The Textual and Logical Issues with לוּלֵא in Ps 27:13

Back to Psalm 27

Introduction

Ps. 27:13 according to the MT:

לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ הֶ֭אֱמַנְתִּי לִרְא֥וֹת בְּֽטוּב־יְהוָ֗ה בְּאֶ֣רֶץ חַיִּֽים׃

Fletcher (Fletcher, 115) calls the Hebrew of this verse “notoriously difficult”, because of the first word, ‘lule’. It has unusual puncta extraordinaria (PE), which may indicate scribal reservations related to the word, and it raises a potential aposiopesis: the word itself usually begins a protasis clause, which would be expected to have an apodosis counterpart following the protasis. This verse, however, contains no clear apodosis. Related textual, grammatical and phrasal meaning questions arise around these concerns:

1. TEXTUAL:
   1. Option 1: Retain MT's לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ.
   2. Option 2: Delete לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ (NIV, ESV, NEDS, LXX [partially], Aquila, Symmachus, Syriac, rendering a translation like, 'I believe that I shall look upon the goodness of the LORD in the land of the living'! [ESV])
2. GRAMMATICAL: If retained, לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ should be interpreted as an...
   1. Option 1: Emphatic adverb (NASB, DCH, HALOT) rendering a translation like, 'I indeed believed I would see the goodness of Y. in the land of the living' (DCH)
   2. Option 2: Unreal conditional particle
3. CLAUSAL MEANING: If לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ is retained and interpreted as an unreal conditional particle, the apodosis is...
   1. Option 1: Located in the preceding verse (Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Niehaus, rendering a translation like, '12a Do not deliver me to the will of my enemies 12b (For) false witnesses and one breathing out violence had prevailed against me 13 had I not trusted to see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living' [Niehaus, 88-89]),
   2. Option 2: Omitted and might either be supplied by the translator (KJV, ERV, NET, NASB 1995, rendering a translation like, 'I had fainted, unless I had believed to see the goodness of the LORD in the land of the living' [KJV]), or the reader/listener (DBT, JPS, Stec [Targum translation], BDB, rendering a translation like, 'If I had not believed to look upon the goodness of the LORD In the land of the living!—'[JPS 1917])?

The following argument maps will present 3 textual options, 2 grammatical options, and 2 (phrasal) meaning options:

Argument Map(s)

Textual: should לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ be retained or deleted?

Retain לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ

===
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
=== 
<Retain לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ>: לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ is original to the text. The clause remains לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ הֶ֭אֱמַנְתִּי  (Had I not believed). 
 + <Textual evidence>: The MT and most Hebrew MSS retain לולא.
  + [MT and Hebrew MSS evidence]: E.g., Aleppo Codex
  + [Targum]: The Targum of Psalms is based on a Hebrew manuscript that read לולא.
  <_ <Dots indicated deletion>: In the MT, the word לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ is surrounded by dots which indicate the need for deletion. At some point the pre-Masoretic texts became sanctified along with their scribal marks (later they were reinterpreted in the Talmud) (Tov 235-6). #dispreferred
   + <Dots at Qumran indicated deletion>: In Qumran manuscripts dots were used to indicate deletion.#dispreferred
    + [Example in the Great Isaiah Scroll]: E.g., in the Great Isaiah Scroll: Isa. 15:7; 19:5; 35:10; 36:4, 7; 40:8. #dispreferred
   - <PE function unclear>: There is no consensus with regards to the origin of the PE found in HB texts; they could signal deletion, doubt or significance.'Each of the explanations can account for one or more of the dotted words, but none of them can explain every occurrence'. . .'the only thing the 'dotted' passages have in common is that there is some issue in each'" (Kelley et al. 1998: 33-34, quoted in Diamond, EHLL).
    + [HB texts with PE]: Gen 16:5, 18:9, 19:33, 33:4, 37:12; Num 3:39, 9:10, 21:30, 29:15; Deut 29:28; 2 Sam 19:20; Isa 44:9; Ezek 41:20, 46:22; Ps 27:13
    + <Midrash in BT Berakot 4a>: The midrash in BT Berakot 4a takes for granted that the six dots express doubt related to content, indicating a different reading, not textual exclusion (Gruber, 280-281). 
 - <Missing apodosis>: לולא usually introduces a protasis clause followed by an apodosis clause, but here there is no apodosis. #dispreferred
  <_ <Lectio difficilior>: לולא usually begins a protasis clause followed by an apodosis clause. The difficult reading (lectio difficilior) raised by the lack of apodosis could have led to scribal changes. The aposiopesis reading is the more difficult one, which could indicate anteriority.

Delete לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ

===
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
=== 
<Remove "לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ">: לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ is not original to the text and should be removed. The clause becomes הֶ֭אֱמַנְתִּי ('I had believed). #dispreferred
 + <Textual support for removal>: Some manuscript witnesses remove לולא. #dispreferred
  + [Ancient Versions]: Ancient supports for removal evidence: LXX; Aquila; Symmachus; Jerome; Syriac #dispreferred
  + [Hebrew manuscripts]: de Rossi and Kennicott (MSS 117, 142, 309, 368, 874) #dispreferred
  <_ <Greek versions possible repositioning>: The LXX does not have לולא in v.13 but there is a possible emendation and repositioning of the word in v. 12. The LXX may have read לו instead of לולא, represented by ἑαυτῇ at the end of the previous verse.
 + <Dots indicated deletion>: Originally the dots indicated deletion. At some point the pre-Masoretic texts became sanctified along with their scribal marks (later they were reinterpreted in the Talmud) (Tov, 235-6). #dispreferred
  + <Dots at Qumran indicated deletion>: Qumran texts dotted deleted letters. These deleted letters are not included in the MT; the corrected text is the same as the MT. #dispreferred
   + [Example in the Great Isaiah Scroll]: E.g., in the Great Isaiah Scroll: Isa. 15:7; 19:5; 35:10; 36:4, 7; 40:8. #dispreferred
  + <Ancient support for deletion of MT PE>: Deletion of MT dotted letters or words in several HB texts is supported by textual witnesses. #dispreferred
   + [Ancient support for deletion of MT Puncta Extraordinaria]: E.g., Ezekiel 46:22 deletion of MT PE is supported by the LXX, Peshitta, Vulgate; Gen. 33:4, deletion is supported by the LXX.; in Gen. 16:5, the deletion of י is supported by the Samaritan Pentateuch. #dispreferred
  <_ <Midrash in BT Berakot 4a>: The midrash in BT Berakot 4a takes for granted that the six dots express doubt related to content, indicating a different reading, not textual exclusion (Gruber, 280-281).
  - <Differing explanations for HB texts with ''puncta extraordinaria''(PE)>: There is no consensus with regards to the origin of the PE found in HB texts; they could signal deletion, doubt or significance.'Each of the explanations can account for one or more of the dotted words, but none of them can explain every occurrence'. . .'the only thing the 'dotted' passages have in common is that there is some issue in each'" (Kelley et al. 1998: 33-34, quoted in Diamond, EHLL). It is better therefore not to delete PE so as to avoid removing part of the original text.
   + [HB texts with PE]: Gen 16:5, 18:9, 19:33, 33:4, 37:12; Num 3:39, 9:10, 21:30, 29:15; Deut 29:28; 2 Sam 19:20; Isa 44:9; Ezek 41:20, 46:22; Ps 27:13
   - <Only example of this dot pattern>: This is the only example of dots above and below the word, which could be grounds to treat it differently than other examples of ''puncta extraordinaria''. #dispreferred 
 + <Missing apodosis>: לולא is most often read as part of the protasis in a conditional. The lack of a clear apodosis favours changing the text. #dispreferred

Grammatical: if retained, should it be retained as an adverbial or as an unreal conditional particle?

Unreal conditional particle

===
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
=== 

<לולא is an unreal conditional particle in a protasis-apodosis construction>: (Had I not believed) 
(DCH, HALOT)
 + <Typical לולא use>: In the thirteen occurrences of לולא it is usually part of a protasis-apodosis construction (Niehaus, 88).
  + [Hebrew Bible לולא evidence]: Gen. 31:42, 43:10; Deut. 32:26-27; Judg. 14:18; 1 Sam. 25:34; 2 Sam. 2:27; 2 Kgs. 3:14; Pss. 27:13 94:17, 106:23, 119:92, 124:1-2; Isa. 1:9
 - <Missing apodosis>: The lack of a clear apodosis could favour a different grammatical reading. #dispreferred
  - <Biblical examples of missing apodoses>: There are other examples of protasis only conditional sentences in the Hebrew Bible.
   + [Protasis-only evidence]: Gn. 30:27; 38:17; 50:15, Ex. 32:32, Jb. 38:5 (GKC §159 dd; 2; Perowne, 270)

Emphatic adverb

===
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
=== 

<לולא is an empahtic adverb>: (Surely I had believed) (BDB, SDBH) #dispreferred
 + <Missing apodosis>: The lack of a clear apodosis could favour not reading this clause as conditional. #dispreferred
  - <Biblical examples of missing apodoses>: There are other examples of protasis only conditional sentences in the Hebrew Bible.
   + [Protasis-only evidence]: Gn. 30:27; 38:17; 50:15, Ex. 32:32, Jb. 38:5 (GKC §159 dd; 2; Perowne, 270)

Clausal meaning: if conditional, is the apodosis located in the preceding verse or is it omitted?

Omitted apodosis

===
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
=== 

<לולא is part of a protasis-apodosis construction with an omitted apodosis>: (– had I not believed–)
 + <Typical לולא clause order>: In the thirteen occurrences of לולא it is usually part of a protasis-apodosis construction with the protasis preceding the apodosis (Niehaus, 88). Reading the apodosis as omitted is consistent with this. 
  + [Typical לולא clause order evidence]: Gen. 31:42, 43:10; Judg. 14:18; 1 Sam. 25:34; 2 Sam. 2:27; 2 Kgs. 3:14; Pss. 94:17, 119:92, 124:1-2; Isa. 1:9
  <_ <Hebrew Bible לולא inversions>: In two HB texts with לולא the apodosis is before the protasis (Niehaus, 88). #dispreferred
   + [לולא inversion evidence]: Deut. 32:26-7; Ps. 106:23; (Ps. 27:13) (Niehaus, 88-89). #dispreferred
 + <Hebrew Bible missing apodoses>: There are other examples of protasis only conditional sentences in the Hebrew Bible.
  + [Protasis-only evidence]: Gen. 30:27; 38:17; 50:15, Exod. 32:32, Jb. 38:5 (GKC 159 dd; 2, Perowne 270).
 + <Excited aposiopesis>: The missing content in an HB aposiopesis could be supplied from context by translator or reader. This can be a technique to heighten the emotion in the text.
  + [Biblical examples of aposiopesis]: E.g., Gen. 3:22, 20:3, 25:22, 35:22; Exod. 32:31-32; Judg. 5:29-30; 2 Sam 5:8; Ps. 6:3;  1 Chron. 4:10 (Bullinger, 151-153)
 + <Poetic function>: The missing content in an HB aposiopesis can cause the reader to pause. Aposiopesis functions by thwarting expectation. Here an apodosis is expected and the reader waits just as David instructs his readers to do ('wait') in the following verse.

Apodosis in preceding verse

Lule is part of an inverted P-A construction, with the apodosis in the preceding verse.

===
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
=== 

<לולא is part of an inverted protasis-apodosis construction, with the apodosis in the preceding verse>: (false witnesses would have prevailed against me unless I had believed) (Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Niehaus) #dispreferred
 + <Hebrew Bible לולא inversions>: In two HB texts with לולא the apodosis is before the protasis (Niehaus, 88). #dispreferred
  + [לולא inversion evidence]: Deut. 32:26-7; Ps. 106:23; (Ps. 27:13) (Niehaus, 88-89). #dispreferred
 + <כִּי as apodosis introduction>: The כִּי in v.12b could introduce an apodosis of v.13a (Niehaus, 88-89). #dispreferred
  <_ <כִּי as subordinating conjunction>: The כִּי clause in v.12b logically supports v.12a as a subordinating conjunction: 'do not give me to the craving of my adversaries, for (because) false witnesses and those who breathe out violence have risen against me'.
 + <קום with the בְּ preposition as 'prevail against' in Ps. 27:12>: If קום is read more strongly as 'prevail against' in Ps. 27:12 instead of 'rise against' it is logically better connected to 13a. #dispreferred
  - <'Rise against'>: The verb קום with the בְּ preposition in Ps. 27:12 probably means 'rise against' instead of 'prevail against' (BDB :L:, HALOT :L:, DCH :L:, SDBH :L:)   
 + <Found 'missing apodosis'>: Seeing v.12 and v.13 as an inverted protasis-apodosis construction solves the missing apodosis difficulty. #dispreferred
  

Conclusion

The unusual “puncta extraordinaria” (PE) on lule in Ps. 27:13 raise textual, grammatical and clausal meaning questions. The first is whether lule should be deleted or retained in the text. Though PE have been viewed as critical scribal marks that clearly signal deletion of a letter or word in texts such as the DSS, there is no consensus on the purpose of PE in the (Masoretic Text) MT. In the MT they could signal doubt, deletion or significance (Diamond, EHLL; Gruber, 280-81; Slotki, 347-68; Tov, 235-36; Yeivin, 45-46). Given the possibility of the latter, and the inclusion of lule in most Hebrew manuscripts, it is preferable to retain lule as original to the text.

Retained in the text lule could be read as either an emphatic adverb or as an unconditional particle. The major difficulty with the latter reading is that lule would then be part of a protasis (P) which would usually be coupled with an apodosis (A). There is no clear apodosis in v. 13. However, there are a number of BH protasis-only texts and lule is usually read as part of a P-A construction rather than as an emphatic adverb. For these reasons it is best to read lule as an unconditional particle beginning a protasis clause.

With this reading a final question arises: does the P-A construction have an inverted protasis-apodosis, with the apodosis in the preceding verse, or is the apodosis omitted? Arguments for the former would be strengthened by reading the כִּי in v. 12b as part of the P-A construction and ‘rising up’ as ‘prevail against’, rendering the construction something like: “for false witnesses and those who breathe out violence would have prevailed against me if I had not believed. . .”. However כִּי logically supports v. 12a and the major Hebrew lexicons support reading קום and the בְּ preposition as ‘rising against’. For these reasons, and because in most P-A constructions with lule the protasis follows the apodosis, it is preferable to read v. 13 as containing an ‘excited aposiopesis’ to be filled in by translator or reader.

This reading has the poetic function of heightening the emotion of the text. Providing a dash (–) in the missing protasis space could also have the function of causing readers to pause and wait, just as they are exhorted to do in the following verse: “Had I not believed I would look on the goodness of YHWH in the land of the living– Wait for YHWH!” In v. 13 the poet affirms his belief with a statement in a form that creates pause to consider what life would be without it. This consideration adds force to the psalmist’s expression of his choice in v. 14 for himself and others to keep courage while waiting for YHWH.

Research

Translations

Ancient

• MT: לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ הֶ֭אֱמַנְתִּי לִרְא֥וֹת בְּֽטוּב־יְהוָ֗ה בְּאֶ֣רֶץ חַיִּֽים׃
• Mp: 4 times (Mm 1714) it is written in a certain manner with the א aleph at the end of the word and one of those times it is unique (in Psalm 27:13) (cf. Mm note 10 = Mp sub loco) with puncta extraordinaria (dots placed above and below the word, "which probably indicate that doctrinal or textual reservations were held by scribes" William R. Scott, 3) with the exception of the letter ו waw and one instance (with one letter) of the 15 words is dotted .
• Mm 1714: Genesis 43:10; Judges 14:18; 2 Samuel 2:27; Psalm 27:13
• Mm: Mp sub loco – "The note indicates that we have corrected an error in the Mp of L, or that the difficulty is due to the absence of a related list in the Mm of L. These instances are discussed fully in our Massorah Gedolah, vol. III" (BHS, Prolegemena XVII-XVIII).
• BHS critical note: לולא is absent in a few manuscripts, and in the Septuagint (but compare with Psalm 27:12 [the Septuagint adds ἑαυτῇ = לו of לולא at the end of the verse]).
• Iuxta LXX: redo videre bona Domini in terra viventium.
• Iuxta Hebr: go autem credo quod videam bona Domini in terra viventium.
• Vulgate: Credidi videre bonitatem Jovae.
• Ο': πιστεύω τοῦ ἰδεῖν τὰ, ὰγαθὰ κυρίου.
• Ά: ἐπίστευσα τοῦ ἰδεῖν ἐν ἀγαθῷ κυρίου.
• Σ: επίστευον ἰδεῖν τήν ἀγαθοσύνην κυρίου.
• LXX: 12 μὴ παραδῷς με εἰς ψυχὰς θλιβόντων με, ὅτι ἐπανέστησάν μοι μάρτυρες ἄδικοι, καὶ ἐψεύσατο ἡ ἀδικία ἑαυτῇ. 13 πιστεύω τοῦ ἰδεῖν τὰ ἀγαθὰ κυρίου ἐν γῇ ζώντων.
• NETS Bible: 12 Do not give me up to the souls of people that afflict me, because unjust witnesses rose against me and injustice lied to itself. 13 I believe, in order that I may see the good things of the Lord in the land of the living.
• Peshitta: ܝܓܐܢܐ݂ܕܝܢܗܝܡܢ݂ܬܶܕܐܚܙܐ݂ܒܛ݂ܒ݂ܬܗܕܡܪܐ ܰܳܰ̈
• TAYLOR: But I believe that I will see the good things of the Lord in the land of the living).
• Targum: אילולי די הימנית למחמי בטובא דייי בארעא דחיי עלמא׃
• Stec: (Had I not believed that I would see the goodness of the LORD in the land of eternal life . . . .
• 4Q85: (4QPsc): . . . [ האמנתי לראות בטוב ] "I am still confident that I will see] the Lord’s [goodness] in the lan[d of the living" (Parry, Donald W. , and Andrew C. Skinner eds., Dead Sea Scrolls Electronic Library Biblical Texts. In Consultation with Emanuel Tov and Eugene Ulrich. Leiden: Brill, 2015, http://dx.doi.org.proxy3.library.mcgill.ca/10.1163/2451-9383_dss..dsbo-eng14q85 R Parry, Donald W., and Andrew C. Skinner eds., Dead Sea Scrolls Electronic Library Biblical Texts. In Consultation with Emanuel Tov and Eugene Ulrich. Leiden: Brill, 2015, http://dx.doi.org.proxy3.library.mcgill.ca/10.1163/2451-9383_dss..dsbo-eng14q85).

Modern

• NIV: I remain confident of this: I will see the goodness of the LORD in the land of the living.
• NLT: Yet I am confident I will see the LORD’s goodness while I am here in the land of the living.
• ESV” I believe that I shall look upon the goodness of the LORD in the land of the living!
• BSB: Still I am certain to see the goodness of the LORD in the land of the living.
• NASB: I certainly believed that I would see the goodness of the LORD In the land of the living.
• NASB (1995): I would have despaired unless I had believed that I would see the goodness of the LORD In the land of the living.
• NASB (1977): I would have despaired unless I had believed that I would see the goodness of the LORD In the land of the living.
• AB: I would have despaired had I not believed that I would see the goodness of the LORD In the land of the living.
• CSB: I am certain that I will see the LORD’s goodness in the land of the living.
• HCSB: I am certain that I will see the LORD's goodness in the land of the living.
• CEV: but I know I will live to see how kind you are.
• GNT: I know that I will live to see the LORD's goodness in this present life.
• GWT: I believe that I will see the goodness of the LORD in this world of the living.
• ISB: I believe that I will see the LORD's goodness in the land of the living.
• NET Bible: Where would I be if I did not believe I would experience the LORD's favor in the land of the living?
• KJV: I had fainted, unless I had believed to see the goodness of the LORD in the land of the living.
• NKJV: I would have lost heart, unless I had believed That I would see the goodness of the LORD In the land of the living.
• WEB: I am still confident of this: I will see the goodness of Yahweh in the land of the living.
• ASV: I had fainted , unless I had believed to see the goodness of Jehovah In the land of the living.
• DBT: Unless I had believed to see the goodness of Jehovah in the land of the living ...!
• ERV: I had fainted, unless I had believed to see the goodness of the LORD in the land of the living.
• NLT: Yet I am confident I will see the LORD’s goodness while I am here in the land of the living.
• DRB: I believe to see the good things of the Lord in the land of the living.
• PHBT: But I have believed that I shall see the goodness of LORD JEHOVAH in the land of the living.
• JPS (1917): If I had not believed to look upon the goodness of the LORD In the land of the living!--
• JPS (1985): Had I not the assurance that I would enjoy the goodness of the LORD in the land of the living…
• TOJB (2011): Did I not believe to see Hashemʼs goodness in the Eretz Chayyim!
• BST: I believe that I shall see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living.

French

• NBS: Oh ! si je ne croyais pas voir la bonté du Seigneur sur la terre des vivants ! (27.13 Oh ! si je ne croyais pas… : texte incertain ; plusieurs traducteurs omettent le premier mot du texte pour lire je crois que je verrai… (le verbe traduit par croire est apparenté au mot amen ). – voir : tournure analogue, avec un autre verbe, au v. 4 ; cf. 22.18n. – sur la terre des vivants 52.7 ; 116.9n  ; 142.6 ; cf. 118.17s ; Es 38.11 ; 53.8 ; Jr 11.19 ; Ez 26.20 ; 32.23ss ; Jb 28.13).
• BDS: Que deviendrais-je ╵si je n’avais pas l’assurance ╵d’expérimenter la bonté ╵de l’Eternel au pays des vivants ?).
• FRDBY: Si je n'avais pas eu la confiance que je verrais la bonté de l'Éternel dans la terre des vivants....!
• LSG: Oh! Si je n’étais pas sûr de voir la bonté de l’Éternel Sur la terre des vivants!…
• NFC: Que deviendrais-je, si je n'avais pas l'assurance de voir la bonté du Seigneur sur cette terre où nous vivons ?
• NVS78P: Oh ! si je n'étais pas sûr de contempler la bonté de l'Éternel Sur la terre des vivants ! …
• S21: Oh! si je n’étais pas sûr de voir la bonté de l’Eternel au pays des vivants…
• TOB: Je suis sûr de voir les bienfaits du SEIGNEUR* au pays des vivants. (Litt. Si je n'étais pas sûr. Dans le texte hébr., la conjonction (si... ne... pas), qui exprime un serment positif, est entourée de points conventionnels qui suggèrent peut-être une altération du texte ou une lecture à éviter; la plupart des versions n'en tiennent pas compte).

Spanish

• LBLA: Hubiera yo desmayado, si no hubiera creído que había de ver la bondad del Señor en la tierra de los vivientes.
• RVR95: Hubiera yo desmayado, si no creyera que he de ver la bondad de Jehová en la tierra de los vivientes.
• BTI: Confío en ver la bondad del Señor en la tierra de los vivos. (27,13: la tierra de los vivos: En oposición a la morada o reino de los muertos (el seol hebreo —ver VOCABULARIO BÍBLICO—), lugar al que caracteriza la ausencia de toda relación con Dios).

German

• Lutherbibel (1984): Ich glaube aber doch, dass ich sehen werde die Güte des HERRN im Lande der Lebendigen.

Secondary Literature

• ALTER: If I but trust to see the LORD’s goodness, in the land of the living— (NOTE: If I but trust. This sentence, at least in the textual form passed down to us, seems to be an ellipsis) (Robert Alter, The book of Psalms : a translation with commentary, 2007).
• CHANANEL: [Rabeinu Chananel on Exodus 14:31:1 11th century cf. cairo genizah] This is also what David spoke of when he said in Psalms 27,13: לולא האמנתי לראות בטוב ה' בארץ חיים, “Had I not the assurance that I would enjoy the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living, etc.” There is the obligation to believe in the eventual arrival of a redeemer [ed. note: This is a cornerstone of Judaism]" (www.sefaria.org).
• CRAIGIE: I believe that I will see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living FOOTNOTE: "In MT, the line begins with לולא (“unless, if not”); but this term normally introduces a protasis clause, and in v 13 there is no apodosis (though it is possible that the apodosis clause could have been suppressed: GKC, § 159 dd). One solution is to provide the apodosis from v 12b (the clause introduced by כי “for”), as proposed by Niehaus (art. cit.). But the extraordinary pointing in MT (six points above and below the main consonants) indicates that the term was suspect to the Massoretes (cf. Briggs, Psalms, p. xxiv) and in five Heb. MSS it is omitted, as in the translation above. (It is also omitted in G, though the equivalent of לו is added to the last clause of v 12.) (Craigie, Psalms 1-50, WBC, 16:229, 230).
• DAHOOD: In the Victor do I trust, to behold the beauty of Yahweh in the land of eternal life. "The significance of the divine appellative le' in this verse comes out clearly with the observation that Yahweh is the Victor over Death, and is called le'ōn mawet, "The Victor over Death" in Hab 1:12. For further associations of this appellative with questions of life and death, cf. NOTES on Ps vii 13-14. “the Victor". Reading lelē' for unexplained MT lule'; the construction he'emin le, "to believe or trust in a person," is well attested. Cf. Deut 9:23 and BDB, p. 53a. The divine appellative lē’ has been studied in the NOTE on Ps 7:13” (Dahood, I:169-70). [Commentary on Psalm 7:13]: "the Victor". Commonly labelled corrupt, consonantal 'm l'e yšb yields to satisfactory explanation when vocalized 'im lē' yāšub, and when le' is derived from the very frequent Ugaritic-Phoenician root l'y, "to be strong, to prevail." The root is also well known from Akk. lē'ū, "to be strong," and its presence in Hebrew was proposed many decades ago by those scholars who saw it in the Hebrew feminine name lē'āh, "domina." The stative vocalization le'ah supports the pointing lē' for the masculine form. For recent discussions of Northwest Semitic occurrences of this root, see A. M. Honeyman, PEQ (1961), 151-52, and Maurice Sznycer, Semitica 13 (1963), 21-30. Other instances of operative ‘i’m, balancing prescribe lū in the next verse, are in Pss 81:9, 95:7, 139:19” (Mitchell Dahood, Psalms, 1965, AB I:46).
• DIAMOND: "Nequdot (also termed puncta extraordinaria) are para-textual dots written above certain letters and words in the Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible. In the Pentateuch these dots occur in ten verses: Gen. 16.5; 18.9; 19.33; 33.4; 37.12; Num. 3.39; 8.10; 21.20; 29.15; Deut. 29.28. They also are seen at five other sites: 2 Sam. 19.20; Isa. 44.9; Ezek. 41.20; 46.22; Ps. 27.13. The existence of the dots is flagged in Masora Parva in the margin of Masoretic codices by the abbreviated note נקוד (i.e., נקודות nequdot). These supralineal dots are a different order of marking from the Hebrew vowel points and cantillation signs and do not affect pronunciation or accentuation. Not all biblical and rabbinic sources place the dots exactly where we see them in the Masoretic text. Dotted letters and words are found in the biblical fragments in the Qumran scrolls and in early Samaritan manuscripts, but their usage probably goes back much farther. There is no consensus on their origin or function. The two issues are interrelated. Three theories have been proposed for the function of these dots: 1) to indicate that the letter or word under them is to be deleted; 2) to indicate that such a letter or word is spurious or superfluous; 3) to signal that the word and the verse in which it occurs carry special midrashic or exegetical significance. “Each of the explanations can account for one or more of the dotted words, but none of them can explain every occurrence” (Kelley et al. 1998:33). In Gen. 33.4, for example, a case could be made from the context and the plain sense that the dotted word וַׄיִּׄשָּׁׄקֵ֑ׄהׄוּׄ way-yiššå̄qēhū is indeed questionable. A supralineal dot was used to mark deletion in Greek texts written by the scribes in the Alexandrian schools and may well have been adopted by scribes in the Hellenistic centuries of the Second Temple period for that purpose (Lieberman 1950:44). But it can also be argued that the dots in Gen. 33.4 indicate a call from the received exegetical tradition to interpret Esau’s kiss midrashically. If this is so, the use and placement of dots for this purpose may have originated with the earlier scribes in the Persian part of the Second Temple period or even with those in the First Temple period. It is probable that “the only thing the [dotted] passages have in common is that there is some issue in each” (Kelley et al. 1998:34)" (Diamond, James S., “Nequdot”, in: Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics, Edited by: Geoffrey Khan. Consulted online on 19 August 2023 <http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.is.ed.ac.uk/10.1163/2212-4241_ehll_EHLL_COM_00000235>

First published online: 2013 First print edition: 9789004176423 )

• DOTAN: "These dots are a very ancient tradition, the evidence concerning some of them going back to the second century C.E.; see for example, R. Yose in the Mishnah (Pes. 9:2) concerning the he with a dot, in the word רחקה (Num. 9:10)" (Aron Dotan, Encyclopedia Judaica, 2007, 13:608).
• DRIVER: Commenting on Isaiah 24:9 but gives view of puncta extraordinaria, "Obviously המה is not wanted, as the puncta extraordinaria indicate, and may be deleted as a faulty anticipation of the same word two verses. . ." (G. R. Driver, "Hebrew Notes," Journal of Biblical Literature, 68.1 [1949], 58).
• ERBELE-KÜSTER: What would be if I would not dare to hope to see the beautiful goodness of the Eternal in the land of the living? "In a (negated) question, the fragile hope of tasting the grace and goodness of the Eternal is expressed" (Dorothea Erbele-Küster, "Poetics and Ethics Psalm 27 as an Exemplary Reading," Canon & Culture, 10.1 [2016], 45, 48).
• FLETCHER: "The Hebrew of v. 13 is notoriously difficult (FN. 258). In the end it is a statement of renewed confidence". FOOTNOTE 258: "The issue hinges on what to do with לולא. It is normally the beginning of a protasis-apodosis clause, but there is no apodosis in this verse. Jeffrey Niehaus proposes an 'inverted protasis-apodosis'. . . [Craigie] shows how the term looked suspect to the Massoretes who left it untranslated." (Daniel H. Fletcher, "Seeking Solace in the Sanctuary: The Canonical Placement of Psalm 27", in Hebrew and Beyond: Studies in Honor of Rodney E. Cloud, edited by David Musgrave, 2016, 115-116).
• GINSBURG: "Though the Talmud and midrashim do not discuss the four passages which have the extraordinary points in the Prophets and only refer to the one instance in the Hagiographa,viz., Ps XXVII 13, the St. Petersburg codex of A. D. 916 which is the oldest dated MSS, gives the list of the 15 instances no fewer than three times [FN 1], and all the other MSS. which I have collated correspond with this ancient recension (FOOTNOTE 1: Comp. Sanhedrin 13b; Blau, Masoretische Untersuchungen. p.31)." "Ps. XXVII 13. - In the Talmud (Berachoth 4a) where the points on לולא are discussed, the following statement is made in the name of R. Jose who flourished in the second century: It is propounded in the name of R. Jose לולא has dots to indicate that David spoke before the Holy One, blessed be He, Lord of the universe, I believe in Thee that Thou wilt richly reward the righteous in the world to come, but I do not know whether I shall have my portion among them or not! From the words, therefore, but I do not know, or I do not believe, it is evident that he took the dots to cancel the first part of this expression and that he read it I do not believe. In other recensions, however, the word was entirely elided as is attested by some MSS., the Septuagint, the Syriac and the Vulgate. Accordingly, the passage ought to be translated: I believe that I shall see The goodness of the Lord in the land of the living. The italic words I had fainted, both in the Authorized Version and in the Revised Version are an exegetical gloss" (Christian D. Ginsburg, Introduction to the Massoretico-Critical Edition of the Hebrew Bible, 1966, 331, 333).
• GKC 159 dd: [2] "The conditional sentence is frequently found in an abridged form, where the suppressed clauses can be easily supplied from the context; cf. Gn 13:9, 24:19, 1 S 2:6 ואם־לא And if not, i.e. and if thou wilt not give it to me, then I take it (perfect according to § 106 n) by force ; cf. 1 S 6:9. The use of ויש alone in Ju 6:13 is peculiar, as also in 2 K 10:15 (where read with the LXX וַיאמֶר יְהֹוא וָיֵ֖שׁ) in the sense of if it be so. —In 2 S 13:26, 2 K 5:17 וָלֹ֕א alone appears to be used in the sense of if really...not, in each case with a following jussive equivalent to may there at least, &c. (cf. § 143 d) ; but perhaps with Matthes, ZAW. 1903, p. 122 if., following Kuipers, we should read וְלֹ֨א would that! —In 1 S 13:13, Jb 3:13 the condition must be supplied from the preceding clause to complete the sentence introduced by כִּֽי־עַ֭תָּה, in Jb 31:28 by כִּֽי in 2 K 13:19 by אָ֛ז. —The apodosis also appears sometimes in an abridged form (e.g. Gn 4:24, Is 43:2) or is entirely suppressed, e. g. Gn 30:27, 38:17, 50:15 (see y above), Ex 32:32, Ps 27:13, Jb 38:5, where properly הַ֝גֵּ֗ד must be supplied with כִּ֣י תֵדָ֑ע as in verses 4 and 18 ; cf. § 167 a. —In Ps 8:4, instead of the apodosis I exclaim which we should expect, the exclamation itself follows".
• HAUGE: Oh—if I did not believe that I shall see the goodness of Yahweh in the Land of the Living! (Martin R. Hauge, Sheol and Temple : Motif Structure and Function in the I-Psalm 1995, 127).
• IBN EZRA: IF I HAD NOT BELIEVED... This is connected to the previous verse. Its means, my enemies would have ruled over me [FOOTNOTE 42: Lit., “almost ruled over me.”] if I had not believed to look to the Lord and said to myself, Wait for the Lord. Now then, let the truth of my words with which I used to direct myself and say, Yea, wait for the Lord, be shown to be true (Abraham Ibn Ezra, Commentary : On the First Book of Psalms. Boston, MA: Academic Studies Press, 2009, 203).
• KENNICOTT: (missing) לולא [lule] in 3 manuscripts 117, 142, 309 –– לולי [luli] 37, 131, 240, 255, 274, 500, 613; primo 418 –– *לול [lul*] 39, 43 –– א ['] sup.raf. 42, 249. (Benjamin Kennicott, Vetus Testamentum Hebraicum cum Variis Lectionibus, 1775, 327).
• KHAN: "It is generally thought that this authorized text is to be identified with the type of text found in the proto-Masoretic manuscripts from Qumran, which was subsequently transmitted with great precision after the destruction of the temple. Some signs of textual collation may indeed be reflected by various marks that appear in the Masoretic consonantal text. These include dots written above, and in one case (Ps. 27.13) also below, certain letters, and inverted nuns, which are written before and after Num. 10.35-36 and Ps. 107.23-28. These are editorial marks that were in use in the Second Temple period. They both signify that the items marked should be removed from the text. They appear to have been borrowed from the contemporary Greek school of textual criticism. The inverted nuns are, in fact, corruptions of a scribal sign that originally consisted of a reversed Greek sigma (Lieberman 1962, 38–46; Tov 1992, 54–57). Indeed it has been argued that the insistence on scribal exactitude in handing down written records in general at this period was partly inspired by the Greek tradition (Lieberman 1962, ibid.)" (Geoffrey Khan, A Short Introduction to the Tiberian Masoretic Bible and Its Reading Tradition, 2013, 17-18).
• LIEBERMAN: “Modern scholars correctly associated these signs with the critical marks employed the Alexandrians”. . . “The dot was, naturally, the more primitive sign; it meant. . . nota bene. . . The Rabbis did not always treat these dots as a mark of doubtful reading. . . as a mark of an unusual allusion in the passage”(p. 45).” “In the classical Greek texts. . . any Greek grammarian. . . would ask, ‘What in the world does this signify?’ The Rabbis did the same thing” (Saul Lieberman, “Critical Marks (σημεία κρτικά) in the Hebrew Bible in,” in Hellenism in Jewish Palestine; studies in the literary transmission, beliefs and manners of Palestine in the I century B.C.E.-IV century C.E., 1962, 39, 45-46).
• MAGIN: I believe that I will look upon the goodness of Yahweh in the land of the living. "Verses 13 and 14 complete the psalm and consist of a statement of faith and an exhortation. In verse 13 David seems to draw his conclusion after having experienced an array of emotions: 1. having exalted Yahweh for his salvation and protection, 2. declaring the only thing he really wants from him, 3. restating his trust in him, 4. doubting whether he is listening, 5. reminding himself that he is near, 6. and then returning to declarations of need" (Harry Magin, "An Analysis of Psalm 27", GIALens., [2010], 6, 10).
• MARTIN: "To indicate alternative or doubtful linear readings" (Malachi Martin, The Scribal Character of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 1958, I:166).
• MULDER: Mulder suggests that the dot is pre-masoretic (i.e., before the second half of the first millennium C. E.), "Besides the above-mentioned activities in the tradition of the Bible in the pre-masoretic period, a number of other peculiarities may be mentioned which must go back to ancient traditions. In fifteen places in the Bible there are dots over and sometimes also below the words. In Sifrei Num 69 (pp. 64-65) to Num 9:10, a list is given of the places in the Pentateuch where these puncta extraordinaria can be found. Of those there are ten: Gen 16:5; 18:9; 19:33; 33:4; 37:12; Num 3:39; 9:lO; 21:30; 29:15 and Deut 29:28. There are four more places in the Prophets: 2 Sam 19:20; Isa 44:9; Ezek 41:20 and 46:22, and one in the Hagiographa: Ps 27:13. Although many theories on the significance of these dots have been put forward, their exact meaning is not clear. They are not part of a system of vocalization. They do, however, occur in Torah-scrolls which are suitable for public recitation. In these dots, we probably already meet critical notes on the text by the scribes" (Martin Jan Mulder, “The Transmission of the Biblical Text,” in Mikra: Text, Translation, Reading & Interpretation of the Hebrew Bible in Ancient Judaism & Early Christianity, eds. Martin Jan Mulder and Harry Sysling, 1990, 93 and cf. 108).
• NIEHAUS: Lule occurs 13 times, almost always a protasis-apodosis convention (with the exception of Deut 32:26-27; Ps 106:23; Ps 27:13). Niehaus sees Psalm 27:13 has an inverted protasis-apodosis in Psalm 27:13 as it does in the Deuteronomy and other Psalm passages. He reads Ps 27:12-13: "12a Do not deliver me to the will of my enemies- 12b For false witnesses and one breathing out violence had arisen against me, 13 Had I not trusted to see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living". "An alternate translation would not retain ki as a subordinating conjunction with reference to main clause (12a), but regard it as introducing the apodosis. Moreover, qum, when used with b may be translated not merely "arise against," but more forcefully as "prevail against," as in D 19:15, where the action of a witness against a defendant is also at issue. Rendering Ps 27:12-13 light of these considerations, we obtain the following translation: '12a Do not deliver me to the will of my enemies 12b (For) false witnesses and one breathing out violence had prevailed against me 13 Had I not trusted to see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living" (Jeffrey Niehaus, "The Use of lûlē in Psalm 27," Journal of Biblical Literature 98.1 [1979], 88-89)
• PEROWNE: "An instance of apiosiopesis. Our Version gives the sense very well in supplying "I had fainted;" but the words refer to the present, not to the past. The holy singer feels now, at this moment, when the false and violent men are before his mind, how helpless he would be, did he not trust and hope in his God : 'There were an end of me–or what would become of me, did I not believe,' &c." FOOTNOTE B: "See similar instances of apiosiopesis with an omitted apodosis after לוּ, Gen. 50:15, and after לוּלֵא, with the apodosis introduced with כִּי, Gen 31:42, 43:10, Ps.124:1, or an imperf., as Deut. 32:29, where an imperf. (fut.) follows, and so here" (J. J. Stewart Perowne, Psalms, 1976 I:270).
• PES.: "What is the definition of a distant journey that exempts one from observing the first Pesaḥ? Anywhere from the city of Modi’im and beyond, and from anywhere located an equal distance from Jerusalem and beyond in every direction; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Eliezer says: From the threshold of the Temple courtyard and beyond is considered a distant journey;therefore, anyone located outside the courtyard at the time that the Paschal lamb is slaughtered is exempt from observing the first Pesaḥ. Rabbi Yosei said to him: Therefore, the word is dotted over the letter heh in the word “distant [reḥoka]” to say that the meaning of the word should be qualified: It should be understood that it is not because he is really distant; rather, it includes anyone located from the threshold of the Temple courtyard and beyond" (Mishnah Pesachim 9:2 www.sefaria.org).
• RASHI: HAD I NOT TRUSTED.... Were it not that I TRUSTED in the Holy One Blessed be He, those [aforementioned in v. 12] FALSE WITNESSES would have attacked me and put an end to me. As for [the word] lûlê, it is dotted [to allude] to the midrash, which our rabbis composed (FOOTNOTE 21: the expression… means simply ‘Our rabbis interpreted’, it appears that here Rashi employs the verb… as a denominative verb meaning ‘they composed a midrash’): “I know that You will give the innocent a reward in the world to come, but I do not know whether or not I have a portion with them.” (FOOTNOTE 22: The source of this midrash is BT Berakot 4a; with Zohory, p. 93 cf. also Midrash Tehillim here. This midrash takes for granted the idea that the six dots, three written above the word lûlê and three written below it express doubt. The midrash speaks of the doubt as to whether or not the psalmist has a portion in the life of the post-eschatological era. At an earlier stage the dots referred to a different doubt. Note that such dots expressing doubt belong neither to the vowel points nor to the Masoretic accents; these dots appear even in the unpointed biblical scrolls employed in the service of the synagogue. Such dots are found in fifteen places in the Hebrew Bible: ten in the Pentateuch (Gen. 16:5;18:9; 19:33; 33:4; 37:12; Num. 3:39; 9:10; 21:30; 29:15; Deut. 29:28); four in the Books of the Prophets (2 Sam. 19:20; Isa. 44:9; Ezek. 41:20; 46:22); and once only in the Hagiographa (here at Ps. 27:13). According to Avot de Rabbi Nathan 34:5 the reason for these dots is as follows: “Ezra said, ‘If Elijah the Prophet should appear and ask me, “Why did you write this [the word whose authenticity is doubtful]?” I shall say to him, “I have already placed dots over them [to indicate that they should be ignored].” Now should he say to me, “You have written properly,” I shall remove the dots from them.’” For parallels to the latter account and for parallels to the phenomenon in the Hellenistic world see Lieberman, Hellenism in Jewish Palestine, pp. 38-46; see also Christian D. Ginsburg, Introduction to the Massoretico-Critical Edition of the Hebrew Bible (London: Trinitarian Bible Society, 1897; reprint, New York: Ktav, 1966), pp. 318-34; Romain Butin, The Ten Nequdoth of the Torah (Baltimore: J. H. Furst & Co., 1906; reprint, New York: Ktav, 1969); Israel Yeivin, Introduction to the Tiberian Masorah, trans. E. J. Revell, Society of Biblical Literature Masoretic Studies, ed. Harry M. Orlinsky, no. 5 (Missoula, Mt.: Scholars Press, 1980), pp. 44-46) (Mayer Gruber, Rashi's Commentary on Psalms, 2004, 277, 280-81).
• ROSS: The Masoretes considered the meaning uncertain (Allen Ross, A Commentary on the Psalms, I:633).
• de ROSSI: XXVII 13 לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ Nisi. Deest in K. 117, 142, 309, ex prima manu in meis 368, 874, in Lxx, Aquila, Symmacho, Syro, Vulg., Arabe. Conf. Lilienthal. pag. 380 , Doederlein Schol. V. T. pag. 87 , Michaelis Bibl. or. Tom. XII pag. 135 , Kohlerus in Reperì. or. Tom. V p. 43. (Giovanni Bernardo de Rossi, Variae Lectiones Veteris Testamenti, Volume 4 Gorgias Press, 2012, 22).
• SLOTKI: This clause may justifiably be retained without any external additions. Cf. Gunkel ·,op. cit. p. 117 f), 'Der Satz mit לולא wird als eine erregte '· Aposiopese '׳ verstanden; der ausgelassene Nachsatz ware : so stünde es schlimm, genauer: so wäre ich in meinem Elend vergangen '. J. Wellhausen (S.Β.O.T.) also retains לולא despite the fact that this word is marked by puncta extraordinaria. L. Blau in the last number of this Journal (January 1930) in reviewing Ginsburg's Introduction to the Hebrew O.T. published in 1928 reminds us that in his Papyri und Talmud (Berlin 1913) he has shown 'dass Punkte Streichungszeichen (Strassburg, 1891). According to Blau, therefore לולא is to be deleted. According to Strack and Buhl (cf. Ginsburg's Introduction, London, 1928, p. 52) the puncta extraordinaria indicate doubt. Gunkel (op. cit. p. 117) referring to the puncta on לולא, remarks, 'לולא von der altjüdischen Kritik punktiert (d. h. ganz oder teilweise gestrichen)'; and adds, 'Dem Sinne und auch wohl dem Versmass nach ist es unentbehhrlich.'" (Israel W. Slotki, "The Metre and Text of Psalm 27", Journal of Theological Studies, 31.4 [1930], 393-94).
• TALMON: Regarding Butin's Ten Nequdoth of the Torah, "[h]is minute analysis of all available sources leads him to conclude that the puncta extraordinaria were introduced into the Hebrew text before the destruction of the Second Temple. . . and that they should be traced to the second century BCE, the days of the early Tannaim (Shemaryahu Talmon, "Prolegomenon to The Ten Nequdoth of the Torah," in Text and Canon of the Hebrew Bible: Collected Studies, 2010, 347-368).
• TOV: “Although these dots originally denoted the erasure of letters ... traditionally they were explained as indications of doubtful letters”. "Similar dots above mainly single letters, appear in 15 instances in the Masoretic manuscripts of the Bible, as well as one instance both above and below the letters (Psalm 27:13). The similarity between the Masoretic system and qumran scribal habits was recognized long ago [cf. "Prolegemenon" to R. Butin, The Ten Nequdoth of the Torah, 1969]. In all these instances the dots in the Qumran texts as well as in the Masoretic manuscripts denote the deletion of the dotted elements, even the Martin named them 'alternative or doubtful linear readings.' as for the MT, when the pre-Masoretic texts became sanctified together with all their scribal marks, and no further changes, omissions, or additions were allowed, paradoxically even the cancellation dots were sanctified so that they could no longer be removed. These dots (named puncta extraordinaria) were therefore transmitted as such in the MT, but they soon lost their original meaning. At that stage they were reinterpreted in the Talmud and midrashim as signifying doubts regarding dotted letters, or as reflecting a hidden meaning in the text, in any event, not as indicating a cancellation" (Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 52, cf. 203, 235-36).
• YEIVIN: 1) They indicate that the dotted letters should be erased. Dots are used for this purpose in early codices, and in the Dead Sea Scrolls, where the dot may be placed both above and below the letter to be erased, or only above it. 2) The dots indicate the the textual tradition was in doubt. Ths is suggested by the Rabbinic statement 'Some say, 'why are the dots used?'. . . 3) The dots relate Midrashic commentary. . . In a few cases it is possible to argue that the dotted letter or word is superfluous. . ." (Israel Yeivin, Introduction to the Tiberian Masorah, 1980, 45-46).
• AVOT DE RABBI NATHAN 34:6-7: The Holy Blessed One tested our ancestors with ten trials, and they did not emerge whole from any of them. They are as follows: “In the wilderness, on the plain, facing Suf, [between Paran, and Tophel, and Lavan, and Hatzerot, and Di-zahav]” (Deuteronomy 1:1). “In the wilderness”: When they made the Golden Calf, as it says (Exodus 32:8), “They made themselves a molten calf.” “On the plain”: Because of water, as it says (Exodus 17:3), “There the people thirsted for water.” “Facing Suf”: When they rebelled at the Sea of Reeds (and some say: This was the idol that Micah made). Rabbi Yehudah said: They rebelled at the sea, meaning, they rebelled in the sea, as it says (Psalms 106:7), “They rebelled at the Sea of Reeds.” “Between Paran”: With regard to the spies (as it says in Numbers 13:3), “Moses sent them from the wilderness of Paran.” “And Tophel”: These were the frivolous words (tiphlot) they said about the manna. “Lavan”: This was Korah’s mutiny. “Hatzerot”: Because of the quails. So far, that is seven. But in another place (Deuteronomy 9:22) it says, “At Tav’erah, and at Masah, and at Kivrot HaTa’avah.” “Di-zahav”: This is when (Aaron) said to them: Enough (dai) of this golden (zahav) sin which you have committed with the calf! But Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov would say: [Terrible] enough (dai) is this sin that Israel was punished for to last from now until the resurrection of the dead. The Holy Blessed One is praised with ten names. They are as follows: A-D-O-N-A-I, E-L-O-H-I-M, E-L-O-A-H, E-L-O-H-E-Kh-A, E-L-O-H-E-Kh-E-M, E-L, E-H-I-Y-E-H A-S-H-E-R E-H-I-Y-E-H, Sh-A-D-A-I, and Tzevaot. Rabbi Yosei disagreed that Tzevaot was one of them, for it says (Deuteronomy 20:9), “Appoint generals for the armies (tzevaot) to head the people.” Idol worship is denounced with ten names. They are as follows: shikutzim (abominations), gilulim (filth), maseichot (molten figures), p’silim (sculpted figures), elilim (false gods), asheirim (tree idols), hamanim (sun icons), atzavim (forms), aven (wickedness), and teraphim (statues). Two signs [two Hebrew letters nun inverted] are given in the Torah to mark off a small section. What is this section? “And when the Ark would travel…” (Numbers 10:35–36). Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel would say: It would be more appropriate to take this section out from where it is, and have it written in a different place. There is a similar sign in the verse (Judges 18:30), “And Jonathan, son of Gershom, son of Menashe.” Was Gershom the son of Menashe? No, he was the son of Moses. But his actions were not like those of Moses his father, so they added a nun to connect him to Menashe instead. A similar exegesis was applied to the verse (Zechariah 4:14), “These are the two sons of the pure oil, who serve the Master of all the Earth.” These are Aaron and the Messiah. I would not be able to tell which of them was the more beloved, except that it says [with regard to the Messiah], “The Eternal has sworn and will not change His mind; you will be a priest forever, [the rightful king that I have chosen]” (Psalms 110:4). From this verse we know that the messianic king is even more beloved than a rightful priest. See, it says (Psalms 80:14), “A wild boar from the forest [hazir miya’ar] will gnaw at it.” Shouldn’t it say: A hippopotamus from the river [hazir miye’or] will gnaw at it? But it says “from the forest,” because when Israel does not do the will of God, then the gentiles will come upon them like a wild boar from the forest. Just as a wild boar from the forest will kill people and injure other animals, and is a torment to people, so whenever Israel does not do the will of God, the gentiles will come and kill them, torture them, and injure them. But when Israel does the will of God, the gentiles do not rule over them, and are like a hippopotamus from the river. Just as a hippopotamus does not kill people, and causes no injury to other creatures, so whenever Israel does the will of God, no foreign nation will kill, injure, or torture them. And then it will be written as: From the river [i.e., miye’or, with an aleph, instead of miya’ar, with an ayin]. Ten words in the Torah are marked with dots. They are as follows: 1. “The Eternal will judge between me and you” (Genesis 16:5). There is a dot above the letter yod in the term, “and you.” This teaches that Sarah did not say this to Abraham, but to Hagar. Some say that it means she was speaking about those who caused the fighting “between me and you.” 2. “They said to him, Where is Sarah?” (Genesis 18:9). There are dots above the letters aleph, yod, and vav in the term, “to him,” to indicate that they already knew where she was, but they nevertheless inquired about her. 3. (There is a dot on the verse,) “When she lay down and when she arose” (Genesis 19:33). There is a dot above the letter vav in the term, “When she arose” the first time it is used [with regard to Lot’s older daughter]. This teaches that he was not aware of what happened until the (younger daughter) arose. 4. “And Esau ran to greet him, and he hugged him, fell on his neck, and kissed him” (Genesis 33:4). The term for, “and kissed him,” has dots above every letter, to teach that he did not kiss him sincerely. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar would say: It means that this kiss was sincere, but every other one he gave Jacob was not. 5. “His brothers went to shepherd their father’s flocks in Shechem” (Genesis 37:12). There are dots on the word just before “flocks.” This teaches that they did not actually go to shepherd the flocks, but to eat and drink (and indulge their temptations). 6. “All the Levites who were recorded, whom Moses and Aaron recorded” (Numbers 3:39). There are dots above Aaron’s name. Why? To teach that Aaron himself was not counted in this record. 7. “On a long journey” (Numbers 9:10). There is a dot above the letter hei in the word “long.” This teaches that this does not really mean a long journey, but any exiting the boundaries of the outer court of the Temple. 8. “We caused destruction all the way up to Nophach, which reaches into Medeba” (Numbers 21:30). There is a dot above the letter resh in the word “which.” Why? To teach that they destroyed the idolaters but not the countries themselves (whereas the practice of idolaters was to destroy entire countries). 9. “A tenth, a tenth for each” (Numbers 29:15). [This verse delineates the meal offering that accompanies the burnt offering] on the first day of the Sukkot festival. There is a dot above the letter vav in the [first occurrence of the] word “tenth.” Why? To teach that there is only one-tenth [measure] for each. 10. “The hidden things are for the Eternal our God, and the revealed things are for us and our children forever” (Deuteronomy 29:30). There are dots above the words “for us and our children,” and above the letter ayin in the word “forever.” Why? For this is what Ezra said: If Elijah comes and says to me: Why did you write it this way? I will say to him: I have already put dots above these words [to indicate I was not certain it was correct]. But if he says to me: You wrote it correctly, then I will remove the dots (www.sefaria.org).
• GENESIS RABBA: [51:8] AND THEY MADE THEIR FATHER DRINK WINE . . . AND HE KNEW NOT WHEN SHE LAY DOWN, AND WHEN SHE AROSE U-BEKUMAH (ib. 33): this Word [U-BEKU-MAH ] is dotted, 2 intimating that he did not indeed know of her lying down, but he did know of her arising. FOOTNOTES: 2 It is traditionally written ubekumah, 3 Hence AND WHEN SHE AROSE is not the object of AND HE KNEW NOT, but belongs to the next sentence : And after she arose, it came to pass on the morrow, etc. It is possible to deduce from this passage that the dotted letter or word is superfluous like in Num 21:30 where asher occurs as ash in the Samaritan Pentateuch. In most cases where a Rabbinic discussion of the dots is recorded, a midrashic explanation for their use is given (www.sefaria.org).

Lexicons

• DCH: "לוּלֵא [14 times] conj. unless—לוּלֵי—1. as unreal conditional particle, if not, had not, etc., unless. a. with perfect in protasis and with apodosis in perfect, לוּלֵא הִתְמַהְמָ֑הְנוּ כִּי־עַתָּה שַׁבְנוּ זֶה פַּעֲמָֽיִם if we had not delayed, we could now have returned twice Gn 43:10, לוּלֵא חֲרַשְׁתֶּם בְּעֶגְלָתִי לֹא מְצָאתֶם חִידָתִי if you had not ploughed with my heifer, you would not have found out my riddle Jg 14:18, לוּלֵי מִהַרְתְּ … כִּי אִם־נוֹתַר לְנָבָל had you not made haste, … there would surely not have remained anyone to Nabal 1 S 25:34 (mss לוּלֵא), לוּלֵי י׳ … הוֹתִיר לָנוּ שָׂרִיד כִּמְעָ֑ט כִּסְדֹם הָיִינוּ if Y. … had not left us a few survivors, we would soon have been as Sodom Is 1:9; also Gn 31:42; Nm 22:33 (if em. אוּלַי perhaps) 2 S 2:27 (mss לוּלֵי). b. with imperfect in protasis and with apodosis in (1) perfect, אָמַרְתִּי אַפְאֵיהֶם … לוּלֵי כַּעַס אוֹיֵב אָגוּר I might have said, I shall destroy them, … did I not fear the anger of the enemy Dt 32:27 (mss לוּלֵא); (2) waw consecutive + imperfect, וַיֹּאֹמֶר לְהַשְׁמִידָם לוּלֵי מֹשֶׁה … עָמַד בַּפֶּרֶץ לְפָנָיו he would have commanded their destruction had Moses not … stood in the breach before him Ps 106:23. c. with participle in protasis and with apodosis in imperfect, לוּלֵי פְנֵי יְהוֹשָׁפָט … אֲנִי נֹשֵׂא אִם־אַבִּיט אֵלֶיךָ if I did not have regard for Jehoshaphat, … I would not look at you 2 K 3:14. d. with nominal clause in protasis and with apodosis in perfect, לוּלֵי י׳ עֶזְרָתָה לִּי כִּמְעַט שָׁכְנָה דוּמָה נַפְשִׁי were Y. not my help my soul would soon have dwelt in silence Ps 94:17, לוּלֵי תוֹרָתְךָ שַׁעֲשֻׁעָ֑י אָז אָבַדְתִּי בְעָנְיִי were your law not my delight, I should have perished in my affliction Ps 119:92. 2. perh. as emphatic adverb, indeed (unless as §1, but with apodosis omitted), לוּלֵא הֶאֱמַנְתִּי לִרְאוֹת בְּטוּב־י׳ בְּאֶרֶץ חַיִּים I indeed believed I would see the goodness of Y. in the land of the living Ps 27:13 (mss lack לוּלֵא; or em. לוֹ׃ לֹא uttering violence to himself; I did not believe).* 3. לוּלי שֶׁ- except that, unless, לוּלֵי י׳ שֶׁהָיָה לָנוּ … לוּלֵי י׳ שֶׁהָיָה לָנוּ … אֲזַי חַיִּים בְּלָעוּנוּ if Y. had not been on our side, … if Y. had not been on our side, … then they would have swallowed us alive Ps 124:1. Also perh. 4QPrQuot 2051 (לולהי)" (DCH, 530).
• BDB: "†לוּלֵא S3884 TWOT1085a GK4295 Gn 43:10; Ju 14:18; 2 S 2:27; ψ 27:13, elsewhere לוּלֵי10 if not, unless (from לוּ if, and לֵא, by dissim. (Kö 236, 489) for לֹא not; cf. Arabic لَوْلَا (lawlā)), the neg. of לוּ, and used similarly:—a. sq. pf., Ju 14:18 לולא חרשׁתם … לא מצאתם unless ye had ploughed with my heifer, ye would not have found out my riddle, 1 S 25:34 (second כי resumptive: כִּי 1 d), ψ 106:23; with apod. introd. by כִּי עַתָּה Gn 31:42; 43:10; by אָז 2 S 2:27 (כי resumptive); by כִּמְעַט Is 1:9; with an aposiop. ψ 27:13 if I had not believed …! b. sq. impf. Dt 32:27 אמרתי … לולי אגור I should have said, &c. … except I dreaded, &i>c. c. sq. ptcp., 2 K 3:14. d. without a verb, ψ 94:17 (apod. כמעט), 119:92 (apod. אָז). In the later language, ψ 124:1, 2 לוּלֵי י׳ שֶׁ- (apod. אֲזַי) except that … (cf. Aramaic ܕ (d)? … ܐܶܠܘܽ ܠܴܐ (ʾelu lo) ψ 106:23, אִילּוּלֵי … דִּי ψ 27:13 𝔗).—Read also לוּלֵי for אוּלַי in Nu 22:33 (apod. כִּי עַתָּה). See further on לוּ and לוּלֵא Dr§ 139–145 Kö. 487 f. 565" (BDB, 530).
• TWOT: 1085 לוּ (lû), לוּא (lûʾ) would that, I wish, perhaps. A Hebrew particle used to mark several kinds of potential constructions. 1085a לוּלֵא (lûlēʾ) if not, unless (e.g., Jud 14:19; I Sam 25:34). lû marks three degrees of personal desire or agreement: wishes, entreaties, and statements of assent. It also marks two types of potential clauses: “perhaps” clauses and conditional clauses. When used to express a wish, it may be translated “would that” or “I wish.” Abraham’s desire that Ishmael might live before God (Gen 17:18) and Joshua’s rhetorical wish that the Hebrews had remained beyond the Jordan (Josh 7:7) are both marked by this particle. Combined with other devices to indicate potentiality, it may express a very strong wish (I Sam 14:30). In Abraham’s petition that the Hebronites would hear him (Gen 23:13), lû serves as a particle of entreaty. Finally, it marks Laban’s agreement with Jacob’s proposition on wages (Gen 30:34). When introducing pure potential clauses, it may be translated as “perhaps” as when Joseph’s brothers speculated that Joseph might hate them (Gen 50:15; RSV “it may be”). When accompanied by a statement of consequence, i.e. an apodosis, the lû clause becomes the protasis of an unreal conditional sentence. “If the Lord had meant to kill us” (Jud 13:23) and “if Absalom were alive” (II Sam 19:7) are good examples of this (cf. Job 16:4; Ezk 14:15)" (TWOT, 470–471).
• HALOT: לוּלֵא Gn 43:10 Ju 14:18 2S 2:27, elsewhere לוּלֵי, dissimilated < לוּלֹא (Bauer-L. Heb. 652b, cf. יֵשׁוּעַ); ? EgArm. (Jean-H. Dictionnaire 136); Arb. laulā; Akk. lū lā (vSoden Gramm. §122c; AHw. 559a): —1. if not; unless (unreal condition !): with pf. לוּלֵא הָיָה if … had not been Gn 31:42 43:10, cj. Nu 22:33, Ju 14:18 1S 25:34 2S 2:27 Is 1:9 Ps 106:23; with impf. לוּלֵי אָגוּר if I had not feared Dt 32:27; with pt. 2K 3:14; in nominal clause Ps 94:17 119:92 124:1f; —2. affirmation surely (< 1, through aposiopesis of the rest of the clause in final position, Gunkel) Ps 27:13 (punctuation for deletion, Ginsberg 333f; Geiger 258; Bauer-L. Heb. 79s, but indispensable) †" (HALOT, 524).
• HALOT: I אמן [Page 64] הַאֲמִינוּ, pt. מַאֲמִין: causative —1. to believe = to think (:: 3 !) with inf., that Jb 15:22, with כִּי Ps 116:10 Jb 9:16 La 4:12; with לְ and inf., to be convinced that Ps 27:13; —2. to regard something as trustworthy, to believe in: a thing Hab 1:5, a word Ex 4:8f 1K 10:7 Is 53:1 Ps 106:24 Pr 14:15 2C 9:6; with בְּ, to (have) trust in Nu 20:12 1S 27:12 Mi 7:5 Sir 36 [33]31; with לְ Gn 45:26 Ex 4:1, 8 Jr 40:14; abs (HALOT, 64).
• SDBH: (cj) = marker indicating that if the event in focus would not have been true another event would not have taken place – if not. לולי references in the Psalms: 27:13, 94:17, 106:23, 119:92, 124:1, 124:2.

References

27:13