Property: Discussion
From Psalms: Layer by Layer
P
*'''2 Samuel 7.''' אֲנִי֙ אֶהְיֶה־לּ֣וֹ לְאָ֔ב וְה֖וּא יִהְיֶה־לִּ֣י לְבֵ֑ן
+
*'''Genesis 1-3''': The imagery that opens the first book of Psalms is drawn from the beginning of the first book of Torah (i.e., Genesis).
**In Genesis 1, the creation of trees on Day 3 parallels, in terms of the literary structure, the creation of humans (who are told to “be fruitful” [פְּרוּ]) on Day 6. So also, in Psalm 1, a human (הָאִישׁ) is compared to a tree.
**In Genesis 2, Yahweh plants a garden (2:8) full of beautiful trees (2:9) and a river of water to nourish it (2:10). Similarly, Psalm 1 depicts a well-nourished tree planted (in a garden?) by water channels.
**In Genesis 3, once humans are exiled from the garden, Yahweh sets “the Cherubim and the flaming sword turning in every direction to guard the “pathway” (דֶּרֶךְ) to the “tree of life” (עֵץ הַחַיִּים) (3:24). Psalm 1 also describes a "pathway" (v. 1, 6) that leads to a "tree" (of life?) (v. 3). Perhaps the pathway imagery and the tree imagery of Psalm 1 are conceptually linked via this verse (Gen. 3:24). Thus, according to the Psalm, meditation on Torah is the pathway that brings humanity back to Eden.
*'''Deuteronomy 17:18-20''': וְהָיָ֣ה כְשִׁבְתּ֔וֹ עַ֖ל כִּסֵּ֣א מַמְלַכְתּ֑וֹ וְכָ֙תַב ל֜וֹ אֶת־מִשְׁנֵ֙ה הַתּוֹרָ֤ה הַזֹּאת֙ עַל־סֵ֔פֶר מִלִּפְנֵ֥י הַכֹּהֲנִ֖ים הַלְוִיִּֽם׃ וְהָיְתָ֣ה עִמּ֔וֹ וְקָ֥רָא ב֖וֹ כָּל־יְמֵ֣י חַיָּ֑יו לְמַ֣עַן יִלְמַ֗ד לְיִרְאָה֙ אֶת־יְהוָ֣ה אֱלֹהָ֔יו לִ֠שְׁמֹר אֶֽת־כָּל־דִּבְרֵ֞י הַתּוֹרָ֥ה הַזֹּ֛את וְאֶת־הַחֻקִּ֥ים הָאֵ֖לֶּה לַעֲשֹׂתָֽם׃ לְבִלְתִּ֤י רוּם־לְבָבוֹ֙ מֵֽאֶחָ֔יו וּלְבִלְתִּ֛י ס֥וּר מִן־הַמִּצְוָ֖ה יָמִ֣ין וּשְׂמֹ֑אול לְמַעַן֩ יַאֲרִ֙יךְ יָמִ֧ים עַל־מַמְלַכְתּ֛וֹ ה֥וּא וּבָנָ֖יו בְּקֶ֥רֶב יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃
**points of connection: הָאִישׁ = king?, תּוֹרָה (v.2ab), וְקָ֥רָא ב֖וֹ כָּל־יְמֵ֣י חַיָּ֑יו (יהגה יומם ולילה), (pathway imagery?) ס֥וּר מִן־הַמִּצְוָ֖ה יָמִ֣ין וּשְׂמֹ֑אול
*'''Joshua 1:8''': לֹֽא־יָמ֡וּשׁ סֵפֶר֩ הַתּוֹרָ֙ה הַזֶּ֜ה מִפִּ֗יךָ וְהָגִ֤יתָ בּוֹ֙ יוֹמָ֣ם וָלַ֔יְלָה לְמַ֙עַן֙ תִּשְׁמֹ֣ר לַעֲשׂ֔וֹת כְּכָל־הַכָּת֖וּב בּ֑וֹ כִּי־אָ֛ז תַּצְלִ֥יחַ אֶת־דְּרָכֶ֖ךָ וְאָ֥ז תַּשְׂכִּֽיל׃
**points of connection w/Ps. 1: תּוֹרָה, הָגָה, יוֹמָם וָלַיְלָה, צלח, דֶּרֶךְ
*'''Jeremiah 17:7-8''': בָּר֣וּךְ הַגֶּ֔בֶר אֲשֶׁ֥ר יִבְטַ֖ח בַּֽיהוָ֑ה וְהָיָ֥ה יְהוָ֖ה מִבְטַחֽוֹ׃ 8 וְהָיָ֞ה כְּעֵ֣ץ׀ שָׁת֣וּל עַל־מַ֗יִם וְעַל־יוּבַל֙ יְשַׁלַּ֣ח שָֽׁרָשָׁ֔יו וְלֹ֤א (יִרָא) [יִרְאֶה֙] כִּֽי־יָבֹ֣א חֹ֔ם וְהָיָ֥ה עָלֵ֖הוּ רַֽעֲנָ֑ן וּבִשְׁנַ֤ת בַּצֹּ֙רֶת֙ לֹ֣א יִדְאָ֔ג וְלֹ֥א יָמִ֖ישׁ מֵעֲשׂ֥וֹת פֶּֽרִי׃
**points of connection: בָּרוּךְ (Ps.1:1a, אשׁרי האישׁ), tree imagery, w/explicit verbal correspondence (...וְהָיָ֞ה כְּעֵ֣ץ׀ שָׁת֣וּל עַל־מַ֗יִם)
*'''Ps 1,4''''"`UNIQ--ref-0000091B-QINU`"' הָרְשָׁעִים {C} MT, Gal, Hebr, S, T // ampl-styl: G clav + לֹא כֵן
*In v.4b, the LXX adds ἀπὸ προσώπου τῆς γῆς (מפני [ה]ארץ)
+
*'''Ps. 6:4-5.''' In John 12:27, Jesus takes the lament of Psalm 6 on his own lips to express his anguish before the passion. Interestingly, while he prays the lament part of the psalm (v.4), he refuses to pray the petitionary part (v.5). Unlike his ancestor David, Jesus does not ask to be delivered from death. Instead, he embraces his Father's will that he should die.
:Ps. 6:4-5 (Heb): וְ֭נַפְשִׁי נִבְהֲלָ֣ה מְאֹ֑ד... ה֝וֹשִׁיעֵ֗נִי
:Ps. 6:4-5 (OG):καὶ ἡ ψυχή μου ἐταράχθη σφόδρα... σῶσόν με
:Jn. 12:27: Νῦν '''ἡ ψυχή μου τετάρακται''', καὶ τί εἴπω; πάτερ, '''σῶσόν με''' ἐκ τῆς ὥρας ταύτης; ἀλλὰ διὰ τοῦτο ἦλθον εἰς τὴν ὥραν ταύτην
*'''Ps. 6:9.''' These words will be spoken by the risen Christ against his enemies (i.e., all who do not do God's will) on the day of judgment.
:Ps. 6:9 (Heb): ס֣וּרוּ מִ֭מֶּנִּי כָּל־פֹּ֣עֲלֵי אָ֑וֶן
:Ps. 6:9 (OG): ἀπόστητε ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ πάντες οἱ ἐργαζόμενοι τὴν ἀνομίαν
:Matt. 7:23: ἀποχωρεῖτε ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ οἱ ἐργαζόμενοι τὴν ἀνομίαν.
:Luke 13:27: ἀπόστητε ἀπ᾽ ἐμοῦ πάντες ἐργάται ἀδικίας.
+
*'''v. 1.''' The locative proposition is fronted before both עָמָד and יָשָׁב but not הָלַך. The syntax and semantics of “locative inversion” needs to be checked (see Borer'"`UNIQ--ref-00000908-QINU`"' for references and discussion as well as Rappaport Hovav and Levin'"`UNIQ--ref-00000909-QINU`"').
*'''v. 2.''' The phrase בְּתוֹרַת יְהוָה could be fronted for contrastive focus, but the normal syntax is probably in initial position (but this needs to be checked against the data, particularly for definite subjects with predicate PPs). The phrase וּבְתוֹרָתוֹ is certainly fronted for that reason.
*'''v. 2a.''' "Lines 2a and 4a are nonverbal. The predicate of 2a is a prepositional phrase; the predicate of 4a is an adverb; each of these lines begins a new section of the poem: what the happy man does (2a-3e) and the fate of the wicked (4a-5b)."'"`UNIQ--ref-0000090A-QINU`"'
*'''v. 3b.''' The normal order after the אֲשֶׁר clause would be VSO, so פִּרְיוֹ is fronted, but it is unclear to me why. Perhaps it is for prosodic reasons?
*'''v. 3d.''' The Hiphil verbal form (יַצְלִיחַ) may be intransitive-exhibitive (“prospers”) or causative (“causes to prosper”). If the verb is intransitive, then כֹל ("all, everything”) is the subject. If the verb is causative, then the godly individual or the Lord himself is the subject and כֹל is the object.
*'''v. 4a.''' See note on v. 2a.
*'''v. 5b.''' The negative particle and verb from the preceding line (5a) are assumed by ellipsis here (the wicked “will not arise/stand”).
*'''v. 6.''' Normal word order for participles is SVO on pretty much everyone’s account. The order could be flipped because of כִּי (though this is a debatable point'"`UNIQ--ref-0000090B-QINU`"'). If VSO is not the normal order here, the verb could be fronted for contrastive focus with תֹאבֵד.
[[File:Psalm 1 Info-Structure (Floor).jpg|825px|class=img-fluid|Information Structure]]
+
*'''v. 1.''' לָמָּה
:Psalm 2 begins emphatically with a double rhetorical question (the initial interrogative word לָמָּה is implicit in line B). Some interpreters construe the rhetorical “Why?” (לָמָּה) of v. 1 as applying also to v. 2, e.g., “[Why] do earth’s kings take their stand...”'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A50-QINU`"' The psalmist expresses his outrage in defense of his God (YHWH) and chosen King—that the nations would have the audacity to rebel against them. DeClaissé et. al consider the first line to be “an exclamation of surprise” that indicates “puzzlement.”'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A51-QINU`"' But that does not seem to be the correct connotation in this context; rather, these dramatic queries indicate a sharp warning and rebuke: How could these nations do such a foolish thing—they cannot win against the Almighty; they will most certainly fail—completely (יהגו ריק)!
+
*'''v. 12d.''' “Taking shelter” in the Lord is an idiom for seeking and enjoying his protection. This also demonstrates the subject’s loyalty to the Lord God. In the psalms those who “take shelter” in God are contrasted with the wicked and equated with those who love, fear, and serve him (Pss 5:11-12, 31:17-20, 34:21-22.)
+
*'''v. 1a.''' - '''God''' blesses that man
*'''v. 1d.''' - they mock '''God''' (+at God+ (CEV), no use +for God+ (TEV))
*'''v. 2.''' - in ''''obeying'''' [the Torah] (TEV)
*'''v. 4.''' - chaff is ''''worthless''''
+
*'''v. 1b.''' יֶהְגּוּ is metonymic for “devising, planning, plotting” (see Ps. 38:12; Pr. 24:2).
*'''v. 4a.''' יוֹשֵׁב is used metonymically in this royal setting with reference to “sitting enthroned” (see Pss. 9:7; 29:10; 55:19; 102:12; 123:1).
*'''v. 12a.''' The verb נשׂק (“kiss”) refers metonymically to showing homage (see 1 Sam. 10:1; Hos. 13:2).
*'''v. 12bc.''' Anger is here used metonymically for judgment.
+
*'''v. 2.''' The LXX reads διάψαλμα (סלה) at the end of v. 2.
*'''v. 9a.''' The LXX reads “you will shepherd them” (ποιμανεῖς). This reading, quoted in the Greek text of the NT in Rev. 2:27, 12:5, and 19:15, assumes a different vocalization of the consonantal Hebrew text (תִּרְעֵם) and understands the verb as רָעָה (“to shepherd”) rather than רָעַע (“to break”). But the presence of נָפַץ (“to smash”) in the next line strongly favors the MT vocalization. Goldingay proposes a deliberate rhetorical ambiguity here, namely, that this line “lays alternative possibilities before the nations—either firm shepherding or devastating destruction.”'"`UNIQ--ref-000009B0-QINU`"'
*'''vv. 11-12''''"`UNIQ--ref-000009B1-QINU`"' וְגִילוּ בִרְעָדָה: נַשְּׁקוּ בַר {B} MT, α', σ', Hier, Gal, Hebr, S, T, // facil-styl: G, s
**Traditionally, “kiss the son” (KJV)—“the crux interpretum of Ps 2.”'"`UNIQ--ref-000009B2-QINU`"' But בַּר is the Aramaic word for “son,” not the Hebrew (cf. Prov. 31:2). For this reason many regard the reading as suspect. Some propose emendations of vv. 11-12. One of the more popular proposals is to read בִּרְעָדָה נַשְּקוּ לְרַגְלָיו (“in trembling kiss his feet”). It makes better sense to understand בַּר as an adjective meaning “pure” (see Pss. 24:4, 73:1 and BDB 141 s.v. 3 בַר) functioning here in an adverbial sense. If read this way, then the syntactical structure of exhortation (imperative followed by adverbial modifier) corresponds to the two preceding lines (see v. 11). The verb נשׂק (“kiss”) refers metonymically to showing homage (see 1 Sam. 10:1; Hos. 13:2). The exhortation in v. 12 advocates a genuine expression of allegiance and warns against insincerity. When swearing allegiance, vassal kings would sometimes do so insincerely, with the intent of rebelling when the time was right. The so-called “Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon” also warn against such an attitude. In this treaty the vassal is told: “If you, as you stand on the soil where this oath [is sworn], swear the oath with your words and lips [only], do not swear with your entire heart, do not transmit it to your sons who will live after this treaty, if you take this curse upon yourselves but do not plan to keep the treaty of Esarhaddon ...may your sons and grandsons because of this fear in the future.”'"`UNIQ--ref-000009B3-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-000009B4-QINU`"'
***However, the proposal that בַּר should be read as ‘pure’ is not entirely satisfying. The verb נשׁק (‘to kiss’) is normally followed by ל to indicate the person kissed. The person kissed is rarely indicated without ל as a complement of the verb: 1 Sam 20:41, Hos 13:2, Prov 24:26. The person kissed may also be a pronominal suffix: 1 Sam 10:1, Cant 1:2, 8:1 and Gen 33:4. In Psalm 2:11, עבד has a direct object. The adverbial modifiers are clearly marked as such by prepositions. So, the parallel suggested is weak. Note that occurrences of נשׁק without ל are found in poetry and this is the case of Psalm 2.
*'''v. 2a.''' The phrase “kings of the earth” is hyperbolic.
+
*'''v. 2b.''' The adverbial phrase יוֹמָם וָלַיְלָה is a merism (day and night = continually).
+
*'''v. 2b.''' The verb הָגָה, which means “to recite quietly; to meditate,” refers metonymically to intense study and reflection, which in ancient times would often be carried out orally, even by someone studying in isolation.
*'''v. 2b.''' Study of the “law” (i.e., God’s covenantal instructions) is metonymic here for the correct attitude and behavior that should result from an awareness of and commitment to God’s moral will, as expressed in God’s “word.”
*'''v. 5a.''' The verb קוּם, lit. ‘arise’, is used metonymically, either for "withstanding" or for taking legal action, i.e., "accusing" (see above on [[#Lexical Semantics|Lexical semantics]]). “Rising in the judgment” (קוּם בַּמִּשְׁפָּט) appears to be a metonymy for taking action in a legal case (see [[Image::courtroom|Courtroom Imagery]]), since formal speech in a legal setting seems to have been prefaced by the speaker's rising. In Psalm 27, for instance, the Psalmist complains of false witnesses (עֵדֵי שֶׁקֶר) rising up (קוּם) against him (Ps. 27:12). In Psalm 76, God, the judge (שֹׁפֵט), rises (קוּם) for the judgment/verdict (לַמִּשְׁפָּט) to rescue the poor in the land (Ps. 76:10). In Isaiah 54, tongues rise up (קוּם) with Israel for the judgment (לַמִּשְׁפָּט) only to be found guilty (Isa. 54:17). In the New Testament also, at Jesus’ trial before the Sanhedrin, the witnesses rise (ἀνίστημι) to testify (Mk. 14:56), and the high priest rises (ἀνίστημι) to question Jesus (Mk. 14:60).
+
*'''v. 4a.''' יוֹשֵׁב בַּשָׁמַיִם is fronted to focus on the shift to a new topic/agent.
*'''v. 4b.''' the subject/agent (אֲדֹנַי) is fronted for emphasis–It is the almighty ‘Lord’ (אֲדֹנַי—a form used only in reference to God) who mocks them!
*'''v. 6a.''' The first person pronoun with preposed waw (וַאֲנִי) appears before the first person verbal form for emphasis (constituent focus), reflected in NET’s translation by “I myself”—which is reinforced also by the subsequent י alliteration.
*'''v. 7ab.''' The divine name (יְהוָה) may be either the free member of the bound phrase חֹק יְהוָה or the preverbal subject of a new clause (יְהוָה אָמַר אֵלִי). According to the latter option, the subject, יְהוָה, is fronted as in v. 4ab.
*'''v. 7c.''' The fronted subject complement (בְּנִי) is an instance of constituent focus.
*'''v. 7d.''' The fronted temporal reference—“today!” (הַיּוֹם)—is an instance of constituent focus: “The emphasis on today also occurs in other types of covenant renewal ceremony; see Deut 26:17 and 30:19.”'"`UNIQ--ref-00000A1B-QINU`"' The fronted personal pronoun (אֲנִי), an instance of [renewed] topic focus, corresponds to “my son” (בְּנִי) in the preceding line—also phonologically.
+
*'''v. 5a.''' “Then” (אָז) is used here as a stylistic device to introduce a stressed phrase. When things have reached a climactic stage, the point of judicial decision, at that point Yahweh makes his definitive regal pronouncement (v. 6).
*'''v. 10a.''' “So now...” (וְעַתָּה) – a standard discourse opener begins stanza D. "The use of וְעַתָּה (‟and now therefore”) is meant to alert the reader that there is an informed inference or consequence here" (BDB, 254).'"`UNIQ--ref-000009F9-QINU`"'
*'''v. 12b.''' The particle פֶּן indicates a negative purpose/result relationship.
+
*'''v.1 (ss)'''
:שִּׁמיִ֗נית – "The meaning of the Hebrew term ְשִּׁמיִ֗נית (“sheminith”) is uncertain; perhaps it refers to a particular style of music (cf. 1 Chr. 15:21)—or to an eight-stringed instrument'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D01-QINU`"' 'Ibn Ezra is probably right when he prefers ‘on the eighth mode,’ somewhat similar to Gregorian chant.''"`UNIQ--ref-00000D02-QINU`"'"'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D03-QINU`"' "The implication may be that the musical accompaniment should be on a lower or base octave (''all' ottava bassa'', Delitsch, ''Psalm I''), which would be appropriate to the solemn theme of the psalm."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D04-QINU`"'
*'''v.2.'''
:תְיַסְּרֵֽנִי – "The verb יסר suggests a didactic wisdom setting, with reference perhaps to a parent disciplining a child (cf. Prov. 3:11)."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D05-QINU`"' This is significant, since the Davidic king (v.1, לדוד) was considered to be God's son (Ps. 2:7; cf. 2 Sam. 7:14). See below on [[#Reference/allusions|Reference/allusions]].
*'''v.3.'''
:חָנֵּנִי – "Kurt W. Neubauer has shown in a study of this verb, חנן, that its context is always the covenant relationship and that it expresses the expectant plea of the faithful servant to his master in that relationship."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D06-QINU`"'
:אֻמְלַל – "The verb (אמל) is consistently used in those contexts in the Old Testament in which vitality and strength and fruitfulness and hope are gone: in Jeremiah 14, to describe the effects of draught and famine; in Joel 1 to describe a locust plague; in Hosea 4:3 to picture the devastating effects of evil, and in Isaiah 24, the last apocalyptic condition of earth under curse."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D07-QINU`"'
:רְפָאֵנִי – 'The petition "heal me" does not necessarily refer to physical healing [only] but may well include every restorative work that God does upon body and soul.''"`UNIQ--ref-00000D08-QINU`"'"'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D09-QINU`"'
:נִבְהְלוּ – "Normally the verb בהל refers to an emotional response and means 'tremble with fear, be terrified' (see vv.4, 11)... The verb may figuratively refer to one of the effects of his physical ailment, perhaps a fever. In Ezek. 7:27 the verb describes how the hands of the people will shake with fear when they experience the horrors of divine judgment."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D0A-QINU`"'
*'''v.4.'''
:נֶפֶשׁ – "The suffixed form of נֶפֶשׁ ('inner being') is often rendered simply as a pronoun in poetic texts, but referentially it seems to denote more than this."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D0B-QINU`"'
*'''v.5.'''
:שׁוּבָה – "Terrien proposes 'Repent!' – However, it does not seem likely that this is a 'command' or that the psalmist is 'arguing with his God.''"`UNIQ--ref-00000D0C-QINU`"' Why not? Because of the following חַסְדֶּךָ."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D0D-QINU`"'
*'''v.6.'''
:זִכְרֶךָ – "The Hebrew noun זֵכֶר ('remembrance') here refers to the 'name' of the Lord as invoked in liturgy and praise, especially during communal worship (cf. Ps. 30:4; 97:12). '"Remember"' is more than an intellectual act of mental representation. It is an intense spiritual act of bringing to mind what God has done as a basis for gratitude (cf. 111:4)''"`UNIQ--ref-00000D0E-QINU`"' Such deliberate remembrance could even refer to 'recounting God’s great deeds in an act of worship: cf. 71:15f.; Isaiah 63:7)''"`UNIQ--ref-00000D0F-QINU`"'"'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D10-QINU`"'
:שְׁאוֹל – see below on [[#Cultural background|Cultural background]]
*'''v.11.'''
:יֵבוֹשׁוּ – "The force of בוֹשׁ is somewhat in contrast to the primary meaning of the English, 'to be ashamed,' in that the English stresses the inner attitude, the state of mind, while the Hebrew means 'to come to shame' and stresses the sense of public disgrace, a physical state."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000D11-QINU`"'
*'''v.10.''' The various body-parts in v.10 are related metonymically to the act of speaking. Speech originates as a thought inside a person (קרב), proceeds through the throat (גרון) and out of the mouth (פה) by way of the tongue (לשׁון). The psalmist declares that each of these parts, and thus the speech of his enemies from beginning to end, is corrupt. The various images are presented in a [[#Chiasms|chiastic]] arrangement.
**'''v.10a.''' "Mouth" (פֶּה) is metonymic for speech.
**'''v.10b.''' "Insides" (קֶרֶב) are metonymic for the "the inner psychological and spiritual core of a person"'"`UNIQ--ref-00000CBC-QINU`"' (LXX: καρδία) which is the seat of that person's thoughts (see Jer. 4:14). What comes out of the "mouth" (10a) and the "tongue" (10d) begins inside a person (10b).
**'''v.10c.''' "Throat" or "windpipe" (גָּרוֹן) is associated with a person's voice (Isa. 58:1; Ps.69:4; 115:7). In Ps. 5:10, the "throat" is the point at which the thoughts of a person's inner being (10b) begins to be articulated into sound.
**'''v.10d.''' "Tongue" (לָשׁוֹן) is metonymic for speech. The smoothness of their tongues (חלק) is metonymic for flattery.
+
*'''v.10b.''' "The prefixed verbal form 'has accepted' may be interpreted as a preterite here; it is parallel to a perfect and refers to the fact that the LORD has responded favorably to the psalmist’s request. On the other hand, a translation like NIV’s 'accepts' also conveys the correct idea (see Craigie, ''Psalms'', 95)."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000CA4-QINU`"' The LXX translates the verb as past perfective (aorist): προσεδέξατο. Yet there is nothing in the context that demands interpreting the verb as a preterite. יִקַּח may function as a simple future, per the more typical use of ''yiqtol''.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000CA5-QINU`"' At the same time, the ''qatal'' form שָׁמַע might indicate present rather than past tense, since it is a stative verb (like יָדַע, the ''qatal'' form of which is usually present tense). "Stative verbs express perfective aspect that should be translated with the present."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000CA6-QINU`"' The verse might then be translated, "Yahweh hears my plea; Yahweh will receive my prayer."
*'''v.11.''' "The four prefixed verbal forms in this verse (11ab) are best understood as jussives and form a powerful doubled close to the psalm. The psalmist concludes his 'prayer' with an imprecation, calling divine punishment down on his enemies."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000CA7-QINU`"' That the LXX interprets these four verbs as jussives is apparent from its choice of the optative mood (αἰσχυνθείησαν καὶ ταραχθείησαν... ἀποστραφείησαν καὶ καταισχυνθείησαν).
+
*'''v.12''' Why is reading בַּר as ‘son’ problematic? The main reason is that Aramaic was not a lingua franca until the Chaldean Kings of Babylon beginning around 600 B.C. Yet there are many Aramaic words in Classical Hebrew.'"`UNIQ--ref-000009B6-QINU`"' An important example is Psalm 139 with more than half a dozen clear Aramaisms and this Psalm also is attributed to David in the superscription. There is also the same kind of admixture of Phoenician / Hebrew and Aramaic in the inscriptions of Panammu and Zenjirli from the Eighth Century BCE. Consideration of 2 Samuel 23 shows one might expect considerable dialectical variation among the heroes of David’s Army. The reading in the LXX, δράξασθε παιδείας is obviously based upon reading the word בַּר as ‘son’. Admittedly translators of the LXX were influenced by Late Hebrew and Aramaic, but it may also represent an interpretive tradition. Finally, it makes excellent sense to construe בַּר as ‘son’ since foreign kings are being addressed by the psalmist.
:The phonological analysis above, which noted the alliteration of בר in vv.11-12, might also explain why the author used בַּר instead of בֵּן in v.12a.
+
*'''v.13b.''' Yahweh is compared to "the shield" (כַּצִּנָּה) – this generic use of the article is common in similes. The צִנָּה was a "long, oblong shield. It was about the height of a man since it was intended to protect the entire body."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000CB9-QINU`"' In this respect, the צִנָּה differed from the smaller מָגֵן (cf. Ps.3:4). In Ps. 5:13, the image of a shield (צִנָּה) "connotes encompassing protection"'"`UNIQ--ref-00000CBA-QINU`"' and maps onto Yahweh as the protector of the righteous.
+