This page can be edited just like Wikipedia. Click Edit at the top of the page and use the same formatting as Wikipedia. Click here for formatting help.

To make citations, include citation information between ref tags, like this:

<ref>Wendland, Ernst. Expository Outlines on the Psalms</ref>

Hebrew (BHS)[ ]

אַ֥שְֽׁרֵי־הָאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֤ר ׀ לֹ֥א הָלַךְ֮ בַּעֲצַ֪ת רְשָׁ֫עִ֥ים וּבְדֶ֣רֶךְ חַ֭טָּאִים לֹ֥א עָמָ֑ד וּבְמֹושַׁ֥ב לֵ֝צִ֗ים לֹ֣א יָשָֽׁב׃ כִּ֤י אִ֥ם בְּתֹורַ֥ת יְהוָ֗ה חֶ֫פְצֹ֥ו וּֽבְתֹורָתֹ֥ו יֶהְגֶּ֗ה יֹומָ֥ם וָלָֽיְלָה׃ וְֽהָיָ֗ה כְּעֵץ֮ שָׁת֪וּל עַֽל־פַּלְגֵ֫י מָ֥יִם אֲשֶׁ֤ר פִּרְיֹ֨ו ׀ יִתֵּ֬ן בְּעִתֹּ֗ו וְעָלֵ֥הוּ לֹֽא־יִבֹּ֑ול וְכֹ֖ל אֲשֶׁר־יַעֲשֶׂ֣ה יַצְלִֽיחַ׃ לֹא־כֵ֥ן הָרְשָׁעִ֑ים כִּ֥י אִם־כַּ֝מֹּ֗ץ אֲֽשֶׁר־תִּדְּפֶ֥נּוּ רֽוּחַ׃ עַל־כֵּ֤ן ׀ לֹא־יָקֻ֣מוּ רְ֭שָׁעִים בַּמִּשְׁפָּ֑ט וְ֝חַטָּאִ֗ים בַּעֲדַ֥ת צַדִּיקִֽים׃ כִּֽי־יֹודֵ֣עַ יְ֭הוָה דֶּ֣רֶךְ צַדִּיקִ֑ים וְדֶ֖רֶךְ רְשָׁעִ֣ים תֹּאבֵֽד׃

Greek (Rahlfs-Hanhart LXX)

¹μακάριος ἀνήρ ὃς οὐκ ἐπορεύθη ἐν βουλῇ ἀσεβῶν καὶ ἐν ὁδῷ ἁμαρτωλῶν οὐκ ἔστη καὶ ἐπὶ καθέδραν λοιμῶν οὐκ ἐκάθισεν ²ἀλλ᾽ ἢ ἐν τῷ νόμῳ κυρίου τὸ θέλημα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐν τῷ νόμῳ αὐτοῦ μελετήσει ἡμέρας καὶ νυκτός ³καὶ ἔσται ὡς τὸ ξύλον τὸ πεφυτευμένον παρὰ τὰς διεξόδους τῶν ὑδάτων ὃ τὸν καρπὸν αὐτοῦ δώσει ἐν καιρῷ αὐτοῦ καὶ τὸ φύλλον αὐτοῦ οὐκ ἀπορρυήσεται καὶ πάντα ὅσα ἂν ποιῇ κατευοδωθήσεται ⁴οὐχ οὕτως οἱ ἀσεβεῖς οὐχ οὕτως ἀλλ᾽ ἢ ὡς ὁ χνοῦς ὃν ἐκρίπτει ὁ ἄνεμος ἀπὸ προσώπου τῆς γῆς ⁵διὰ τοῦτο οὐκ ἀναστήσονται ἀσεβεῖς ἐν κρίσει οὐδὲ ἁμαρτωλοὶ ἐν βουλῇ δικαίων ⁶ὅτι γινώσκει κύριος ὁδὸν δικαίων καὶ ὁδὸς ἀσεβῶν ἀπολεῖται

Phonology[ ]

Consonants

What date do we have for the introduction of final consonants, to know if it could have been original to the psalm?,

Sound combinations

Alliteration with אַשְׁרֵי and the play on sounds with רָשָׁע may be the reason the relative pronoun אֲשֶׁר is used so many times (3x) within this poem.,

Infrequent letters or sounds

Phonological Overview

Phonological Overview 2

ק appears three times, ג two times, שׂ only one time; sibilants ז and ס do not appear in this Psalm.,

Patterns in beginnings

The opening of the second section (לֹא כֵן הָרְשָׁעִים) contains a number of sonic correspondences with the opening of the first section (אַשְׁרֵי הָאִישׁ) (an instance of structural anaphora). There is a repetition of consonants (א/ע, שׁ, ר) in both, and the pattern of stressed vowels (ā, ē) is the same in both.,

Patterns in endings

masculine plural ending ים at the end of lines 1b, 4a, 5b, 6a,

Similar sounds in adjacent lines

יֶהְגֶּה יוֹמָם וָלָיְלָה (v.2b) --> עַל־פַּלְגֵי מָיִם (v.3a); note alliteration of ל(x2), מ(x2), ג, and י

עדת (v.5b) --> יודע (v.6a); repetition of ע + ד,

Other observations

The psalm ends with a word starting with the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet (תאבד), just as it began with a word starting with the first letter (אשרי), thus forming a phonological inclusio: “The end result is that the fates of the two ways are juxtaposed by placing them at the opposite ends of the alphabet: one is beatitude, the other is perdition. ...The A—Z guide to being a commendable person” [before God]^[1] (cf. Deut. 5:32-33).
v. 1a. אַשְׁרֵי הָאִישׁ ("the blessings of the man") sounds like אֲשֻׁרֵי הָאִישׁ ("the footsteps of the man), a likely wordplay given the pathway imagery in v.1 (...אשׁר לא הלך). "Given the controlling metaphor of a journey in this poem, as indicated by the threefold repetition of the word דרך (“way”; vv. 1a, 6a, 6b) and the reference to walking (v. 1a), the אשרי formula is especially appropriate in the title of the poem since the term, whatever its etymology, recalls the verb אשר, which means “walk” (qal) and “make way, lead” (piel). Note the frequent association of אשׁרי with walking (Pss 89:16; 119:1; 128:1; Prov 20:7) and with a journey (Pss 84:6; 119:1; 128:1; Prov 8:32)."^[2] The connection between אַשְׁרֵי and אֲשֻׁרֵי may be etymological (thus, possibly a root-play) as well as phonological. "The Hebrew root אשר is related to Arabic ⁾atara (“to make a mark/an impression”), which in the fourth form means “prefer, select, honor.” Hence, one finds the Arabic term ''⁾atirun (“honored, favored”). One may surmise, therefore, that the original sense of Hebrew אשר is “mark (leave a trace/footprint),” hence “step, walk’ (qal, Prov 9:6), and so the piel אשר means “lead” (Isa 1:17; 3:12; 9:16) but also “declare (someone as being) ahead,” thus, to be admired, envied, or congratulated."^[3]
v. 2. Word play on יהוה (v.2a) and יהגה (v.2b)
vv. 2-3. "the word-play on חפץ and צלח interchange ח with ץ"^[4]
v. 5b. the phrase בַּעֲדַת צַדִּיקִים sounds like the earlier phrase בַּעֲצַת רְשָׁעִים (v. 1). This phonological correspondence highlights the contrast between the righteous and the wicked: the righteous do not "walk" in the עֲצַת רְשָׁעִים, and the sinners will not stand in the עֲדַת צַדִּיקִים.

Lexical Semantics[ ]

Difficult Words

More complete explanations of the words used in Psalm 1 can be found in the UBS Translators Handbook on the Psalms^[5] and in commentaries like the Word Biblical Commentaries series.^[6] A few words that may cause difficulties for translators are highlighted here.

v. 1

אַשְׁרֵי הָאִישׁ – (see below)

ְהָלַך – (see below)

עֵצָה – This word most often refers to the “counsel” or “guidance” one receives from others. To “walk in the advice of the wicked” means to allow their evil ideas to impact and determine one’s behavior.

רְשָׁעִים – (see below)

דֶּרֶךְ – (see below)

עָמַד – (see below)

מוֹשָׁב – (see below)

לֵצִים – (see below)

יָשָב – (see below)

v. 2

תּוֹרָה – (see below)

יֶהְגֶּה – The word הָגָה is not as much ‘meditate’ but ‘mutter.’ The idea is not that the blessed person thinks on the law day and night, but the law is actually on his or her lips. The problem with the translation into English is that ‘he mutters his law’ does not sound like a good thing necessarily. Something like ‘muses’ might be better or ‘chews on’, but both of these miss the muttering component. It might be best to put a footnote with ‘muse’ to indicate that speaking is involved. It has been translated "meditate/think about (ESV, NRSV, NASB, NIV, NET, NLT, CEV) < "study" (NJPS, TEV).

v. 3

עֵץ – (see below)

שָׁתוּל – (see below)

פַּלְגֵי מַיִם – (see below)

בְּעִתּוֹ – (see below)

v. 4

מֹץ – (see below)

v. 5

מִשְׁפָּט – It is difficult to tell whether מִשְׁפָּט means ‘lawcourt’ (as in the place) or as referring to the act of making a ruling. Both are possible. The former is suggested by the parallel to בַּעֲדַת, but the latter fits the context as well.

יָקֻמוּ – (see below)

עֵדָה – This concept is not necessarily limited to a local assembly of people, like a local synagogue. It may refer to the regular public meetings at the sanctuary (tabernacle or temple) as well. It is normally a large crowd of people.

v. 6

יוֹדֵעַ – To “know a way” means, in its most basic sense, “to recognize-acknowledge a pathway, route, or prescribed way of life” (see Jos. 3:4, Job 21:14, Ps. 67:2, Isa. 42:16, Jer. 5:4-5). In the OT and a covenantal context, the verb ידע has a relational implication: Yahweh in personal relationship with his faithful people. When the stative ידע is used verbally as a participle, it may mean ‘care for’ (see Prov. 12:10; 29:7). In this case, the “way of the godly” is not their behavior, but their course of life or destiny. Alternatively, the word may indicate familiarity and suggest that God walks with the righteous on their pathway. It could also refer to the Lord recognizing the behavior of the godly and, by metonymy, rewarding their godliness with security and prosperity (“the LORD rewards the behavior of the godly”). It has been translated "knows" (ESV, NASB), "watches over/guards/protects" (NRSV, NIV, NET, NLT), "guides" (TEV), "cherishes" (NJPS).

צַדִּיקִים – (see below)

תֹּאבֵד – (see below),

References to God

יְהוָ֗ה only in v. 2 (בְּתֹורַ֥ת יְהוָ֗ה) and v. 6 (יֹודֵ֣עַ יְ֭הוָה דֶּ֣רֶךְ צַדִּיקִ֑ים). The Lord is thus the genitive for the Torah, the object of the blessed one's study, and also the one in the end 'knowing' the way of the righteous. By implication, the Lord 'knowing' the way of the righteous is what causes it to prosper, for the flip side is that the way of the wicked perishes. Any semantic nuance is more on the side of 'knowing' than the name, 'LORD'.
This feature is considered relevant for this psalm.,

Tetragrammaton

No other words for God.,

Repeated words

דֶּרֶךְ – “Pathway” (דֶּרֶךְ) in v. 1 refers to the characteristic lifestyle of people, in this case, that of God-hating sinners. So also in v.6, it seems to refer to the life of each group, the righteous’ and wicked’s lives being described as a path/road/journey metaphorically (see v. 1). In this verse, the “way of the wicked” may refer to their course of life (Ps. 146:9; Pr. 4:19; Jer. 12:1), their sinful behavior (Pr. 12:26; Pr. 15:9)—or both, with the latter means implying the former inevitable result.
רְשָׁעִים – Who are the ‘wicked’ as opposed to the Law-loving ‘righteous’? They are not merely bad and immoral people, but actively enemies of the Law and God’s people. The wicked were not only the unbelieving people of neighboring pagan nations opposed to Israel and persecuting it, but also Israelites not living lives aligned to the Law and persecuting those who are, the righteous ones. In the psalms, רְשָׁעִים describes people who are proud, practical atheists (Pss. 10:2, 10:4, 10:11), who hate God’s principles and commands, commit sinful deeds, speak lies and slander (Ps. 50:16-20), and cheat or deceive others (Ps. 37:21). Rendering it as mere ‘bad people’ will be weak.
צַדִּיקִים – The righteous are more than mere good people, they are Torah-loving people, they are people in line with God’s will, they are the true people of the Covenant. Translating the word with ‘good people’ will be inadequate. Maybe a term like faithful ones, or aligned ones, or even straight ones, will work better. But the chosen word needs to be considered in the light of other Hebrew Biblical terms like the upright ones, the blameless ones, and so on.
תּוֹרָה – The word תּוֹרָה can refer either to instruction in general or specifically to God’s instruction as contained within the first five books. The choice to render this key concept is important because it will appear many more times. It has been translated "law (ESV, NRSV, NASB, NIV, NLT, TEV, NET (commands)), "teaching" (NJPS, CEV). In English, the translation “commands” is too limiting (and legalistic!) a rendering for תּוֹרָה; in this context, “instructions” is closer to the original meaning, and even “God’s word” would also be broadly appropriate. Yet it may also refer specifically to the Pentateuch.

"Often the Hebrew word torah is identified with the Law – the primary identifying document of Israelite (and later Jewish) faith. The Torah in this sense refers to the first five books of our Old Testament–Genesis through Deuteronomy–which as a unified collection came to a final form as authoritative Scripture only in the exilic period (ca. 450-400 B.C.). While this is an appropriate understanding of torah in many contexts, the word often has a much more general sense of 'guidelines, instruction.' This sense is by far the more common use in wisdom contexts, and since our psalm clearly moves in the wisdom environment, many have suggested it is the more general meaning that is appropriate here."^[7]

"It may be possible to affirm both levels of meaning. As James L. Mays has shown us, Psalm 1 is the first of several Torah psalms strategically placed within the book of Psalms (1; 19; 119). These psalms exhort the hearers/readers to pay close attention to God's commandments and to be faithful in their response to them. At the same time, however, the wisdom understanding of torah prevents easy limitation to the first five books of the Torah. Biblical wisdom literature had already begun to identify torah (the life-giving commandments of Yahweh) with the life-giving insights given by Yahweh through the wisdom tradition. Thus, most likely torah here implies the traditional commandments of God in the Torah–commandments Israel is expected to obey–as well as the life-giving guidance God gives elsewhere in Scripture."^[8]

"Our comprehension of this verse and of the whole psalm now depends on the interpretation of the term תורה (Torah)... תורה is 'instruction' in the sense of the 'merciful revelation of the will of God (Von Rad). In Psalm 1 this merciful revelation of the will of God is presupposed as something fixed and written. For an understanding of this view of תורה we must in the first place adduce the late Deuteronomic, or Deuteronomistic, conception. The תורה is the complete, written revelation of the will of God, which may be read in public (Deut. 31:9-11) or in private (Josh. 1:7)... The תורה in this sense is the authoritatively valid 'Sacred Scripture.' The scope of sacred Scripture in Ps. 1:2 cannot be determined. Is the reference to Deuteronomy, to the Pentateuch, or even to the (partly) completed canon? This question is related to the uncertainty of the dating of Psalm 1. Indeed, in its nature as a preamble to the Psalter, the concept תורה in any case–and even primarily–includes the scriptural scroll of the Psalms."^[9]

"Torah was in the pre-exilic period not so much 'law' in our sense as 'teaching, instruction.'"^[10]

"Given these wisdom connections, it seems natural to understand תורה in Psalm 1:2 as 'instruction.' This sense seems to be confirmed by the antithesis of תורה, which is 'the advice (עצת) of the wicked' (v.1), not their legal commands." However, "it seems that at the time of writing of Ezra and Chronicles the תורת יהוה, given through Moses, was identical to the תורת משׁה, given by the Lord, and that both refer to the Five Books of Moses (cf. 2 Chron. 34:14; Ezra 7:6). So the תורת יהוה in Psalm 1 naturally refers to the Five Books of Moses." "When we combine the sense of תורה as 'instruction' with תורת יהוה as the Five Books of Moses, we conclude that the book of Psalms invites believers to meditate on the Five Books of Moses as a source of instruction for experiencing the joys/blessings (v.1) and prosperity/success (v.3) held out in Psalm 1."^[11]

מוֹשָׁב – Here the Hebrew term מוֹשָׁב, although often translated “seat” (cf. NEB, NIV), appears to refer to an entire assembly of evildoers. The word also carries the sense of “assembly” in Ps. 107:32, where it stands in synonymous parallelism with קָהָל (“assembly”).
יָשָב – To “sit in the assembly” of לֵצִים means to completely identify with them in their proud, sinful plans, discourse, and behavior. יָשַׁב here may mean more than just ‘sit,’ though it is having physically sat in the company of scoffers (to hear their evil speech) that is the problem; it may indicate something more long-term like ‘dwelt’ in parallel with the other two verbs (הלך and עמד).

1a
1b	רשׁעים
1c		דרך	חטאים
1d
2c				תורה	יהוה
2d				תורה
3a
3b
3c
3d
4a	רשׁעים
4b
5a	רשׁעים
5b			חטאים			צדיקים
6a		דרך			יהוה	צדיקים
6b	רשׁעים	דרך

This feature is considered relevant for this psalm.,

Semantically/thematically related words

"Wicked"
- רְשָׁעִים – (see above on Repeated words)
- לָצִים – The plural Hebrew noun ִליץ refers to arrogant individuals (Pr. 21:24) who love conflict (Ps. 12:4; Pr. 22:10) and scornfully reject wisdom and correction (Pr. 1:22, 9:7-8, 13:1, 15:12). It has been translated "mockers" (NIV, NLT), "insolent" (NJPS), "sneering" (CEV), "scoffers" (ESV, NRSV, NET), "+at God+" (CEV), "no use +for God+" (TEV).
Motion Verbs
- ְהָלַך – הלך in BH is normally ‘go’ not ‘walk’, since it takes a location proposition. However, הלך ב seems to be metaphorical for ‘live according to’. In other words, the blessed person has not lived according to the counsel of wicked people.
- עָמַד – To “stand in the pathway of/with sinners” means to closely associate with them in their sinful attitude and behavior. The phrase means something very similar as הלך ב, since עמד can mean to remain.
- יָשָׁב (see above on Repeated Words)
- יָקֻמוּ –

"Ever since Antiquity, verse 5 of Ps 1 has been interpreted in different ways. Modern translations give us usually three main meanings:

a) to stand up or to rise,

b) to stand (to keep standing),

c) to prevail (in a judgment).

As for modern commentaries, they tend to develop one of the three former interpretations."^[12]

The collocation with קוּם and מִשְׁפָּט seems to have a special meaning, namely to ‘get up to accuse,’ (compare to Isa. 54:17). The idea is that the wicked will not be able to accuse the righteous in judgment in any way. Alternatively, it may refer to being pronounced innocent and acquitted in court, with the sense of “withstand”; “endure,” as in 1 Sam. 13:14 and Job 8:15. In either case, the context suggests a judicial setting in which the wicked lose their case/are judged guilty. It has been translated "stand" (ESV, NRSV, NASB, NIV) > "stand in innocence" (NLT, TEV), "withstand" (NET), "survive" (NJPS), "have an excuse" (CEV).

Agricultural Terms
- עֵץ – The noun עֵץ, occurring 330 times in the Hebrew Bible and 6 times in the Psalms, may refer to a “tree” (sg) or collectively to “trees” (pl), or to the material that comes from trees, namely, “wood.” When referring to a “tree” or to “trees,” עֵץ “emphasizes only the genus, while individual species of trees (e.g., אֶרָז ‘cedar,’ אֵצֶל ‘tamerisk,’ בְּרוֹשׁ ‘cypress,’ גֶּפֶן ‘grapevine,’ זַיִת ‘olive tree,’ לוּז ‘almond tree,’ שִׁקְמָה ‘sycamore,’ תְּאֵנָה ‘fig tree,’ תָּמָר ‘date palm’) or tree shapes (e.g., סְבַךְ/סְבֹךְ ‘bush’ or the word group אַלָּה/אַלּוֹן אֵלָה/אֵלוֹן ‘large tree,’ usually understood as ‘oak/terebinth’) acquire specific designations.”^[13] Languages have different words for trees. Not all trees grow well next to the water, and not all have leafs all year, nor fruit.
- שָׁתוּל – see below on Rare Words.
- פַּלְגֵי מַיִם – The phrase refers literally to “channels of water”—as in a well-maintained irrigation system. "In the metaphorical world of the psalm, [the] stream is God’s instruction.”^[14] The use of the phrase פַּלְגֵי מַיִם together with the attributive participle שָׁתוּל suggest a garden setting for the tree.
- בְּעִתּוֹ – Lit., “in its season/time”—that is, one’s life-“time” as divinely determined.
- מֹץ – The word מֹץ is another agricultural term, referring to the light-weight casks of winnowed wheat that is useless and which is so light that it easily can be taken by the wind, never to be seen again.
Pathway language
- דֶּרֶךְ – (see above on Repeated Words)
- הלך, עמד – (see above on Motion Verbs)
- תֹּאבֵד – The root אבד is used for the sense of both ‘be destroyed’ and ‘be lost,’ and it may be a play on words here in the context of דֶּרֶך, normally meaning ‘road/way,’ being used as ‘life.’ In English, ‘lost’ can be used with the same two senses, so it may be helpful to translate as ‘lost.’ It has been translated "perish/doom/ruin/(ends in/leads to) destruction" (ESV, NRSV, NASB, NIV, NET, NLT, TEV, CEV, NJPS).

The sequence רְשָׁ֫עִ֥ים / חַ֭טָּאִים / לֵ֝צִ֗ים is all introduced in v. 1 as that which the blessed/righteous person shuns. It seems to go from generic to specific, with the mocker being the one who despises wisdom, the polar opposite of the one who seeks wisdom in the Torah. The intensification of their accompanying verbs, הָלַךְ֮ / עָמָ֑ד / יָשָֽׁב, starts with a fairly generic verb and proceeds to a specific semantic notion of 'sitting' and even 'dwelling', given more weight with the cognate noun 'seat/dwelling'. The frame is one of righteousness: 'blessed is the one who does not . . .' but then the next 3 lines are all stepping further into wickedness. The righteous is actively choosing to avoid these, suggesting that the first thing a seeker of blessing must do is:

>> To stop all things leading to wickedness and, then, one can devote oneself to the Torah.

>> The source of wisdom is not in oneself / humans (as the mocker might presume) but rather in the Torah alone.

The negative structure of intensification is a foil for a positive intensification of the tree, which

is planted by water, bears fruit in season, has foliage that doesn't wither, and prospers in all things. This whole prospering of the tree is contrasted with its semantic opposite, both in terms of agriculture (tree brings food, chaff is inedible and useless) and morality (righteous vs wicked). Interestingly, the agricultural object used as an analogy for the righteous is not grain or the crops we tend to perceive of as regularly sown and harvested, but rather that which is planted once (e.g. olive/fig tree) and carefully tended over the years. If שָׁת֪וּל is to be understood as 'transplanted', then there may be in view a former position/life of the tree/person, such that it needs to be removed from its former context and placed in a new context in order to flourish. This would fit with a sense of rejecting wickedness to devote oneself to the Torah. Note the asymmetry: rejecting walking/standing/sitting among the wicked in order to delight in/meditate on the Torah. There isn't even any 'walking according to the Law of the Lord' but only delighting in it and meditating on it day and night.

>> This psalm is not about our actions but rather our allegiance.

יֹומָ֥ם וָלָֽיְלָה is the timeframe for meditating on the Torah: a merism indicating 'at all times'. If walking/standing/sitting might refer to different parts of life, each of which requires rejecting wickedness, there is no part of life that excludes the Torah.

The psalm begins with the righteous being declared blessed because he rejects the ways of the wicked, while it ends with the wicked being excluded from the assembly of the righteous. One must choose either to reject or to be rejected; either:

reject wickedness > choose righteousness, or choose wicked > be rejected from the righteous (To consider: 'judgment' > 'place of judgment' > courts/city gates, with or without eschatological overtones?)

The metaphor of 'The Way' is used extensively, from walk/stand/sit to explicit uses of 'way', with the culmination of the psalm that Lord 'knowing' the way of the righteous but the way of the wicked perishing. A title for the psalm might be: 'The Way of the Righteous v the Way of the Wicked'.
This feature is considered relevant for this psalm.,

Rare words

אַ֥שְֽׁרֵי־הָאִ֗ישׁ - meaning and pragmatic function

'formal introduction of a blessing' per Zimmerli (pursue)^[15].

The phrase in Psalm 1 has been translated "blessed/happy is the one/man" (NIV, ESV, NASB, NJPS), "happy are those" (NRSV, NLT, TEV) "+God+ blesses those people" (CEV).

The Hebrew noun is an emphatic abstract plural, ֥אַשְׁרֵי (‘happinesses/joys-of’), i.e. “Oh, how joyous!” Goh suggests “commendable” ^[16], which seems more appropriate in this setting.

אַשְׁרֵי is to be distinguished from ברך, the principal word in the Old Testament referring to the multiplying and abundant benefits of the Covenant. Here to be ‘blessed’ (אַשְׁרֵי) means to be considered fortunate and blessed, to be admired by others.^[17] "Barak is a benediction, ashar more of a congratulation."^[18]

In other contexts the word refers metonymically to the peace and contentment that God-given fellowship and security produce (see v. 3; Pss. 2:12, 34:9, 41:1, 65:4, 84:12, 89:15, 106:3, 112:1, 127:5, 128:1, 144:15).

"The Old Greek and the Vulgate interpret the opening Hebrew word, אשרי, as a declaration of blessedness. This view maybe corroborated by the juxtaposition of the verbs אשר and ברך in Ps 72:17. The equivalence is further suggested by Jer 17:7-8, which has ברוך הגבר אשר (“Blessed is the man who ...”) in a context that, as in Psalm 1, speaks of a tree being planted by waters. Yet the verb אשר is never used with God as the subject or the object, and the form אשרי is never used of God or by God. The closest one comes to the use of the verb with Gods involvement is only by implication: “May Yhwh keep him and preserve him; may he be commended [יאשר] in the land” (Is 41:3). One may conclude, therefore, that אשר is an atheological equivalent of ברך. Whereas ברך is “bless,” אשר in the piel means something like “commend.""^[19]

אַ֥שְֽׁרֵי־הָאִ֗ישׁ as a title? see below
The opening word of the Psalm, “Blessed is…” is a theme frame (a word that holds the theme together in a longer stretch of text). Languages have different ways to position a theme framing word in a story or in a poem. In Hebrew, it is the first word of the poem. It is likely the same in many languages, but it is necessary to research local poems for examples. It can even be left-dislocated, followed by a comma, or a relative clause “The one who is blessed is…”, or even by a cleft sentence.
שָׁת֪וּל – The verb שׁתל appears 10 times in the Masoretic text of the Hebrew Bible (Jer. 17:8; Ezek. 17:8, 10, 22, 23; 19:10, 13; Hos. 9:13[?]; Ps. 1:3; 92:14) only in the Qal stem and most often as a passive participle (8/10 times). Its use here indicates that this is an agricultural context, i.e. we are talking about something cultivated rather than natural. The word suggests an intentional “planting” (or “trans-planting”) at a particular favorable place by some other agent, with God being implied (v. 6a). In this way, the word is distinguished from the more general נטע ("plant"). This act of “transplanting” (שׁתל) is associated in the biblical literature with gardens (Ezek. 17:8, 10, 22, 23; 19:10[LXX]), water (Jer. 17:8; Ezek. 17:8; 19:10; Ps. 1:3) and fruit/productivity (Jer. 17:8; Ezek. 17:8, 23; 19:10; Ps. 1:3; 92:14). The most illustrative occurrences of the meaning of the verb are in Ezekiel 17, where a “twig/sapling” (יֹנֶקֶת) plucked from among the tops of the high cedar trees (Ezek. 17:22-23) is planted (שׁתל) on Yahweh’s high and lofty mountain for the purpose of growing branches, producing fruit, and becoming a majestic cedar (Ezek. 17:23).

Verbs[ ]

Verb forms

Definition Feature being studied	Occurrences Sections where this feature is present or absent	Clustering	Intersection	Structure
qatal	הלך (v.1b), עמד (v.1c), ישב (v.1d)	v. 1		"The initial cluster of three parallel qatals (1b-d) is followed by a verbless line (2a) and a line with yiqtol (2b); the changes from verbal to nonverbal and then to a different conjugation parallel the change in content, which moves from what does not characterize the happy man (1a-d) to what does (2a-b)."<ref>Frederic Putnam, “Working with Biblical Hebrew Poetry,” in Basics of Hebrew Discourse, edited by Miles van Pelt (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Academic, 2019), 184-185.</ref>
yiqtol	יהגה (v.2b), יתן (v.3b), יבול (v.3c), יצליח (v.3d), תדפנו (v.4b), יקמו (v.5a), תאבד (v.6b)	vv. 2-6		(see above cell)
weqatal	והיה (v.3a)		beginning of third subunit within the first strophe (v.3)
participle	יודע (v.6a)	only v.6a	beginning of final strophe (v.6)	"The only non-finite predicate in the poem is the participle יוֹדֵעַ (v. 6a). Since the six verbal predicates in lines 3b-6a are yiqtols, it seems highly probably that the poet used a participle here... to mark the shift from the description of the wicked to the summary statement that closes the poem and maintains the "righteous...wicked" pattern of the body of the poem (6a-b)."<ref>Frederic Putnam, “Working with Biblical Hebrew Poetry,” in Basics of Hebrew Discourse, edited by Miles van Pelt (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Academic, 2019), 184-185.</ref>

The negative choices of the righteous are all qatal forms, and the rest of the psalm entirely yiqtol/weqatal/participle. The semantics fit with present perfect for v. 1: these are things the righteous 'have not done', whereas v. 2 has what the righteous do and the rest of the psalm has the results that 'will/do happen' to the general classes of righteous & wicked. The split is thus

past/perfective (what has not happened, v. 1)
present habitual (verbless & yiqtol) for the righteous
present habitual / future for the results

This means every verb is non-specific: it either refers to the class of the righteous/wicked or it refers to a typical behaviour/action of the LORD. The entire psalm speaks in categories, rather than specifics.

The implications are myriad, in terms of the regularity and reliability of how people's decisions / alignment with righteousness or wickedness bring on their own results.

>> The purpose of this psalm is not to instruct on proper actions (although that is covered briefly and is an assumption); the purpose of this psalm is to instruct on the outcomes of one's prior choices.

v. 1bcd. The qatal verbs are all negated and activities the righteous is to reject. This has led to confusion over the meaning of qatal/yiqtol, but here is used poetically as one more way to oppose the righteous from the wicked. The qatal verbs are probably perfect, not habitual (as they are normally translated), i.e. ‘who has not gone…’ and not ‘who goes’ (qatal is quite rare as a habitual and yiqtol would have been unambiguously habitual given the context).

v. 2b. The phrase יוֹמָם וָלָיְלָה establishes the Topic Time and makes the yiqtol (יֶהְגֶּה) necessarily habitual. The null copula can be past, present, or future, but I am not sure if it can be any aspect. If so, a better translation might be ‘his delight has been in the law of God’ to match the qatal forms in the previous verse.

v. 3a. The Hebrew perfect verbal form with waw consecutive here (וְהָיָה) continues the sense of the imperfect in the preceding verse. Thus, the one who studies and obeys (does) God’s commands typically prospers in life in a biblical proverbial sense. וְהָיָה is probably connected to the previous verse as a consequence, though this need not be expressed explicitly in the translation.

v. 3bc. The subsequent imperfect verbal forms in v. 3 (יִתֵּן and יִבּוֹל) draw attention to the typical nature of the actions/states they describe. Alternatively, these verbs may be future relative to the planting rather than habitual, i.e. ‘whose fruit will be borne on time and whose leaf will not wither.’ This creates expectation for what will happen as a result of the planting. In other words, the planting will cause something to happen in the future relative to it.

v. 3d. The TAM in the last clause of this verse could either be hypothetical and then future or two habituals. The difference would be ‘and (in) all he might do, he will succeed’ vs. ‘and (in) all he does, he succeeds.’ Most translations have the latter, and the difference is fairly inconsequential.

v. 4b. The Hebrew imperfect verb (תִּדְּפֶנּוּ) draws attention to the typical nature of the action described.

v. 5.

Is v.5 a timeless description like the rest of the psalm, or does this verse narrate future events (eschatological prediction)?

"There is no evidence that the judgment here spoken of is the tribunal of man. Clearly the reference is to the judgment of God."^[20]

"Ps. 1:5, in view of Ps. 24:3, provisionally must be translated, 'therefore the wicked will not enter the judgment court, nor sinners the congregation of the righteous.' And the meaning would be as follows: The רשׁעים do not have access to the act of sacral judgment (משׁפט), which is the presupposition for access to the sanctuary, and therefore also do not arrive at the עֵדָה of the צדיקים, that is the congregation that praises God in the holy place (Pss. 118:19, 20; 111:1)... Or course... it is probably not at all conceivable that the sacral-legal and the cultic institutions still have a real significance for our psalm. The concepts and formulations are indeed molded from that model, but they have largely been spiritualized. The sacral-judicial institution of משׁפט mentioned in Psalm 1 and the עדת צדיקים transcend the empirical reality of the cultic-sacral and are made transparent entities that affect all of existence and point to the end-time. Thus those conceptions would finally be proved to be correct which speak–perhaps too quickly and too rashly–of משׁפט as of the 'final judgment' and of עדה as the 'messianic congregation of the new world.'"^[21]

The context and the meaning of קוּם with מִשְׁפָּט seem to actually favor a circumstantial reading of yiqtol in the future ‘will not be able to,’ though I am not sure if this is possible without the periphrastic construction יוּכְלוּ לָקוּם. Either way, the statement seems to be generic.

Translating the verb tenses correctly is a challenge. Verb systems do different things in different languages. It is not necessary to perfectly line up the verb tenses. It may sound artificial and can introduce misunderstanding.
This feature is considered relevant for this psalm.,

Person, gender and number

Definition Feature being studied	Occurrences Sections where this feature is present or absent	Clustering	Intersection	Connections	Structure
3rd person	הלך (v.1b), עמד (v.1c), ישב (v.1d), יהגה (v.2b), והיה (v.3a), יתן (v.3b), יבול (v.3c), יצליח (v.3d), תדפנו (v.4b), יקמו (v.5a), תאבד (v.6b)	entire psalm: every verb in the psalm which is marked for person is 3rd person			Cohesion.
plural	יקמו (v.5a)	only one occurrence at v.5a; all other verbs are singular	beginning of subunit within 2nd strophe

This feature is considered relevant for this psalm.,

Verb stem types (binyanim)

Definition Feature being studied	Occurrences Sections where this feature is present or absent	Clustering	Intersection	Connections	Structure
Qal	הלך (v.1b), עמד (v.1c), ישב (v.1d), יהגה (v.2b), והיה (v.3a), יתן (v.3b), יבול (v.3c), תדפנו (v.4b), יקמו (v.5a), יודע (v.6a), תאבד (v.6b)	v.1bcd, v.3abc, v.6ab
Hiphil	יצליח (v.3d)	one occurrence at 3d; absent elsewhere	occurs immediately before a break - the second part of the psalm.<!--Jason.Sommerlad-->		The distribution of verb stems in this psalm "might seem normal, since more than two-thirds of all verbs in the Hebrew Bible are qal, and hiphil is the next most common stem. The hiphil in 1:3[d], however, not only stands in contrast to the consistent qals in the rest of the poem but also concludes its first main section, the 'happy man' (1a-3e)."<ref>Frederic Putnam, “Working with Biblical Hebrew Poetry,” in Basics of Hebrew Discourse, edited by Miles van Pelt (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Academic, 2019), 184-185.</ref>

v.3d. Is יַצְלִיחַ transitive or intransitive? In the Hiphil stem, הצליח may be either intransitive ("to be successful") or transitive ("to make something a success").^[22]

Collins argues that we should "take the Hiphil in the intransitive sense, since no causative agent is mentioned."^[23]

However, Delitzsch argues that the transitive reading with "the man" as the subject is the most natural. "This Hiph. (from צלח, Arab. tslh, to divide, press forward, press through, vid., Psalm 45:5) signifies both causative: to cause anything to go through, or prosper (Genesis 34:23), and transitive: to carry through, and intransitive: to succeed, prosper (Judges 18:5). With the first meaning, Jahve would be the subject; with the third, the project of the righteous; with the middle one, the righteous man himself. This last is the most natural: everything he takes in hand he brings to a successful issue (an expression like 2 Chronicles 7:11; 2 Chronicles 31:21; Daniel 8:24)."^[24]

Goldingay makes a similar argument. "The verb ṣālaḥ (hiphil) can be used intransitively with an impersonal subject (see Judg. 18:5) but the transitive usage is much more common (e.g., Ps. 37:7; Deut. 28:29; Josh. 1:8; Isa. 48:15); 2 Chron. 7:11 is esp. similar to this instance. NRSV likely presupposes this understanding (cf. its rendering at Ps. 37:7). While God can be the subject of this verb, neither those parallels nor the present context points in this direction."^[25]

"The hiphil of the verb, which may be transitive, intransitive, or causative, allows a surfeit of meaning here, altogether performing the flourishing that is conveyed. The promise of flourishing is being played out in the abundance of lines and in the polyvalence of the text."^[26]

This feature is considered relevant for this psalm.,

Other

**Verb Morphology**
Verse	Verb	Stem	Conjugation	Person	Gender	Number	Suffix	Root
1b	הָלַךְ	Q	qatal	3	m	s		הלך
1c	עָמַד	Q	qatal	3	m	s		עמד
1d	לֵצִים	Q	participle		m	p		ליץ
1d	יָשָׁב	Q	qatal	3	m	s		ישׁב
2b	יֶהְגֶּה	Q	yiqtol	3	m	s		הגה
3a	וְהָיָה	Q	weqatal	3	m	s		היה
3a	שָׁתוּל	Qp	participle		m	s		שׁתל
3b	יִתֵּן	Q	yiqtol	3	m	s		נתן
3c	יִבּוֹל	Q	yiqtol	3	m	s		נבל
3d	יַצְלִיחַ	H	yiqtol	3	m	s		צלח
4c	תִּדְּפֶנּוּ	Q	yiqtol	3	f	s	3ms	נדף
5a	יָקוּמוּ	Q	yiqtol	3	m	p		קום
6a	ַיוֹדֵע	Q	participle		m	s		ידע
6b	תֹּאבֵד	Q	yiqtol	3	f	s		אבד

Nouns[ ]

Number

Definition Feature being studied	Occurrences Sections where this feature is present or absent	Clustering	Intersection	Connections	Structure
plural	אַשְׁרֵי (v.1a), רְשָׁעִים (v.1b), חַטָּאִים (v.1c), לֵצִים (v.1d), פַּלְגֵי (v.3a), מַיִם (v.3a) הָרְשָׁעִים (v.4a), רְשָׁעִים (v.5a), וְחַטָּאִים (v.5b), צַדִּיקִים (v.5b), צַדִּיקִים (v.6a), רְשָׁעִים (v.6b). Nearly all of the plural nouns refer to classes of people (e.g. רְשָׁעִים, צַדִּיקִים).	v.1 (4x); vv. 5-6 (x5); almost absent in vv.2-3.	beginning and ending of psalm; beginning (v.1) of first section (vv.1-3); beginning (v.4) of second section (vv.4-5), final section (v.6)	vv.5-6 connected to v.1	Plurals within the first line of each section (anaphora). The lack of plural nouns in v.2 indicates a measure of discontinuity with v.1.
singular	הָאִישׁ (v.1a), בַּעֲצַת (v.1b), וּבְדֶרֶךְ (v.1c), וּבְמוֹשַׁב (v.1d), בְּתוֹרַת (v.2a), חֶפְצוֹ (v.2a), וּֽבְתוֹרָתוֹ (v.2b), יוֹמָם (subst. as adv. v.2b), וָלָיְלָה (v.2b), כְּעֵץ (v.3a), פִּרְיוֹ (v.3b), בְּעִתּוֹ (v.3b), וְעָלֵהוּ (v.3c), וְכֹל (v.3d), כַּמֹּץ (v.4b), רוּחַ (v.4b), בַּמִּשְׁפָּט (v.5a), בַּעֲדַת (v.5b), דֶּ֣רֶךְ (v.6a), וְדֶרֶךְ (v.6b)	Mostly in the first section of the Psalm (vv.1-3), where הָאִישׁ (sg.) is the topic.			הָאִישׁ (singular), the topic of the first section, is contrasted with the wicked (plural), which are the topic of the second section.

See the table below on noun morphology.
This feature is considered relevant for this psalm.,

Gender

Definition Feature being studied	Occurrences Sections where this feature is present or absent	Clustering	Intersection	Connections	Structure
masculine	אַשְׁרֵי (v.1a), הָאִישׁ (v.1a), רְשָׁעִים (v.1b), וּבְדֶרֶךְ (v.1c?), חַטָּאִים (v.1c), וּבְמוֹשַׁב (v.1d), לֵצִים (v.1d), חֶפְצוֹ (v.2a), וָלָיְלָה (v.2b), כְּעֵץ (v.3a), פַּלְגֵי (v.3a), מָיִם (v.3a), פִּרְיוֹ (v.3b), וְעָלֵהוּ (v.3c), וְכֹל (v.3d), הָרְשָׁעִים (v.4a), כַּמֹּץ (v.4b), רְשָׁעִים (v.5a), בַּמִּשְׁפָּט (v.5a), וְחַטָּאִים (v.5b), צַדִּיקִים (v.5b), דֶּ֣רֶךְ (v.6a?), צַדִּיקִים (v.6b), רְשָׁעִים (v.6b)
feminine	בַּעֲצַת (v.1b), וּבְדֶרֶךְ (v.1c), בְּתוֹרַת (v.2a), וּֽבְתוֹרָתוֹ (v.2b), בְּעִתּוֹ (v.3b), רוּחַ (v.4b), בַּעֲדַת (v.5b), דֶּ֣רֶךְ (v.6a), וְדֶרֶךְ (v.6b)	distributed rather evenly throughout the psalm		There is a clear connection between בַּעֲצַת(v.1b) and בַּעֲדַת (v.5b). Morphologically, both nouns are feminine, singular, construct nouns from a I-yôd root (יעץ/יעד). Phonologically, they sound very much like (see above on Phonology).	The connection between בַּעֲצַת(v.1b) and בַּעֲדַת (v.5b) suggests a correspondence between these lines.

See the table below on noun morphology.

The morphological gender of דרך is masculine, but the syntactic gender of דרך in v.1c and v.6a is impossible to determine. In v.6b, the syntactic gender of דרך is feminine.

This feature is considered relevant for this psalm.,

Definiteness

See the table below on noun morphology.

v. 1. It may be significant that there is no definite article with the three construct nouns, i.e. ‘who has not walked in a piece of advice of wicked people…in a path of sinners…in a seat of scoffers.’

v. 5. Despite the fact that there is no article on any of the plural nouns that refer to people, it still refers to the class, which might require the article in some languages to express (including English). This is quite common in BH.

v. 5a. The definite article on מִשׁפָּט indicates a specific judgment in the mind of the speaker. This may refer either a temporal-historical judgment, which the author anticipates, or to the final eschatological judgment. Periodically during the OT period, God would come in judgment, removing the wicked from the scene, while preserving a godly remnant (see Gen. 6-9; Ps. 37; Hab. 3). The LXX’s addition of “from the face of the earth” at the end of the preceding colon would also suggest a climactic eschatological judgment.

v. 6. Hebrew often omits the definite article for definite things (see verse 5).

This feature is considered relevant for this psalm.,

Pronominal suffixes

**Noun Morphology**
Verse	Noun	Gender	Number	"Declension"	Suffix	Definiteness	Root
1a	אַשְׁרֵי	m	p	cst.		*	אשׁר
1a	הָאִישׁ	m	s	abs.		*(h)	אישׁ
1b	בַּעֲצַת	f	s	cst.			יעץ
1b	רְשָׁעִים	m	p	abs.			רשׁע
1c	וּבְדֶרֶך	m / f	s	cst.			דרך
1c	חַטָּאִים	m	p	abs.			חטא
1d	וּבְמוֹשַׁב	m	s	cst.			ישׁב
1d	לֵצִים (ptc)	m	p	abs.			ליץ
2a	בְּתוֹרַת	f	s	cst.		*	ירה
2a	יְהוָה			abs.		*
2a	חֶפְצוֹ	m	s	abs.	3ms	*	חפץ
2b	וּבְתוֹרָתוֹ	f	s	abs.	3ms	*	ירה
2b	וָלָיְלָה	m	s	abs. (adv.)
3a	כְּעֵץ	m	s	abs.			עצה
3a	פַּלְגֵי	m	p	cst.			פלג
3a	מָיִם	m	d	abs.			מי
3b	פִּרְיוֹ	m	s		3ms	*	פרה
3b	בְּעִתּוֹ	f	s	abs.	3ms	*	ענה
3c	וְעָלֵהוּ	m	s	abs	3ms	*	עלה
3d	וְכֹל	m	s	abs.			כלל
4a	הָרְשָׁעִים	m	p	abs.		*(h)	רשׁע
4b	כַּמֹּץ	m	s	abs.		*	מוֹץ
4b	רוּחַ	f	s	abs.			רוּח
5a	רְשָׁעִים	m	p	abs.			רשׁע
5a	בַּמִּשְׁפָּט	m	s	abs.		*	שׁפט
5b	וְחַטָּאִים	m	p	abs.			חטא
5b	בַּעֲדַת	f	s	cst.			יעד
5b	צַדִּיקִים	m	p	abs.			צדק
6a	יְהוָה			abs.		*
6a	דֶּ֣רֶךְ	m / f	s	cst.			דרך
6a	צַדִּיקִים	m	p	abs.			צדק
6b	וְדֶרֶךְ	f	s	cst.			דרך
6b	רְשָׁעִים	m	p	abs.			רשׁע

,

Addressee change

See tablebelow.

No second-person forms or vocatives. The topic shifts:

blessed one (subject)
wicked one (patient)
closing
- wicked (subject w/ negative verb)
- righteous (object, known by God)
- wicked (effective subject)

This feature is considered relevant for this psalm.,

Speaker change

Third person throughout. See table below.
This feature is considered relevant for this psalm.,

Subject change

Subjects
The subjects are:

the blessed man > the tree that represents him
the wicked > the wind that blows away chaff representing them > wicked/sinners
the LORD
way of the wicked

(The last two form one couplet, whereas the first two each form, separately, multiple cola.)

Semantic Roles
(Righteous as agent / positive undergoer)

The blessed (righteous) avoids the wicked's ways.
The righteous seeks the Torah of the LORD.
He will prosper like a tree.

(Wicked as patient & wind as agent)

The wicked are like chaff
Which the wind blows away

(The LORD as experiencer > implied agent / way of the wicked as undergoer)

The wicked will not withstand judgment, nor sinners the assembly of the righteous
The Lord knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked perishes

There is a shift from agency (especially active, deliberate choices of the righteous) to the passivity of the wicked, who only receives his due. The only time the wicked are a subject is denying their ability to survive judgment.

>> The Lord has an implicit role, which may set up the book of Psalms: his agency does need to be explicit in order to be present. He is the source of the Torah which leads to good choices, and he is the one overseeing and thus ensuring the results. The wicked doesn't need to do anything additional to receive the punishment for his wickedness: it comes as a natural result to his prior choices to become wicked.

Ref.	Speaker	Person	Subject/Agent
1a	Psalmist	3	הָאִישׁ
1b	Psalmist	3	הָאִישׁ
1c	Psalmist	3	הָאִישׁ
1d	Psalmist	3	הָאִישׁ
2a	Psalmist	3	חֶפְצוֹ
2b	Psalmist	3	הָאִישׁ
3a	Psalmist	3	הָאִישׁ
3b	Psalmist	3	עֵץ = הָאִישׁ
3c	Psalmist	3	עֵץ = הָאִישׁ
3d	Psalmist	3	עֵץ = הָאִישׁ
4a	Psalmist	3	הָרְשָׁעִים
4b	Psalmist	3	הָרְשָׁעִים/רוּחַ
5a	Psalmist	3	רְשָׁעִים
5b	Psalmist	3	חַטָּאִים
6a	Psalmist	3	יהוה
6b	Psalmist	3	דֶּרֶךְ רְשָׁעִים

v.3d. This colon is probably the biggest translation problem in this Psalm. The subject of יעשה might be 1. the man or 2. the tree, and that of יצליח might be a. “what the man/tree does”, b. the man /tree or c. God.”

1a. everything the man does is successful (NIV, Darby, Douay-Rheims, RV, KJV; most French, German and Russian translations)

1b. everything the man does, he makes succeed

1c. everything the man does, God makes succeed

1d. (in) everything the man does, he prospers (most English translations!)

2a. everything the tree produces flourishes (NJPS, or perhaps “every bud the tree produces, turns into fruit”?)

2b. everything the tree produces, the tree makes successful

2c. everything the tree produces, God makes flourish

Who or what is the subject of יַעֲשֶׂה (v.3d)?

“Some think that a tree is the subject of this last line (see American Translation [AT] ‘and whatever it bears comes to maturity’; see also NJV). But most commentaries and translations take the righteous person to be the subject; so TEV ‘they succeed.’”^[27]

“It is only with וכל, where the language becomes unemblematic, that the man who loves the Law of God again becomes the direct subject. The accentuation treats this member of the verse as the third member of the relative clause; one may, however, say of a thriving plant צלח, but not הצליח. This Hiph. (from צלח, Arab. tslh, to divide, press forward, press through, vid., Psalms 45:5) signifies both causative: to cause anything to go through, or prosper (Genesis 34:23), and transitive: to carry through, and intransitive: to succeed, prosper (Judges 18:5). With the first meaning, Jahve would be the subject; with the third, the project of the righteous; with the middle one, the righteous man himself. This last is the most natural: everything he takes in hand he brings to a successful issue (an expression like 2 Chronicles 7:11; 2 Chronicles 31:21; Daniel 8:24).”^[28]

“From the point of view of the semantic content, it cannot be said that D follows on as a third parallel line from B and C. The colon does not concern part of the tree but rather, like line A, is a statement of a more general nature. Moreover, the clause contains no proforms (such as ‘its’ in lines B and C) referring back to the tree, and grammatically it is not contained within the relative clause in which lines B and C are situated. Line D, therefore, evidently stands independently of the preceding two lines. The subject of its first verb, יעשׂה, is 3rd person masculine singular which is best taken as agreeing with והיה at the beginning of the A-line (as, for example, in NIV NASB REB). The subject of והיה, ‘he’, refers to the man who delights in and meditates on God’s law (v.2). The man who esteems the divine law in this way will also prosper in everything he does.” ^[29]

“The syntax is ambivalent, and the line could refer to the tree. But the line is best taken as referring to the righteous man and as concluding the first section (vv.1-3).”^[30]

“The closing colon of the stanza [v.3d] introduces a degree of ambiguity. It states, it prospers in everything. The subject of the phrase is ambiguous; it could either be the tree of v. 3 or the righteous one of v. 1. If it is the tree, then the point is that in all weather conditions the tree flourished. If it is the human, then the point is that the environment created by the wicked cannot extinguish the righteous. Like heat applied to a chemical reaction, this ambiguity serves to help the tenor and the vehicle of the simile (the righteous one and the vibrant tree, respectively) marry. The one who studies God’s instruction is the tree transplanted near water.”^[31]

"There is poetic play as well in the ambiguity of the subject of the verb עשׂה which can mean 'produce' or 'do,' as medieval Jewish commentators regularly noticed. In light of the arboreal imagery, one should first take the verb to refer to the plant (Cf. עשה used of plants in Gen 1:11-12; Isa 5:2,4,10; 37:31 [= 2 Kgs 19:30]; Jer 12:2; 17:8; Hos 8:7; 9:17). Ezekiel 17:8-10 is an especially pertinent parallel, for it speaks of a vine planted (שתל) by abundant waters to be productive (עשה), a plant that is expected to flourish (צלח). Understanding the well-rooted plant to be the subject, therefore, one might translate the subject with the English neuter: “whatever it produces thrives” (NJPS). This is the interpretation of the Targums and was followed by Radaq. At the same time, as Ibn Ezra and others prefer, the subject may be the commendable person who delights in Yhwh's תורה and, like Joshua, engages it 'day and night.' Hence the subject of עשה is not only the plant ('it') but also the commendable one ('he'): 'whatever he does prospers' (NIV; similarly KJV, NRSV). Diodore of Tarsus is perceptive in his interpretation, for he recognizes that the poet is moving from the figure (the tree) to its referent (the person). Ambiguity is a tool of the poet at this point, and it is particularly shrewdly employed, for the commendable person and the tree become one and the same."^[32]

Who or what is the subject of יַצְלִיחַ (v.3d)?

"Furthermore, just as the subject of עשה is not exclusive, so also the subject of is not exclusive. It may refer to all that the tree produces—its fruit (v. 3a) and צלח foliage (v. 3b) will be abundant: “all that it produces will flourish” (so Jerome; similarly Augustine, Hilary of Foitiers, Cassiodorus). It may refer to all that the commendable person does: “all that he does will succeed” or he will bring all he does to a successful conclusion (so Midr. Teh. 1:12,13; Peshitta; Diodore ofTarsus; Aquinas; NJB: “every project succeeds”), an interpretation that is compelling in light of the intertextuality with Josh 1:7-8. It may also refer to God, as Erasmus implies: “Whatever they do, they have God as their guide.... How could anyhing undertaken with Gods guidance fail to prosper?” So one may translate, “All that he does. He will prosper.” Indeed, the hiphil of the verb, which may be transitive, intransitive, or causative, allows a surfeit of meaning here, altogether performing the flourishing that is conveyed. The promise of flourishing is being played out in the abundance of lines and in the polyvalence of the text."

See the related discussion Verb stem types (binyanim)

This feature is considered relevant for this psalm.

Particles[ ]

Negative markers

Verse one has a threefold לֹ֥א : the blessed one does not walk, does not stand, does not sit with the wicked.
In v. 3, the foliage of the (righteous) tree does not wither.
"Not so" (like the prospering tree) are the wicked, v. 4.
Consequently, the wicked will 'not' stand in judgment / or sinners in the assembly of the righteous.

The first occurrences of negative markers are all the righteous either abstaining from wicked behaviour or experiencing the absence of results of wicked behaviour. The last two are the wicked not experiencing the results of righteousness.

v.2 and v.6 are the only two verses in the poem without the Hebrew negative particle (לא ‘no/not’).,

Independent personal pronouns

No personal pronouns in this psalm! Perhaps because it is short? Search how many psalms have no pronouns, or pronouns per word average across the psalms.,

Prepositions

Chan argues for a chiastic structure for vv. 1-5 (A A' B' B), where the letters (A/B) represent the subjects (righteous/wicked respectively) and the chiasm is formed by distribution of the prepositions בְּ (vv. 1-2, 5) and כְּ (vv. 3-4).^[33]

vv.1-2 (בְּ)

v.3 (כְּ)

v.4 (כְּ)

v.5 (בְּ),

Waw/Vav

Coordinating words within a line

v.2b יוֹמָם וָלַיְלָה

Coordinating lines within a unit

v.1b --(waw + noun)--> 1c --(waw + noun)--> 1d
v.2a --(waw + noun)--> 2b
v.3b --(waw + noun)--> 3c --(waw + noun)--> 3d
v.5a --(waw + noun)--> 5b
v.6a --(waw + noun)--> 6b

Coordinating units (bicola, tricola, etc.) within a section

v.2 --(weqatal)--> v.3

Coordinating sections (none)

The connective ‘and’ in the various parallelisms and structures of intensification require some care in the translation of those parallelisms where they occur. In some languages ‘and’ is never used for a sequential action or a next phase, the verse lines are just juxtapositioned with no connective whatsoever.,

Other particles

אשׁר – Wordplay with אשׁרי and רשׁע.^[34] "The three occurrences of the relative particle אשר [in the first section] (vv. 1a, 3b, 3b) echo the title [אשרי האיש], thus keeping the commendable person on track, as it were, whereas the wicked are not so."^[35]
v. 2a. כִּי אִם (also in v.4b) is contrastive, but it does not seem to be simply ‘but.’ It contrasts the type of input that the blessed man delights in with the type of input and lifestyle that he refuses to live in from the previous verse. It introduces a sudden contrast between the sinful behavior depicted in v. 1 and the godly lifestyle described in v. 2. In translation, such a connective calls for some mechanism of contrast in the TL. It doesn’t need to be a connective, although it is likely that a contrastive connective may be required.

v. 4a. כֵן refers back to the righteous who succeed at what they do.

v.4b. As in v. 2, the Hebrew expression כִּי אִם ִ֤(“instead”) is strongly disjunctive and introduces a consequent disparity between the prosperity of the godly depicted in v. 3 and the destiny of the wicked described in v. 4. This contrast between the righteous and the ungodly has already been strongly signaled by the initial לא כן of v. 4.

v. 5a. The expression עַל-כֵּן may indicate either (1) an explanation of the metaphors, or (2) a definitive conclusion based on the preceding v. 4. In the case of the latter, עַל-כֵּן refers back to the fact that the wicked’s destruction will be evident as well as the prosperity of the righteous. For this reason, the wicked will have nothing to accuse the righteous with because it will be evident who is in the right.

v. 6a. כִּי introduces the reason why the wicked will not be able to go to judgment with the righteous. Alternatively, כִּי may just have a discourse function asserting a final conclusion. Another option is to understand כִּי as introducing a ground for the whole Psalm. The righteous succeed (vv. 1-3) and the wicked come to nothing (vv. 4-5) because (כִּי) of Yahweh's action on behalf of the righteous (v. 6a grounds vv. 1-3) and because of the nature of the wicked's path (v. 6b grounds vv. 4-5).

Figurative[ ]

Metaphor

Psalm 1 begins (v. 1) and ends (v. 6) with the conceptual metaphor LIFE is a PATHWAY (דֶּרָךְ).,

Simile

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 tree (v. 3) planted by water, producing fruit and leaves, and the wicked person is compared to chaff that is blown by the 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.,

Metonymy

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). “Rising in the judgment” (קוּם בַּמִּשְׁפָּט) appears to be a metonymy for taking action in a legal case (see 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).,

Merism

v. 2b. The adverbial phrase יוֹמָם וָלַיְלָה is a merism (day and night = continually).

Context[ ]

Translation advice

Translate as a “conceptual metaphor”
- Walk, stand, sit = relationship, being under the influence of
- What would be a conceptual metaphor appropriate for this comparison of lives led?
  - It could be a different set altogether
  - It could be a rendition of the ones being used (e.g. walking = walking together for a chat; sitting = sitting together in pleasant conversation; etc.)
Translate with agricultural metaphors if it fits the culture. Otherwise use something else.
- Trees, fruit vs. chaff,

Figures of Speech

The imagery of Psalm 1 corresponds to and reinforces the Psalm’s structure:

a. Pathway imagery (v. 1)

b. Botanical simile (v. 3)

b.’ Botanical simile (v. 4)

a.’ Pathway imagery (v. 6),

Cultural background

הָאִישׁ – As in the case of all ANE literature, Hebrew wisdom texts often assume and reflect the male-oriented perspective of ancient Israelite society. However, the principle of the psalm is certainly applicable to all people, regardless of their gender or age. To facilitate modern reference and application, one may translate the gender and age specific “man” with the more neutral “one”; “person” would also be possible. Since the godly person described in the psalm is representative of all followers of God (note the plural form צַדִּיקִים [“righteous, godly”] in vv. 5-6), one could translate the collective singular with the plural “those” both here and in vv. 2-3, where singular pronouns and verbal forms are utilized in the Hebrew text (cf. NRSV). However, here the singular form may serve to emphasize that godly individuals are usually outnumbered by the wicked and must bear the social consequences. Retaining the singular allows the translation to retain this common contrastive perspective.
- On the other hand, the tree imagery of Psalm 1 may suggest identifying the blessed man (הָאִִישׁ) as Israel's king. Trees functioned as images of kings in the Ancient Near East.^[36] “In both biblical and ancient Near Eastern tradition, the individual most typically identified with a tree is a person of royalty.”^[37] This identification of the blessed man as Israel's king is supported by the fact that the king was expected to transcribe the Torah and spend his life studying it (Deut. 17:18-19). In other words, the ideal king was to "delight in Yahweh's Torah and muse on [it] day and night" (Ps. 1:2). This identification is also supported by the distinctly royal profile of the Psalter as a whole. It is only fitting that a book largely written by and focused on Israel's king should begin with a description of him. If this identification is correct, then it would be important to preserve the masculine referent in translation where possible.
v.3. For a discussion of tree imagery in the Bible and in the Ancient Near East, see Osborne, Trees and Kings.^[38]
- v.3a. The tree is said to be "transplanted" (שָׁתוּל) “on water channels” (עַל פַּלְגֵי מַיִם). The noun פֶּלֶג (from the verb which means “to divide”) refers to an “artificial water channel.”^[39] According to Bullinger, “the word פֶּלֶג is used for any little channel by which the water is distributed or divided, especially the channels which divide-up a garden.”^[40] The use of the phrase פַּלְגֵי מַיִם together with the attributive participle שָׁתוּל suggests a garden context for the tree.
v.4b. Chaff is separated from grain and blown away by the wind during the winnowing process. “In winnowing, grain is threshed in order to separate the kernel of grain from the husk and straw. The mixture is thrown into the air with a winnowing fork or shovel. The wind blows the light husks away, the heavier straw falls near the edge of the threshing floor, and the grain falls back to the floor to be collected. Both the light husks and the heavier straw are referred to in the words translated ‘chaff’ in the Bible.”^[41]
v.5. Is the “מִשְׁפָּט” of verse 5 (1) Ordinary court cases, (2) court cases accusing the wicked of exploiting the poor, or (3) the final judgment by God. If the first or second, perhaps we should describe the cultural background for how judgment against the wicked worked. Note the definite article here.,

Implicit information

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',

Reference/allusions

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),

Other

Canonical Setting
Psalms 1 and 2 form the introduction to the Psalter. "The unique position of these two psalms at the beginning of the whole Psalter as well as Book One suggests we are likely dealing with a distinct editorial function for these psalms. While there is some textual evidence for the combination of these psalms, John T. Willis has shown conclusively that they are originally distinct compositions which function editorially as the introduction to the whole psalter and to Book One respectively."^[42]^[43]

Mathematical[ ]

Fokkelman's prosody and syllable counts

The following table is from Fokkelman's Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible Volume 2, Appendix I.^[44]

Strophe	Verse	Syllables per word	Syllables per line	Syllables per strophe
1	1ab	2.2.2 / 1.2.3.3	6 + 9 = 15	54
	1cd	3.3.1.2 / 4.2.1.2	9 + 9 = 18
	2	1.1.3.2.2 / 5.2.2.3	9 + 12 = 21
2	3ab	3.2.2.1.2.1 / 2.2.2.3	11 + 9 = 20	35
	3cd	4.1.2 / 2.2.2.2	7 + 18 = 15
3	4	1.1.4 / 1.1.2.2.4.1	6 + 11 = 17	55
	5	1.1.1.3.3.3 / 4.3.3	12 + 10 = 22
	6	1.2.2.1.3 / 2.3.2	9 + 7 = 16

"16 cola with 144 syllables; average per colon 9.00"^[45]
"The first Psalm immediately shows the ceiling of syllabic prosody: the exact 9 as the average number of syllables per colon. This has been realized here by arranging 144 syllables in 16 cola."^[46]
The number 144 may be significant (144 = 12 x 12).
"The quantitative balance of the two L-strophes is almost perfect: 54 and 55 syllables."^[47]
Note that Fokkelman's threefold division of the text differs from that proposed below). If his syllable count is applied to the strophic division proposed below, then it yields the following result: Strophe 1: 89 syllables, Strophe 2: 39 syllables, Strophe 3: 16 syllables.,

Alternative prosody and syllable counts

The first section (vv.1-3) has 89 syllables. The middle (45th) syllable of this section is תוֹ in בְּתוֹרָתוֹ (v.2b). The three middle syllables are thus -בְּתוֹרָ. This word also happens to be the middle word of the first section (see below).,

Cola distribution

Fokkelman claims that "Psalm 1 is a completely bicolic poem."^[48] Alternatively, it seems that v.1 and v.3 might be analyzed as tetracola, since v.1c is, in many ways, parallel to v.1b, as is v.3c to v.3b. The first section (vv.1-3) would thus consist of the following: tetracolon, bicolon, tetracolon. The second section (vv.4-5) would consist of two bicola, and third section (v.6) of a single bicolon.,

Classifying parallelisms

Psalm 1 contains 6 parallelisms:

v. 1. Parallelism of similarity, with a structure of intensification: from walking to standing to sitting, from counsel to way to scoffers.
v. 3. Parallelism of specification, planted to yielding fruit (which most normally do) to not withering (which less do), to prospering. It is a structure of intensification.
v. 4. Parallelism of addition/expansion, extra information about the wicked is added.
v. 5. Parallelism of similarity, the wicked and sinners are synonymous, a word-pair, and although judgment and congregation are not synonymous, but indirectly related concepts of the gathering of the righteous.
v. 6. Parallelism of similarity indicated with contrast, with chiasm, contrasting the righteous and the wicked and the end destination of each. The parallelism does not seem to be tight but there must be a general idea of prosperity for the righteous and destruction for the wicked.
- "The bicolic v. 6 serves as a summary by giving the competitors one half-verse each. Besides balance, there is also disruption of balance. God is on the side of the righteous, which makes the latter the target and grammatical object of God's interest. In the final clause, the other is degraded so far that he is neither grammatical subject nor object any more. His 'way' is a dead end: by using an intransitive verb, the original Hebrew suggests that misconduct is a process without God, which by itself and autonomously leads to a painful end."^[49]

**v.1.**
		אַ֥שְֽׁרֵי־הָאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֤ר׀
^cרְשָׁ֫עִ֥ים	^bבַּעֲצַ֪ת	^aלֹ֥א הָלַךְ֘
^aלֹ֥א עָמָ֑ד	^c'חַ֭טָּאִים	^b'וּבְדֶ֣רֶךְ
^aלֹ֣א יָשָֽׁב׃	^c''לֵ֜צִ֗ים	^b''וּבְמוֹשַׁ֥ב

**v.2.**
	^bחֶ֫פְצ֥וֹ	^aבְּתוֹרַ֥ת יְהוָ֗ה	כִּ֤י אִ֥ם
^cיוֹמָ֥ם וָלָֽיְלָה׃	^b'יֶהְגֶּ֗ה	^a'וּֽבְתוֹרָת֥וֹ

**v.5.**
^cבַּמִּשְׁפָּ֑ט	^bרְ֭שָׁעִים	^aלֹא־יָקֻ֣מוּ	עַל־כֵּ֤ן׀
^c'בַּעֲדַ֥ת צַדִּיקִֽים׃	^a'⟨ ⟩	^'bוְ֜חַטָּאִ֗ים

**v.6.**
^dצַדִּיקִ֑ים	^cדֶּ֣רֶךְ	^bיְ֭הוָה	^aיוֹדֵ֣עַ	כִּֽי־
	^a'תֹּאבֵֽד׃	^d'רְשָׁעִ֣ים	^c'וְדֶ֖רֶךְ

,

Selah

none,

Quotations / direct speech

none,

Elision

v.2. It may be significant that there is no elision in this line, but rather the word תוֹרה is repeated in both in a and b lines.
v.5. Verb and negative particle (לֹא יָקֻמוּ) elided in the b-line.,

Chiasms

v.1bc (See above)
v.6ab See above),

Word order

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^[50] for references and discussion as well as Rappaport Hovav and Levin^[51]).

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)."^[52]

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^[53]). If VSO is not the normal order here, the verb could be fronted for contrastive focus with תֹאבֵד.

,

Lunn on Word order

The following table has been adapted from Nicholas Lunn's Word-Order Variation in Biblical Hebrew Poetry, Appendix 2.^[54] For a key to the various symbols and abbreviations, click here.

Ref.	Text	Constituent Order	Colon-Type
1ab	// אַשְׁרֵי־הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר לֹא הָלַךְ בַּעֲצַת רְשָׁעִים	Comp S R V^neg M //	Nom-CAN^R//
1cd	וּבְדֶרֶךְ חַטָּאִים לֹא עָמָד // וּבְמוֹשַׁב לֵצִים לֹא יָשָׁב	w-M V^neg // w-M V^neg	DEF//DEF
2	כִּי אִם בְּתוֹרַת יְהוָה חֶפְצוֹ // וּֽבְתוֹרָתוֹ יֶהְגֶּה יוֹמָם וָלָיְלָה	C Comp S // w-M V M w-M	Nom//MKD
3a	/ וְהָיָה כְּעֵץ שָׁתוּל עַל־פַּלְגֵי מָיִם	w-V Comp /	CAN/
3bc	/ אֲשֶׁר פִּרְיוֹ יִתֵּן בְּעִתּוֹ // וְעָלֵהוּ לֹא־יִבּוֹל	R O V M // w-S V^neg /	MKD^R//MKD/
3d	וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר־יַעֲשֶׂה יַצְלִיחַ	w-O(R V) V	CAN^R-MKD
4	לֹא־כֵן הָרְשָׁעִים / כִּי אִם־כַּמֹּץ אֲֽשֶׁר־תִּדְּפֶנּוּ רֽוּחַ	Comp^neg S / C-Comp R V-o S	Nom/Nom-CAN^R
5	עַל־כֵּן לֹא־יָקֻמוּ רְשָׁעִים בַּמִּשְׁפָּט // וְחַטָּאִים בַּעֲדַת צַדִּיקִים	C V^neg S M // w-S M	CAN//Gap
6	כִּי־יוֹדֵעַ יְהוָה דֶּ֣רֶךְ צַדִּיקִים / וְדֶרֶךְ רְשָׁעִים תֹּאבֵד	C-V^pt S O / w-S V	Ptcp/MKD

For a detailed treatment, see pp. 195-200.^[55]

v.1. "While the first clause adheres to canonical word order (V^neg M), the following two have been inverted (M V^neg) – ab//ba//ba... his rendering of constituents in the secondary lines of parallelisms is a commonplace feature in the poetry of the Old Testament."^[56]
v.2. This is "an instance of replacing focus... Fronting invariably takes place in the clause containing the information replacing that of the negated first clause... We recall the constraint upon marked word order in parallelisms that the markedness of the A-line will be repeated in the B."^[57]
v.3. "What we have here in [v.3bc] well fits the description of specifying focus. Having mentioned the tree in the opening line of the verse (3a), we are then introduced to two particular components of the tree, and these are placed in the preverbal position. We conclude therefore that lines B and C show marked focus."^[58] "The fronting of the phrase וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר־יַעֲשֶׂה presents little difficulty. It has been remarked even in the earliest word-order studies in Hebrew that phrases containing the quantifier כֹּל ('all') are frequently placed in the clause-initial position. The reason for this can now be identified as pragmatic marking. The adjoining of the quantifier to the subject, object, or prepositional phrase serves to highlight the degree of extent of the entity in question. Here the stress is on the 'everything.'"^[59]
v.6. "The fronting of the NP[Su] in the B-line of the bicolon is clearly indicative of a contrastive relationship with the A-line... We are thus not looking at a poetically motivated defamiliar reordering of constituents, but an order which is strictly pragmatically determined."^[60],

Middle word (maqqef)

58 words. The middle word is מַיִם.,

Middle word (independent lexemes)

The middle word within the first section (vv.1-3) is וּבְתוֹרָתוֹ. This may be significant, given the thematic centrality of תּוֹרָה in this psalm. As for the entire Psalm, there are 67 words, and the middle words are יִתֵּן בְּעִתּוֹ.,

Middle line

The middle line is אֲשֶׁר פִּרְיוֹ יִתֵּן בְּעִתּוֹ. This corresponds to the fact that the middle words are יִתֵּן בְּעִתּוֹ, the last words of this middle line.

Variants[ ]

Kinds of variants

Ps 1,4^[61] 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)

Summary[ ]

Line divisions

1a* אַשְׁרֵי־הָאִישׁ

1b אֲשֶׁר לֹא הָלַךְ בַּעֲצַת רְשָׁעִים

1c וּבְדֶרֶךְ חַטָּאִים לֹא עָמָד

1d וּבְמוֹשַׁב לֵצִים לֹא יָשָׁב

2a כִּי אִם בְּתוֹרַת יְהוָה חֶפְצוֹ

2b וּֽבְתוֹרָתוֹ יֶהְגֶּה יוֹמָם וָלָיְלָה

3a וְהָיָה כְּעֵץ שָׁתוּל עַל־פַּלְגֵי מָיִם

3b אֲשֶׁר פִּרְיוֹ יִתֵּן בְּעִתּוֹ

3c וְעָלֵהוּ לֹא־יִבּוֹל

3d וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר־יַעֲשֶׂה יַצְלִיחַ

4a לֹא־כֵן הָרְשָׁעִים

4b כִּי אִם־כַּמֹּץ אֲֽשֶׁר־תִּדְּפֶנּוּ רוּחַ

5a עַל־כֵּן לֹא־יָקֻמוּ רְשָׁעִים בַּמִּשְׁפָּט

5b וְחַטָּאִים בַּעֲדַת צַדִּיקִים

6a כִּי־יוֹדֵעַ יְהוָה דֶּ֣רֶךְ צַדִּיקִים

6b וְדֶרֶךְ רְשָׁעִים תֹּאבֵד,

Section divisions

v.1a (אַשְׁרֵי־הָאִישׁ) as a title.

"The semantic analysis of these lines (see p. 226) suggests that 1a functions primarily as a title – 'The Happy Man,' who is then the subject of the next nine lines (1b-3d) before the poet spends four lines describing the wicked (and 'unhappy') (4a-5b), followed by a conclusion (6a-b)."^[62]

"Midrashic exegesis regards אשרי האיש as a title—the title of Book 1 of the Psalter, according to Midr. Teh. 1:2. Certainly the absence of a superscription in this the first psalm is glaring, as interpreters have long noticed. So one might regard אשרי האיש as an incipit, like הללויה, which serves as an incipit... Indeed, אשׁרי האישׁ may be seen as the title of Psalm 1 and, as such, also of Book1 and indeed of the entire Psalter."^[63]

Structurally, Psalm One divides into three progressively smaller portions, or poetic “strophes.”

Section A – vv. 1-3

Section B – vv. 4-5

Section C – v. 6

The wicked's part of the contrast is much shorter than that of the righteous. Does this reflect the comparative lifespan or honor of each of them, or something else?

The Psalm can be segmented in two main parts: first the celebration of the Law-abiding person (verses 1-3), and the second part (verses 4-6) strengthening this theme by means of contrast, by contrasting the righteous Law-abiding person with the wicked.
- There are a clear paragraph and strophe break at the end of verse 3, before the contrasting of the Torah-loving righteous and the wicked.
- What is less clear is if there is a break at the end of verse 5 (like the NIV). That depends on the interpretation of the connective כִּי and to what extent verse 6 is seen as the concluding summary of the whole Psalm or only of verses 4-6. If כִּי is interpreted as an emphatic ‘indeed’, it lifts the parallelism to a conclusion of the whole Psalm. If כִּי is interpreted as a reason or a ground for the poor results of the wicked, then it may be better to take verse 6 as part of the strophe on the wicked and not have a stanza break.

There are a number of other ways in which commentators have arranged Psalm 1 into its constituent poetic units. The proposed structure agrees with that of Samuel Goh, except that he terms the “strophes” as “stanzas” and considers every verse to be a “strophe.” ^[64] Samuel Terrien also discerns a tripartite pattern but segments the text differently:^[65]

A. The dynamism of the righteous (1-2)

B. The prosperity of the righteous (3)

C. The “evanescence” of the ungodly (4-6)

A variation of the structures suggested above is the following A-B-A’ ring pattern by Willem VanGemeren:^[66]

A. The discerning way of the godly (1-2)

B. The future of the godly and the wicked contrasted (3-5)

A’ The discriminating way of God (6)

Bratcher and Reyburn divide the psalm into two parts:^[67]

A. Describes the truly righteous person(1-3)

B. Compares the wicked person to useless chaff (4-6)

David Dorsey perceives a chiastic arrangement:^[68]

A. Righteous people keep separate from the wicked (1-2)

B. Fruitful, secure state of the righteous (3)

B’ Barren, insecure state of the wicked (4)

A’ Wicked people will be kept separate from the (blessed) righteous on judgement day (5-6)

Similarly, Rolf Jacobson finds a concentric formation, though delineated differently:^[69]

A. The way of the wicked (1)

B. The Torah of the Lord (2)

B’ The prosperity found in the Torah (3)

A’ The judgment of the wicked (4-6)

C. John Collins (so also ESV) argues for the following structure:^[70]

1-2 Contrasting sources of guidance and values

3-4 Contrasting similes of effects of their lives

5-6 Contrasting outcomes of their ways

Fokkelman demarcates three strophes, two long and one short:^[71]

L: vv. 1-2 (54 syllables)

S: v. 3 (35 syllables)

L: vv. 4-6 (55 syllables)

So which one will it be, and what difference does it make? As to “which one,” every analyst must do her/his homework and propose a structure that best seems to fit the psalmist’s rhetorical dynamics and thematic message. Indeed, it is possible the several overlapping arrangements were deliberately intended. On the other hand, the different formations do not all “mean” the same, and at least for presentation purposes, as in an oral recital, one pattern will have to be chosen over the others since the phonology would change for each one (e.g., pause, stress, intonation, etc.) depending on the language.,

Communicative function

Didactic.,

Cohesion

The whole Psalm is written in the 3rd person. See character features table.
Strophe A (vv. 1-3) describes the “righteous” individual, who avoids sin (1), seeks God’s word and will (2), and is “blessed” by God (3). From another perspective, this “righteous” person (cf. vv. 5-6) is first defined in negative terms (what he does not do), then in positive terms (his/her godly behavior), and thirdly in figurative terms (a fruitful tree). Thus, this godly person’s character and conduct are in focus throughout— as is the “Law” (תּוָֹרה), or covenantal instructions of the Lord (significantly repeated in the center of this initial strophe, v. 2ab).
- v.1. Parallel prepositional phrases; parallel motion verbs.
- v.2. Continued fronting of prepositional phrases (2x in v. 1, 2x in v. 2). Contrast with “where” (בְּ) the righteous one is “living”: “with the evil one” vs. “the Law.”
Strophe B (vv. 4-5) describes the wicked (הָרְשָׁעִים), who, like the righteous in the first section, are described in terms of what they are like (v. 4 [≈]) and what they will not do (v. 5 [-]).
The psalm concludes with a short summary strophe (C, v. 6) that only now introduces the superintending divine agent (יְהוָה), whose guiding “Torah” principles govern everything in life for all people—one way, or the other! “God—the ‘proper subject’ of all theology—finally is named as an actor.”^[72] The verse proceeds climactically to distinguish Yahweh’s attitude and actions with regard to the wicked and the righteous—a thematic antithesis that is highlighted by the chiastic word order and syntax of this final verse:

A [positive]: transitive verb + subject (YHWH) – B: “way of the righteous” (object) // B’: [negative]: “way of the wicked” (subject) – A’: intransitive verb.

Many other phonological linkages involving similar sounds and repeated lexical items traverse the psalm, thus knitting the text audibly into a harmonious lyric, yet pervasively didactic whole.,

Discontinuity & boundaries

Shifts in topic mark the primary section divisions. See character features table.
These boundaries are reinforced by a number of formal features
- Morphological: Hiphil verb at the end of the first section (3d); definite article at the beginning of the first and second sections (הָאִישׁ, הָרְשָׁעִים)
- Syntactic: Verbless clauses at the beginning of the first and second sections (anaphora)
- Lexical: רשׁעים at 1a and 4a (anaphora)
- Phonological: inclusio marking boundaries of 1st section (guttural + sibilant + a/ā + ē); preponderance of glides (י,ו) in the first section, dentals the second and third sections (ד, ת); noun phrases that open each section (לֹא כֵן הָרְשָׁעִים / אַשְׁרֵי הָאִישׁ) are similar in sound (structural anaphora): repetition of consonants (א/ע, שׁ, ר) and identical pattern of stressed vowels (ā, ē).,

Prominence

The importance of verse 2 needs to be emphasized somehow in translations.,

Main message

The first part of the Psalm contains information (v. 2) for the blessed that is not included for the wicked in the second part of the Psalm. So the structure of the poem itself seems to suggest that the wicked are characterized by a lack of what the blessed have (a relationship with God through the Torah). The structure thus reinforces the main message of the poem: Blessing proceeds from a relationship with God.

For the heading of Psalm 1, there are several options: 1) The Law, 2) The Blessedness of the Law, 3) The Righteous and the Wicked, or even 4) The Law Prospers the Righteous. The Blessedness of the Law probably most comprehensively captures the theme.

The theme is not only the celebration of the law by itself but the celebration of the righteous adherence to it. The Psalm can be segmented in two parts: first, the celebration of the Torah-abiding person, and the second part (verses 4-6) strengthening this theme by means of contrast, by contrasting the righteous Law-loving person with the wicked. The initial celebration of the Torah by describing the Law-abiding person takes the form of a negative statement what such a person is not like, followed by a positive comparison with a tree planted next to running water and flourishing.

The initial description what such is Torah-loving person is not has a thematic structure of intensification,^[73] the volume increases in crescendo from walking to standing to sitting and from the wicked to sinners to mockers. The negative serves as a foil^[74] or a preparation for the positive, this time again in a structure of intensification, with the comparison of the Torah-loving person with tree next to water, increasingly flourishing, starting with all-season leaves and climaxing in being prosperous in all he or she does.

For further effect, the flourishing tree of the righteous is then contrasted with the wicked. The wicked is compared with chaff, blown by the wind and taken away. Light, feeble, worthless, and of no substance. With an allusion to all the inadequate, non-blessed meetings of the sinners and mockers, this stark comparison with the wicked is then elaborated that he will not be able to stand with honour in the court and be acquitted and even less so at the congregation of the righteous at the sanctuary.

The poem ends by means of summary, contrasting the wicked with the righteous again, and this time, with the exalted statement that the Lord knows the way of the righteous. He is familiar with such a person and engages intimately with him or her. The righteous belongs, not only with honour to the congregation of the people of God, but to the Lord himself. In contrast, the Torah-ignoring wicked will perish, disappearing just like the chaff taken by the wind.,

Connections between sections

v. 4 (c’) corresponds to v. 3 (c) in terms of imagery (כְּעץ / כַּמֹּץ). This connect is strengthened by morphology (כְּ) and phonology (monosyllabic noun w/final ץ). The “wicked” are briefly (a single colon), but graphically described (4) in agricultural imagery that forges a contrastive connection with v. 3. A sonic similarity is also forged between the two nouns “tree” (עֵץ) and “chaff” (מֹץ).
v. 5 (a’) corresponds to v. 1 (a) syntactically (V[NEG] [S] M^ב), lexically (the verbs indicate motion [הלך/עמד/ישׁב // קום], and the nouns רשׁעים and חטאים appear in both verses), and phonologically (בַּעֲצַת – בַּעֲדַת). In verse 5, there is a motion verb (יָקֻ֣מוּ) that is similar to the three verbs in verse 1, but here it describes a motion that the wicked cannot "do". The ultimate fate of the ungodly is summarized in a communal, now also judicial scene (5) that recalls that of v. 1.
That v. 2 (b), the positive description of the righteous, has no correspondent in the 2nd section is significant. The Torah has no place in the wicked person’s life. This is the fundamental distinction between the righteous and the wicked.
Verses 2 and 6 are connected in special ways (as shown by the blue type in the above table)—they both begin with the same introductory word in Hebrew (כי ‘for’), feature sets of parallel words (תורה ‘law’ in verse 2, דרך ‘path’ in verse 6), and are the only two verses in the poem without the Hebrew negative particle (לא ‘no/not’). Perhaps most importantly, these two verses are the only ones that mention God’s covenant Name. What happens in verse 2 seems to affect what happens in verse 6—so, those who delight in the Torah are known by God, but those without Him will perish. (Driving the point home, the author of the psalm omits God’s Name from the second half of verse 6, embodying the grim future of those who do not have God in their lives. Without Him, their way ends in destruction, a reality which the line artistically reflects by simply leaving Him out of the picture.) So, our translators need to know to connect verses 2 and 6 in their translations. This connection is noted by Chan, who writes, "Syntagmatically, יהוה only occurs in v. 6 and v. 2. In the latter reference, יהוה is collocated with the Torah."^[75]. According to Chan, this connection suggests that "the Torah of Yahweh, the object of meditation by any person, serves as a pointer to Yahweh himself. In other words, the revelatory aspect of the Torah is stressed, that the Torah reveals who God is or what his plans are."^[76]

The following propositional analysis shows how the lines and sections of the Psalm are connected semantically: ,

Large-scale structures

The contrast between the righteous (Strophe 1) and the wicked (Strophe 2) is sharpened by the fact that the subunits of Strophes 1 and 2 are arranged in a kind of concentric pattern. This is based on the connections noted in the section above.

a Does not walk...

b Torah

c like a tree

c' like chaff

b' X

a' Will not rise...

One could also view this structural inversion in terms of a medial thematic division: A. the righteous keep separate from the wicked [vv. 1-2]; B. the fruitful productiveness of the righteous [3]; B’ the chaffly unproductiveness of the wicked [4]; A' the separation of the righteous and the wicked in God’s judgment [5-6].

The righteous man does not associate with the wicked (v. 1) – righteous (v. 2-3) – wicked (v. 4-5) - righteous contrasted with wicked (v. 6). Two different “contrasts” or “separations” of righteous versus wicked bookend this psalm, framing yet another (more prominent?) contrast between them.

Chan argues for a chiastic structure for vv. 1-5 (A A' B' B), where the letters (A/B) represent the subjects (righteous/wicked respectively) and the chiasm is formed by distribution of the prepositions בְּ (vv. 1-2, 5) and כְּ (vv. 3-4).^[77] As for v. 6, he notes that it "is about the righteous, which corresponds to AA’ (vv. 1-3) while v. 6b the wicked, corresponds to B’B (vv. 4-5).^[78] Chan's proposed structure is depicted in the following table:

Section	Subject	vv.	Prep.
A	righteous	vv. 1-2	ְבּ
A'	righteous as tree	v. 3	ְכּ
B'	wicked as chaff	v. 4	ְכּ
B	wicked	v. 5	ְבּ
AB	righteous and wicked	v. 6

,

Translation

Translation by Sebastian Floor

¹ Blessed is the man who has not walked according to the counsel of wicked people, nor lived according to the way of sinners, nor dwelt in the assembly of scoffers.

² On the contrary, his delight has been in the law of God. On his law he muses day and night.

³ He will be like a tree transplanted on channels of water whose fruit will be borne on time and whose leaf will not wither. In whatever he might do, he will succeed.

⁴ It is not so for the wicked. On the contrary, he is like the chaff which wind blows away.

⁵ Therefore, the wicked will not be able to arise to accuse in judgment, nor will sinners be able to in the assembly of the righteous

⁶ because Yahweh cares for the righteous on life’s journey, but the wicked will be lost.

Translation by Kevin Grasso

¹ Blessed is the man who has not walked according to the counsel of wicked people, nor lived according to the way of sinners, nor dwelt in the assembly of scoffers.

² On the contrary, his delight has been in the law of God. On his law he muses day and night.

³ He will be like a tree transplanted on channels of water whose fruit will be borne on time and whose leaf will not wither. In whatever he might do, he will succeed.

⁴ It is not so for the wicked. On the contrary, he is like the chaff which wind blows away.

⁵ Therefore, the wicked will not be able to arise to accuse in judgment, nor will sinners be able to in the assembly of the righteous

⁶ because Yahweh cares for the righteous on life’s journey, but the wicked will be lost.

Translation by Brad Willits

¹ Happy is the good man

Who doesn’t listen to the advice of wicked people,

Who doesn’t hang out with them,

Who doesn’t spend time listening to their schemes.

² The good man

Delights in learning about God’s Truth

And spends hours reflecting on it.

³ His life flourishes like a tree planted by the river.

He is productive and lets nothing get him down.

Everything he touches succeeds.

^4-5 But it is not that way with the wicked.

They cannot stand the test of honest truth

And they are an eye sore in a group of good people.

Their life does not flourish like a well-watered tree,

Rather their leaves dry up

And the winds of life blow them away.

⁶ God walks with the righteous down their good road,

But he leaves the wicked to pursue their own self-destruction.

Translation by Ryan Sikes

¹Oh, how happy is the man who

Has not walked by bad advice,

Has not stood in a path of vice,

Has not dwelt in a land of lies!

²But in the teaching of the Lord is his delight.

On his teaching does he dwell by day and night.

³He is like a tree of life

Planted on fresh flowing streams.

Fruit in season! Leaves unfading!

Always blooming! Ever green!

⁴Oh, how different are the wicked!

Like chaff that's driven by the wind.

⁵They will not rise up to contend.

They will not stand with righteous men.

⁶For Yahweh knows the way of the just.

The wicked's way will wind up lost.,

Outline or visual representation

Outline 1 (Wendland's Expository outline^[79])

I. The righteous person is blessed (1-2). Blessed: happy, fortunate, prosperous, and enviable. This could read, “Oh the blessedness of a righteous person.” He is blessed because of

A. What he does not do: Note the progression: Walking, standing, sitting. If you walk in the counsel of the ungodly, you will soon be standing in the way of sinners, and eventually sitting in the congregation of the mockers.

1. He does not walk in the counsel of ungodly men.

a. Walk in the counsel: Following their advice and purposes.

Gal 5:7-8: Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth? This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.

2. He does not stand in the way of sinners.

a. Stand means to be submissive and inactive in their presence.

It does not mean we re not to befriend them for purposes of winning them to the Lord.

3. He does not sit with the scornful.

a. Sit: Relax and rest with the mockers.

b. God opposes the scornful: Proverbs 3:34.

B. What he does do:

1. He delights in the law of the Lord.

a. The law of God are His precepts, instructions, teachings.

b. He is in, not under the law.

2. He meditates in God’s law day and night.

Meditate means to ponder and study.

II. Because of this: (3)

A. Position: The righteous will be like a tree planted by the rivers of water.

1. The analogy of the righteous as a tree is common in Scripture:

Isa 61:3: To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that he might be glorified.

Isa 30:21: And thine ears shall hear a word behind thee, saying, This is the way, walk ye in it, when ye turn to the right hand, and when ye turn to the left.

Ps 92:12: The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree: he shall grow like a cedar in Lebanon.

B. Productive: The righteous will bring forth fruit in his season.

Matt 7:17-20: Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

C. Perpetual. The “leaf” of the righteous will not wither in hard times. God’s trees are evergreens!

Jer 17:7-8: Blessed is the man that trusteth in the Lord, and whose hope the Lord is. For he shall be as a tree planted by the waters, and that spreadeth out her roots by the river, and shall not see when heat cometh, but her leaf shall be green; and shall not be careful in the year of drought, neither shall cease from yielding fruit.

D. Prosperous. Whatever the righteous does will prosper. This does not mean immunity to problems, sickness, losses, etc., but even in difficulties, he willprosper in the end.

3 Jn 1:2: Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.

2 Chr 26:5: ...and as long as he sought the Lord, God made him to prosper.

E. Planted. God’s trees are planted. They are not wild-growing trees. See Isaiah 61:3.

III. The ungodly or wicked person is one who is disobedient and living without God They are the opposite of the righteous, so this means: (4)

A. They do...

1. Walk in the counsel of ungodly men.

2. Stand in the way of sinners.

3. Sit with the scornful.

B. They do not:

1. Delight in the law of the Lord.

2. Meditate in God’s law day and night.

IV. Because of this: (5)

A. The ungodly are like the chaff which the wind drives away.

1. The wicked are like chaff: Wheat was threshed by beating it on a hard surface to dislodge the grain. It was then tossed into the air. The grain would fall back to the ground, but the chaff (husks) would be blown away by the wind.

2. The wicked are just as unstable. They are worthless, dead, and without substance.

B. The ungodly will not stand in the time of judgment.

1. They stand in the way of sinners, but they won’t stand justified in judgment.

Rev 20:13-15: And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

See also Rev. 6:16-17; 20:11-15; and Matthew 25:31-46.

C. The ungodly will not be among the congregation of the righteous.

1. They sit with the scornful, but they won’t be among the congregation of the righteous.

Rev 21:27: And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

V. Decisions determine their destiny: (6)

A. The righteous: The Lord knows his way.

(Knows: Fully acquainted with his way.)

Matt 7:14: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

Isa 30:21: And thine ears shall hear a word behind thee, saying, This is the way, walk ye in it, when ye turn to the right hand, and when ye turn to the left.

B. The unrighteous: His way will perish (end in ruin and come to naught). Not only will the unrighteous perish, his way will perish also.

Prov 16:25: There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

Matt 7:13-14: Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat.

Overview[ ]

See Psalm 1/Features for an itemized list of diagnostic & rhetorical features.

Authorship[ ]

This Psalm is anonymous.

Genre[ ]

In terms of genre Psalm 1 is a celebration Psalm, celebrating the Torah and celebrating the righteous obedience to it. It has been classified as a Wisdom Psalm (with the likes of Psalm 19 and 119), given the centrality of the Torah (the Law as written down in the Pentateuch) as the source of wisdom. It has also been classified as a didactic Psalm.^[80] Anderson classifies the psalm as a "Torah (wisdom) psalm."^[81]

In terms of emic genre (the internal system of classifying Psalms in the superscriptions), Psalm 1 receives no classification.

References[ ]

↑ Samuel T. S. Goh, The Basics of Hebrew Poetry: Theory and Practice (Eugene: Cascade, 2017), 130-132.
↑ Seow, Choon Leong. “An Exquisitely Poetic Introduction to the Psalter.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132, no. 2 (2013): 275–93.
↑ Seow, Choon Leong. “An Exquisitely Poetic Introduction to the Psalter.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132, no. 2 (2013): 275–93.
↑ Alan Kam-Yau Chan, Melchizedek Passages in the Bible (Warsaw/Berlin: De Gruyter Open Ltd., 2016), 229.
↑ Robert Bratcher and William Reyburn, A Translator’s Handbook on the Book of Psalms (New York: United Bible Societies, 1991).
↑ Peter Craigie, Psalms. 1-50. Word Biblical Commentary (Waco: Word Books, 1983).
↑ Wilson, Gerald H. Psalms. Vol. 1. NIVAC. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002.
↑ Wilson, Gerald H. Psalms. Vol. 1. NIVAC. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002.
↑ Kraus, Hans-Joachim. Psalms 1–59: A Continental Commentary. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993.
↑ Holladay, William L. The Psalms Through Three Thousand Years. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996.
↑ Futato, Mark David, and David M. Howard. Interpreting the Psalms: An Exegetical Handbook. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2007.
↑ Christopher Rico, "Yaqume: Tenir, Prevaloir, Se relever Ou Ressusciter?" RB (2019) 126-4 (pp. 497-520).
↑ J.A Soggins, “עֵץ,” in Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 1997).
↑ Nancy deClaissé-Walford, Rolf Jacobson, and Beth Tanner, The Book of Psalms. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2014) 64.
↑ Walther Zimmerli, "Zur Struktur der alttestamentlichen Weisheit" in Zeitschrift Für Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 51 (1933): 180.
↑ Samuel T. S. Goh, The Basics of Hebrew Poetry: Theory and Practice (Eugene: Cascade, 2017), 132.
↑ Paratext 9 Marble notes in the ESV, UBS/SIL
↑ Victor Hamilton, TWOT.
↑ Seow, Choon Leong. “An Exquisitely Poetic Introduction to the Psalter.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132, no. 2 (2013): 275–93.
↑ William S. Plumer, Psalms, in Geneva Series of Commentaries (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust: 2016).
↑ Kraus, Hans-Joachim. Psalms 1–59: A Continental Commentary. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993.
↑ HALOT.
↑ Collins, C. John. “Psalm 1: Structure and Rhetoric.” Presbyterion 31 (Spring 2005): 37–48.
↑ Delitzsch, Franz. Psalms. Vol. 5. Commentary on the Old Testament. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1986.
↑ Goldingay, John. Psalms: Psalms 1–41. Vol. 1. BCOT. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006.
↑ Seow, Choon Leong. “An Exquisitely Poetic Introduction to the Psalter.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132, no. 2 (2013): 275–93.
↑ Bratcher, Robert G., and William D. Reyburn. A Handbook on Psalms. UBS Handbook Series. New York: United Bible Societies, 1991.
↑ Delitzsch, Franz. Psalms. Vol. 5. Commentary on the Old Testament. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1986
↑ Lunn, Nicholas P. Word-Order Variation in Biblical Hebrew Poetry: Differentiating Pragmatics and Poetics. Paternoster Biblical Monographs. Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2006.
↑ Craigie, Peter C. Psalms 1–50. WBC 19. Waco, TX: Word, 1983.
↑ DeClaisse-Walford, Nancy L., Rolf A. Jacobson, and Beth LaNeel Tanner. The Book of Psalms. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2014.
↑ Seow, Choon Leong. “An Exquisitely Poetic Introduction to the Psalter.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132, no. 2 (2013): 275–93.
↑ Alan Kam-Yau Chan, Melchizedek Passages in the Bible (Warsaw/Berlin: De Gruyter Open Ltd., 2016), 229-230.
↑ Fokkelman, J.P. Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis (Vol 2: 85 Psalms and Job 4–14). Vol. 2. Studia Semitica Neerlandica. Van Gorcum, 2000.
↑ Seow, Choon Leong. “An Exquisitely Poetic Introduction to the Psalter.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132, no. 2 (2013): 275–93.
↑ William Osborne, Trees and Kings: A Comparative Analysis of Tree Imagery in Israel’s Prophetic Tradition and the Ancient near East, (University Park: Eisenbrauns, 2018).
↑ William Brown, Seeing the Psalms: A Theology of Metaphor (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002), 69.
↑ William Osborne, Trees and Kings: A Comparative Analysis of Tree Imagery in Israel’s Prophetic Tradition and the Ancient near East, (University Park: Eisenbrauns, 2018).
↑ Ludwig Köhler and Walter Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (New York: Brill, 1994).
↑ E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech in the Bible (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1898)., 98
↑ Leland Ryken, James Wilhoit, and Tremper Longman III, eds, “Chaff,” in Dictionary of Biblical Imagery (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1998).
↑ J.T. Willis, "Psalm 1 – An Entity," in ZAW 91 (1979), 381-401.
↑ Gerald H. Wilson, “The Use of ‘Untitled’ Psalms in the Hebrew Psalter,” in ZAW 97, no. 3 (1985): 404–13.
↑ J.P. Fokkelman, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis, Vol. 2 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000), 387.
↑ J.P. Fokkelman, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis, Vol. 2 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000), 387.
↑ J.P. Fokkelman, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis, Vol. 2 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000), 53.
↑ J.P. Fokkelman, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis, Vol. 2 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000), 53.
↑ J.P. Fokkelman, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis, Vol. 2 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000), 54.
↑ J.P. Fokkelman, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis, Vol. 2 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000), 53.
↑ Hagit Borer, Structuring Sense, Vol. 1: In Name Only (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005).
↑ Beth Levin and Malka Rappaport Hovav, Unaccusativity : At the Syntax-LexicalSemantics.Interface (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1995).
↑ Frederic Putnam, “Working with Biblical Hebrew Poetry,” in Basics of Hebrew Discourse, edited by Miles van Pelt (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Academic, 2019), 184-185.
↑ Robert Holmstedt, “אֲנִי וְלִבִּי: The Syntactic Encoding of the Collaborative Nature of Qohelet’s Experiment,” Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 9, no. 19 (2009): 1–26; Robert Holmstedt, "The Typological Classifications of the Hebrew of Genesis: Subject-Verb or Verb-Subject?,” Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 11, no. 14 (2011): 1–39.
↑ Nicholas Lunn, Word-Order Variation in Biblical Hebrew Poetry: Differentiating Pragmatics and Poetics (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2006).
↑ Nicholas Lunn, Word-Order Variation in Biblical Hebrew Poetry: Differentiating Pragmatics and Poetics (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2006), 195-200.
↑ Lunn, 196.
↑ Lunn, 197.
↑ Lunn, 198.
↑ Lunn, 198.
↑ Lunn, 200.
↑ Dominique Barthélemy, Critique textuelle de l’Ancien Testament: Tome 4. Psaumes, https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-150304
↑ Patton, Matthew H, Frederic C Putnam, and Miles V Van Pelt. Basics of Hebrew Discourse: A Guide to Working with Hebrew Prose and Poetry, 2019.
↑ Seow, Choon Leong. “An Exquisitely Poetic Introduction to the Psalter.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132, no. 2 (2013): 275–93.
↑ Samuel T. S. Goh, The Basics of Hebrew Poetry: Theory and Practice (Eugene: Cascade, 2017), 116; cf. also John Goldingay, Psalms: 1-41, Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006), 81-89.
↑ Samuel Terrien, The Psalms : Strophic Structure and Theological Commentary (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Pub., 2003), 69.
↑ Willem VanGemeren, “Psalms,” in Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Vol. 5. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary with the New International Version (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1991), 53.
↑ Robert Bratcher and William Reyburn, A Translator’s Handbook on the Book of Psalms (New York: United Bible Societies, 1991), 14.
↑ David Dorsey, The Literary Structure of the Old Testament: A Commentary on Genesis-Malachi (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1999), 176.
↑ Nancy deClaissé-Walford, Rolf Jacobson and Beth Tanner, The Book of Psalms. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2014), 58.
↑ C. John Collins, “Psalm 1: Structure and Rhetoric,” Presbyterion 31, no. 1 (Spring 2005): 37–48.
↑ J.P. Fokkelman, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis, Vol. 2 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000), 53-55.
↑ Nancy deClaissé-Walford, Rolf Jacobson and Beth Tanner, The Book of Psalms. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2014), 63.
↑ Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Poetry (New York: Basic Books, 1985).
↑ Stephen Levinsohn, Self-Instruction Materials on Narrative Discourse Analysis, https://www.sil.org/system/files/reapdata/22/99/56/22995675039289691129649347369389105482/NARR.pdf
↑ Alan Kam-Yau Chan, Melchizedek Passages in the Bible (Warsaw/Berlin: De Gruyter Open Ltd., 2016), 131.
↑ Alan Kam-Yau Chan, Melchizedek Passages in the Bible (Warsaw/Berlin: De Gruyter Open Ltd., 2016), 125.
↑ Alan Kam-Yau Chan, Melchizedek Passages in the Bible (Warsaw/Berlin: De Gruyter Open Ltd., 2016), 229-230.
↑ Alan Kam-Yau Chan, Melchizedek Passages in the Bible (Warsaw/Berlin: De Gruyter Open Ltd., 2016), 229.
↑ Ernst Wendland, Expository Outlines of the Psalms, https://www.academia.edu/37220700/Expository_Outlines_of_the_PSALMS
↑ S.E. Gillingham, The Poems and Psalms of the Hebrew Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994); Peter Craigie, Psalms. 1-50, Word Biblical Commentary (Waco: Word Books, 1983).
↑ Bernhard Anderson and Steven Bishop, Out of the Depths: The Psalms Speak for Us Today, third edition (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2000), 219.

[1] Samuel T. S. Goh, The Basics of Hebrew Poetry: Theory and Practice (Eugene: Cascade, 2017), 130-132.

[2] Seow, Choon Leong. “An Exquisitely Poetic Introduction to the Psalter.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132, no. 2 (2013): 275–93.

[3] Seow, Choon Leong. “An Exquisitely Poetic Introduction to the Psalter.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132, no. 2 (2013): 275–93.

[4] Alan Kam-Yau Chan, Melchizedek Passages in the Bible (Warsaw/Berlin: De Gruyter Open Ltd., 2016), 229.

[5] Robert Bratcher and William Reyburn, A Translator’s Handbook on the Book of Psalms (New York: United Bible Societies, 1991).

[6] Peter Craigie, Psalms. 1-50. Word Biblical Commentary (Waco: Word Books, 1983).

[7] Wilson, Gerald H. Psalms. Vol. 1. NIVAC. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002.

[8] Wilson, Gerald H. Psalms. Vol. 1. NIVAC. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002.

[9] Kraus, Hans-Joachim. Psalms 1–59: A Continental Commentary. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993.

[10] Holladay, William L. The Psalms Through Three Thousand Years. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996.

[11] Futato, Mark David, and David M. Howard. Interpreting the Psalms: An Exegetical Handbook. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2007.

[12] Christopher Rico, "Yaqume: Tenir, Prevaloir, Se relever Ou Ressusciter?" RB (2019) 126-4 (pp. 497-520).

[13] J.A Soggins, “עֵץ,” in Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 1997).

[14] Nancy deClaissé-Walford, Rolf Jacobson, and Beth Tanner, The Book of Psalms. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2014) 64.

[15] Walther Zimmerli, "Zur Struktur der alttestamentlichen Weisheit" in Zeitschrift Für Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 51 (1933): 180.

[16] Samuel T. S. Goh, The Basics of Hebrew Poetry: Theory and Practice (Eugene: Cascade, 2017), 132.

[17] Paratext 9 Marble notes in the ESV, UBS/SIL

[18] Victor Hamilton, TWOT.

[19] Seow, Choon Leong. “An Exquisitely Poetic Introduction to the Psalter.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132, no. 2 (2013): 275–93.

[20] William S. Plumer, Psalms, in Geneva Series of Commentaries (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust: 2016).

[21] Kraus, Hans-Joachim. Psalms 1–59: A Continental Commentary. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993.

[22] HALOT.

[23] Collins, C. John. “Psalm 1: Structure and Rhetoric.” Presbyterion 31 (Spring 2005): 37–48.

[24] Delitzsch, Franz. Psalms. Vol. 5. Commentary on the Old Testament. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1986.

[25] Goldingay, John. Psalms: Psalms 1–41. Vol. 1. BCOT. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006.

[26] Seow, Choon Leong. “An Exquisitely Poetic Introduction to the Psalter.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132, no. 2 (2013): 275–93.

[27] Bratcher, Robert G., and William D. Reyburn. A Handbook on Psalms. UBS Handbook Series. New York: United Bible Societies, 1991.

[28] Delitzsch, Franz. Psalms. Vol. 5. Commentary on the Old Testament. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1986

[29] Lunn, Nicholas P. Word-Order Variation in Biblical Hebrew Poetry: Differentiating Pragmatics and Poetics. Paternoster Biblical Monographs. Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2006.

[30] Craigie, Peter C. Psalms 1–50. WBC 19. Waco, TX: Word, 1983.

[31] DeClaisse-Walford, Nancy L., Rolf A. Jacobson, and Beth LaNeel Tanner. The Book of Psalms. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2014.

[32] Seow, Choon Leong. “An Exquisitely Poetic Introduction to the Psalter.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132, no. 2 (2013): 275–93.

[33] Alan Kam-Yau Chan, Melchizedek Passages in the Bible (Warsaw/Berlin: De Gruyter Open Ltd., 2016), 229-230.

[34] Fokkelman, J.P. Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis (Vol 2: 85 Psalms and Job 4–14). Vol. 2. Studia Semitica Neerlandica. Van Gorcum, 2000.

[35] Seow, Choon Leong. “An Exquisitely Poetic Introduction to the Psalter.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132, no. 2 (2013): 275–93.

[36] William Osborne, Trees and Kings: A Comparative Analysis of Tree Imagery in Israel’s Prophetic Tradition and the Ancient near East, (University Park: Eisenbrauns, 2018).

[37] William Brown, Seeing the Psalms: A Theology of Metaphor (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002), 69.

[38] William Osborne, Trees and Kings: A Comparative Analysis of Tree Imagery in Israel’s Prophetic Tradition and the Ancient near East, (University Park: Eisenbrauns, 2018).

[39] Ludwig Köhler and Walter Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (New York: Brill, 1994).

[40] E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech in the Bible (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1898)., 98

[41] Leland Ryken, James Wilhoit, and Tremper Longman III, eds, “Chaff,” in Dictionary of Biblical Imagery (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1998).

[42] J.T. Willis, "Psalm 1 – An Entity," in ZAW 91 (1979), 381-401.

[43] Gerald H. Wilson, “The Use of ‘Untitled’ Psalms in the Hebrew Psalter,” in ZAW 97, no. 3 (1985): 404–13.

[44] J.P. Fokkelman, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis, Vol. 2 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000), 387.

[45] J.P. Fokkelman, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis, Vol. 2 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000), 387.

[46] J.P. Fokkelman, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis, Vol. 2 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000), 53.

[47] J.P. Fokkelman, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis, Vol. 2 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000), 53.

[48] J.P. Fokkelman, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis, Vol. 2 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000), 54.

[49] J.P. Fokkelman, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis, Vol. 2 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000), 53.

[50] Hagit Borer, Structuring Sense, Vol. 1: In Name Only (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005).

[51] Beth Levin and Malka Rappaport Hovav, Unaccusativity : At the Syntax-LexicalSemantics.Interface (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1995).

[52] Frederic Putnam, “Working with Biblical Hebrew Poetry,” in Basics of Hebrew Discourse, edited by Miles van Pelt (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Academic, 2019), 184-185.

[53] Robert Holmstedt, “אֲנִי וְלִבִּי: The Syntactic Encoding of the Collaborative Nature of Qohelet’s Experiment,” Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 9, no. 19 (2009): 1–26; Robert Holmstedt, "The Typological Classifications of the Hebrew of Genesis: Subject-Verb or Verb-Subject?,” Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 11, no. 14 (2011): 1–39.

[54] Nicholas Lunn, Word-Order Variation in Biblical Hebrew Poetry: Differentiating Pragmatics and Poetics (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2006).

[55] Nicholas Lunn, Word-Order Variation in Biblical Hebrew Poetry: Differentiating Pragmatics and Poetics (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2006), 195-200.

[56] Lunn, 196.

[57] Lunn, 197.

[58] Lunn, 198.

[59] Lunn, 198.

[60] Lunn, 200.

[61] Dominique Barthélemy, Critique textuelle de l’Ancien Testament: Tome 4. Psaumes, https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-150304

[62] Patton, Matthew H, Frederic C Putnam, and Miles V Van Pelt. Basics of Hebrew Discourse: A Guide to Working with Hebrew Prose and Poetry, 2019.

[63] Seow, Choon Leong. “An Exquisitely Poetic Introduction to the Psalter.” Journal of Biblical Literature 132, no. 2 (2013): 275–93.

[64] Samuel T. S. Goh, The Basics of Hebrew Poetry: Theory and Practice (Eugene: Cascade, 2017), 116; cf. also John Goldingay, Psalms: 1-41, Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006), 81-89.

[65] Samuel Terrien, The Psalms : Strophic Structure and Theological Commentary (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Pub., 2003), 69.

[66] Willem VanGemeren, “Psalms,” in Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Vol. 5. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary with the New International Version (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1991), 53.

[67] Robert Bratcher and William Reyburn, A Translator’s Handbook on the Book of Psalms (New York: United Bible Societies, 1991), 14.

[68] David Dorsey, The Literary Structure of the Old Testament: A Commentary on Genesis-Malachi (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1999), 176.

[69] Nancy deClaissé-Walford, Rolf Jacobson and Beth Tanner, The Book of Psalms. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2014), 58.

[70] C. John Collins, “Psalm 1: Structure and Rhetoric,” Presbyterion 31, no. 1 (Spring 2005): 37–48.

[71] J.P. Fokkelman, Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis, Vol. 2 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000), 53-55.

[72] Nancy deClaissé-Walford, Rolf Jacobson and Beth Tanner, The Book of Psalms. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2014), 63.

[73] Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Poetry (New York: Basic Books, 1985).

[74] Stephen Levinsohn, Self-Instruction Materials on Narrative Discourse Analysis, https://www.sil.org/system/files/reapdata/22/99/56/22995675039289691129649347369389105482/NARR.pdf

[75] Alan Kam-Yau Chan, Melchizedek Passages in the Bible (Warsaw/Berlin: De Gruyter Open Ltd., 2016), 131.

[76] Alan Kam-Yau Chan, Melchizedek Passages in the Bible (Warsaw/Berlin: De Gruyter Open Ltd., 2016), 125.

[77] Alan Kam-Yau Chan, Melchizedek Passages in the Bible (Warsaw/Berlin: De Gruyter Open Ltd., 2016), 229-230.

[78] Alan Kam-Yau Chan, Melchizedek Passages in the Bible (Warsaw/Berlin: De Gruyter Open Ltd., 2016), 229.

[79] Ernst Wendland, Expository Outlines of the Psalms, https://www.academia.edu/37220700/Expository_Outlines_of_the_PSALMS

[80] S.E. Gillingham, The Poems and Psalms of the Hebrew Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994); Peter Craigie, Psalms. 1-50, Word Biblical Commentary (Waco: Word Books, 1983).

[81] Bernhard Anderson and Steven Bishop, Out of the Depths: The Psalms Speak for Us Today, third edition (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2000), 219.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[45]

[46]

[47]

[48]

[49]

[50]

[51]

[52]

[53]

[54]

[55]

[56]

[57]

[58]

[59]

[60]

[61]

[62]

[63]

[64]

[65]

[66]

[67]

[68]

[69]

[70]

[71]

[72]

[73]

[74]

[75]

[76]

[77]

[78]

[79]

[80]

[81]

	Blessed One(s)	Wicked Ones
Intro to Character	v. 1 - doesn’t sin	v. 4a - not the same
Relationship	v. 2 – with God’s Torah	no mention
Picture/Results	v. 3 – tree: fruitful, successful	vv. 4b-5 – chaff: doesn’t survive
Path	v. 6a - known by God	v. 6b - destruction

Psalm 1/Research

Hebrew (BHS)[ ]

Greek (Rahlfs-Hanhart LXX)

Phonology[ ]

Consonants

Sound combinations

Infrequent letters or sounds

Patterns in beginnings

Patterns in endings

Similar sounds in adjacent lines

Other observations

Lexical Semantics[ ]

Difficult Words

References to God

Tetragrammaton

Repeated words

Semantically/thematically related words

Rare words

Verbs[ ]

Verb forms

Person, gender and number

Verb stem types (binyanim)

Other

Nouns[ ]

Number

Gender

Definiteness

Pronominal suffixes

Addressee change

Speaker change

Subject change

Particles[ ]

Negative markers

Independent personal pronouns

Prepositions

Waw/Vav

Other particles

Figurative[ ]

Metaphor

Simile

Metonymy

Merism

Context[ ]

Translation advice

Figures of Speech

Cultural background

Implicit information

Reference/allusions

Other

Mathematical[ ]

Fokkelman's prosody and syllable counts

Alternative prosody and syllable counts

Cola distribution

Classifying parallelisms

Selah

Quotations / direct speech

Elision

Chiasms

Word order

Lunn on Word order

Middle word (maqqef)

Middle word (independent lexemes)

Middle line

Variants[ ]

Kinds of variants

Summary[ ]

Line divisions

Section divisions

Communicative function

Cohesion

Discontinuity & boundaries

Prominence

Main message

Connections between sections

Large-scale structures

Translation

Outline or visual representation

Overview[ ]

Authorship[ ]

Genre[ ]