Psalms:
Bk 1: 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
Bk 2: 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
Bk 3: 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89
Bk 4: 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106
Bk 5: 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119a 119b 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132
133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150
Additional Psalms: 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 Samuel Chronicles
Essays: Intro - Music - Form & Language
35:1 LE DAVID RIYVAH YHVH ET YERIVAI LECHAM ET LOCHAMAI
לְדָוִד רִיבָה יְהוָה אֶת יְרִיבַי לְחַם אֶת לֹחֲמָי
KJ (King James translation): (A Psalm of David.) Plead my cause, O LORD, with them that strive with me: fight against them that fight against me.
BN (BibleNet translation): For David. Quarrel , YHVH, with those who quarrel with me; make war against those who make war to steal my bread.
Title and first verse amalgamated in the Yehudit.
Note that oddity of etymology that connects war and bread - what other reason is there, after all, for making the former?
KJ's "Plead my cause" is not simply inaccurate, because this is not what is being requested; it also fails to match the RIYVAH with the YERIVAI, or the LECHAM to the LOCHAMAI, which is essential to the poetry of the verse.
35:2 HACHAZEK MAGEN VE TSINAH VE KUMAH BE EZRATI
הַחֲזֵק מָגֵן וְצִנָּה וְקוּמָה בְּעֶזְרָתִי
KJ: Take hold of shield and buckler, and stand up for mine help.
BN: Take up your shield and chain-mail, and come to my assistance.
MAGEN: So many Davidic references to the shield, you would almost think the Magen David was a metaphor for the deity!
TSINAH: Is there a deliberate echoing of Tsi'on in the choice of TSINAH? It is an odd word to have chosen if it is not an echo; the root is... this is complex, because, first, there is TSIN, which is the name of a part of the southern desert much visited in the Exodus stories (cf Numbers 13:21). That is generally thought to get its name from the low palm trees, but the only palm trees I have ever seen in that part of the world are small clumps around the oases, while the rest is scrub-desert. And a TSINAH is a thorn, which is precisely what grows best in scrub-desert. Most of David's life as a bandit was spent in scrub-desert, around Adul-Am and the Aravah and further west into Tsin, so the image is contextually appropriate, even if it is still odd as the apparent description of a weapon to accompany the shield. But that is how it is intended here, and again in Psalm 91:4, and Ezekiel 23:24 as well. But probably it wasn't a weapon anyway. Nor a "buckler", which is simply a shorter form of shield. Logic would make it some primitive form of chain-mail, a protective armour made of metal thorns: imagine trying to attack a man who is surrounded by gorse bushes. Metaphorically, I mean.
As per my note in the previous verse, one does not "plead a cause" in full military armour. YHVH is being called to the battlefield, not the Court of Appeals.
35:3 VE HAREK CHANIT U SEGOR LIKRAT RODPHAY EMOR LE NAPHSHI YESHU'ATECH ANI
KJ: Draw out also the spear, and stop the way against them that persecute me: say unto my soul, I am thy salvation.
BN: Draw out the spear too, and shut the gates against those who pursue me; say to my soul: "I am your salvation."
LIKRAT: Another of the occasions on which my system of transliteration breaks down. The Aleph between the Reysh and the final Tav needs to be pronounced, but the pronunciation is aspirate, a mere breath. Likra't really, but that upsets the final Tav. There isn't a way of doing this precisely in English (other than through this note).
CHANIT: Just as the TSINAH seemed to echo TSI'ON, so CHANIT, being intended for wielding in the hand of the deity, seems to echo CHANUN - mercy. The CHANIT was probably the very long javelin (the root has a sense of "flexibility", so this a logical deduction); the shorter spear was called a ROMACH (Numbers 25:7, Judges 5:8), while the forked trident was the KIYDON (Joshua 8:18, 1 Samuel 17:6). There is also MORANIT (מוֹרָנִית), but that is probably the name of the people who used this version of the weapon - see 1 Chronicles 27:30 and Nehemiah 3:7.
As per my note in the previous verse, one does not "plead a cause" in full military armour. YHVH is being called to the battlefield, not the Court of Appeals.
35:3 VE HAREK CHANIT U SEGOR LIKRAT RODPHAY EMOR LE NAPHSHI YESHU'ATECH ANI
וְהָרֵק חֲנִית וּסְגֹר לִקְרַאת רֹדְפָי אֱמֹר לְנַפְשִׁי יְשֻׁעָתֵךְ אָנִי
KJ: Draw out also the spear, and stop the way against them that persecute me: say unto my soul, I am thy salvation.
BN: Draw out the spear too, and shut the gates against those who pursue me; say to my soul: "I am your salvation."
LIKRAT: Another of the occasions on which my system of transliteration breaks down. The Aleph between the Reysh and the final Tav needs to be pronounced, but the pronunciation is aspirate, a mere breath. Likra't really, but that upsets the final Tav. There isn't a way of doing this precisely in English (other than through this note).
CHANIT: Just as the TSINAH seemed to echo TSI'ON, so CHANIT, being intended for wielding in the hand of the deity, seems to echo CHANUN - mercy. The CHANIT was probably the very long javelin (the root has a sense of "flexibility", so this a logical deduction); the shorter spear was called a ROMACH (Numbers 25:7, Judges 5:8), while the forked trident was the KIYDON (Joshua 8:18, 1 Samuel 17:6). There is also MORANIT (מוֹרָנִית), but that is probably the name of the people who used this version of the weapon - see 1 Chronicles 27:30 and Nehemiah 3:7.
SEGOR: There are translations which render this as "battle-axe", and others which go for "javelin"; I have no explanation to offer, but can send you to this link. The root means "to close" or "to shut".
NAPHSHI YESHU'ATECH: I noted previously that NEPHESH is feminine. Do I need to note yet again that YHVH is the Moshi'a, not a human or even a demi-god?
35:4 YEVOSHU VE YIKALMU MEVAKSHEY NAPHSHI YISOGU ACHOR VE YACHPERU CHOSHVEY RA'ATI
יֵבֹשׁוּ וְיִכָּלְמוּ מְבַקְשֵׁי נַפְשִׁי יִסֹּגוּ אָחוֹר וְיַחְפְּרוּ חֹשְׁבֵי רָעָתִי
KJ: Let them be confounded and put to shame that seek after my soul: let them be turned back and brought to confusion that devise my hurt.
BN: Let them be shamed and dishonoured, those who would seek after my soul; let them be turned back, and disgraced, those who would plot to wound me.
YIKALMU: "Humiliated" would be the dictionary definition. I wonder if this was the root, from the earlier Greek, and maybe an earlier Phoenician-Hittite, of the Latin "calamitas", which we now pronounce "calamity". William Jones would certainly agree.
RA'ATI: And for a third time (at least!) in this Psalm, a word with an intentional echo: the wound is to his reputation, not his body; from RA = "evil", "wickedness".
Again, my translation is as much about getting the form of the verse as the words.
35:5 YIHEYU KE MOTS LIPHNEY RU'ACH U MAL'ACH YHVH DOCHEH
יִהְיוּ כְּמֹץ לִפְנֵי רוּחַ וּמַלְאַךְ יְהוָה דּוֹחֶה
KJ: Let them be as chaff before the wind: and let the angel of the LORD chase them.
BN: Let them be as chaff before the wind, driven by YHVH's messenger.
RU'ACH...MAL'ACH...DOCHEH: Sound-patterns. Deep in the throat. Which instrument would you use to harmonise this? And counterpointing too: breathy aspirate Hs: YIHEYU...LIPHNEY... DOCHEH... even perhaps YHVH - depending on how they pronounced it in those days. Much of the same in the next verse too.
35:6 YEHI DARKAM CHOSHECH VA CHALAKLAKOT U MAL'ACH YHVH RODPHAM
יְהִי דַרְכָּם חֹשֶׁךְ וַחֲלַקְלַקּוֹת וּמַלְאַךְ יְהוָה רֹדְפָם
KJ: Let their way be dark and slippery: and let the angel of the LORD persecute them.
BN: Let their way be dark and slippery, pursued by YHVH's messenger.
So that we have to ask: how far does the choice of words depend on the echoings of meanings, in order to convey idea (specifically theology), and how far is it simply libretto responding to the challenges of orchestration? Both, probably.
35:7 KI CHINAM TAMNU LI SHACHAT RISHTAM CHINAM CHAPHRU LE NAPHSHI
כִּי חִנָּם טָמְנוּ לִי שַׁחַת רִשְׁתָּם חִנָּם חָפְרוּ לְנַפְשִׁי
KJ: For without cause have they hid for me their net in a pit, which without cause they have digged for my soul.
BN: For no good reason they have concealed a net to destroy me; without cause have they have dug a pit to inter my soul.
HINAM: "For nothing", as in "without receiving payment" in Genesis 29:15; "for free", as in "without having to make any payment", in Exodus 21:2; "without cause" in 1 Samuel 19:5.
The verse is not grammatically complete, which makes it difficult to render in English. A word-by-word literal translation reads: "Because without cause they have concealed to me destruction their net, without cause they have dug for my soul." I can only presume that, on this occasion, the libretto was simply unable to keep up with the orchestration.
35:8 TEVO'EHU SHO'AH LO YED'A VE RISHTO ASHER TAMAN TILKEDU BE SHO'AH YIPOL BAH
תְּבוֹאֵהוּ שׁוֹאָה לֹא יֵדָע וְרִשְׁתּוֹ אֲשֶׁר טָמַן תִּלְכְּדוֹ בְּשׁוֹאָה יִפָּל בָּהּ
KJ: Let destruction come upon him at unawares; and let his net that he hath hid catch himself: into that very destruction let him fall.
BN: Let destruction come upon him unawares; {N} and let the net that he has hidden catch him instead; let him fall into it and meet his own destruction.
SHO'AH: The root really means "storm" or "tempest", which obviously causes destruction, and probably was the original word for "noise" because of the sound the storm makes. And logical that it should have that meaning, in these verses - the storm being the metaphorical "messengers" of YHVH, the ones carrying his Word, whom KJ mistranslates as "angels".
How did it get to mean "holocaust", as in the 20th century German one? From the Arabic, and even the pre-Arabic, where SHO'AH specifically means "wickedness", "evil" or "iniquity", and as such connects to the word RESH'A, which we have seen repeatedly in these Psalms with precisely that meaning.
For other instances of its use as "iniquity", look at Job 11:11 or Isaiah 5:18, though these are connected to the masculine form, SHAV, which we have seen frequently in the Tanach, as "worthless" (Exodus 23:1 for example); for its use as "futility", which is the nothingness consequent upon destruction, look at Job 7:3 or Isaiah 30:28 - I have deliberately chosen the same author twice, to show how the word has these two parallel uses, and the explanation probably lies in the fact that Job is a Babylonian text, while Yesha-Yah (Isaiah) was (were) the Prophet(s) of the period just before and during the exile in Babylon, so a moment of history when the pre-Arabic and the Yehudit were going through some interchanges.
And of course SHO'AH provides yet another echo-word in this Psalm: from SHO'AH in the verse to BIY'SHU'ATO in the next.
YIPOL: Another of those occasions where the qamats is pronounced O and not A. Like the Vav which was probably always Wav in the Biblical age, so the qamats was probably always O and not A. Daoud, rather than David, for example.
35:9 VE NAPHSHI TAGIL BA YHVH TASIS BIY'SHU'ATO
KJ: And my soul shall be joyful in the LORD: it shall rejoice in his salvation.
BN: And my soul shall rejoice in YHVH; it shall exult in his salvation.
TAGIL...TASIS: Not much difference in meaning between these two. We know TAGIL from HAVA NAGILA, which is very much an active form of rejoicing, through dance and song and the playing of musical instruments. TASIS (see the link for the list of its usages) is more about the emotional response, the audience rather than the performers, usually the deity "delighting" when humans get it right.
BIY'SHU'ATO: As noted above, there is a deliberate word-play here with Sho'ah in the previous verse. An Aleph (א) there, an Ayin (ע) here.
But also, whose salvation? YHVH's salvation is not an issue, so it can't be him; yet this is addressed to a deity. David in his capacity as Tammuz, Adonis, Osher...
35:10 KOL ATSMOTAI TO'MARNAH YHVH MI CHAMOCHA MATSIL ANI MECHAZAK MIMENU VE ANI VE EVYON MI GOZLI
KJ: All my bones shall say, LORD, who is like unto thee, which deliverest the poor from him that is too strong for him, yea, the poor and the needy from him that spoileth him?
BN: All my bones shall say, who can be compared with you, YHVH, {N} who delivers the weak from the bully, and the poor and the needy from he who would exploit them?
TOMARNAH: At what moment of history did the grammar change? This is 3rd person feminine, plural, future tense, Pa'al (Kal) binyan. Today we would say TOMRU.
YIPOL: Another of those occasions where the qamats is pronounced O and not A. Like the Vav which was probably always Wav in the Biblical age, so the qamats was probably always O and not A. Daoud, rather than David, for example.
35:9 VE NAPHSHI TAGIL BA YHVH TASIS BIY'SHU'ATO
וְנַפְשִׁי תָּגִיל בַּיהוָה תָּשִׂישׂ בִּישׁוּעָתוֹ
KJ: And my soul shall be joyful in the LORD: it shall rejoice in his salvation.
BN: And my soul shall rejoice in YHVH; it shall exult in his salvation.
TAGIL...TASIS: Not much difference in meaning between these two. We know TAGIL from HAVA NAGILA, which is very much an active form of rejoicing, through dance and song and the playing of musical instruments. TASIS (see the link for the list of its usages) is more about the emotional response, the audience rather than the performers, usually the deity "delighting" when humans get it right.
BIY'SHU'ATO: As noted above, there is a deliberate word-play here with Sho'ah in the previous verse. An Aleph (א) there, an Ayin (ע) here.
But also, whose salvation? YHVH's salvation is not an issue, so it can't be him; yet this is addressed to a deity. David in his capacity as Tammuz, Adonis, Osher...
35:10 KOL ATSMOTAI TO'MARNAH YHVH MI CHAMOCHA MATSIL ANI MECHAZAK MIMENU VE ANI VE EVYON MI GOZLI
כָּל עַצְמוֹתַי תֹּאמַרְנָה יְהוָה מִי כָמוֹךָ מַצִּיל עָנִי מֵחָזָק מִמֶּנּוּ וְעָנִי וְאֶבְיוֹן מִגֹּזְלוֹ
KJ: All my bones shall say, LORD, who is like unto thee, which deliverest the poor from him that is too strong for him, yea, the poor and the needy from him that spoileth him?
BN: All my bones shall say, who can be compared with you, YHVH, {N} who delivers the weak from the bully, and the poor and the needy from he who would exploit them?
TOMARNAH: At what moment of history did the grammar change? This is 3rd person feminine, plural, future tense, Pa'al (Kal) binyan. Today we would say TOMRU.
Biblical Socialism! Don't tell that to the Bible-Belt evangelists!
Several prefictual, and other, Mems here, which hums very musically; some are prefixes, some verb forms, some simply a letter in the word.
Several prefictual, and other, Mems here, which hums very musically; some are prefixes, some verb forms, some simply a letter in the word.
ATSMOTAI...MATSIL...GOZLI: From their placement in the verse it feels like symmetry of sound, except that the last of these has a hard sound; so it is probably just coincidence.
MI KAMOCHA: Is a much repeated phrase throughout the liturgy, alternated with the responsum EYN KAMOCHA: Who is like you? There is no one like you.
35:11 YEKUMUN EDEY CHAMAS ASHER LO YADA'TI YISH'ALUNI
KJ: False witnesses did rise up; they laid to my charge things that I knew not.
BN: False witnesses rose up; they asked me about things of which I had no knowledge.
BN (alternate translation): False witnesses get paid by the tabloids to make up defamatory lies about me; the tabloids defend their suddenly increased advertising revenues by claiming it's in the public interest.
CHAMAS: "unrighteous"? - usually used to mean "destruction", and usually through the use of Qassam rockets, or at the very least "violence"; and then how does it contrast with SHO'AH, above?
35:12 YESHALMUNI RA'AH TACHAT TOVAH SHE CHOL LE NAPHSHI
KJ: They rewarded me evil for good to the spoiling of my soul.
BN: They paid back my good deeds with evil ones, until my soul was torn with grief.
YISH'ALUNI was the last word in the previous verse, YESHALMUNI is the first in this: the translation needs to find ways to parallel these deliberate word-plays. Not at all easy on this occasion!
SHECHOL: This is the principal verb for "bereavement" - cf Genesis 27:45.
I think we should rename this "The Yep, been there, done that" Psalm. I am certain everyone has had, or knows someone who has had, the experience of this verse and the previous.
35:13 VA ANI BA CHALOTAM LEVUSHI SAK INEYTI VA TSOM NAPHSHI U TEPHILATI AL CHEYKI TASHUV
KJ: But as for me, when they were sick, my clothing was sackcloth: I humbled my soul with fasting; and my prayer returned into mine own bosom.
BN: As for me, when they were sick, I put on sackcloth, I afflicted my soul with fasting; {N} and as to my prayer, they spat it back in my face.
I am by no means convinced by either of these translations. He could be saying that, where they did bad he at least tried to do good, and the last phrase reaps the benefit. But, based on the previous verses, I strongly, and sadly, suspect that the last phrase is as I have rendered it.
35:14 KE RE'A KE ACH LI HIT'HALACHTI KA AVEL EM KODER SHACHOTI
KJ: I behaved myself as though he had been my friend or brother: I bowed down heavily, as one that mourneth for his mother.
KJ: I treated him as I would my friend or my brother, like a man utterly devastated by mourning for his mother.
This verse then tries to undermine my translation of the end of the last, because he is still determined to go on doing good; but then the next verse will re-affirm it, because the others keep on spitting in his face. Perhaps it is precisely this ambivalence that the Psalmist wants us to hear.
35:15 U VE TSAL'I SAMCHU VE NE'ESAPHU NE'ESPHU ALAI NECHIM VE LO YADA'TI KAR'U VE LO DAMU
KJ: But in mine adversity they rejoiced, and gathered themselves together: yea, the abjects gathered themselves together against me, and I knew it not; they did tear me, and ceased not:
BN: And when I hesitated they were happy, and gathered themselves in a great get-together against me; even those who I did not know; {N} they tore me apart relentlessly.
Is it just my imagination or am I hearing, not only lots of alliteration, but accrostical alliteration through the verses - Nun on this occasion, though there are still more K sounds? I have tried to echo it with my Hs and Gs
DAMU: Hmmm! With a Mem medugash! From the root DAMAM, "to be silent". Hmmm! See verse 14.
35:16 BE CHANPHEY LA'AGEY MA'OG CHAROK ALAI SHINEYMO
KJ: With hypocritical mockers in feasts, they gnashed upon me with their teeth.
BN: With the profanest mockeries of backbiting they gnash at me with their teeth.
And the repetitions too; same root, different usages: LA'AGEY MA'OG here; NE'ESAPHU NE'ESPHU in 15; several others.
35:17 ADONAI KAMAH TIR'EH HASHIYVAH NAPHSHI MI SHO'EYHEM MI KEPHIRIM YECHIYDATI
KJ: Lord, how long wilt thou look on? rescue my soul from their destructions, my darling from the lions.
BN: Lord, how long will you stand there watching? {N} Rescue my soul, my beloved, from their destructions, from the lions.
KEPHIRIM: Are these the same lions that turned up in the previous Psalm? The lion was, of course, the symbol of Yehudah (cf Genesis 49:9). But wait a moment, this places the Psalm in the mouth of the mother, not the son.
MI KEPHIRIM: There is often a difficulty with the text, to determine whether to treat the prepositional prefix as though it were separate, and pronounce it that way, or to take it as joined, because it is written that way: it also impacts on a sheva under the second letter, which is silent if they are joined, but pronounced if they are separate. Here we have to do the former, because the latter would require a removal of the dagesh from the Kaph, and the Masoretic text insists on keeping it. MI KEPHIRIM, not MICHPHIRIM.
35:18 ODECHA BE KAHAL RAV BE AM ATSUM AHALELECHA
KJ: I will give thee thanks in the great congregation: I will praise thee among much people.
BN: I will express my thanks to you within the wider congregation; I will praise you profoundly among the people.
Once again my translation is more concerned with echoing the assonances and alliterations than with being precisely literal.
35:19 AL YISMECHU LI OYEVAI SHEKER SON'AI CHINAM YIKRETSU AYIN
KJ: Let not them that are mine enemies wrongfully rejoice over me: neither let them wink with the eye that hate me without a cause.
BN: Do not allow those who are wrongfully my enemies, who hate me, to get pleasure from winking their eye at me for no just a cause.
YACHASHOVUN: Two dots on the Sheen needs explaining (as does the anachronistic gerund!). So much simpler to insert a Vav and put the left-hand dot above it. But that only works in the Masoretic text, where the dots have been added as an aid for those who struggle with the unpointed. Put in the Vav, and you risk changing the meaning of the word for those who can read unpointed. So it has to be this way. (The anachronistic gerund is simply what it is.)
35:21 VA YARCHIVU ALAI PIYHEM AMRU HE'AH HE'AH RA'ATAH EYNEYNU
KJ: Yea, they opened their mouth wide against me, and said, Aha, aha, our eye hath seen it.
BN: Yea, they opened their mouth wide against me saying: "Aha, aha, our eye has seen it".
RA'ATAH: Isn't that a grammar error (yes, I know I have made one too: grammatical error)? 3rd person feminine singular, but the eyes are plural. Or maybe it gets away without correction, because it echoes RA'IYTAH in the very next verse, which then becomes HA'IYRAH in the verse that follows - a completely different root and meaning, but this is all about sounds, cadences, echoes of echoes in the echoing of echoings.
35:22 RA'IYTAH YHVH AL TECHERASH ADONAI AL TIRCHAK MIMENI
KJ: This thou hast seen, O LORD: keep not silence: O Lord, be not far from me.
BN: You have seen, YHVH. Do not hold your tongue, my Lord. Do not keep your distance from me.
35:23 HA'IYRAH VE HAKIYTSAH LE MISHPATI ELOHAI VA ADONAI LE RIYVI
KJ: Stir up thyself, and awake to my judgment, even unto my cause, my God and my Lord.
BN: Rouse yourself. Wake up and judge me; judge my cause, my god and my Lord.
The problem - we've seen it before, even in this Psalm - of translating YHVH as "Lord" is that you need "Lord" as the correct translation for ADONAI, and the two are not necessarily the same person and/or deity (though, as it happens, on this occasion they are).
And then RA'IYTAH in the previous, via HA'IYRAH, to HAKIYTSAH here.
35:24 SHAPHTENI CHE TSIDKECHA YHVH ELOHAI VE AL YISMECHU LI
KJ: Judge me, O LORD my God, according to thy righteousness; and let them not rejoice over me.
BN: Judge me, YHVH my god, according to your righteousness; and let them not take their pleasure over me.
35:25 AL YOMRU VE LIBAM HE'AH NAPHSHENU AL YOMRU BILA'ANUHU
KJ: Let them not say in their hearts, Ah, so would we have it: let them not say, We have swallowed him up.
BN: Let them not say in their heart: "Aha, we have our desire"; let them not say: "We have swallowed him up."
35:28 U LESHONI TEH'GEH TSIDKECHA KOL HA YOM TEHILATECHA
KJ: And my tongue shall speak of thy righteousness and of thy praise all the day long.
BN: And my tongue shall speak of your righteousness, and utter praises to you, all day long. {P}
Which phrasing takes us back to the previous Psalm 34:14, as did both the CHAPHETS and the TAMID of the penultimate verse. Is this then a continuation of that Psalm, and the two should be treated as one?
MI KAMOCHA: Is a much repeated phrase throughout the liturgy, alternated with the responsum EYN KAMOCHA: Who is like you? There is no one like you.
35:11 YEKUMUN EDEY CHAMAS ASHER LO YADA'TI YISH'ALUNI
יְקוּמוּן עֵדֵי חָמָס אֲשֶׁר לֹא יָדַעְתִּי יִשְׁאָלוּנִי
KJ: False witnesses did rise up; they laid to my charge things that I knew not.
BN: False witnesses rose up; they asked me about things of which I had no knowledge.
BN (alternate translation): False witnesses get paid by the tabloids to make up defamatory lies about me; the tabloids defend their suddenly increased advertising revenues by claiming it's in the public interest.
BN (Presidential translation, Washington, circa 2019): "It's all fake news. They're lying!"
CHAMAS: "unrighteous"? - usually used to mean "destruction", and usually through the use of Qassam rockets, or at the very least "violence"; and then how does it contrast with SHO'AH, above?
35:12 YESHALMUNI RA'AH TACHAT TOVAH SHE CHOL LE NAPHSHI
יְשַׁלְּמוּנִי רָעָה תַּחַת טוֹבָה שְׁכוֹל לְנַפְשִׁי
KJ: They rewarded me evil for good to the spoiling of my soul.
BN: They paid back my good deeds with evil ones, until my soul was torn with grief.
YISH'ALUNI was the last word in the previous verse, YESHALMUNI is the first in this: the translation needs to find ways to parallel these deliberate word-plays. Not at all easy on this occasion!
SHECHOL: This is the principal verb for "bereavement" - cf Genesis 27:45.
I think we should rename this "The Yep, been there, done that" Psalm. I am certain everyone has had, or knows someone who has had, the experience of this verse and the previous.
35:13 VA ANI BA CHALOTAM LEVUSHI SAK INEYTI VA TSOM NAPHSHI U TEPHILATI AL CHEYKI TASHUV
וַאֲנִי בַּחֲלוֹתָם לְבוּשִׁי שָׂק עִנֵּיתִי בַצּוֹם נַפְשִׁי וּתְפִלָּתִי עַל חֵיקִי תָשׁוּב
KJ: But as for me, when they were sick, my clothing was sackcloth: I humbled my soul with fasting; and my prayer returned into mine own bosom.
BN: As for me, when they were sick, I put on sackcloth, I afflicted my soul with fasting; {N} and as to my prayer, they spat it back in my face.
I am by no means convinced by either of these translations. He could be saying that, where they did bad he at least tried to do good, and the last phrase reaps the benefit. But, based on the previous verses, I strongly, and sadly, suspect that the last phrase is as I have rendered it.
35:14 KE RE'A KE ACH LI HIT'HALACHTI KA AVEL EM KODER SHACHOTI
כְּרֵעַ כְּאָח לִי הִתְהַלָּכְתִּי כַּאֲבֶל אֵם קֹדֵר שַׁחוֹתִי
KJ: I behaved myself as though he had been my friend or brother: I bowed down heavily, as one that mourneth for his mother.
KJ: I treated him as I would my friend or my brother, like a man utterly devastated by mourning for his mother.
This verse then tries to undermine my translation of the end of the last, because he is still determined to go on doing good; but then the next verse will re-affirm it, because the others keep on spitting in his face. Perhaps it is precisely this ambivalence that the Psalmist wants us to hear.
KE RE'A KE ACH: Endless word-play in this Psalm, always with homophones and homonyms. Is this in fact KERE'A... KE'ACH... KA'AVEL?
SHACHOTI: "bowed down", as the Christian translators confirm in their own explanations, is surely incorrect - click here, and you will see that they reckon the root is SHACHACH (שָׁחַח), which it can't be, because SHACHAH has two Chets, where this has only one. The root is... hmmm, good question! Job 22:29 has SHACH, for "depressed"... but then I go to Gesenius, who usually knows these things, and I am taken by surprise, because he too insists on SHACHACH; but then he offers it in the Hit'pa'el, the reflexive form, as HISHTACHAVAH, "to prostrate oneself" - but that comes from the root SHETACH, which is "the surface of the floor". So the error is explained: mix up the verbs, and you find the Psalmist here on his knees, and not simply "bowed down", not even just metaphorically "depressed", but fully "prostrate". Except that it isn't; the roots are muddled. So what is it?
SHACHOTI: "bowed down", as the Christian translators confirm in their own explanations, is surely incorrect - click here, and you will see that they reckon the root is SHACHACH (שָׁחַח), which it can't be, because SHACHAH has two Chets, where this has only one. The root is... hmmm, good question! Job 22:29 has SHACH, for "depressed"... but then I go to Gesenius, who usually knows these things, and I am taken by surprise, because he too insists on SHACHACH; but then he offers it in the Hit'pa'el, the reflexive form, as HISHTACHAVAH, "to prostrate oneself" - but that comes from the root SHETACH, which is "the surface of the floor". So the error is explained: mix up the verbs, and you find the Psalmist here on his knees, and not simply "bowed down", not even just metaphorically "depressed", but fully "prostrate". Except that it isn't; the roots are muddled. So what is it?
There is no other root to offer as an alternative translation, and no doubt that "bowed" makes sense in the context. So two other possibilities. First: a different error. Not by the translator, nor by the etymologist, but by the Masoretic scribe. I am rejecting the second possibility, that the second Chet gets dropped in some grammatical usages. But why not the possibility that the single Chet should be medugash, the dot in its midriff telling us that the second Chet has been omitted?
But even that does not explain my translation. I have taken the same possibility - the dropping in this case of the second TAV - and applied it to SHACHAT = "destroy".
35:15 U VE TSAL'I SAMCHU VE NE'ESAPHU NE'ESPHU ALAI NECHIM VE LO YADA'TI KAR'U VE LO DAMU
וּבְצַלְעִי שָׂמְחוּ וְנֶאֱסָפוּ נֶאֶסְפוּ עָלַי נֵכִים וְלֹא יָדַעְתִּי קָרְעוּ וְלֹא דָמּוּ
KJ: But in mine adversity they rejoiced, and gathered themselves together: yea, the abjects gathered themselves together against me, and I knew it not; they did tear me, and ceased not:
BN: And when I hesitated they were happy, and gathered themselves in a great get-together against me; even those who I did not know; {N} they tore me apart relentlessly.
Is it just my imagination or am I hearing, not only lots of alliteration, but accrostical alliteration through the verses - Nun on this occasion, though there are still more K sounds? I have tried to echo it with my Hs and Gs
DAMU: Hmmm! With a Mem medugash! From the root DAMAM, "to be silent". Hmmm! See verse 14.
35:16 BE CHANPHEY LA'AGEY MA'OG CHAROK ALAI SHINEYMO
בְּחַנְפֵי לַעֲגֵי מָעוֹג חָרֹק עָלַי שִׁנֵּימוֹ
KJ: With hypocritical mockers in feasts, they gnashed upon me with their teeth.
BN: With the profanest mockeries of backbiting they gnash at me with their teeth.
And the repetitions too; same root, different usages: LA'AGEY MA'OG here; NE'ESAPHU NE'ESPHU in 15; several others.
35:17 ADONAI KAMAH TIR'EH HASHIYVAH NAPHSHI MI SHO'EYHEM MI KEPHIRIM YECHIYDATI
אֲדֹנָי כַּמָּה תִּרְאֶה הָשִׁיבָה נַפְשִׁי מִשֹּׁאֵיהֶם מִכְּפִירִים יְחִידָתִי
KJ: Lord, how long wilt thou look on? rescue my soul from their destructions, my darling from the lions.
BN: Lord, how long will you stand there watching? {N} Rescue my soul, my beloved, from their destructions, from the lions.
KEPHIRIM: Are these the same lions that turned up in the previous Psalm? The lion was, of course, the symbol of Yehudah (cf Genesis 49:9). But wait a moment, this places the Psalm in the mouth of the mother, not the son.
YECHIYDATI: And doubly so, when she calls him by this epithet, because this is David's epithet... yes, his epithet, and it means "darling" or "beloved"; but not his name, which is only similar in letters and pronunciation, though absolutely identical in meaning. More word-games then. More echoes.
And just for the explanation, David is a pet-name, an abbreviation, like Tony from Anthony or Bill from William. His full name, and Shelomoh's birthname too (2 Samuel 12:24/25, was YEDID-YAH, "the beloved of the moon-goddess". And it is definitely "my" - that final Yud confirms it. So should we be reconsidering this, as a Psalm to be sung by a priestess in the choir, and not a male priest; in the voice of Yah at Chevron, or perhaps of Ornah or Mir-Yam if it is Solomonic and this is later Temple?
MI KEPHIRIM: There is often a difficulty with the text, to determine whether to treat the prepositional prefix as though it were separate, and pronounce it that way, or to take it as joined, because it is written that way: it also impacts on a sheva under the second letter, which is silent if they are joined, but pronounced if they are separate. Here we have to do the former, because the latter would require a removal of the dagesh from the Kaph, and the Masoretic text insists on keeping it. MI KEPHIRIM, not MICHPHIRIM.
35:18 ODECHA BE KAHAL RAV BE AM ATSUM AHALELECHA
אוֹדְךָ בְּקָהָל רָב בְּעַם עָצוּם אֲהַלְלֶךָּ
KJ: I will give thee thanks in the great congregation: I will praise thee among much people.
BN: I will express my thanks to you within the wider congregation; I will praise you profoundly among the people.
Once again my translation is more concerned with echoing the assonances and alliterations than with being precisely literal.
35:19 AL YISMECHU LI OYEVAI SHEKER SON'AI CHINAM YIKRETSU AYIN
אַל יִשְׂמְחוּ לִי אֹיְבַי שֶׁקֶר שֹׂנְאַי חִנָּם יִקְרְצוּ עָיִן
KJ: Let not them that are mine enemies wrongfully rejoice over me: neither let them wink with the eye that hate me without a cause.
BN: Do not allow those who are wrongfully my enemies, who hate me, to get pleasure from winking their eye at me for no just a cause.
SON'AI: Does this word go at the end of the previous, or the beginning of the next? I have left it in the same place in my translation, to retain that ambiguity.
35:20 KI LO SHALOM YEDABERU VE AL RIG'EY ERETS DIVREY MIRMOT YACHASHOVUN
KJ: For they speak not peace: but they devise deceitful matters against them that are quiet in the land.
BN: For they do not speak of wholeness and harmony; rather, they devise deceitful plots against those who are quiet in the land.
SHALOM: Shelomoh's name, again, and Yeru-Shala'im's too - obvious echoes for a poet to play with. But the important here, for the translation, is not the echo but the much larger meaning, though KJ does nicely echoing "peace" at the beginning with "quiet" at the end, despite having to reorganise the sentence to do so. I have echoed it in my translation.
כִּי לֹא שָׁלוֹם יְדַבֵּרוּ וְעַל רִגְעֵי אֶרֶץ דִּבְרֵי מִרְמוֹת יַחֲשֹׁבוּן
KJ: For they speak not peace: but they devise deceitful matters against them that are quiet in the land.
BN: For they do not speak of wholeness and harmony; rather, they devise deceitful plots against those who are quiet in the land.
SHALOM: Shelomoh's name, again, and Yeru-Shala'im's too - obvious echoes for a poet to play with. But the important here, for the translation, is not the echo but the much larger meaning, though KJ does nicely echoing "peace" at the beginning with "quiet" at the end, despite having to reorganise the sentence to do so. I have echoed it in my translation.
YEDABERU: Why not YEDABRU?
RIG'EY: This is the word translated as "quiet"; its sense is "restful", as in physically tranquil, rather than verbally silent. I also cannot help but wonder if this word, almost never used except in libretto, was derived from the Hindu "raga", for which click here.
YACHASHOVUN: Two dots on the Sheen needs explaining (as does the anachronistic gerund!). So much simpler to insert a Vav and put the left-hand dot above it. But that only works in the Masoretic text, where the dots have been added as an aid for those who struggle with the unpointed. Put in the Vav, and you risk changing the meaning of the word for those who can read unpointed. So it has to be this way. (The anachronistic gerund is simply what it is.)
35:21 VA YARCHIVU ALAI PIYHEM AMRU HE'AH HE'AH RA'ATAH EYNEYNU
וַיַּרְחִיבוּ עָלַי פִּיהֶם אָמְרוּ הֶאָח הֶאָח רָאֲתָה עֵינֵינוּ
KJ: Yea, they opened their mouth wide against me, and said, Aha, aha, our eye hath seen it.
BN: Yea, they opened their mouth wide against me saying: "Aha, aha, our eye has seen it".
RA'ATAH: Isn't that a grammar error (yes, I know I have made one too: grammatical error)? 3rd person feminine singular, but the eyes are plural. Or maybe it gets away without correction, because it echoes RA'IYTAH in the very next verse, which then becomes HA'IYRAH in the verse that follows - a completely different root and meaning, but this is all about sounds, cadences, echoes of echoes in the echoing of echoings.
35:22 RA'IYTAH YHVH AL TECHERASH ADONAI AL TIRCHAK MIMENI
רָאִיתָה יְהוָה אַל תֶּחֱרַשׁ אֲדֹנָי אֲל תִּרְחַק מִמֶּנִּי
KJ: This thou hast seen, O LORD: keep not silence: O Lord, be not far from me.
BN: You have seen, YHVH. Do not hold your tongue, my Lord. Do not keep your distance from me.
35:23 HA'IYRAH VE HAKIYTSAH LE MISHPATI ELOHAI VA ADONAI LE RIYVI
הָעִירָה וְהָקִיצָה לְמִשְׁפָּטִי אֱלֹהַי וַאדֹנָי לְרִיבִי
KJ: Stir up thyself, and awake to my judgment, even unto my cause, my God and my Lord.
BN: Rouse yourself. Wake up and judge me; judge my cause, my god and my Lord.
The problem - we've seen it before, even in this Psalm - of translating YHVH as "Lord" is that you need "Lord" as the correct translation for ADONAI, and the two are not necessarily the same person and/or deity (though, as it happens, on this occasion they are).
And then RA'IYTAH in the previous, via HA'IYRAH, to HAKIYTSAH here.
35:24 SHAPHTENI CHE TSIDKECHA YHVH ELOHAI VE AL YISMECHU LI
שָׁפְטֵנִי כְצִדְקְךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהָי וְאַל יִשְׂמְחוּ לִי
KJ: Judge me, O LORD my God, according to thy righteousness; and let them not rejoice over me.
BN: Judge me, YHVH my god, according to your righteousness; and let them not take their pleasure over me.
35:25 AL YOMRU VE LIBAM HE'AH NAPHSHENU AL YOMRU BILA'ANUHU
אַל יֹאמְרוּ בְלִבָּם הֶאָח נַפְשֵׁנוּ אַל יֹאמְרוּ בִּלַּעֲנוּהוּ
KJ: Let them not say in their hearts, Ah, so would we have it: let them not say, We have swallowed him up.
BN: Let them not say in their heart: "Aha, we have our desire"; let them not say: "We have swallowed him up."
VE LIBAM...BILA'ANUHU: This absolutely has to be BE LIBAM, not VE LIBAM, in order to make the fading echo in BILA'ANUHU; and is that fade not just splendid, hushed in by HE'AH NAPHSHENU, itself drifting off into the wilderness like an Azaz-El, swallowed up itself by its own emptiness! Got to be flute, or maybe a soft pan-pipe, for a musical sound-idea as breathlessly profound as that.
35:26 YEVOSHU VE YACHPERU YACHDAV SEMECHEY RA'ATI YILBESHU VOSHET U CHELIMAH HA MAGDIYLIM ALAI
KJ: Let them be ashamed and brought to confusion together that rejoice at mine hurt: let them be clothed with shame and dishonour that magnify themselves against me.
BN: Let them be ashamed and abashed at once, they who take pleasure in my hurt; {N} let them be clothed with shame and confusion who exalt themselves against me.
And then spit on them! YACHPERU... YACHDAV... SEMECHEY... CHELIMAH, and lots of plosives too, so it hits them hard: YACHPERU... YILBESHU, even VOSHET.
35:26 YEVOSHU VE YACHPERU YACHDAV SEMECHEY RA'ATI YILBESHU VOSHET U CHELIMAH HA MAGDIYLIM ALAI
יֵבֹשׁוּ וְיַחְפְּרוּ יַחְדָּו שְׂמֵחֵי רָעָתִי יִלְבְּשׁוּ בֹשֶׁת וּכְלִמָּה הַמַּגְדִּילִים עָלָי
KJ: Let them be ashamed and brought to confusion together that rejoice at mine hurt: let them be clothed with shame and dishonour that magnify themselves against me.
BN: Let them be ashamed and abashed at once, they who take pleasure in my hurt; {N} let them be clothed with shame and confusion who exalt themselves against me.
And then spit on them! YACHPERU... YACHDAV... SEMECHEY... CHELIMAH, and lots of plosives too, so it hits them hard: YACHPERU... YILBESHU, even VOSHET.
VOSHET: Can we hear VOSHET in a Psalm of David and not think of Mephi-Boshet, the crippled son of Yehonatan? 2 Samuel 9 if you are unfamiliar with him; 2 Samuel 21 for the rather tragic ending of his story. There is also an Ish-Boshet, Sha'ul's heir in fact, after the death of Yehonotan - a summary of his life and role here; but really his name was Ish-Ba'al, and Ish-Boshet an insulting nickname.
35:27 YARONU VE YISMECHU CHAPHETSEY TSIDKI VE YOMRU TAMID YIGDAL YHVH HECHAPHETS SHELOM AVDO
KJ: Let them shout for joy, and be glad, that favour my righteous cause: yea, let them say continually, Let the LORD be magnified, which hath pleasure in the prosperity of his servant.
BN: Let them shout for joy, and be glad, those who take delight in my righteousness; {N} yea, let them say continually: "Let YHVH be exalted, for he delights in the wholeness of his servant."
YIGDAL... Friday evening liturgy, Maimonides' "Thirteen Principles of Faith" set as poetry and sung; but we moderns are also hearing YITGADAL; and it may very well be an early version of the Kaddish, rather than the Yigdal, that is being recited here.
35:27 YARONU VE YISMECHU CHAPHETSEY TSIDKI VE YOMRU TAMID YIGDAL YHVH HECHAPHETS SHELOM AVDO
יָרֹנּוּ וְיִשְׂמְחוּ חֲפֵצֵי צִדְקִי וְיֹאמְרוּ תָמִיד יִגְדַּל יְהוָה הֶחָפֵץ שְׁלוֹם עַבְדּוֹ
KJ: Let them shout for joy, and be glad, that favour my righteous cause: yea, let them say continually, Let the LORD be magnified, which hath pleasure in the prosperity of his servant.
BN: Let them shout for joy, and be glad, those who take delight in my righteousness; {N} yea, let them say continually: "Let YHVH be exalted, for he delights in the wholeness of his servant."
YIGDAL... Friday evening liturgy, Maimonides' "Thirteen Principles of Faith" set as poetry and sung; but we moderns are also hearing YITGADAL; and it may very well be an early version of the Kaddish, rather than the Yigdal, that is being recited here.
35:28 U LESHONI TEH'GEH TSIDKECHA KOL HA YOM TEHILATECHA
וּלְשׁוֹנִי תֶּהְגֶּה צִדְקֶךָ כָּל הַיּוֹם תְּהִלָּתֶךָ
KJ: And my tongue shall speak of thy righteousness and of thy praise all the day long.
BN: And my tongue shall speak of your righteousness, and utter praises to you, all day long. {P}
Which phrasing takes us back to the previous Psalm 34:14, as did both the CHAPHETS and the TAMID of the penultimate verse. Is this then a continuation of that Psalm, and the two should be treated as one?
Psalms:
Bk 1: 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
Bk 2: 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
Bk 3: 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89
Bk 4: 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106
Bk 5: 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119a 119b 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132
133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150
Additional Psalms: 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 Samuel Chronicles
Essays: Intro - Music - Form & Language
Copyright
© 2022 David Prashker
All
rights reserved
The
Argaman Press
No comments:
Post a Comment