The Missing Qof in Psalm 25:18

Introduction

Psalm 25:18 reads as follows according to the Masoretic Text:

רְאֵ֣ה עָ֭נְיִי וַעֲמָלִ֑י

וְ֝שָׂ֗א לְכָל־חַטֹּאותָֽי׃

This verse is rather simple to understand and translate. The RJPS's translation is representative of virtually all of the modern translations we consulted:

• Look at my affliction and suffering, and forgive all my sins (RJPS).

The difficulty is that Psalm 25 is an acrostic – a poem in which each verse begins with a successive letter of the Hebrew alphabet – and v. 18 breaks the acrostic pattern. The previous verse (v. 17) begins with tsade and the following verse (v. 19) begins with resh. Therefore, one would expect v. 18 to begin with qof. Instead, it also begins with resh:

v. 17: צָרוֹת

v. 18: רְאֵה (?)

v. 19: רְאֵה

v. 20: שָׁמְרָה

There are two main views on the issue. The first view is that the missing qof is the result of a scribal error and that the original text would have had a word beginning with qof. The second view is that the deviation from the expected acrostic pattern represents an intentional design and contributes to the message of the poem.

Exploring the issue of the missing qof also opens up another, closely related issue: the sequence of v. 15 (the ayin verse) and v. 16 (the pe verse). Was the original sequence of the poem ayin-pe or pe-ayin?

Argument Maps

Scribal error or poetic design?

The first question to be answered on this page is whether the missing qof is better explained as a scribal error or as an element of poetic design. The following two argument maps present both sides of the debate.

Scribal error

Many have argued that the missing qof in v. 18 is the result of a scribal error. Although this view is not reflected in any of the translations that we consulted, it is common among commentators. Craigie, for example, suggests that the original text read קרא ("meet") with a qof. The BHS apparatus suggests reading either קשׁב ("come near") or קחה ("take"). Duhm suggests that v. 19 originally began with the word קַדֵּם ("confront"), which came to be misread as ראה before the whole verse was swapped with v. 18.

 
===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 
[Scribal error]: Verse 18 originally began with a verse beginning with the letter *qof*, and the reading רְאֵה is the result of a scribal error (BHS; Baethgen 1904, 73 :C:; Craigie 1983, 216 :C:, Spieckermann 2023, 297 :C:).#dispreferred
 + <Acrostic pattern>: Psalm 25 is an acrostic poem, and, according to the expected acrostic pattern, one would expect v. 18 to begin with *qof*, not *resh* (Spieckermann 2023, 297 :C:).#dispreferred
  <_ <Deviations>: Acrostic poems in the Bible frequently deviate from expected norms, sometimes for poetic effect. Many acrostics are either incomplete (Nah 1:2–8; see Spronk 2009 :A:), partial (Psa 145:11–13; Song 4:9–11; Psalm 155; see Watson 2001, 199 :M:) or missing letters (Pss 9–10 missing numerous letters; see Benun 2006 :A:; Ps 25 missing ק and ו; Psa 34 missing ו; Psa 37 missing ע; Psa 145 missing נ).
   <_ <Scribal errors>: Some of these deviations are due to scribal errors (for the missing ע in Ps 37, see LXX, discussed in Sikes and Longacre 2025 :A:; for the missing נ in Ps 145, see LXX and 11Q5, discussed in Gentry 2020 :A:). #dispreferred
   + <Poetic design in Pss 9–10>: In Psalms 9–10, all of the missing letters coincide with the mention of the "wicked" (רשע), especially 10:2–11, which consists of an extended meditation on the wicked person. This iconically reflects the problem in the psalm's plot: the wicked destroy order. The only times all the missing letters in 10:2–11 are present within one verse are 9:5, before the first mention of wicked, and 10:18, after the last mention of wicked. These symbolically represent times of (the restoration of) order (see Benun 2006 :A:).
 - <Textual witnesses>: All of the extant textual witnesses, including the earliest witnesses (e.g., LXX, 2nd century BC), support the reading רְאֵה.
  + [Textual witnesses]: MT: רְאֵ֣ה; LXX: ἰδέ; Aquila: ἰδέ; Peshitta: ܘܚܙܝ; Targum: חמי; Jerome (iuxta Hebr.): vide.
  <_ <Early error>: The text of Psalm 25 was transmitted for centuries before our earliest witnesses. The scribal error could have occurred sometime during this early period (Spieckermann 2023, 297 :C:).#dispreferred
 <_ <Impossibility of reconstruction>: Even if v. 18 originally began with a verse beginning with the letter *qof*, this reading is lost to us. It is impossible to reconstruct the original reading with any degree of confidence (cf. Baethgen 1904, 73 :C:).

Poetic design (preferred)

The alternative to viewing the missing qof as a scribal error is to see it as a matter of intentional poetic design.

 
===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 
[Poetic design]: The missing *qof* verse and its replacement with *resh* (רְאֵה) is due to careful poetic design rather than a scribal error (Benun 2006, §3 :A:).
 + <Textual witnesses>: All of the extant textual witnesses, including the earliest witnesses (e.g., LXX, 2nd century BC), support the reading רְאֵה.
  + [Textual witnesses]: MT: רְאֵ֣ה; LXX: ἰδέ; Aquila: ἰδέ; Peshitta: ܘܚܙܝ; Targum: חמי; Jerome (iuxta Hebr.): vide.
 + <Chiasm>: Verses 15–22 are arranged as a chiasm, with the two *resh* verses corresponding to one another at the center of the chiasm.
  + [Chiasm (vv. 15–22)]: A. "Turn towards me" (פְּנֵה אֵלַי) (v. 16); B. hope ("my eyes are on YHWH") and rescue ("bring out of net... bring out of distress") (vv. 15, 17); C. "Look at" (רְאֵה) (v. 18); C. "Look at" (רְאֵה) (v. 19); B. hope ("I have taken refuge... I hope") and rescue ("guard... rescue... keep safe") (vv. 20–21); A. "Redeem, God" (פְּדֵה אֱלֹהִים) (v. 22).
   <_ <Ayin-pe (vv. 15–16)>: This chiasm would require swapping v. 15 and v. 16, so that the *pe* verse precedes the *ayin* verse. But all of the textual witnesses to Psalm 25 have the traditional *ayin*-*pe* order.#dispreferred
 + <Prominence of "forgiveness">: Forgiveness of sins (mentioned in v. 18b) is an especially prominent theme in Psalm 25, so it would make sense for the poem to draw attention to the presence of this theme in v. 18 by disrupting the acrostic structure.
  + <Forgiveness in v. 11>: The prayer for the forgiveness of sins in v. 11 is at the very center of the poem (Hossfeld 1993, 161 :C:; Doyle 2001, 200, 204 :A:; van der Lugt 2006, 272 :M:).
   + [v. 11]: "Because of your name YHWH, would you forgive my guilt, because it is great!" (Ps 25:11, CBC).
   + <Centrality of v. 11>: Verses 8–14 constitute the central section of the psalm, and v. 11 is the central verse of this section.
    + <Center of vv. 8–14>: Verse 11 is flanked on either side by three verses arranged in an ABC pattern that talk about YHWH in the 3rd person (vv. 8–10, 12–14). Verse 11, which sits at the center (X) of this ABCXABC structure is the only verse in this section that addresses YHWH directly.
     + [Center of vv. 8–14]:  A. "instructs... in the way" (v. 8) B. 3/3 rhythm, yiqtols, pronominal reference to previous verse; C. "for those who keep his covenant" (v. 10) X. "Would you forgive!" (v. 11); A. "instructs in the way" (v. 12) B. 3/3 rhythm, yiqtols, pronominal reference to previous verse; C. "for those who fear him... his covenant" (v. 14).
 + <Missing "hope" (קוה)>: "The letters ו and ק \[the two letters that are missing in Psalm 25\] are the two main letters in the word for hope – קוה \[which occurs in vv. 3, 5, 21\]. How ironic that in a psalm whose theme is hope, the letters that spell hope should be missing! ... Ps 25 is missing these two letters because it describes a hopeless situation" (Benun 2006, 12 :A:).

Ayin-Pe or Pe-Ayin?

The previous argument map opened a new question: the sequence of v. 15 (the ayin verse) and v. 16 (the pe verse). This question is closely related to the question of the missing qof, because, if the sequence of Psalm 25 were originally pe-ayin, then it would offer a strong poetic-structural argument for seeing the missing qof as an element of deliberate poetic design.

Ayin-Pe

All translations and virtually all scholars follow the traditional ayin-pe order, which is preserved in all extant witnesses to the text.

 
===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 
[Ayin-Pe]: Psalm 25 originally had an ayin-pe order.#dispreferred
 + <Textual witnesses>: All of the extant textual witnesses, including the oldest witness (LXX), have the ayin-pe order. #dispreferred
 + <Poetic structure>: According to the traditional ayin-pe order, the psalm divides into three parts based on shifts in person. Verses 2–7 address YHWH in the second person; vv. 8–15 (except for the central verse, v. 11) talk about him in the third person; and vv. 16–22 address him in the second person.#dispreferred
  - <Verses 8–15>: Verses 8–14 (without v. 15) comprise a complete poetic section.
   + <vv. 8–14 as a unit>: Verses 8–14 make up a section of seven acrostic letters (cf. the seven letters in vv. 2–7), and it forms an ABCXABC structure. Verse 15 should not be grouped with vv. 8–14, because it stands outside of this structure.
    + [vv. 8–14 as a unit]:  A. "instructs... in the way" (v. 8) B. 3/3 rhythm, yiqtols, pronominal reference to previous verse; C. "for those who keep his covenant" (v. 10) X. "Would you forgive!" (v. 11) (second person); A. "instructs in the way" (v. 12) B. 3/3 rhythm, yiqtols, pronominal reference to previous verse; C. "for those who fear him... his covenant" (v. 14).

Pe-Ayin (preferred)

At least one scholar has argued that Psalm 25 originally had a pe-ayin order. According to this view, v. 15 and v. 16 would have been swapped in the original text. The arguments for and against this position are as follows:

 
===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        rankdir: LR
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 
[Pe-Ayin]: Psalm 25 originally had a *pe*-*ayin* order (First 2014 :A:).
 + <Pe-ayin>: In pre-exilic Israel and Judah, the alphabet was often written with the order pe-ayin (First 2014 :A:; Sikes and Longacre 2025 :A:).
  + <Biblical acrostics>: In several early biblical acrostics, pe precedes ayin.
   + [Lamentations 2-4]: In the MT, the three acrostic poems in Lam 2-4 are arranged in the order pe-ayin (Lam 2:16-17; 3:46-51; 4:16-17).
   + [Prov 31 (LXX)]: In the LXX, the acrostic poem in Prov 31 reflects the pe-ayin order (Prov 31:25-26; MT: עֹז... פִּ֭יהָ. LXX: στόμα... ἰσχὺν).
   + [Lam 1 (4QLam)]: According to 4QLam, pe precedes ayin in the acrostic poem of Lam 1.
  + <Ancient abecederies>: In many of "the abecederies in the traditional aleph-bet scheme that have been discovered in ancient Israel that date from the period of the Judges and the First Temple and that span the letters ayin and pe... pe precedes ayin" (First 2014, 476 :A:).
   + [Izbet Sartah ostracon]: An ostracon from Izbet Sartah (c. early 12th century BC) contains the alphabet written with pe before ayin (see Cross 1980 :A:).
   + [Kuntillet 'Ajrud jar]: Three abecedaries on a jar from Kuntillet 'Ajrud (c. 800 BC) have the order pe-ayin.
   + [Tel Zayit stone]: An abecedary from Tel Zayit (c. 10th century BC) "seems to follow the order of pe preceding ayin" (First 2014, 475 :A:).
   + [Additional ostracon]: An ostracon of unknown provenance (c. early 6th century BC) contains three abecederies in which pe precedes ayin.
 + <Book 1 acrostics>: Other acrostics in Book 1 of the Psalter (e.g., Pss 34, 37) originally had a *pe*-*ayin* order which was subsequently updated to *ayin*-*pe* (Sikes and Loncagre 2025 :A:; on Psalm 34, see exegetical issue: The Text and Meaning of Psalm 34:18).
 - <Textual witnesses>: All of the extant textual witnesses, including the oldest witness (LXX), have the ayin-pe order. The pe-ayin order is not attested in the manuscript tradition for this psalm. #dispreferred
  <_ <Updating>: Our earliest witness dates to the second century BC (LXX), and by this time the order of the Hebrew alphabet had long been standardized as ayin-pe (cf. Sikes and Longacre 2025 :A:). It is plausible that the sequence in Psalm 25 would have been updated at an early point (somtime before the second century BC) and that this update is now reflected in the entire manuscript tradition.
   + <Documented updating of acrostics>: Scribes sometimes updated the order of *ayin*-*pe* / *pe*-*ayin* sections of acrostic poems to reflect their preferred sequence.
    + [Documented updating of acrostics]: Compare, e.g., Lam 1 in MT (ayin-pe) and 4QLam (pe-ayin); and Prov 31 in MT (ayin-pe) and LXX (pe-ayin).
 + <Poetic Structure>: If the pe-ayin order is adopted, then multiple patterns which are characteristic of biblical poetry emerge in the structure of the poem.
  + <Chiasm>: If the pe-ayin order is adopted, then vv. 15–22 would be arranged as a chiasm, with the two *pe* verses framing the chiasm.
   + [Chiasm (vv. 15–22)]: A. "Turn towards me" (פְּנֵה אֵלַי) (v. 16); B. hope ("my eyes are on YHWH") and rescue ("bring out of net... bring out of distress") (vv. 15, 17); C. "Look at" (רְאֵה) (v. 18); C. "Look at" (רְאֵה) (v. 19); B. hope ("I have taken refuge... I hope") and rescue ("guard... rescue... keep safe") (vv. 20–21); A. "Redeem, God" (פְּדֵה אֱלֹהִים) (v. 22).
  + <vv. 15, 17>: If the pe-ayin order is adopted, then v. 15 would be next to v. 17. This would seem to reflect the poem's original design, because there are strong connections between these two verses.
   + [הוציא]: The word הוציא ("bring out") occurs in the b-line of each verse, and these are the only two places in the poem where this word occurs (cf. First 2014 :A:).
   + [Body parts]: Both v. 15 and v. 17 mention parts of the psalmist's body: "eyes" (v. 15a), "feet" (v. 15b), "heart" (v. 17a).
  <_ <Obscuring poetics?>: It is unlikely that a scribe, or scribal community, would have obscured these elements of the poetic structure by changing the sequence of the letters.#dispreferred
   - <Documented updating of acrostics>
  <_ <Person shifts>: Adopting the pe-ayin order obscures an otherwise important aspect of the poetic structure. According to the ayin-pe order, the psalm divides into three parts based on shifts in person. Verses 2–7 address YHWH in the second person; vv. 8–15 (except for the central verse, v. 11) talk about him in the third person; and vv. 16–22 address him in the second person.#dispreferred
   - <Verses 8–15>: Verses 8–14 (without v. 15) comprise a complete poetic section.
    + <vv. 8–14 as a unit>: Verses 8–14 make up a section of seven acrostic letters (cf. the seven letters in vv. 2–7), and it forms an ABCXABC structure.
     + [vv. 8–14 as a unit]:  A. "instructs... in the way" (v. 8) B. 3/3 rhythm, yiqtols, pronominal reference to previous verse; C. "for those who keep his covenant" (v. 10) X. "Would you forgive!" (v. 11) (second person); A. "instructs in the way" (v. 12) B. 3/3 rhythm, yiqtols, pronominal reference to previous verse; C. "for those who fear him... his covenant" (v. 14).

Conclusion (B)

It is, of course, possible that the missing qof, expected according to the acrostic pattern, is due to an early scribal error that predates all of our textual witnesses. However, apart from the expectations of the acrostic structure, there is no evidence to support this view. And even if one should hold this view, it would be impossible to reconstruct the original text with any confidence.

Biblical acrostics frequently deviate from expected norms, sometimes for poetic effect (e.g., Pss 9–10). In the case of the missing qof in Psalm 25:18, there is evidence for deliberate poetic design. We note, for example, that if the original sequence of the poem were pe-ayin (which seems likely), then vv. 15–22 would be arranged as a chiasm, with the two resh verses (vv. 18–19) corresponding to one another at the center of the chiasm.

A. "Turn towards me" (פְּנֵה אֵלַי) (v. 16)

B. hope ("my eyes are on YHWH") and rescue ("bring out of net... bring out of distress") (vv. 15, 17)

C. "Look at" (רְאֵה) (v. 18)

C. "Look at" (רְאֵה) (v. 19)

B. hope ("I have taken refuge... I hope") and rescue ("guard... rescue... keep safe") (vv. 20–21)

A. "Redeem, God" (פְּדֵה אֱלֹהִים) (v. 22).

We also note that the forgiveness of sins, mentioned in v. 18b, is an especially prominent theme in Psalm 25 (see v. 11, the central verse). It would make sense for the poem to draw attention to the presence of this theme in v. 18 by disrupting the acrostic structure.

In other words, there is reason to think that the poet deviated from the expected acrostic pattern for the sake of making v. 18 prominent. This prominence is achieved by (1) using a different letter than what would have been expected (resh instead of qof), and (2) placing vv. 18–19 at the center of a chiasm. The prominence of v. 18 is consistent with the message of the poem and its emphasis on the forgiveness of sins (see v. 11 at the center of the poem).

Research

Translations

Ancient

• LXX: ἰδὲ τὴν ταπείνωσίν μου καὶ τὸν κόπον μου καὶ ἄφες πάσας τὰς ἁμαρτίας μου.
  • "See my humiliation and my trouble, and forgive all my sins."
• Aquila: ἴ̣δ̣ε̣ κακουχίαν μο̣υ̣... καὶ ἆρον ταῖς πάσαις ἁ̣μ̣̣α̣ρ̣τ̣ί̣α̣ι̣ς̣ μ̣̣ο̣υ̣
  • "See my misery... and take away all my sins."
• Peshitta: ܘܚܙܝ ܫܘܥܒܕܝ ܘܥܡܠܝ ܘܫܒܘܩ ܠܝ ܟܠܗܿ ܚܛܝܬܝ܂
  • "See my subjection and my trouble; forgive me all my sin."
• Targum: חמי סיגופי וטורחי ושבוק לכולהון חובי׃
  • "See my affliction and my trouble, and forgive all my sins."
• Jerome (iuxta Hebr.): vide adflictionem meam et laborem meum | et porta omnia peccata mea
  • "See my affliction and my suffering, and take away all my sins."

Modern

• Look on (NIV, NEB, REB)
• Look at (CEB)
• Consider (ESV, NRSVue, GNT)
• See (NET, CEV)
• Feel... and see (NLT)
• Spare a glance for (NJB)
• Sieh an (LUT, HFA, ELB, EÜ, GNB, ZÜR)
• Achte auf (NGÜ)
• Vois (TOB, NVS78P, BDS, PDV2017, NFC, S21)
• Regarde (NBS)
• Mira (RVR95, DHH94I, BTX4)
• Fíjate en (NVI)

Secondary Literature

Baethgen, Friedrich. 1904. Die Psalmen. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Benun, Ronald. 2006. “Evil and the Disruption of Order: A Structural Analysis of the Acrostics in the First Book of Psalms.” The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 6: 2–30.

Craigie, Peter C. 1983. Psalms 1–50. WBC 19. Word.

Doyle, Brian. 2001. “Just You, and I, Waiting - The Poetry of Psalm 25.” OTE 14 (2): 199–213.

Duhm, Bernhard. 1899. Die Psalmen. Kurzer Hand-Kommentar zum Alten Testament, edited by D. Karl Marti, vol. 14. J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck).

First, Mitchell. 2014. “Using the Pe–Ayin Order of the Abecedaries of Ancient Israel to Date the Book of Psalms.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38 (4): 471–85.

Gentry, Peter. 2020. “Chaos Theory and the Text of the Old Testament.” SBJT 24 (3): 55–81.

Hossfeld, Frank-Lothar, and Erich Zenger. 1993. Die Psalmen I: Psalm 1–50. Neue Echter Bibel. Echter.

Sikes, Ryan, and Drew Longacre. 2025. “Restoring the ʿAyin Section of Psalm 37: A Text-Critical and Poetic-Structural Analysis.” Textus 34 (2): 122–49.

Spieckermann, Hermann. 2023. Psalmen. 1: Psalm 1 - 49. Das Alte Testament Deutsch, 14,1. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Spronk, Klaas. 2009. “The Line-Acrostic in Nahum 1: New Evidence from Ancient Greek Manuscripts and from the Literary Analysis of the Hebrew Text.” In The Impact of Unit Delimitation on Exegesis, edited by Raymond de Hoop, Marjo C. A. Korpel, and Stanley E. Porter. Pericope 7. Brill.

Watson, Wilfred G. E. 2001. Classical Hebrew Poetry: A Guide to Its Techniques. Sheffield Academic Press.

References

25:18