Psa 120:3 | KD | STEP | According to the pointing ויּענני, the poet appears to base his present petition, which from onwards is the substance of the whole Psalm, upon the fact of a previous answering of his prayers. For the petition in manifestly arises out of his deplorable situation, which is described in Psa 120:5. Nevertheless there are also other instances in which ויענני might have been expected, where the pointing is ויּענני ( ; ), so that consequently ויּענני may, without any prejudice to the pointing, be taken as a believing expression of the result (cf. the future of the consequence in ) of the present cry for help. צרתה, according to the original signification, is a form of the definition of a state or condition, as in ; 44:27; , , Hos 8:7, and בּצּרתה לּי = בּצּר־לּי, , is based upon the customary expression צר לּי. In follows the petition which the poet sends up to Jahve in the certainty of being answered. רמיּה beside לשׁון, although there is no masc . רמי (cf. however the Aramaic רמּי, רמּאי), is taken as an adjective after the form טריּה, עניּה, which it is also perhaps in Mic 6:12. The parallelism would make לשׁון natural, like לשׁון מרמה in ; the pointing, which nevertheless disregarded this, will therefore rest upon tradition. The apostrophe in is addressed to the crafty tongue. לשׁון is certainly feminine as a rule; but whilst the tongue as such is feminine, the לשׁון רמיה of the address, as in , refers to him who has such a kind of tongue (cf. Hitzig on ), and thereby the לך is justified; whereas the rendering, “what does it bring to thee, and what does it profit thee?” or, “of what use to thee and what advancement to thee is the crafty tongue?” is indeed possible so far as concerns the syntax (Ges. §147, e ), but is unlikely as being ambiguous and confusing in expression. It is also to be inferred from the correspondence between מה־יּתּן לך וּמה־יּסיף לך and the formula of an oath כּה יעשׂה־לּך אלהים לכה יוסיף, ; ; ; ; Rth 1:17, that God is to be thought of as the subject of יתן and יסיף: “what will,” or rather, in accordance with the otherwise precative use of the formula and with the petition that here precedes: “what shall He (is He to) give to thee (נתן as in Hos 9:14), and what shall He add to thee, thou crafty tongue?” The reciprocal relation of to מה־יתן, and of. with the superadding עם to מה־יסיף, shows that is not now a characterizing of the tongue that continues the apostrophe to it, as Ewald supposes. Consequently gives the answer to with the twofold punishment which Jahve will cause the false tongue to feel. The question which the poet, sure of the answering of his cry for help, puts to the false tongue is designed to let the person addressed hear by a flight of sarcasm what he has to expect. The evil tongue is a sharp sword ( ), a pointed arrow ( ), and it is like a fire kindled of hell (Jam 3:6). The punishment, too, corresponds to this its nature and conduct ( ). The “mighty one” (lxx δυνατός) is God Himself, as it is observed in B. Erachin 15 b with a reference to : “There is none mighty by the Holy One, blessed is He.” He requites the evil tongue like with like. Arrows and coals ( ) appear also in other instances among His means of punishment. It, which shot piercing arrows, is pierced by the sharpened arrows of an irresistibly mighty One; it, which set its neighbour in a fever of anguish, must endure the lasting, sure, and torturingly consuming heat of broom-coals. The lxx renders it in a general sense, σὺν τοῖς ἄνθραξι τοῖς ἐρημικοῖς; Aquila, following Jewish tradition, ἀρκευθίναις; but רתם, Arabic ratam , ratem , is the broom-shrub (e.g., uncommonly frequent in the Belkâ ).

‏ Psalms 120:3

According to the pointing ויּענני, the poet appears to base his present petition, which from Psa 120:2 onwards is the substance of the whole Psalm, upon the fact of a previous answering of his prayers. For the petition in Psa 120:2 manifestly arises out of his deplorable situation, which is described in Psa 120:5. Nevertheless there are also other instances in which ויענני might have been expected, where the pointing is ויּענני (Psa 3:5; Jon 2:3), so that consequently ויּענני may, without any prejudice to the pointing, be taken as a believing expression of the result (cf. the future of the consequence in Job 9:16) of the present cry for help. צרתה, according to the original signification, is a form of the definition of a state or condition, as in Psa 3:3; 44:27; Psa 63:8, Jon 2:10, Hos 8:7, and בּצּרתה לּי = בּצּר־לּי, Psa 18:7, is based upon the customary expression צר לּי. In Psa 120:2 follows the petition which the poet sends up to Jahve in the certainty of being answered. רמיּה beside לשׁון, although there is no masc. רמי (cf. however the Aramaic רמּי, רמּאי), is taken as an adjective after the form טריּה, עניּה, which it is also perhaps in Mic 6:12. The parallelism would make לשׁון natural, like לשׁון מרמה in Psa 52:6; the pointing, which nevertheless disregarded this, will therefore rest upon tradition. The apostrophe in Psa 120:3 is addressed to the crafty tongue. לשׁון is certainly feminine as a rule; but whilst the tongue as such is feminine, the לשׁון רמיה of the address, as in Psa 52:6, refers to him who has such a kind of tongue (cf. Hitzig on Pro 12:27), and thereby the לך is justified; whereas the rendering, “what does it bring to thee, and what does it profit thee?” or, “of what use to thee and what advancement to thee is the crafty tongue?” is indeed possible so far as concerns the syntax (Ges. §147, e), but is unlikely as being ambiguous and confusing in expression. It is also to be inferred from the correspondence between מה־יּתּן לך וּמה־יּסיף לך and the formula of an oath כּה יעשׂה־לּך אלהים לכה יוסיף, 1Sa 3:17; 1Sa 20:13; 1Sa 25:22; 2Sa 3:35; Rth 1:17, that God is to be thought of as the subject of יתן and יסיף: “what will,” or rather, in accordance with the otherwise precative use of the formula and with the petition that here precedes: “what shall He (is He to) give to thee (נתן as in Hos 9:14), and what shall He add to thee, thou crafty tongue?” The reciprocal relation of Psa 120:4 to מה־יתן, and of. Psa 120:4 with the superadding עם to מה־יסיף, shows that Psa 120:4 is not now a characterizing of the tongue that continues the apostrophe to it, as Ewald supposes. Consequently Psa 120:4 gives the answer to Psa 120:3 with the twofold punishment which Jahve will cause the false tongue to feel. The question which the poet, sure of the answering of his cry for help, puts to the false tongue is designed to let the person addressed hear by a flight of sarcasm what he has to expect. The evil tongue is a sharp sword (Psa 57:5), a pointed arrow (Jer 9:7), and it is like a fire kindled of hell (Jam 3:6). The punishment, too, corresponds to this its nature and conduct (Psa 64:4). The “mighty one” (lxx δυνατός) is God Himself, as it is observed in B. Erachin 15 b with a reference to Isa 42:13 : “There is none mighty by the Holy One, blessed is He.” He requites the evil tongue like with like. Arrows and coals (Psa 140:11) appear also in other instances among His means of punishment. It, which shot piercing arrows, is pierced by the sharpened arrows of an irresistibly mighty One; it, which set its neighbour in a fever of anguish, must endure the lasting, sure, and torturingly consuming heat of broom-coals. The lxx renders it in a general sense, σὺν τοῖς ἄνθραξι τοῖς ἐρημικοῖς; Aquila, following Jewish tradition, ἀρκευθίναις; but רתם, Arabic ratam , ratem , is the broom-shrub (e.g., uncommonly frequent in the Belkâ).