regular meaning “because” rather than having to be purely emphatic (''IBHS'' 39.3.4e). The כִּי also makes it hard to take the line as an anticipatory testimony to Yhwh’s having answered the plea."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000AA2-QINU`"'
*'''vv.1-2.''' The interrogative לָמָּה is implied in v.1b and possibly also in v.2ab.
*'''v.8bc.''' Verb gapping: אֶתְּנָה elided in b-line.
+
*'''vv.2-10.''' Yahweh is a king. His majesty fills heaven and earth (vv.2-3a). Like earthly kings, he has vengeful enemies (v.3bc), and he has built a fortress in order to stop their attacks (v.3bc). He has delegated his royal authority to human beings (vv.6-7).
*'''v.4a.''' Yahweh has fingers.
*'''v.7a.''' Yahweh has hands.
+
*'''vv.2-3.''' "Strophe 1 (vv.2-3) is characterized and syntactically governed by five I-forms of the cohortative imperfect."'"`UNIQ--ref-0000103D-QINU`"'
*'''vv.4-5.''' "Jakobson has shown that 'an alternation of grammatical categories of person' can function as a 'means of intense dramatization' (Jakobson, "Poetry of Grammar"). In vv.4-5, such a dramatization occurs in the contrast between the third person plural in describing the activities of the wicked enemies (יִכָּשְׁל֥וּ וְ֝יֹאבְד֗וּ) and the second person in describing the activities of Yahweh (עָ֭שִׂיתָ / יָשַׁ֥בְתָּ)."'"`UNIQ--ref-0000103E-QINU`"'
*'''vv.12-13.''' "Strophe 6 (vv.12-13) is marked off by two plural imperatives – the only passage in which a group of the poet's associates is addressed."'"`UNIQ--ref-0000103F-QINU`"'
+
*'''vv.2a,10a.'''
:אַדִּיר occurs 28 times (including Ezek. 17:8), indicating (1) what is mighty/powerful, hence magnificent/majestic/splendid/stately (mighty waters [Ex. 15:10; Ps. 93:4]; splendid vine [Ezek. 17:8]; stately tree [Ezek. 17:23; 2 Chron. 11:2]; mighty ship [Isa. 33:21]; mighty nations [Ezek. 32:18]; mighty kings [Ps. 136:18]; mighty gods [1 Sam. 4:8]; glorious military leader [Ps. 76:5]); (2) leaders/kings who are of dignity, high rank, and great military prowess, someone superior by virtue of rank, social class, rule, or strength (Jdg. 5:13, 25; Isa. 10:34 & 33:21 [of Yahweh]; Jer. 14:3; 25:34-36; 30:21; Nah. 2:6; 3:18; Ps. 16:3; Neh. 3:5; 10:30; 2 Chron. 23:20). Since Yahweh is addressed as Lord/Ruler, אַדִּיר in the context refers to his kingly majesty with the idea of "might" close to the fore. Enemies and strength are in the context.
:שֵׁם – The name of God stands for God himself–his character and person–and for his reputation–his revelation of himself. In all the earth, he is, and is known as mighty–having kingly majesty.
*'''v.3.'''
:עֽוֹלְלִ֙ים׀ וְֽיֹנְקִים֘ – This pair of participles may form a ''hendiadys'': "nursing children" (cf. v.3c: "avenging enemy"). Note that, since "the Hebrew women were accustomed to suckle their children for a long period (cf. 2 Macc. 7:27), יונק may refer to "a little child which is able to lisp and speak."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000F04-QINU`"' Alternatively, עֽוֹלְלִ֙ים׀ וְֽיֹנְקִים֘ may be a [[#Merism|merism]] (cf. 1 Sam. 15:3; 22:19; Jer. 44:7).
:יסד – "to '''found'''" (fix firmly, immovable, solid). יסד may also mean "appoint" and "ordain" with reference to installing into office or royal decrees (cf. 1 Chron. 9:22; Est. 1:8), but this meaning is uncommon, only found in the post-exilic books–Ps. 8 is Davidic–and does not seem to work within the context of Ps. 8:3 (עֹז).
:עֹז – "'''stronghold'''." "Koehler-Baumgartner (first edition) proposes a II עֹז 'protection, refuge, shelter,' w. forms identical w. I עֹז ‘strength’, but derived fm. עוז ‘take shelter’ rather than fm. עזז ‘be strong’; this proposal has not won acceptance, and recently others have suggested for the cited passages the meaning 'fortress.'"'"`UNIQ--ref-00000F05-QINU`"' Places where עֹז possibly/probably means "stronghold," i.e., a place of defensive/offensive power, include Jer. 16:19; Ps. 28:7-8; 46:2; 59:10, 18 (cf. Prov. 14:26; 24:5). This meaning fits the context of the usage in Ps. 8:3, where עֹז is the object of יסד ('to found' [of buildings, cities, etc.]) and where enemies are mentioned.
:צוֹרְרֶיךָ – While "foes" appear often in the Psalter, this is the first (and surprising) mention of ''God's'' foes. The reference is usually explained in terms of "the foes that God overcomes in the process of creation" (cf. Ps. 74).'"`UNIQ--ref-00000F06-QINU`"' Yet this concept of a creation conflict has been discredited in recent years. It is better to see the reference to God's enemies in light of the context of the Psalter as a book. God's enemies are those who rebel against his rule and the rule of his anointed king (cf. Ps. 2).
*'''v.5b.'''
:תִּפְקְדֶנּוּ – "'There is probably no other Hebrew verb that has caused translators as much trouble as ''pqd''''"`UNIQ--ref-00000F07-QINU`"' – despite the fact that this word is attested in most, if not all, of the ancient Semitic languages and the seeming legion of studies devoted to it... With God as Agent, פקד expresses an ''intense personal attention, including careful inspection, which triggers appropriate action, whether positive (i.e., assistance) or negative (i.e., punishment).''"'"`UNIQ--ref-00000F08-QINU`"' ''HALOT'': "1. to '''make a careful inspection'''... e. to be troubled about, be concerned for (Isa. 23:17; Jer. 23:2; Zech. 11:16; Ps. 8:5)."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000F09-QINU`"'
*'''vv.2c-3.''' The (mouth=)[[#Metonymy|words]] of [[#Merism|children]] (v.3a) are the foundations of a (עז=)[[#Difficult Words|stronghold]] (v.3b). Just as יסד refers to the first stage of the building process (Josh 6:26 & 1 Kgs. 16:34 //hanging doors = final stage of building; 1 Kgs. 5:31; Zech. 4:9 //בִּצַּע = "finish"; Ezra 4:10-11), so childhood is the first stage of human development. If childhood represents the foundation of the fortress, then full-grown man/humanity (אדם/אנושׁ) represents the completed fortress. Yahweh will have stopped his enemies (v.3c) when humanity achieves complete dominion over the earth.
+
*'''vv.3-4.''' In the center of the Psalm are two botanical similes (marked with the preposition כּ): the righteous person is compared to a [[Image::tree]] (v. 3) planted by [[Image::water]], producing [[Image::fruit]] and [[Image::leaf|leaves]], and the wicked person is compared to [[Image::chaff]] that is blown by the [[Image::wind]] (v. 4).
**'''vv.2-3a.''' The connection between verses 2 and 3 seems to be that God’s Torah is like the ground around the river that the tree is planted in – the righteous are planted in it through their continuous remembrance and study of it.
**'''v.3b.''' “Fruit” could refer to prosperity in life or acts of obedience to God (cf Isa 5). Does “in its time” in verse 3 imply non-continuous prosperity/obedience? The next two statements, “foliage won’t wither” and “everything he does prospers” imply continuity and comprehensive success. So is there a contrast between the first and the second/third statements, or is “in its time” merely an artifact of the natural facts of the metaphor?
**'''v.3c.''' Can “foliage” refer to obedience? It can refer to general success (Prov 11:28). Note contrastive link between “not withering” (v. 3) and “[dry] chaff” (v. 4).
**'''v.3d.''' The last clause of v. 3 (וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר־יַעֲשֶׂה יַצְלִיחַ) is best understood as a continuation of the tree imagery. The subject of יַעֲשֶׂה could be הָאִישׁ (v. 1) but is more likely עֵץ (v. 3). The verb עָשָׂה may be used to describe a tree’s production of fruit (cf. Gen 1:11-12; Ezek. 17:23) or branches (cf. Ezek. 17:8). The verb צלח may similarly be used to refer to a tree’s flourishing (cf. Ezek. 17:9-10).
**'''v.4.''' The “steadiness” of the tree “שָׁת֪וּל” is contrasted with the helpless motion of the chaff. Elsewhere in Psalms, being moved (with the verb "מוֹט") occurs as a metaphor for danger and trouble (e.g. Ps 15:5; 125:1). Tree vs. chaff is a comparison not only of permanence vs. impermanence, but (agricultural) usefulness vs. uselessness.
*'''vv.3-6.''' The heart of the psalm consists of an extended apostrophe, a direct address to בְּנֵי אִישׁ.
+
*'''vv.3a, 6a.''' The נֶפֶשׁ stands for the whole person.
*'''v.4b.''' אִֽם־יֶשׁ־עָ֥וֶל בְּכַפָּֽי׃ – "Hands" represent the whole person – "a kind of ''Metonymy'' or ''Synecdoche'', by which a part of a person is put for the whole."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000E8C-QINU`"'
*'''v.17.''' The head (ראשׁ // קדקד) stands for the whole person.
+
*'''vv.3b-4a.''' AB//B'A chiasm joining two verses. Function: gives cohesion to section 1
:'''a''' נִבְהֲל֣וּ '''b''' עֲצָמָֽי / '''b'''' וְ֭נַפְשִׁי '''a'''' נִבְהֲלָ֣ה
*'''vv.4ab-5a.''' AB//B'A' chiasm joining two sections (''anadiplosis''). Function: gives cohesion to sections 1-2 (first half of psalm)
:'''a''' ...וְ֭נַפְשִׁי '''b''' ...ואת יְ֝הוָ֗ה / '''b'''' שׁוּבָ֣ה יְ֭הוָה '''a'''' חַלְּצָ֣ה נַפְשִׁ֑י
*'''v.7bc.''' AB//B'A' chiasm based primarily on [[#Similar sounds in adjacent lines|phonology]]. Function: marks prominence
:'''a''' אַשְׂחֶ֣ה '''b''' מִטָּתִ֑י // '''b'''' בְּ֝דִמְעָתִ֗י '''a'''' אַמְסֶֽה
*'''v.10ab.''' ABC//BC'A' partial chiasm, based on grammar, semantics, and phonology.
:'''a''' שָׁמַ֣ע '''b''' יְ֭הוָה '''c''' תְּחִנָּתִ֑י // '''b'''' יְ֝הוָ֗ה '''c'''' תְּֽפִלָּתִ֥י '''a'''' יִקָּֽח׃
:"A chiastic arrangement of syntactic constituents reinforces the psalmist’s confident claims: Verb + Voc/Nobj (10a) // Voc/Nobj + Verb (10b), as does the similar sounding key nominal expressions that reference his appeal: תְּחִנָּתִ֑י and תְּֽפִלָּתִ֥י."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D54-QINU`"'
+
*''Sheol'' (v.6, שְׁאוֹל) – "According to common OT belief (though there are exceptions, e.g., 23:6), those who descend into the realm of death/Sheol are cut off from God’s mighty deeds and from the worshiping covenant community that experiences divine intervention (Pss. 30:9; 88:10-12; Isa. 38:18). In his effort to motivate a positive divine response, the psalmist reminds God that he will receive no praise or glory if he allows the psalmist to die. ''Dead men do not praise God!'''"`UNIQ--ref-00000D88-QINU`"'
:Sheol is a proper name for "the underworld."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D89-QINU`"' It is depicted as a place of great depth (e.g., Deut. 32:22), guarded by gates (e.g., Isa. 38:10), associated with darkness (e.g., Job 17:13), dust (e.g., Job 17:16), and silence (e.g., Ps. 31:18).'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D8A-QINU`"' Contrary to the view that Sheol is a name for the underworld, R.L. Harris has argued that Sheol is a poetic synonym for קֶבֶר, referring merely to the grave. "Its usage does not give us a picture of the state of the dead in gloom, darkness, chaos, or silence, unremembered, unable to praise God, knowing nothing... Rather, this view gives us a picture of a typical Palestinian tomb, dark, dusty, with mingled bones and where 'this poor lisping stammering tongue lies silent in the grave.'"'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D8B-QINU`"'
*''Enemies'' (vv.8-11) – "The reference to 'enemies' may reflect the popular, but erroneous opinion that sick people were great sinners and hence being punished by God (e.g., Job 4:7-11, 8:1-22, 11:13-20). On the other hand, Terrien suggests that 'the poet is the victim of sorcerers...professional magicians' (''The Psalms'', 114), but this is rather too specific and unsupportable by the textual evidence."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D8C-QINU`"' Since the psalmist is also the king (v.1, לדוד), the enemies may have been political adversaries, whether inside or outside of David's kingdom, seeking to take advantage of the king's illness.
+