Psa 10:2-11 | KD | STEP | The Psalm opens with the plaintive inquiry, why Jahve tarries in the deliverance of His oppressed people. It is not a complaining murmuring at the delay that is expressed by the question, but an ardent desire that God may not delay to act as it becomes His nature and His promise. למּה, which belongs to both members of the sentence, has the accent on the ultima , as e.g., before עזבתּני in , and before הרעתה in , in order that neither of the two gutturals, pointed with a , should be lost to the ear in rapid speaking (vid., on , and Luzzatto on , נחה עליו). For according to the primitive pronunciation (even before the Masoretic) it is to be read: lam h Adonaj ; so that consequently ה and א are coincident. The poet asks why in the present hopeless condition of affairs (on בצּרה vid., on ) Jahve stands in the distance (בּרחוק, only here, instead of מרחוק), as an idle spectator, and why does He cover (תּעלּים with orthophonic Dagesh , in order that it may not be pronounced תּעלים), viz., His eyes, so as not to see the desperate condition of His people, or also His ears ( ) so as not to hear their supplication. For by the insolent treatment of the ungodly the poor burns with fear (Ges., Stier, Hupf.), not vexation (Hengst.). The assault is a πύρωσις, 1Pe 4:12. The verb דּלק which calls to mind דּלּקת, πυρετός, is perhaps chosen with reference to the heat of feeling under oppression, which is the result of the persecution, of the (בּו) דּלק אחריו of the ungodly. There is no harshness in the transition from the singular to the plural, because עני and רשׁע are individualising designations of two different classes of men. The subject to יתּפשׁוּ is the עניּים, and the subject to חשׁבוּ is the רשׁעים. The futures describe what usually takes place. Those who, apart from this, are afflicted are held ensnared in the crafty and malicious devices which the ungodly have contrived and plotted against them, without being able to disentangle themselves. The punctuation, which places Tarcha by זוּ, mistakes the relative and interprets it: “in the plots there, which they have devised.”

‏ Psalms 10:2-11

The Psalm opens with the plaintive inquiry, why Jahve tarries in the deliverance of His oppressed people. It is not a complaining murmuring at the delay that is expressed by the question, but an ardent desire that God may not delay to act as it becomes His nature and His promise. למּה, which belongs to both members of the sentence, has the accent on the ultima, as e.g., before עזבתּני in Psa 22:2, and before הרעתה in Exo 5:22, in order that neither of the two gutturals, pointed with a, should be lost to the ear in rapid speaking (vid., on Psa 3:8, and Luzzatto on Isa 11:2, נחה עליו). ^{▼▼According to the Masora למּה without Dag. is always Milra with the single exception of Job 7:20, and ימּה with Dag. is Milel; but, when the following closely connected word begins with one of the letters אהע it becomes Milra, with five exceptions, viz., Psa 49:6; 1Sa 28:15; 2Sa 14:31 (three instances in which the guttural of the second word has the vowel i), and 2Sa 2:22, and Jer 15:18. In the Babylonian system of pointing, למה is always written without Dag. and with the accent on the penultimate, vid., Pinsker, Einleitung in das Babylonish-hebräishce Punktationssystem, S. 182-184.}

For according to the primitive pronunciation (even before the Masoretic) it is to be read: lam h Adonaj; so that consequently ה and א are coincident. The poet asks why in the present hopeless condition of affairs (on בצּרה vid., on Psa 9:10) Jahve stands in the distance (בּרחוק, only here, instead of מרחוק), as an idle spectator, and why does He cover (תּעלּים with orthophonic Dagesh, in order that it may not be pronounced תּעלים), viz., His eyes, so as not to see the desperate condition of His people, or also His ears (Lam 3:56) so as not to hear their supplication. For by the insolent treatment of the ungodly the poor burns with fear (Ges., Stier, Hupf.), not vexation (Hengst.). The assault is a πύρωσις, 1Pe 4:12. The verb דּלק which calls to mind דּלּקת, πυρετός, is perhaps chosen with reference to the heat of feeling under oppression, which is the result of the persecution, of the (בּו) דּלק אחריו of the ungodly. There is no harshness in the transition from the singular to the plural, because עני and רשׁע are individualising designations of two different classes of men. The subject to יתּפשׁוּ is the עניּים, and the subject to חשׁבוּ is the רשׁעים. The futures describe what usually takes place. Those who, apart from this, are afflicted are held ensnared in the crafty and malicious devices which the ungodly have contrived and plotted against them, without being able to disentangle themselves. The punctuation, which places Tarcha by זוּ, mistakes the relative and interprets it: “in the plots there, which they have devised.” Psa 10:3-4

The prominent features of the situation are supported by a detailed description. The praett. express those features of their character that have become a matter of actual experience. הלּל, to praise aloud, generally with the accus., is here used with על of the thing which calls forth praise. Far from hiding the shameful desire or passion (Psa 112:10) of his soul, he makes it an object and ground of high and sounding praise, imagining himself to be above all restraint human or divine. Hupfeld translates wrongly: “and he blesses the plunderer, he blasphemes Jahve.” But the רשׁע who persecutes the godly, is himself a בּצע a covetous or rapacious person; for such is the designation (elsewhere with בּצע Pro 1:19, or רע בּצע Hab 2:9) not merely of one who “cuts off” (Arab. bḍ‛), i.e., obtains unjust gain, by trading, but also by plunder, πλεονέκτης. The verb בּרך (here in connection with Mugrash, as in Num 23:20 with Tiphcha בּרך) never directly signifies maledicere in biblical Hebrew as it does in the alter Talmudic (whence בּרכּת השּׁם blasphemy, B. Sanhedrin 56a, and frequently), but to take leave of any one with a benediction, and then to bid farewell, to dismiss, to decline and abandon generally, Job 1:5, and frequently (cf. the word remercier, abdanken; and the phrase “das Zeitliche segnen” = to depart this life). The declaration without a conjunction is climactic, like Isa 1:4; Amo 4:5; Jer 15:7. נאץ, properly to prick, sting, is sued of utter rejection by word and deed. ^{▼▼Pasek stands between נאץ and יהוה, because to blaspheme God is a terrible thought and not to be spoken of without hesitancy, cf. the Pasek in Psa 74:18; Psa 89:52; Isa 37:24 (2Ki 19:23).}

In Psa 10:4, “the evil-doer according to his haughtiness” (cf. Pro 16:18) is nom. absol., and בּל־ידרשׁ אין אלהים (contrary to the accentuation) is virtually the predicate to כּל־מזמּותיו. This word, which denotes the intrigues of the ungodly, in Psa 10:2, has in this verse, the general meaning: thoughts (from זמם, Arab. zmm, to join, combine), but not without being easily associated with the secondary idea of that which is subtly devised. The whole texture of his thoughts is, i.e., proceeds from and tends towards the thought, that he (viz., Jahve, whom he does not like to name) will punish with nothing (בּל the strongest form of subjective negation), that in fact there is no God at all. This second follows from the first; for to deny the existence of a living, acting, all-punishing (in one word: a personal) God, is equivalent to denying the existence of any real and true God whatever (Ewald). Psa 10:5

This strophe, consisting of only three lines, describes his happiness which he allows nothing to disturb. The signification: to be lasting (prop. stiff, strong) is secured to the verb חיל (whence חיל) by Job 20:21. He takes whatever ways he chooses, they always lead to the desired end; he stands fast, he neither stumbles nor goes astray, cf. Jer 12:1. The Chethîb דרכו (דּרכו) has no other meaning than that give to it by the Kerî (cf. Psa 24:6; Psa 58:8). Whatever might cast a cloud over his happiness does not trouble him: neither the judgments of God, which are removed high as the heavens out of his sight, and consequently do not disturb his conscience (cf. Psa 28:5, Isa 5:12; and the opposite, Psa 18:23), nor his adversaries whom he bloweth upon contemptuously. מרום is the predicate: altissime remota. And הפיח בּ, to breathe upon, does not in any case signify: actually to blow away or down (to express which נשׁב or נשׁף would be used), but either to “snub,” or, what is more appropriate to Psa 10:5, to blow upon them disdainfully, to puff at them, like הפּיח in Mal 1:13, and flare rosas (to despise the roses) in Prudentius. The meaning is not that he drives his enemies away without much difficulty, but that by his proud and haughty bearing he gives them to understand how little they interfere with him. Psa 10:6-7

Then in his boundless carnal security he gives free course to his wicked tongue. That which the believer can say by reason of his fellowship with God, בּל־אמּוט (Psa 30:7; Psa 16:8), is said by him in godless self-confidence. He looks upon himself in age after age, i.e., in the endless future, as אשׁר לא ברע, i.e., as one who (אשׁר as in Isa 8:20) will never be in evil case (ברע as in Exo 5:19; 2Sa 16:8). It might perhaps also be interpreted according to Zec 8:20, Zec 8:23 (vid., Köhler, in loc.): in all time to come (it will come to pass) that I am not in misfortune. But then the personal pronoun (אני or הוּא) ought not be omitted; whereas with our interpretation it is supplied from אמּוט, and there is no need to supply anything if the clause is taken as an apposition: in all time to come he who.... In connection with such unbounded self-confidence his mouth is full of אלה, cursing, execratio (not perjury, perjurium, a meaning the word never has), מרמות, deceit and craft of every kind, and תּך, oppression, violence. And that which he has under his tongue, and consequently always in readiness for being put forth (Psa 140:4, cf. Psa 66:17), is trouble for others, and in itself matured wickedness. Paul has made use of this Psa 10:7 in his contemplative description of the corruptness of mankind, Rom 3:14. Psa 10:8

The ungodly is described as a lier in wait; and one is reminded by it of such a state of anarchy, as that described in Hos 6:9 for instance. The picture fixes upon one simple feature in which the meanness of the ungodly culminates; and it is possible that it is intended to be taken as emblematical rather than literally. חצר (from חצר to surround, cf. Arab. hdr , hṣr, and especially hdr) is a farm premises walled in (Arab. hadar , hadâr , hadâra), then losing the special characteristic of being walled round it comes to mean generally a settled abode (with a house of clay or stone) in opposition to a roaming life in tents (cf. Lev 25:31; Gen 25:16). In such a place where men are more sure of falling into his hands than in the open plain, he lies in wait (ישׁב, like Arab. q‛d lh , subsedit = insidiatus est ei), murders unobserved him who had never provoked his vengeance, and his eyes להלכה יצפּנוּ. צפה to spie, Psa 37:32, might have been used instead of צפן; but צפן also obtains the meaning, to lie in ambush (Psa 56:7; Pro 1:11, Pro 1:18) from the primary notion of restraining one’s self (Arab. ḍfn , fut. i. in Beduin Arabic: to keep still, to be immoveably lost in thought, vid., on Job 24:1), which takes a transitive turn in צפן “to conceal.” חלכה, the dative of the object, is pointed just as though it came from חיל: Thy host, i.e., Thy church, O Jahve. The pausal form accordingly is חלכה with Segol, in Psa 10:14, not with Ṣere as in incorrect editions. And the appeal against this interpretation, which is found in the plur. חלכאים Psa 10:10, is set aside by the fact that this plural is taken as a double word: host (חל = חיל = חיל as in Oba 1:20) of the troubled ones (כּאים, not as Ben-Labrat supposes, for נכאים, but from כּאה weary, and mellow and decayed), as the Kerî (which is followed by the Syriac version) and the Masora direct, and accordingly it is pointed חלכּאים with Ṣere. The punctuation therefore sets aside a word which was unintelligible to it, and cannot be binding on us. There is a verb הלך, which, it is true, does not occur in the Old Testament, but in the Arabic, from the root Arab. ḥk , firmus fuit, firmum fecit (whence also Arab. ḥkl, intrans. to be firm, fermé, i.e., closed), it gains the signification in reference to colour: to be dark (cognate with חכל, whence חכלילי) and is also transferred to the gloom and blackness of misfortune. ^{▼▼Cf. Samachschari’s Golden Necklaces, Proverb 67, which Fleischer translates: “Which is blacker: the plumage of the raven, which is black as coal, or thy life, O stranger among strangers?” The word “blacker” is here expressed by Arab. ahlaku, just as the verb Arab. halika, with its infinitives halak or hulkat and its derivatives is applied to sorrow and misery.}

From this an abstract is formed חלך or חלך (like חפשׁ): blackness, misfortune, or also of a defective development of the senses: imbecility; and from this an adjective חלכּה = חלכּי, or also (cf. חפשׁי, עלפּה Eze 31:15 = one in a condition of languishing, עלף) חלכּה = חלכּי, plur. חלכּאים, after the form דּוּדאים, from דּוּדי, Ew. §189, g. Psa 10:9

The picture of the רשׁע, who is become as it were a beast of prey, is now worked out further. The lustrum of the lion is called סך Jer 25:38, or סכּה Job 38:40 : a thicket, from סכך, which means both to interweave and to plait over = to cover (without any connection with שׂך a thorn, Arab. shôk, a thistle). The figure of the lion is reversed in the second line, the עני himself being compared to the beast of prey and the רשׁע to a hunter who drives him into the pit-fall and when he has fallen in hastens to drag him away (משׁך, as in Psa 28:3; Job 24:22) in, or by means of (Hos 11:4, Job 41:1), his net, in which he has become entangled. Psa 10:10-11

The comparison to the lion is still in force here and the description recurs to its commencement in the second strophe, by tracing back the persecution of the ungodly to its final cause. Instead of the Chethîb ודכה (ודכה perf. consec.), the Kerî reads ידכּה more in accordance with the Hebrew use of the tenses. Job 38:40 is the rule for the interpretation. The two futures depict the settled and familiar lying in wait of the plunderer. True, the Kal דּכה in the signification “to crouch down” finds no support elsewhere; but the Arab. dakka to make even (cf. Arab. rṣd , firmiter inhaesit loco, of the crouching down of beasts of prey, of hunters, and of foes) and the Arab. dagga, compared by Hitzig, to move stealthily along, to creep, and dugjeh a hunter’s hiding-place exhibit synonymous significations. The ταπεινώσει αὐτὸν of the lxx is not far out of the way. And one can still discern in it the assumption that the text is to be read ישׁח ודכה: and crushed he sinks (Aquila: ὁ δὲ λασθεὶς καμφθήσεται); but even דּכה is not found elsewhere, and if the poet meant that, why could he not have written דּכה? (cf. moreover Jdg 5:27). If דּכה is taken in the sense of a position in which one is the least likely to be seen, then the first two verbs refer to the sculker, but the third according to the usual schema (as e.g., Psa 124:5) is the predicate to חלכּאים (חלכּאים) going before it. Crouching down as low as possible he lies on the watch, and the feeble and defenceless fall into his strong ones, עצוּמיו, i.e., claws. Thus the ungodly slays the righteous, thinking within himself: God has forgotten, He has hidden His face, i.e., He does not concern Himself about these poor creatures and does not wish to know anything about them (the denial of the truth expressed in Psa 9:13, Psa 9:19); He has in fact never been one who sees, and never will be. These two thoughts are blended; עב with the perf. as in Job 21:3, and the addition of לנצח (cf. Psa 94:7) denies the possibility of God seeing now any more than formerly, as being an absolute absurdity. The thought of a personal God would disturb the ungodly in his doings, he therefore prefers to deny His existence, and thinks: there is only fate and fate is blind, only an absolute and it has no eyes, only a notion and that cannot interfere in the affairs of men.