Psa 68:30 | KD | STEP | The poet now looks forth beyond the domain of Israel, and describes the effects of Jahve’s deed of judgment and deliverance in the Gentile world. The language of is addressed to Israel, or rather to its king ( ; ): God, to whom everything is subject, has given Israel עז, victory and power over the world. Out of the consciousness that He alone can preserve Israel upon this height of power upon which it is placed, who has placed it thereon, grows the prayer: establish (עוּזּה with וּ for ŭ , as is frequently the case, and with the accent on the ultima on account of the following Aleph , vid., on ), Elohim, that which Thou hast wrought for us; עזז, roborare , as in ; , lxx δυνάμωσον, Symmachus ἐνίσχυσον. It might also be interpreted: show Thyself powerful (cf. רוּמה, 21:14), Thou who ( ) hast wrought for us (פּעל as in , with ל, like עשׂה ל, ); but in the other way of taking it the prayer attaches itself more sequentially to what precedes, and shows that זוּ can also represent the neuter. Hitzig has a still different rendering: the powerful divine help, which Thou hast given us; but although - instead of -ת in the stat. construct . is Ephraimitish style (vid., on ), yet עוּזּה for עז is an unknown word, and the expression “from Thy temple,” which is manifestly addressed to Elohim, shows that פּעלתּ is not the language of address to the king (according to Hitzig, to Jehoshaphat). The language of prayerful address is retained in Psa 68:30. From the words מהיכלך על ירושׁלם there is nothing to be transported to (Hupfeld); for would thereby become stunted. The words together are the statement of the starting-point of the oblations belonging to יובילוּ: starting from Thy temple, which soars aloft over Jerusalem, may kings bring Thee, who sittest enthroned there in the Holy of holies, tributary gifts (שׁי as in ; ). In this connection (of prayer) it is the expression of the desire that the Temple may become the zenith or cynosure, and Jerusalem the metropolis, of the world. In this passage, where it introduces the seat of religious worship, the taking of מן as expressing the primary cause, “because or on account of Thy Temple” (Ewald), is not to be entertained. In follows a summons, which in this instance is only the form in which the prediction clothes itself. The “beast of the reed” is not the lion, of which sojourn among the reeds is not a characteristic (although it makes its home inter arundineta Mesopotamiae, Ammianus , , and in the thickets of the Jordan, ; ; Zec 11:3). The reed is in itself an emblem of Egypt ( , cf. ), and it is therefore either the crocodile, the usual emblem of Pharaoh and of the power of Egypt ( , cf. Psa 74:13.) that is meant, or even the hippopotamus (Egyptian p - ehe - môut ), which also symbolizes Egypt in (which see), and according to is more appropriately than the crocodile (התנין אשׁר בּיּם, ) called היּת קנה. Egypt appears here as the greatest and most dreaded worldly power. Elohim is to check the haughty ones who exalt themselves over Israel and Israel’s God. אבּירים, strong ones, are bulls ( ) as an emblem of the kings; and עגלי explains itself by the genit. epexeg . עמּים .gexep: together with ( Beth of the accompaniment as in , , and beside the plur. humanus , ) the calves, viz., the peoples, over whom those bulls rule. With the one emblem of Egypt is combined the idea of defiant self-confidence, and with the other the idea of comfortable security (vid., Jer 46:20.). That which is brought prominently forward as the consequence of the menace is moulded in keeping with these emblems. מתרפּס, which has been explained by Flaminius substantially correctly: ut supplex veniat , is intended to be taken as a part. fut . (according to the Arabic grammar, ḥâl muqaddar , lit., a predisposed condition). It thus comprehensively in the singular (like עבר in ) with one stroke depicts thoroughly humbled pride; for רפס (cf. רמס) signifies to stamp, pound, or trample, to knock down, and the Hithpa . either to behave as a trampling one, , or to trample upon one’s self, i.e., to cast one’s self violently upon the ground. Others explain it as conculcandum se praebere ; but such a meaning cannot be shown to exist in the sphere of the Hebrew Hithpael ; moreover this “suffering one’s self to be trampled upon” does not so well suit the words, which require a more active sense, viz., בּרצּי־כסףcep, in which is expressed the idea that the riches which the Gentiles have hitherto employed in the service of God-opposed worldliness, are no offered to the God of Israel by those who both in outward circumstances and in heart are vanquished (cf. ). רץ־כּסף (from רצץ, confringere ) is a piece of uncoined silver, a bar, wedge, or ingot of silver. In בּזּר there is a wide leap from the call גּער to the language of description. This rapid change is also to be found in other instances, and more especially in this dithyrambic Psalm we may readily give up any idea of a change in the pointing, as בּזּר or בּזּר (lxx διασκόρπισον); בּזּר, as it stands, cannot be imperative (Hitzig), for the final vowel essential to the imperat. Piel is wanting. God hath scattered the peoples delighting in war; war is therefore at an end, and the peace of the world is realized. In , the contemplation of the future again takes a different turn: futures follow as the most natural expression of that which is future. The form יאתיוּ, more usually found in pause, here stands pathetically at the beginning, as in Job 12:6. השׁמנּים, compared with the Arabic chšm (whence Arab. chaššm , a nose, a word erroneously denied by Gesenius), would signify the supercilious, contemptuous (cf. Arab. âšammun , nasutus , as an appellation of a proud person who will put up with nothing). On the other hand, compared with Arab. ḥšm , it would mean the fat ones, inasmuch as this verbal stem (root Arab. ḥšš , cf. השׁרת, ), starting from the primary signification “to be pressed together,” also signifies “to be compressed, become compact,” i.e., to regain one’s plumpness, to make flesh and fat, applied, according to the usage of the language, to wasted men and animals. The commonly compared Arab. ḥšı̂m , vir magni famulitii , is not at all natural, - a usage which is brought about by the intransitive signification proper to the verb starting from its radical signification, “to become or be angry, to be zealous about any one or anything,” inasmuch as the nomen verbale Arab. hạšamun signifies in the concrete sense a person, or collectively persons, for whose maintenance, safety, and honour one is keenly solicitous, such as the members of the family, household attendants, servants, neighbours, clients or protègés, guest-friends; also a thing which one ardently seeks, and over the preservation of which one keeps zealous watch (Fleischer). Here there does not appear to be any connecting link whatever in the Arabic which might furnish some hold for the Hebrew; hence it will be more advisable, by comparison of השׁמל and חשׁן, to understand by חשׁמנים, the resplendent, most distinguished ones, perillustres . The dignitaries of Egypt come to give glory to the God of Israel, and Aethiopia, disheartened by fear before Jahve (cf. ), causes his hands to run to Elohim, i.e., hastens to stretch them out. Thus it is interpreted by most expositors. But if it is ידיו, why is it not also יריץ? We reply, the Hebrew style, even in connection with words that stand close beside one another, does not seek to avoid either the enallage generis (e.g., , ), or the enall. numeri (e.g., ). But “to cause the hands to run” is a far-fetched and easily misunderstood figure. We may avoid it, if, with Böttcher and Olshausen, we disregard the accentuation and interpret thus, “Cush - his hands cause to hasten, i.e., bring on in haste ( ; ), to Elohim,” viz., propitiating gifts; תּריץ being the predicate to ידיו, according to Ges. §146, 3.

‏ Psalms 68:30

The poet now looks forth beyond the domain of Israel, and describes the effects of Jahve’s deed of judgment and deliverance in the Gentile world. The language of Psa 68:29 is addressed to Israel, or rather to its king (Psa 86:16; Psa 110:2): God, to whom everything is subject, has given Israel עז, victory and power over the world. Out of the consciousness that He alone can preserve Israel upon this height of power upon which it is placed, who has placed it thereon, grows the prayer: establish (עוּזּה with וּ for ŭ, as is frequently the case, and with the accent on the ultima on account of the following Aleph, vid., on Psa 6:5), Elohim, that which Thou hast wrought for us; עזז, roborare, as in Pro 8:28; Ecc 7:19, lxx δυνάμωσον, Symmachus ἐνίσχυσον. It might also be interpreted: show Thyself powerful (cf. רוּמה, 21:14), Thou who (Isa 42:24) hast wrought for us (פּעל as in Isa 43:13, with ל, like עשׂה ל, Isa 64:3); but in the other way of taking it the prayer attaches itself more sequentially to what precedes, and Psa 62:12 shows that זוּ can also represent the neuter. Hitzig has a still different rendering: the powerful divine help, which Thou hast given us; but although - instead of -ת in the stat. construct. is Ephraimitish style (vid., on Psa 45:5), yet עוּזּה for עז is an unknown word, and the expression “from Thy temple,” which is manifestly addressed to Elohim, shows that פּעלתּ is not the language of address to the king (according to Hitzig, to Jehoshaphat). The language of prayerful address is retained in Psa 68:30. From the words מהיכלך על ירושׁלם there is nothing to be transported to Psa 68:29 (Hupfeld); for Psa 68:30 would thereby become stunted. The words together are the statement of the starting-point of the oblations belonging to יובילוּ: starting from Thy temple, which soars aloft over Jerusalem, may kings bring Thee, who sittest enthroned there in the Holy of holies, tributary gifts (שׁי as in Psa 76:12; Psa 18:7). In this connection (of prayer) it is the expression of the desire that the Temple may become the zenith or cynosure, and Jerusalem the metropolis, of the world. In this passage, where it introduces the seat of religious worship, the taking of מן as expressing the primary cause, “because or on account of Thy Temple” (Ewald), is not to be entertained.

In Psa 68:31 follows a summons, which in this instance is only the form in which the prediction clothes itself. The “beast of the reed” is not the lion, of which sojourn among the reeds is not a characteristic (although it makes its home inter arundineta Mesopotamiae, Ammianus, Psa 18:7, and in the thickets of the Jordan, Jer 49:19; Jer 50:44; Zec 11:3). The reed is in itself an emblem of Egypt (Isa 36:6, cf. Psa 19:6), and it is therefore either the crocodile, the usual emblem of Pharaoh and of the power of Egypt (Eze 29:3, cf. Psa 74:13.) that is meant, or even the hippopotamus (Egyptian p - ehe - môut), which also symbolizes Egypt in Isa 30:6 (which see), and according to Job 40:21 is more appropriately than the crocodile (התנין אשׁר בּיּם, Isa 27:1) called היּת קנה. Egypt appears here as the greatest and most dreaded worldly power. Elohim is to check the haughty ones who exalt themselves over Israel and Israel’s God. אבּירים, strong ones, are bulls (Psa 22:13) as an emblem of the kings; and עגלי explains itself by the genit. epexeg. עמּים .gexep: together with (Beth of the accompaniment as in Psa 68:31, Psa 66:13, and beside the plur. humanus, Jer 41:15) the calves, viz., the peoples, over whom those bulls rule. With the one emblem of Egypt is combined the idea of defiant self-confidence, and with the other the idea of comfortable security (vid., Jer 46:20.). That which is brought prominently forward as the consequence of the menace is moulded in keeping with these emblems. מתרפּס, which has been explained by Flaminius substantially correctly: ut supplex veniat, is intended to be taken as a part. fut. (according to the Arabic grammar, ḥâl muqaddar, lit., a predisposed condition). It thus comprehensively in the singular (like עבר in Psa 8:9) with one stroke depicts thoroughly humbled pride; for רפס (cf. רמס) signifies to stamp, pound, or trample, to knock down, and the Hithpa. either to behave as a trampling one, Pro 6:3, or to trample upon one’s self, i.e., to cast one’s self violently upon the ground. Others explain it as conculcandum se praebere; but such a meaning cannot be shown to exist in the sphere of the Hebrew Hithpael; moreover this “suffering one’s self to be trampled upon” does not so well suit the words, which require a more active sense, viz., בּרצּי־כסףcep, in which is expressed the idea that the riches which the Gentiles have hitherto employed in the service of God-opposed worldliness, are no offered to the God of Israel by those who both in outward circumstances and in heart are vanquished (cf. Isa 60; 9). רץ־כּסף (from רצץ, confringere) is a piece of uncoined silver, a bar, wedge, or ingot of silver. In בּזּר there is a wide leap from the call גּער to the language of description. This rapid change is also to be found in other instances, and more especially in this dithyrambic Psalm we may readily give up any idea of a change in the pointing, as בּזּר or בּזּר (lxx διασκόρπισον); בּזּר, as it stands, cannot be imperative (Hitzig), for the final vowel essential to the imperat. Piel is wanting. God hath scattered the peoples delighting in war; war is therefore at an end, and the peace of the world is realized.

In Psa 68:32, the contemplation of the future again takes a different turn: futures follow as the most natural expression of that which is future. The form יאתיוּ, more usually found in pause, here stands pathetically at the beginning, as in Job 12:6. השׁמנּים, compared with the Arabic chšm (whence Arab. chaššm, a nose, a word erroneously denied by Gesenius), would signify the supercilious, contemptuous (cf. Arab. âšammun , nasutus, as an appellation of a proud person who will put up with nothing). On the other hand, compared with Arab. ḥšm, it would mean the fat ones, inasmuch as this verbal stem (root Arab. ḥšš , cf. השׁרת, 2Sa 22:12), starting from the primary signification “to be pressed together,” also signifies “to be compressed, become compact,” i.e., to regain one’s plumpness, to make flesh and fat, applied, according to the usage of the language, to wasted men and animals. The commonly compared Arab. ḥšı̂m , vir magni famulitii, is not at all natural, - a usage which is brought about by the intransitive signification proper to the verb starting from its radical signification, “to become or be angry, to be zealous about any one or anything,” inasmuch as the nomen verbale Arab. hạšamun signifies in the concrete sense a person, or collectively persons, for whose maintenance, safety, and honour one is keenly solicitous, such as the members of the family, household attendants, servants, neighbours, clients or protègés, guest-friends; also a thing which one ardently seeks, and over the preservation of which one keeps zealous watch (Fleischer). Here there does not appear to be any connecting link whatever in the Arabic which might furnish some hold for the Hebrew; hence it will be more advisable, by comparison of השׁמל and חשׁן, to understand by חשׁמנים, the resplendent, most distinguished ones, perillustres. The dignitaries of Egypt come to give glory to the God of Israel, and Aethiopia, disheartened by fear before Jahve (cf. Hab 3:7), causes his hands to run to Elohim, i.e., hastens to stretch them out. Thus it is interpreted by most expositors. But if it is ידיו, why is it not also יריץ? We reply, the Hebrew style, even in connection with words that stand close beside one another, does not seek to avoid either the enallage generis (e.g., Job 39:3, Job 39:16), or the enall. numeri (e.g., Psa 62:5). But “to cause the hands to run” is a far-fetched and easily misunderstood figure. We may avoid it, if, with Böttcher and Olshausen, we disregard the accentuation and interpret thus, “Cush - his hands cause to hasten, i.e., bring on in haste (1Sa 17:17; 2Ch 35:13), to Elohim,” viz., propitiating gifts; תּריץ being the predicate to ידיו, according to Ges. §146, 3.