Introduction

Psalm 15:4c, לְ֝הָרַ֗ע is difficult to translate, particularly because, as Dahood notes, "the more common Biblical Hebrew usage would require the phrase to be translated More common biblical Hebrew usage would require that the phrase... be translated "he swore to do wrong, and he did not retract" (302). This translation would be problematic given that the subject in this verse is presented in the Psalm as the individual (or group) who is the answer to the questions of the first verse: “O LORD, who may abide in Your tent? Who may dwell on Your holy hill? This individual walks with integrity, works righteousness and speaks truth in his heart (v. 2), and in verse 3 is said to not do “evil (רָעָ֑ה) to his fellow". This individual, then, would not be expected to swear to ‘do wrong and not retreat’. Both text critical and semantic issues concerning the phrase לְ֝הָרַ֗ע, 'to do wrong', require consideration when addressing this issue.

Argument Map(s)

Text Critical Question: Should לְ֝הָרַ֗ע, 'to do wrong/harm', be retained as per the MT or emended to לְהַרֵעָ, 'neighbour/friend'?

 
===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        rankdir: LR
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 
[to harm (לְ֝הָרַ֗ע)]: Masoretic vocalizations should be retained and the word should be interpreted as "to harm" (without textual emendation): "he swears (even) to (his own) hurt/harm/evil and does not change".
 + <Modern Versions>: (NIV, ESV, NET, CEV, JPS/1985, NLT, GNT, NRSV, NEB/REB, NJB?) Dictionaries and commentaries also support this reading (Author Date:Page :C:).
  + [Lectio difficilior]: More difficult reading often preferred.
  - [Some modern translations emend]:Douay-Rheims (Author Date:Page :C:; Author Date:Page :A:).#dispreferred
 + <Ancient Support>: Aq, Rashi, Kimchi, NJPS, Jer "swears to his detriment" (Author Date:Page :C:).
  - [Ancient counter]: LXX, Sym, Jer, Syr (Author Date:Page :C:; Author Date:Page :A:).#dispreferred
   - [Scholarly support]: Briggs and Alter (Author Date:Page :C:).#dispreferred
 + <Context>:
  + [Background of Lev. 5:4]: Lev. 5:4, potentially a background for Psalm 15:4c, translates 'לְ֝הָרַ֗ע' as to harm'
  + [Community behavior theme]: a reading of the MT says that oath keeping is important for members of the community, even if costly
   - [Emended reading focuses on community behavior]: the emended reading 'to a neighbor' more explicitly reinforces the HB and ANE emphasis on the importance of oath keeping in community.#dispreferred
 - <Emend to 'neighbour'>: 'he swears to his friend and does not change’ (Author Date:Page :G:).#dispreferred
  + [Context with v.3]: fulfilling an oath to his neighbor does not contradict the earlier portrayals, including that ‘he does no harm/evil to his neighbor’ (v. 3).#dispreferred 
   - [Semantic readings of לְ֝הָרַ֗ע]: some semantic readings of לְ֝הָרַ֗ע also do not contradict v.3 or the rest of the psalm.

Semantic Question: how should the word לְ֝הָרַ֗ע be read in the context of Psalm 15?

harm to self
harm to others
moral evil

 
===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        rankdir: LR
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 
[Self-harm (לְ֝הָרַ֗ע)]: "swears to do evil to his own detriment"
 + <Textual support>:  Dictionaries and commentaries also support this reading (Author Date:Page :C:).
  + [Modern versions]:(NIV, ESV, NET, CEV, JPS/1985, NLT, GNT, NRSV, NEB/REB, NJB?)
   <_ [Some modern versions disagree]: Kezler, Ibn Ezra (translates as self harm in this passage but as harm to another in Lev. 5:4.#dispreferred
  + [Ancient versions]: (Author Date:Page :C:; Author Date:Page :A:).
   <_ [Some ancient versions emend text]: (Author Date:Page :C:).#dispreferred
 + <Context of v.3>:
  + [Repeated roots read negatively]: vv.3-4 are embedded in a list of descriptors of who may dwell on the LORD's holy mountain. V.3 disqualifies someone who wrongs/harms a neighbour. V.4 uses the same root: it could contradict verse 3 to say that someone who takes an oath to wrong/harm another would still qualify to enter. Reading לְ֝הָרַ֗ע as referring to self-harm does not contradict v.3.
  - [Defense Harm]: Could be referring to harm of an enemy.#dispreferred
  - [Judicial Harm]: Could be referring to a punishment when it would be justice to harm one in the community.#dispreferred
    + [No contrast specified]: No contrasted situation or group of people is mentioned in relation to not harming neighbours.
 + <Lev. 5:4 parallel>: shared lexical and thematic features (Author Date:Page :G:).
  + [Harm/good]: Milgrom and Schenker view the merism as referring to harm/good rather than moral/immoral. Milgrom, along with Rashi and the Talmud, read לְ֝הָרַ֗ע in Lev. 5:4 as harm to self rather than harm to another.
   + [Ašam offering]: Milgrom chooses this reading for Lev. 5:4, pointing out the topic of oaths that harm others is addressed later in the chapter in vv 21-26
   - [Ibn Ezra disagrees]: Ibn Ezra takes Lev. 5:4 as harm to another.#dispreferred
   - [All of Lev. 5:4 not necessarily the background]: Lev 5:4 is explicitly about rash oaths, which are not mentioned in Ps. 15:4. It is unclear how much of the Lev context informs Ps 15:4. #dispreferred
 - <Harm to others>: #dispreferred
  + [King's role to defend and judge]: In 1 Sam 8:19 the desired role of the king is to fight (and presumably harm) the enemies of the Lord, and Israel, and also to judge. 2 Sam 4:9-12 is an instance when King David, in a judicial role, makes and carries out an oath to punish (harm) the murderers of Ish-bosheth.#dispreferred
  + [Jephthah fulfills his oath]: In Judges 11 Jephthah keeps his oath, even though it causes harm to another
   - [Text neither condemns nor celebrates]: Jepthah's actions are not explicitly evaluated in the text.
  + [Ibn Ezra interpretation]: Lev. 5:4 refers to oath against another #dispreferred
   - [Milgrom chooses a different reading]: rather with Rashi, Talmud and others he reads לְ֝הָרַ֗ע as self-harm. Because harm to others is discussed later in the chapter, he assumes Lev.5:4 refers to a different kind of harm.
   - [Ibn Ezra reads Ps.15 as self-harm]
 - <Moral Evil>: 'sworn to do no wrong and does not falter' Dahood and Craigie #dispreferred 
  + [Lamed read in 'separative sense']: also in Ps. 40:11 and 84:12 Craigie p.150 #dispreferred
   + [Ugaritic texts]: 'A wider knowledge of Hebrew grammar, made possible by the Ugaritic texts, renders any textual change needless, for the ras shamra tablets provide clear examples of the preposition lamed "to" with the meaning "from".'
   - [Lamed read "to" a person]: Kottsieper "swears to the wicked and does not violate it" but even here the oath is not broken.
   - [Lamed read as a verbal adjunct (result)]: to do harm [to himself]
  + [Solves the question of v.3 repetition]: 'sworn to do no wrong'#dispreferred

Conclusion

Research

Translation

Ancient

LXX: ὁ ὀμνύων τῷ πλησίον αὐτοῦ καὶ οὐκ ἀθετῶν·
- "he who swears to his fellow and does not renege"
Aq.: τον κακώσαι...
- "you hurt him"
Th.: τον κακώσαι...
- "you hurt him"
Sym.: ό όμόσας εταίρος είναι, και μη άλλαγείς
- "the same partner is and does not change"
Jer.: iurat ut se adfligat et non mutat
- "he swears to afflict himself and does not change"
Jer. Jurat ad malefaciendum (in damnum suum), nec muta
- "he swears to do evil (to his own dtriment), and does not change"
Jer. psalterium gall.: Qui jurat proximo suo, et non decipit
- "he who swears to his neighbor, and does not deceive"
Jer. juxta hebraicum: urat[etiam]ad damnificandum et non mutat(!); argentum suum non commodat cum foenore et munus adversus innocentem non accipit
- "he swears [also] to damage and does not change (does not accept interest and obligation against the innocent)
Syr.: ܝܡܐ ܠܚܒܪܗ ܘܠܐ ܡܕܓܠ
- "he takes an oath with his friend and does not deceive" For MT לְ֝הָרַ֗ע to his harm P has to his friend (cf. LXX,τῷ πλησίον αὐτοῦ).
- The difference is due to confusion with regard to vocalization of the Hebrew word. For MT לְ֝הָרַ֗ע to his harm the Greek and Syriac translators understood τῷ πλησίον αὐτοῦto his friend
Tg.: לאבאשא לגרמיה ולא משלחף/יפרג
- "who will swear to do harm to himself and does not change"

Mp. 6 times לְ֝הָרַ֗ע
Mm. 227
- Gen 31:7; Lev 5:4; Jer 4:22; 25:29; Zech 8:14; Ps 15:4

Modern

NIV: who keeps an oath even when it hurts, and does not change their mind
NLT: and keep their promises even when it hurts
ESV: who swears to his own hurt and does not change
NASB: He takes an oath to his own detriment, and does not change
GNT: They always do what they promise, no matter how much it may cost
NET: He makes firm commitments and does not renege on his promise
KJV: He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not
DBT: who, if he have sworn to his own hurt, changeth it not
DRB: He that sweareth to his neighbour, and deceiveth not
CPDV: He who swears to his neighbor and does not deceive
NJPS: who stands by his oath even to his hurt
TOV: Se fait-il tort dans un serment, il ne se rétracte pas (Gr.: S'il jure à son prochain)
NBS: il ne se rétracte pas, s'il fait un serment à son préjudice
BDS: Il tient toujours ses serments même s’il doit en pâtir
BFC: S'il a fait un serment qui lui cause du tort, il ne change pas ce qu'il a dit
Luther 1984: wer seinen Eid hält, auch wenn es ihm schadet
RVR95: el que aun jurando en perjuicio propio, no por eso cambia
NVI: al que comple lo prometido aunque salga perjudicado
DHH: el que cumple sus promesas aunque le vaya mal

Secondary Literature

BDB: do an injury, hurt, swear לְהָרַע, = to one’s hurt, ψ 15:4
HALOT: to inflict harm, injury; to inflict harm; to do evil, treat badly (cf. Isa 11:9; 41:23; 65:25; Zeph 1:12; Ps 15:4)
DCH: without object but with preposition: do harm to, deal harshly with, deal badly with, bring trouble upon. Collocation רָעַע and שָׁבַע he swears to (his own) harm
Zorell: personae cui malum infertur (p. 782b)
SDBH: = causative action by which humans or deities bring suffering or disaster upon humans, often as the result of wrong behavior -- to do harm (to someone); to make suffer; to deal, treat harshly; to afflict

Alter: When he vows to his fellow man, he does not revoke it "When he vows to his fellow man, / he does not revoke it. The Masoretic text here is problematic. It appears to read: “he vows to do evil / and will not revoke it,” which is hardly an attribute one would attach to the moral person. But three ancient translations — the Septuagint, the Syriac, and the Peshitta—read here instead of lehara, “to do evil,” lere'eihu, “to his fellow man,” which merely reverses the order of the consonants. It is the sort of error a scribe could have" easily made." (p.130)
Avishur: He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not (p.124)
Barre: "Read leharêa, "to his neighbor", instead of the MT's lehära, "to do harm, evil" The change is based on the LXX, Symmachus and the Synac It seems that the Masoretes did not correctly vocalize the consonants because of the rare occurrence of the article after a preposition (cf GKC § 55 η, ρ 112) Probably under the influence of Lev ν 4, the consonants were read as a hiphil infinitive construct On the other hand, the Septuagint not only recognized the presence of the article, but also rightly interpreted it as denoting possession (cf R J Williams, Hebrew Syntax An Outline [Toronto/Buffalo, 19762], § 86, ρ 19) The Septuagint's understanding of the word is strongly supported by Ezek xxn 12 where we find the crimes of * 'taking bribes" and "charging interest" are explicitly related to taking advantage of a "neighbor" (p. 210)
Boloje and Groenewald: who makes an oath to his/her hurt and does not change (p. 137)
Buttenwieser: Even though he has pledged himself to his own hurt (p. 202)
Craigie: He has sworn to do no wrong and does not falter ("to do no wrong": the translation follows Dahood (CBQ 16 [1954] 302) and Psalms I, 84, taking lamedh in the separative sense; but the form remains curious and the sense of the passage is uncertain" (p. 150 footnote 4.a.). "The seventh condition indicates not merely a determination to do good,but the swearing of a solemn oath to avoid doing wrong, and the accompanying determination never to falter or waver in the performance of that oath" (p. 152).
Dahood: he swore not to do wrong and he did not retract "More common biblical Hebrew usage would require that the phrase... "he swore to do wrong, and he did not retract/' But this translation is explicitly ruled out by the preceding verse which states that the blameless man "does no wrong to his friend and brings no reproach on his neighbor." It is not strange, then, that the textual history of this phrase reveals that a number of emendations has been offered in order to relieve the Psalmist of intolerable inconsistency. But a wider knowledge of Hebrew grammar, made possible by the discovery of the Ugaritic texts, renders any textual change needless, for the Ras Shamra tablets provide clear examples of the preposition / "to" with the meaning "from."... The eminently good sense which emerges from this solution, the consonance of the translation with the idea expressed in ν 3b, the use of the preposition min "from" with the verb [נִשְׁבַּע] (Is 54,9), and the use of [לֹֽ] in the sense of "from" in Pss 40,11; 84,12 make it highly probable that the MT preserves the true reading, which is to be rendered "he swore not to do wrong, and he did not retract." (p.302)
Ibn Ezra: He that sweareth, to his own hurt and changeth not "He swears to harm his body, that is, he swears to fast. Fasting weakens the flesh." (p. 111)
Kapelrud: der som sverger med hensyn til det onde, uten å gjøre forandring "he who swears with regard to evil, without making a change" (p. 43)
Kessler:
Lussier: "The true servant of God will keep his oaths and vows without modification even though he may lose by it" (p. 408)
Michel: Schwört er (sich selbst) zum Schaden, so ändert er's nicht "Hier deutlich wieder dieselbe Zeitstufe, das verneinte impf. gibt wieder die Nicht-Folge an." (p. 130)
Milgrom: "to good or bad purpose. lehāra 'ô lehêtîb, lit., "to do harm or good," either (1) to oneelf as for instance "I shall eat" or "I shall not eat"; "I shall sleep" or "I shall not sleep" (Rashi, based on b. Šebu. 27a; cf. b. Nazir 62b) or (2) to another (Ibn Ezra). Nevertheless, this expression is probably a merism meaning "anything" (see Gen 24:5; 31:24; Num 24:18; 2 Sam 14:17, 20 [Cassuto 1964: 62]; Isa 41:23), confirmed by the following explanatory clause: "whatever a man may utter in an oath." In any event, Ibn Ezra's view must be rejected; the oath that harm's another person is the subject of the 'ašām offering of vv 21-26. With Rashi (and the Talmud), the oath must be restricted to anything that the oath taker promises to do or not do for himself" (p.300)
Perowne: (Who) sweareth to (his own) hurt, and changeth not "לְהָרַע... The Chald. rightly, "so as to afflict himself." The word is inf. Hiph. of רָעַע... and there is a reference no doubt, to the formula in Lev. v.4... i.e. let the consequences be what they will (to himself of course), whether that sweareth unto his neighbour and disappointeth him not, though it were to his hinderence." See another similar instance of combined readings in xxix.1." (1:188-189)
Miller: "Its meaning is quite uncertain. Most probably it is to be understood as indicating either one who swears an oath even to his own harm and will not break it or one who swears an oath to his neighbor... and will not break it. In either case the requirement has to do with keeping oaths. Some interpreters would understand the colon as in fact a bicolon and perhaps with missing words (so Kraus). That seems less likely in this case. There is no textual evidence for a haplography, although it is possible that one occurred at an early stage of the transmission of the text. The meter and syllabic length of the four words correspond to the meter and length of the two following cola as well as the three Id' sentences of v. 3." (fn. 18 "For discussion of these alternatives see the commentaries. LXX, followed by the Peshitta and the Gallican Psalter of Jerome, translates 'to his neighbor'. In his Psalterium iuxta Hebraeos Jerome translated the Hebrew: iurat ut se adfligat et non mutat, i.e. understanding the Hebrew according to the first alternative indicated above.") (p. 267)
Rashi: HE TAKES AN OATH TO HURT himself, BUT HE DOES NOT CHANGE his oath. A fortiori he does not change it concerning something which is not to his disadvantage. (fn: The two alternative interpretations derive from the ambiguity of the Heb. preposition 'al. With reference to the second interpretation cf. Mekilta at Ex. 23:8 and Sifre Deut. at Deut. 16:19. (p. 225)
Ridderbos: "4c.5a.b enthalten wieder drei negative Aussagen; diese stehen jedoch nicht sämtlich im Perfekt. Wae ihren Inhalt betrifft, so besteht eine deutliche Verwandtschaft zwischen v. 5a und v. 5b: in beiden Aussagen wird vor einem zu starken Verlangen nach Besitz gewarnt. V. 4c dürfte eine Warnung vor dem Eidbruch enthalten4. Auch dem Eidbruch liegt häufig ein zu starkes Verlangen nach Besitz zugrunde. So können wir v. 4o.6a.b folgendermaßen umschreiben: man darf am Besitz nicht so sehr hängen, daß man um seinetwillen eidbrüchig wird, v. 4c, das Gut seines Nächsten an sich zieht, v. 5a, das Recht verletzt, v. 5b." (p. 156)
Ziegler: "In the Bible, the oath is a formal assertion of truth or declaration of intent which cannot be breached without incurring severe consequences. The Bible provides legal sanctions for the violation of oaths in certain instances (Lev. 5). In addition, the biblical oath seems to possess substantial power which, on occasion, results in the application of divine sanctions upon the violator of his oath." (p. 3). "Features of Ancient Near Eastern oaths which will prove to be important for scholarly perceptions of the biblical oaths include the appeal to a divine authority to witness the oath or punish its violator, the curses attending the oath,70 as well as the generally apprehensive attitude towards the oath. Similarities between the Bible and ancient Near Eastern cultures have also been perceived in the actual formulae of oath-taking, and the rites, gestures or ceremonies which accompanied the oath." (pp. 10-11) "...oaths do not appear arbitrarily in biblical narratives. Rather, oaths are a unique speech-act which can powerfully affect the biblical narrative and underscore its primary ideas." (p. 17) "Psalms 15 poses a similar question (Psalms 15:1–4): O Lord, who may abide in your tent? Who may dwell on your holy hill? Those who walk blamelessly, and do what is right, and speak the truth from their heart; who do not slander with their tongue, and do no evil to their friends, nor take up a reproach against their neighbors; in whose eyes the wicked are despised, but who honor those who fear the Lord; who stand by their oath even to their hurt. The phrase נשבע להרע ולא ימר may be translated in various other ways:77 “Who swears to his detriment but does not violate it,”78 “Who swears to the wicked but does not violate it.”79 In either case, in both Psalms, the integrity of one’s oath-taking is a key component in the creation of a persona worthy to be in close proximity to the divine." (fns. 77-80: "77 Briggs, Psalms, p. 114, following the Septuagint, Syriac and Vulgate, changes the vowels but not the consonants from MT, reading the word להרע , not as bad (rah), but as friend, or neighbor (re’ah), thereby rendering the verse, “Who swears to his friend and does not change.”78 AV; Revised Version; NJPS; Rashi; Kimhi. This is in essence the meaning of NRSV’s translation, although this seems to me to be a preferable literal translation. 79 Kottsieper, שבע , p. 322. 80 Anderson, Psalms, p. 139, notes that the general meaning of Psalms 15:4 is that a righteous man honors his oath.") (p. 42) "David uses his oath to express confidence in his own enduring value for human life, and his concurrent reverence for the institution of kingship. In this way, David breaks the connection between violence and power, recognizing that there is an alternative to violence in obtaining and maintaining power. Taken together, these components begin to form a composite picture of a man of integrity, a potential king suited to establish a dynastic monarchy which does not rely on tyranny and bloodshed in obtaining or maintaining power." (p. 206)

References

15:4

Alter, Robert. 2007. The Book of Psalms: A Translation with Commentary. Norton.

' Avishur, Yizchak, Psalm XV - A Liturgial or Ethical Psalm.

Barre, Lloyd M.

Boloje, Blessing Onoriode, and Alphonso Groenewald. 2016. Accessing Yahweh’s presence: Ethical implications of the entrance liturgy of Psalm 15. Stellenbosch Theological Journal, 2:131–152

Briggs, Charles A., and Emilie Briggs. 1906. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms, Volume 1. Vol. 1. ICC. Edinburgh: T&T Clark.

Buttenwieser, Moses. 1969. The Psalms Chronologically Treated with a New Translation. New York, KTAV.

Craigie, Peter C. 1983. Psalms 1 - 50. Word Biblical Commentary 19. Dallas, TX: Word Books, Publisher.

Dongmo, Folifack. 2013. Le Psaume 15, OTE 26/1: 86-110.

Gruber, Mayer. 2004. Rashi's Commentary on Psalms.Brill Reference Library of Judaism 18, Brill.

Kapelrud, Arvid S. 1965. Salme 15, En Paktsfornyelsessalme. Norsk Theologisk Tidsskrift 66.1:39-46.

Kselman, John S. 1987. Psalm 3: A Structural and Literary Study. The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 49.4:572-580.

Lussier, Ernest, 1948. The New Latin Psalter an exegetical commentary VII Psalms 14 and 15. Catholic Biblical Quarterly. 10.4:408-412.

Michel, Diethem. 1960. Temporaund Satzellung in den Psalmen. Abhandungen zur Evangeischen Theologie Band 1. Bouvier u. Co. Germany.

Milgrom, Jacob. 1998. Leviticus 1-16. Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries. Yale University Press.

Miller, Patrick D. 2000. Israelite Religion and Biblical Theology: Collected Essays, Sheffield Academic Press.

Perowne, J, J. Stewart. 1966. The Book of Psalms A New Translation with Introduction and Notes Explanatory and Critical." Vol. I. Reprinted from the fourth edition and revised. Zondervan.

Ridderbos, Nic H. 1972. Die Psalmen Stilistische Verfahren und Aufbau Mit besonderer Berücksichtigung von Ps 1—41.BZAW 118, De Gruyter.

Strickman, Norman H. 2009. Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra's Commentary on the First Book of Psalms: Chapters 1-41. Reference Library of Jewish Intellectual History. Academic Studies Press.

Zenger, Erich. 2007. Geld as Lebensmittel? Über di Wertung Reichtums Im Psalter (Psalmen 15. 49. 112), in Gott und Geld: Herausgegeben von Martin Ebner (eds. Paul D. Hanson et al; JBTh 21; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener.

Ziegler, Yael, 2008 Promises to Keep: The Oath in Biblical Narrative. Vetus Testamentum, Supplements Brill.

The Meaning of לְהָרַע in Ps 15:4c