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
In this hymn, the cosmological role of David is explored, so that this could as well be entitled "The Journeys of Orpheus" or "A Supplement to the Works of Sylvia Plath and Anne Sexton": heaven and hell serving metaphorically for the highs and lows of human life, the physical joys and anguishes as well as the spiritual, the psychological, the emotional. As "the beloved of the moon-goddess" (Yedid-Yah is David's full name) the Mashiyach inhabits the sunless night, but is also inspired by the radiant magnificence of the moon and stars; and by day, when he ascends into the heavens to sit at the right hand of the sun (verse 10)... you can fill in the rest for yourself, best of all by looking at the middle verse of the piece, verse 12, which provides the point of balance for the poem as well as for the theme; or by looking at Psalm 110:1 (which is echoed precisely in Matthew 22:44, transforming David thereby into Jesus), or even Acts 2:34/35, which casts a very interesting Christian light on this; or this link.
139:1 LA MENATSE'ACH LE DAVID MIZMOR YHVH CHAKARTANI VA TED'A
לַמְנַצֵּחַ לְדָוִד מִזְמוֹר יְהוָה חֲקַרְתַּנִי וַתֵּדָע
KJ: (To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.) O LORD, thou hast searched me, and known me.
BN: For the Leader. A Mizmor for David. {N} YHVH, you have conducted a full investigation of who and what I am, and now you know me.
Double-dedication, for the orchestra/choir-leader and the king/earth-god.
CHAKARTANI: Straight into the word-games and the sound-games. In French there are "savoir" and "connaître", both meaning "to know", but also very different forms of knowledge: knowing some fact is not the same as recognising a person by their face. So in Yehudit there are LADA'AT and LEHAKIR, serving the same differences, and in the same order. BUT the verb here is not LEHAKIR, "to recognise", but LECHAKAR, the Hey closed into a Chet, the Kaf a Kuph. A completely different verb - CHAKAR means "to search" or "to investigate" - and yet it leads to to the same point of knowledge.
Which is why I have gone for an extended translation, so that it is clear what "to search" means in this verse. Rather more the "re-search" than the mere search.
139:2 ATAH YADA'TA SHIVTI VE KUMI BANTAH LE RE'IY ME RACHOK
אַתָּה יָדַעְתָּ שִׁבְתִּי וְקוּמִי בַּנְתָּה לְרֵעִי מֵרָחוֹק
KJ: Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off.
BN: You know when I sit down and when I stand up, you understand my thought from far off.
SHIVTI VE KUMI: My sunrise and sunset, my moonrise and moonset; humans and planets equally! But it is also more than this. In the last Psalm we saw the distinction between the DERECH and the HALACHAH, the workings of the Cosmos in the former, the disciplined lifestyle of the human in the latter. And what is the central credo that defines that HALACHAH? The entire Torah provides the list of responsibilities and prohibitions, but the credo is more specific than that. The credo is the SHEM'A.
So now go to Deuteronomy 6:4, where the Shem'a begins, and follow it down to verse 7, where you will find the source of our current verse, right there on the DERECH.
BANTAH: HEVANTA is what we are accustomed to; but that uses the Hiphil or causative form; here it is in the Pa'al, the simple, active. The root, BINAH = "knowledge", but in Bloom's sense, of evaluated wisdom rather than regurgitated information (DA'AT rather than HAKARAH).
139:3 ARCHI VE RIV'I ZERIYTA VE CHOL DERACHAI HISKANTAH
KJ: Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways.
BN: You measure my wanderings and my times of rest, and are acquainted with all my ways.
I prefer the KJ translation, because it uses the word "path", which is HALACHAH; but unfortunately the Yehudit doesn't say HALACHAH, even though it clearly infers it, through the strayings and wanderings which it does say. But this is the Mosaic Torah, forty years of precisely those sorts of wanderings, before rest was even imaginable.
BANTAH: HEVANTA is what we are accustomed to; but that uses the Hiphil or causative form; here it is in the Pa'al, the simple, active. The root, BINAH = "knowledge", but in Bloom's sense, of evaluated wisdom rather than regurgitated information (DA'AT rather than HAKARAH).
139:3 ARCHI VE RIV'I ZERIYTA VE CHOL DERACHAI HISKANTAH
אָרְחִי וְרִבְעִי זֵרִיתָ וְכָל דְּרָכַי הִסְכַּנְתָּה
KJ: Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways.
BN: You measure my wanderings and my times of rest, and are acquainted with all my ways.
I prefer the KJ translation, because it uses the word "path", which is HALACHAH; but unfortunately the Yehudit doesn't say HALACHAH, even though it clearly infers it, through the strayings and wanderings which it does say. But this is the Mosaic Torah, forty years of precisely those sorts of wanderings, before rest was even imaginable.
HISKANTAH: Word-play yet again. HISKANTA has nothing to do with MISHKAN-TA, except its closeness of lettering, except its sound, except that the latter is precisely where the Mosaic Torah was encupboarded, for transportation through those forty years.
DERACHAI (my notes here are out of verse-order, but necessarily so): And again the distinction between the DERECH and the HALACHAH, but at the human level now: the DERECH being the body I have been given, the family I have been born into, the land, the geography, the moment of time: all out of my control, but what I have to live with. HALACHAH is what I then choose to do with them.
139:4 KI EYN MILAH BILSHONI HEN YHVH YADA'TA CHULAH
KJ: For there is not a word in my tongue, but, lo, O LORD, thou knowest it altogether.
BN: Not a word trips from my tongue, and, lo, YHVH knows the whole of it.
BILSHONI: Or BI LESHONI?
139:5 ACHOR VA KEDEM TSARTANI VA TASHET ALAI KAPECHAH
KJ: Thou hast beset me behind and before, and laid thine hand upon me.
BN: You have hemmed me in both front and back, and laid thy hand upon me.
TSARTANI: "Hemmed" is a negative, and nothing until now has been negative. Or is this a first hint at rebelliousness, self-assertion, a breaking free of the omnipresence?
139:4 KI EYN MILAH BILSHONI HEN YHVH YADA'TA CHULAH
כִּי אֵין מִלָּה בִּלְשׁוֹנִי הֵן יְהוָה יָדַעְתָּ כֻלָּהּ
KJ: For there is not a word in my tongue, but, lo, O LORD, thou knowest it altogether.
BN: Not a word trips from my tongue, and, lo, YHVH knows the whole of it.
BILSHONI: Or BI LESHONI?
139:5 ACHOR VA KEDEM TSARTANI VA TASHET ALAI KAPECHAH
אָחוֹר וָקֶדֶם צַרְתָּנִי וַתָּשֶׁת עָלַי כַּפֶּכָה
KJ: Thou hast beset me behind and before, and laid thine hand upon me.
BN: You have hemmed me in both front and back, and laid thy hand upon me.
TSARTANI: "Hemmed" is a negative, and nothing until now has been negative. Or is this a first hint at rebelliousness, self-assertion, a breaking free of the omnipresence?
But it is also a play on two very different words, TSAR and TSUR, either of which could be the root here. The former are "troubles" and "afflictions", Yiddish Tsures; the latter is one of the great epithets of the deity, "Tsur Yisra-El", "the rock of Israel". So is he hemmed in as a form of protection, the way the Magen David does; or is he surrounded by troubles?
Completely irrelevant to the commentaries on the text, I know, but these things interest me when they happen to come up: why does one translation say "thine" and the other "Thy" - and it isn't the upper/lower case difference that is of interest. One of them must be grammatically incorrect; but which is it? Or is it a regional dialect variation - they say "thine" in the Viking north but "thy" in the Saxon south, or vice-versa? I have offered no translation of my own for this pronoun, in order to keep both of these translations in.
139:6 PIL'IYAH DA'AT MIMENI NISGEVAH LO UCHAL LAH
KJ: Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it.
BN: Such knowledge is too wonderful for me, too high, I cannot reach it.
And how strange, having mentioned Bloom and his great "taxonomy" just a few verses ago, that something of the same order should turn out to be present in this ancient Psalm. First the BANTAH of verse 2, mere information, gleaned from someone else's memory and experience, found in a "Dummy's Guide" or teacher's handout or on Wikipedia: the deity knows me because he witnesses my daily life. But the verb that accompanies it is YADA'TA, not HEVANTA - as with the French SAVOIR and CONNAITRE noted above, and this was definitely SAVOIR. CONNAITRE requires cognitive engagement, an evaluation and assessment of the information in order to draw intelligent conclusions from it, and that would be the DA'AH of this verse - too difficult, alas, for the middle-grader who is writing this, but absolutely perfect for a study group wanting to compare the Kabbalistic Tree of Life with Bloom's Taxonomy.
139:7 ANAH ELECH ME RUCHECHA VE ANAH MI PANEYCHA EVRACH
KJ: Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?
BN: Where shall I go to get away from your spirit? and where shall I flee from your presence?
See my note to "hemmed" at verse 5. Though it is indeed negative; he wants to run away, not break away; based on verse 6, this is evasion, not liberation.
139:8 IM ESAK SHAMAYIM SHAM ATAH VE ATSIY'AH SHE'OL HINECHA
KJ: If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.
BN: If I ascend into the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in She'ol, behold, you are there.
Metaphorical, not literal - this is a poetical image, and it confirms my notes at the top of this page. And/or the poet is speaking to David, perhaps on behalf of David, as the Earth-god. Which still makes it metaphorical, not literal!
SHE'OL: See the link.
139:9 ESA CHANPHEY SHACHAR ESHKENAH BE ACHARIT YAM
KJ: If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea;
BN: If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea...
Completely irrelevant to the commentaries on the text, I know, but these things interest me when they happen to come up: why does one translation say "thine" and the other "Thy" - and it isn't the upper/lower case difference that is of interest. One of them must be grammatically incorrect; but which is it? Or is it a regional dialect variation - they say "thine" in the Viking north but "thy" in the Saxon south, or vice-versa? I have offered no translation of my own for this pronoun, in order to keep both of these translations in.
139:6 PIL'IYAH DA'AT MIMENI NISGEVAH LO UCHAL LAH
פִּלְאִיָּה דַעַת מִמֶּנִּי נִשְׂגְּבָה לֹא אוּכַל לָהּ
KJ: Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it.
BN: Such knowledge is too wonderful for me, too high, I cannot reach it.
And how strange, having mentioned Bloom and his great "taxonomy" just a few verses ago, that something of the same order should turn out to be present in this ancient Psalm. First the BANTAH of verse 2, mere information, gleaned from someone else's memory and experience, found in a "Dummy's Guide" or teacher's handout or on Wikipedia: the deity knows me because he witnesses my daily life. But the verb that accompanies it is YADA'TA, not HEVANTA - as with the French SAVOIR and CONNAITRE noted above, and this was definitely SAVOIR. CONNAITRE requires cognitive engagement, an evaluation and assessment of the information in order to draw intelligent conclusions from it, and that would be the DA'AH of this verse - too difficult, alas, for the middle-grader who is writing this, but absolutely perfect for a study group wanting to compare the Kabbalistic Tree of Life with Bloom's Taxonomy.
139:7 ANAH ELECH ME RUCHECHA VE ANAH MI PANEYCHA EVRACH
אָנָה אֵלֵךְ מֵרוּחֶךָ וְאָנָה מִפָּנֶיךָ אֶבְרָח
KJ: Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?
BN: Where shall I go to get away from your spirit? and where shall I flee from your presence?
See my note to "hemmed" at verse 5. Though it is indeed negative; he wants to run away, not break away; based on verse 6, this is evasion, not liberation.
139:8 IM ESAK SHAMAYIM SHAM ATAH VE ATSIY'AH SHE'OL HINECHA
אִם אֶסַּק שָׁמַיִם שָׁם אָתָּה וְאַצִּיעָה שְּׁאוֹל הִנֶּךָּ
KJ: If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.
BN: If I ascend into the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in She'ol, behold, you are there.
Metaphorical, not literal - this is a poetical image, and it confirms my notes at the top of this page. And/or the poet is speaking to David, perhaps on behalf of David, as the Earth-god. Which still makes it metaphorical, not literal!
SHE'OL: See the link.
139:9 ESA CHANPHEY SHACHAR ESHKENAH BE ACHARIT YAM
אֶשָּׂא כַנְפֵי שָׁחַר אֶשְׁכְּנָה בְּאַחֲרִית יָם
KJ: If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea;
BN: If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea...
I wonder what bird he is thinking of, specifically. In the evening it is always the crow, because the crow is the OREV, and the evening is the EREV (see my notes at Joshua 8:2 and Judges 16:9) - though in the No'ach tale, when his sun-ark comes to set (LANU'ACH) on Mount Ararat, it is a dove (Yonah) first, and the OREV that follows is usually mistranslated as "raven" rather than "crow". Ayelet ha Shachar is a deer, not a bird, so it can't be that. An albatross, perhaps, from the second part of the verse? If it did, it would bring the Yonah tale into the story of Moby-Dick by way of the Ancient Mariner - and all three are variants on the same myth, so why not? See this link for more on that little oddity, and then go back and look again at the fish-and-water elements in the gospels, all the way from Oannes the Baptist to the ichthys served up to the five thousand by the "fishers of men" at Tabgha. This is the dawning of the age of Pisces!
139:10 GAM SHAM YADCHA TANCHENI VE TO'CHAZENI YEMIYNECHA
גַּם שָׁם יָדְךָ תַנְחֵנִי וְתֹאחֲזֵנִי יְמִינֶךָ
KJ: Even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me.
BN: Even there your hand would lead me, and your right hand would hold me.
"I, Human, for all my intelligence, for all my sense of myself as an autonomous, self-defining, unique individual, am in fact simply the consequence of Nature and Nurture, locked inside my Zeitgeist, genetically controlled." 19th and 20th century CE Existentialist and Nihilist philosophy, expressed in the language of the 9th and 10th century BCE (or probably the 3rd or 4th century BCE, as I shall explain in a moment).
139:11 VA OMAR ACH CHOSHECH YESHUPHENI VE LAILAH OR BA ADENI
וָאֹמַר אַךְ חֹשֶׁךְ יְשׁוּפֵנִי וְלַיְלָה אוֹר בַּעֲדֵנִי
KJ: If I say, Surely the darkness shall cover me; even the night shall be light about me.
BN: And if I say: "Surely the darkness shall envelop me, and the light about me shall be night"...
"See the darkness is leaking from the cracks. I cannot contain it. I cannot contain my life."
Sylvia Plath, Winter Trees.
139:12 GAM CHOSHECH LO YACHSHICH MIMECHA VE LAILAH KA YOM YA'IR KA CHASHEYCHAH KA ORAH
KJ: Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee; but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to thee.
BN: "... even the darkness is not too dark for you, {N} so the night shines like the day; as darkness, so light.
As darkness, so light; as light, so darkness. The Christian world divides into the separate realms of Good versus Evil, Light versus Darkness, Joy versus Grief et cetera; but the Jewish world ebbs and flows, seeking an Eliotesque "still point", but also aware that there is none. So the Yetser ha Tov ebbs towards the Yetser ha Ra, and back again; so depression becomes happiness and winter spring, as happiness plunges once more into deep depression, and that is now snow, not cherry blossom, hanging from the branches of the trees. No coincidence that this is expressed in the twelfth verse of a Jewish poem, or that, on this occasion, that 12th verse should also "just happen" to be the middle verse, the point of balance of the whole piece.
And, for the same reasons, it is also dateable. In the epoch of King David, when multiple gods and goddesses ruled the Cosmos, the sun-god ruled by day and the moon-goddess by night, as per Genesis 1:16, and the sun-god had absolutely no power in the darkness (ask Shimshon!), just as the moon-goddess had none when it became light (ask Delilah!). The philosophical ideas expressed in the Psalm can therefore only belong to a much later period of monotheism, commencing not earlier than the 6th century BCE; and, given the sophistication of the metaphysical ruminations, probably this is a further redaction after the Ezraic, belonging to the Hasmonean or even the early Pharisaic era.
139:13 KI ATAH KANIYTA CHILYOTAI TESUKENI BE VETEN IMI
KJ: For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb.
BN: For you have taken hold of my reins; you made me what I am in my mother's womb.
Again, Nature versus Nurture, genetic determination versus the apparent horoscopal allignments of fate and destiny. Nothing of this kind anywhere in human history until the epoch of the Hellenic scientists, circa 4th century BCE.
139:14 ODECHA AL KI NORA'OT NIPHLEYTI NIPHLA'IM MA'ASEYCHA VE NAPHSHI YODA'AT ME'OD
KJ: I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.
BN: So I will give thanks to you, for I am awesomely, quite wonderfully made; {N} all your works are wonderful, and that is something that my soul knows very well.
ODECHA: The rebellion petered out before the stone was even found, the stone that, for just a moment, seemed being made ready to throw against the forehead of the sky. Passive acceptance of the automaton-status of humanity. I, Robot, carrying out the commands that have been programmed by divine HTML. Very sad.
NIPHLA'IM: I am sure they have always been NIPHLA'OT until now; what is the difference, besides one being masculine and the other feminine? And does this insistence upon "intelligent design" include the hare-lips and the dwarfism and the spasticated muscles and the autism, let alone the tsunamis, the avalanches, the earthquakes and the volcanoes?
139:12 GAM CHOSHECH LO YACHSHICH MIMECHA VE LAILAH KA YOM YA'IR KA CHASHEYCHAH KA ORAH
גַּם חֹשֶׁךְ לֹא יַחְשִׁיךְ מִמֶּךָ וְלַיְלָה כַּיּוֹם יָאִיר כַּחֲשֵׁיכָה כָּאוֹרָה
KJ: Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee; but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to thee.
BN: "... even the darkness is not too dark for you, {N} so the night shines like the day; as darkness, so light.
As darkness, so light; as light, so darkness. The Christian world divides into the separate realms of Good versus Evil, Light versus Darkness, Joy versus Grief et cetera; but the Jewish world ebbs and flows, seeking an Eliotesque "still point", but also aware that there is none. So the Yetser ha Tov ebbs towards the Yetser ha Ra, and back again; so depression becomes happiness and winter spring, as happiness plunges once more into deep depression, and that is now snow, not cherry blossom, hanging from the branches of the trees. No coincidence that this is expressed in the twelfth verse of a Jewish poem, or that, on this occasion, that 12th verse should also "just happen" to be the middle verse, the point of balance of the whole piece.
And, for the same reasons, it is also dateable. In the epoch of King David, when multiple gods and goddesses ruled the Cosmos, the sun-god ruled by day and the moon-goddess by night, as per Genesis 1:16, and the sun-god had absolutely no power in the darkness (ask Shimshon!), just as the moon-goddess had none when it became light (ask Delilah!). The philosophical ideas expressed in the Psalm can therefore only belong to a much later period of monotheism, commencing not earlier than the 6th century BCE; and, given the sophistication of the metaphysical ruminations, probably this is a further redaction after the Ezraic, belonging to the Hasmonean or even the early Pharisaic era.
First Psalm
Let there be a God as large as a sunlamp to laugh his heat at you.
Let there be an earth with a form like a jigsaw and let it fit for all of ye.
Let there be the darkness of a darkroom out of the deep. A worm room.
Let there be a God who sees light at the end of a long thin pipe and lets it in.
Let God divide them in half.
Let God share his Hoodsie.
Let the waters divide so that God may wash his face in first light.
Let there be pin holes in the sky in which God puts his little finger.
Let the stars be a heaven of jelly rolls and babies laughing.
Let light be called Day so that men may grow corn or take busses.
Let there be on the second day dry land so that all men may dry their toes with Cannon towels.
Let God call this earth and feel the grasses rise up like angel hair.
Let there be bananas, cucumbers, prunes, mangoes, beans, rice and candy canes.
Let them seed and reseed.
Let there be seasons so that we may learn the architecture of the sky with eagles, finches, flickers, seagulls.
Let there be seasons so that we may put on twelve coats and shovel snow or take off our skins and bathe in the Carribean.
Let there be seasons so the sky dogs will jump across the sun in December.
Let there be seasons so that the eel may come out of her green cave.
Let there be seasons so that the raccoon may raise his blood level.
Let there be seasons so that the wind may be hoisted for an orange leaf.
Let there be seasons so that the rain will bury many ships.
Let there be seasons so that the miracles will fill our drinking glass with runny gold.
Let there be seasons so that our tongues will be rich in asparagus and limes.
Let there be seasons so that fires will not forsake us and turn to metal.
Let there be seasons so that a man may close his palm on a woman's breast and bring forth a sweet nipple, a starberry.
Let there be a heaven so that man may outlive his grasses.
Anne Sexton, "O Ye Tongues" (click here for the other 9 Psalms)
139:13 KI ATAH KANIYTA CHILYOTAI TESUKENI BE VETEN IMI
כִּי אַתָּה קָנִיתָ כִלְיֹתָי תְּסֻכֵּנִי בְּבֶטֶן אִמִּי
KJ: For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb.
BN: For you have taken hold of my reins; you made me what I am in my mother's womb.
Again, Nature versus Nurture, genetic determination versus the apparent horoscopal allignments of fate and destiny. Nothing of this kind anywhere in human history until the epoch of the Hellenic scientists, circa 4th century BCE.
139:14 ODECHA AL KI NORA'OT NIPHLEYTI NIPHLA'IM MA'ASEYCHA VE NAPHSHI YODA'AT ME'OD
אוֹדְךָ עַל כִּי נוֹרָאוֹת נִפְלֵיתִי נִפְלָאִים מַעֲשֶׂיךָ וְנַפְשִׁי יֹדַעַת מְאֹד
KJ: I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.
BN: So I will give thanks to you, for I am awesomely, quite wonderfully made; {N} all your works are wonderful, and that is something that my soul knows very well.
ODECHA: The rebellion petered out before the stone was even found, the stone that, for just a moment, seemed being made ready to throw against the forehead of the sky. Passive acceptance of the automaton-status of humanity. I, Robot, carrying out the commands that have been programmed by divine HTML. Very sad.
NIPHLA'IM: I am sure they have always been NIPHLA'OT until now; what is the difference, besides one being masculine and the other feminine? And does this insistence upon "intelligent design" include the hare-lips and the dwarfism and the spasticated muscles and the autism, let alone the tsunamis, the avalanches, the earthquakes and the volcanoes?
YODA'AT: And sadly this is the verb selected, where we might have hoped for HIKARTI (connaitre), or even better HEVANTI (understood: the achievement of DA'AT). But it is mere information, good enough to get the bonus question on University Challenge, or to please a League Table inspector at your school, but not likely to Bloom in the garden where the Tree of Real Knowledge grows.
139:15 LO NICH'CHAD ATSMI MIMECHA ASHER USEYTI VA SETER RUKAMTI BE TACHTIYOT ARETS
KJ: My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.
BN: The nature of my being was not concealed from you, {N} when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of Earth.
ATSMI: My "Selfness" would be the most precisely accurate translation, in modern terms. But does that convey existence first, or essence first?
TACHTIYOT ARETS: This is where translators have to pay more careful attention. Subtle nuances of differences in meaning. There is no definite article in the Yehudit, so there shouldn't really be one in the English, though it is hard to make this make sense without one.
Beyond that I am unable to offer commentary on this verse, which I simply admit that I do not have the wisdom (DA'AT) or the insight (HAVANAH) to understand. I think, as I did earlier, that this is David as Earth-god, but it does sound rather more like a Golem, or some Pharisaic Midrash that tells more about the making of Adam, the first man, than was elaborated in Genesis 2:7.
139:16 GALMI RA'U EYNEYCHA VE AL SIPHRECHA KULAM YIKATEVU YAMIM YUTSARU VE LO ECHAD BA HEM
KJ: Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.
BN: Your eyes saw my unformed substance, and on your scroll everything was written {N} even the number of my days were determined, though not a single one had yet come into being.
GALMI: Did I just see the word GALMI? See my throwaway remark at verse 15. And then see my September 17 page in "The Book of Days" - click here. Though for our verse, GALMI is simply the embryo, not the full Golem.
SIPHRECHA: Which book is this? The Book of Life? Have "Fate and Destiny" superceded Bloom's Taxonomy in the programmed life of I-Robot?
YUTSARU: One of several very different verbs used in Genesis 1-3 for the very different forms that Creation actually took. And this is the one used for forming Adam, as I suggested at verse 15. Cf Genesis 2:7. Interesting that the same root sprouts into NOTSRIM, which are branches, and also the name by which the earliest Christians were known; perhaps it had simply come to be an alternative for Ben Adam, as a way of saying "human beings".
139:17 VE LI MAH YAKRU RE'EYCHA EL MEH ATSMU RA'SHEYHEM
KJ: How precious also are thy thoughts unto me, O God! how great is the sum of them!
BN: And to what esteem do you aspire? To what does the sum of your creations add up?
EL: Is that a deity or a preposition? LI MAH in the first half; EL MEH in the second. Clearly they echo and parallel.
לֹא נִכְחַד עָצְמִי מִמֶּךָּ אֲשֶׁר עֻשֵּׂיתִי בַסֵּתֶר רֻקַּמְתִּי בְּתַחְתִּיּוֹת אָרֶץ
KJ: My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.
BN: The nature of my being was not concealed from you, {N} when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of Earth.
ATSMI: My "Selfness" would be the most precisely accurate translation, in modern terms. But does that convey existence first, or essence first?
TACHTIYOT ARETS: This is where translators have to pay more careful attention. Subtle nuances of differences in meaning. There is no definite article in the Yehudit, so there shouldn't really be one in the English, though it is hard to make this make sense without one.
Beyond that I am unable to offer commentary on this verse, which I simply admit that I do not have the wisdom (DA'AT) or the insight (HAVANAH) to understand. I think, as I did earlier, that this is David as Earth-god, but it does sound rather more like a Golem, or some Pharisaic Midrash that tells more about the making of Adam, the first man, than was elaborated in Genesis 2:7.
139:16 GALMI RA'U EYNEYCHA VE AL SIPHRECHA KULAM YIKATEVU YAMIM YUTSARU VE LO ECHAD BA HEM
גָּלְמִי רָאוּ עֵינֶיךָ וְעַל סִפְרְךָ כֻּלָּם יִכָּתֵבוּ יָמִים יֻצָּרוּ וְלֹא אֶחָד בָּהֶם
KJ: Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.
BN: Your eyes saw my unformed substance, and on your scroll everything was written {N} even the number of my days were determined, though not a single one had yet come into being.
GALMI: Did I just see the word GALMI? See my throwaway remark at verse 15. And then see my September 17 page in "The Book of Days" - click here. Though for our verse, GALMI is simply the embryo, not the full Golem.
SIPHRECHA: Which book is this? The Book of Life? Have "Fate and Destiny" superceded Bloom's Taxonomy in the programmed life of I-Robot?
YUTSARU: One of several very different verbs used in Genesis 1-3 for the very different forms that Creation actually took. And this is the one used for forming Adam, as I suggested at verse 15. Cf Genesis 2:7. Interesting that the same root sprouts into NOTSRIM, which are branches, and also the name by which the earliest Christians were known; perhaps it had simply come to be an alternative for Ben Adam, as a way of saying "human beings".
139:17 VE LI MAH YAKRU RE'EYCHA EL MEH ATSMU RA'SHEYHEM
וְלִי מַה יָּקְרוּ רֵעֶיךָ אֵל מֶה עָצְמוּ רָאשֵׁיהֶם
KJ: How precious also are thy thoughts unto me, O God! how great is the sum of them!
BN: And to what esteem do you aspire? To what does the sum of your creations add up?
EL: Is that a deity or a preposition? LI MAH in the first half; EL MEH in the second. Clearly they echo and parallel.
YAKRU: The root is YAKIR, which is rather more about the "appraising" than the determining of how "precious" the appraised item might be. And yes, the root of LEHAKIR, so we are back in Bloom's taxonomy.
RE'EYCHA: Likewise echoing and paralleling, with RA'SHEYHEM. A Re'a is a "purpose" or an "aim". RA'SHEYHEM come from ROSH, which a head or a source, but more significantly here the opening word of the Creation tale: Be RE'SHIT.
139:18 ESPEREM ME CHOL YIRBUN HEKIYTSOTI VE ODI IMACH
אֶסְפְּרֵם מֵחוֹל יִרְבּוּן הֱקִיצֹתִי וְעוֹדִי עִמָּךְ
KJ: If I should count them, they are more in number than the sand: when I awake, I am still with thee.
BN: If I were to count them, they would number more than the sand; if I were to wake up, I would still find myself with you.
HEKIYTSOTI: KUTS is indeed "to wake", but homophonously there is also KOTS, a thorn, which generally sprouts alongside the NETSER. I wonder if, by "wake up", he means the leap from I-Robot to I-Human. I do hope he doesn't mean it in the "Cancel" sense of "Woke".
139:19 IM TIKTOL ELOHA RASH'A VE ANSHEY DAMIM SURU MENI
אִם תִּקְטֹל אֱלוֹהַּ רָשָׁע וְאַנְשֵׁי דָמִים סוּרוּ מֶנִּי
KJ: Surely thou wilt slay the wicked, O God: depart from me therefore, ye bloody men.
BN: If only you would destroy the wicked gods, and keep those blood-thirsty men away from me...
TIKTOL: A word that is only known from here, and two occasions in the Book of Iyov (Job), which was not originally a Yisra-Eli text anyway. I wonder how many people, hearing it for the first time and not recognising it, would look for the root, and assume KOTEL? But that would be spelled with a Kaf not a Kuph, and a Tav, not a Tet (כותל)
ELOHA: Double-check that this isn't ELOHAI? And if not, is it another EL question, as in verse 18? The grammar links ELOHA with RASH'A, both singular, whereas the ANSHEY DAMIM are plural; so if this a deity, it has to be the false ones.
RASHA: word-games with RA'SHEYHEM, but also with RE'A, which might have been RA = "wicked" (some of these are only seeable on paper, others only audible in recitation).
RASHA: word-games with RA'SHEYHEM, but also with RE'A, which might have been RA = "wicked" (some of these are only seeable on paper, others only audible in recitation).
MENI: Is that meant to be MIMENI?
139:20 ASHER YOMRUCHA LIMZIMAH NASU LA SHAV AREYCHA
אֲשֶׁר יֹאמְרֻךָ לִמְזִמָּה נָשֻׂא לַשָּׁוְא עָרֶיךָ
KJ: For they speak against thee wickedly, and thine enemies take thy name in vain.
BN: ...who speak [your name] in vain, and regard your cities as worthless.
YOMRUCHA: The word "name" is not actually in the sentence.
LI MEZIMAH: Or LIMZIMAH? Usually I favour the other way around, but variety is the spice of life, and the question remains the same either way.
AREYCHA: The root is definitely IR, is it not?
139:21 HA LO MESAN'EYCHA YHVH ESNA U VITKOMEMEYCHA ETKOTAT
הֲלוֹא מְשַׂנְאֶיךָ יְהוָה אֶשְׂנָא וּבִתְקוֹמְמֶיךָ אֶתְקוֹטָט
KJ: Do not I hate them, O LORD, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee?
BN: Do I not hate them, YHVH, who hate you? And do I not strive with those who rise up against you ?
This begins to become disturbing (see my worried closing note at verse 18). "I have accepted my lack of freedom, my robotic state, my non-autonomy, and have committed myself to submission and servitude (avodah) to the rules of the religion. Anybody who has the same rebellious thoughts that I had earlier, and then takes them forward into a humanistic individualism, refusing to accept their destiny passively, is now an object of my hatred." At least he isn't advocating for them to be beheaded or burned at the stake.
139:22 TACHLIT SIN'AH SENE'TIM LE OYEVIM HAYU LI
תַּכְלִית שִׂנְאָה שְׂנֵאתִים לְאוֹיְבִים הָיוּ לִי
KJ: I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies.
BN: I hate them with utmost hatred; I regard them as my enemies.
SENE'TIM: really wants to be written Sené'tim, but I don't know (savoir) how to do that accent on a capital E, and it isn't quite that strong an é anyway.
139:23 CHAKRENI EL VE DA LEVAVI BECHANENI VE DA SAR'APHAI
חָקְרֵנִי אֵל וְדַע לְבָבִי בְּחָנֵנִי וְדַע שַׂרְעַפָּי
KJ: Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts:
BN: Search me, El, and know my heart; test me, and know my thoughts.
CHAKRENI: Revisiting CHAKARTANI, from verse 1; but there it was YHVH.
EL: For the third time, and this time there is no question from the phrasing that this is EL, the father of the gods. Was this then a much earlier Psalm that was rewritten to update it to the new theology? There was no place for EL in the epoch of the Hasmoneans and the Perushim (Pharisees).
BECHANENI: "test me", as in "give me an examination"; precisely the way the robot-schools operate: "learn by heart what I require you to know: do not taxonomise it: simply accept that it is correct: there will be a test on Thursday to enable you to confirm that you have absorbed the wisdom fully. Our league table position depends on it!"
139:24 U RE'EH IM DERECH OTSEV BI U NECHENI BE DERECH OLAM
KJ: And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting.
BN: And see if any of the paths I follow are false tracks, and lead me on the road to eternity . {P}
OTSEV: Possibly "harmful", though in the context those are synonymous.
BECHANENI: "test me", as in "give me an examination"; precisely the way the robot-schools operate: "learn by heart what I require you to know: do not taxonomise it: simply accept that it is correct: there will be a test on Thursday to enable you to confirm that you have absorbed the wisdom fully. Our league table position depends on it!"
139:24 U RE'EH IM DERECH OTSEV BI U NECHENI BE DERECH OLAM
וּרְאֵה אִם דֶּרֶךְ עֹצֶב בִּי וּנְחֵנִי בְּדֶרֶךְ עוֹלָם
KJ: And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting.
BN: And see if any of the paths I follow are false tracks, and lead me on the road to eternity . {P}
OTSEV: Possibly "harmful", though in the context those are synonymous.
DERECH: I think I have explained this sufficiently above; here, I simply want to point out its repetition.
SurfTheSite
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