Psa 63:1-3 | KD | STEP | Now follows , the morning Psalm of the ancient church with which the singing of the Psalms was always introduced at the Sunday service. This Psalm is still more closely related to than -12. Here, as in , David gives utterance to his longing for the sanctuary; and in both Psalms he speaks of himself as king (vid., Symbolae , p. 56). All the three Psalms, , were composed during the time of Absalom; for we must not allow ourselves to be misled by the inscription, A Psalm, by David, when he was in the wilderness of Judah (also lxx, according to the correct reading and the one preferred by Euthymius, τῆς Ἰουδαίας, not τῆς Ἰδουμαίας), into transferring it, as the old expositors do, to the time of Saul. During that period David could not well call himself “the king” and even during the time of his persecution by Absalom, in his flight, before crossing the Jordan, he tarried one or two days בערבות המדבר, in the steppes of the desert ( , ; ), i.e., of the wilderness of Judah lying nearest to Jerusalem, that dreary waste that extends along the western shore of the Dead Sea. We see clearly from (היּעף בּמּדבּר) and (עיפים, that he there found himself in the condition of a עיף. The inscription, when understood thus, throws light upon the whole Psalm, and verifies itself in the fact that the poet is a king; that he longs for the God on Zion, where he has been so delighted to behold Him, who is there manifest; and that he is persecuted by enemies who have plotted his ruin. The assertion that he is in the wilderness ( ) is therefore no mere rhetorical figure; and when, in , he utters the imprecation over his enemies, “let them become a portion for the jackals,” the influence of the desert upon the moulding of his thoughts is clearly seen in it. We have here before us the Davidic original, or at any rate the counterpart, to the Korahitic pair of Psalms, , -5. It is a song of the most delicate form and deepest spiritual contents; but in part very difficult of exposition. When we have, approximately at least, solved the riddle of one Psalm, the second meets us with new riddles. It is not merely the poetical classic character of the language, and the spiritual depth, but also this half-transparent and half-opaque covering which lends to the Psalms such a powerful and unvarying attractiveness. They are inexhaustible, there always remains an undeciphered residue; and therefore, though the work of exposition may progress, it does not come to an end. But how much more difficult is it to adopt this choice spiritual love-song as one’s own prayer! For this we need a soul that loves after the same manner, and in the main it requires such a soul even to understand it rightly; for, as the saintly Bernard says, lingua amoris non amanti barbara est.

‏ Psalms 63:1-3

Morning Hymn of One Who Is Persecuted, in a Waterless Desert

Now follows Psa 63:1-11, the morning Psalm of the ancient church with which the singing of the Psalms was always introduced at the Sunday service. ^{▼▼Constitutiones Apostolicae, ii. 59: Ἑεκάστης ἡμέρᾳς συναθροίζεσθε ὄρθρου καὶ ἑσπέρας ψάλλοντες καὶ προσευχόμενοι ἐν τοῖς κυριακοῖς· ὄρθρου μὲν λέγοντες ψαλμὸν τὸν ξβ ̓ (Psa 63:1-11), ἐσπέρας δὲ τὸν ρμ ̓ (Psa 141:1-10). Athanasius says just the same in his De virginitate: πρὸς ὄρθρον τὸν ψαλμὸν τοῦτον λέγετε κ. τ. λ. Hence Psa 63:1-11 is called directly ὁ ὀρθρινός (the morning hymn) in Constit. Apostol. viii. 37. Eusebius alludes to the fact of its being so in Ps 91 (92), p. 608, ed. Montfaucon. In the Syrian order of service it is likewise the morning Psalm κατ ̓ ἐξοχήν, vid., Dietrich, De psalterii usu publico et divione in Ecclesia Syriaca, p. 3. The lxx renders אשׁחרך in Psa 63:2, πρὸς σὲ ὀρθρίχω, and באשׁמרות in Psa 63:7, ἐν τοῖς ὄρθροις (in matutinis).}

This Psalm is still more closely related to Psa 61:1-8 than Psa 62:1-12. Here, as in Psa 61:1-8, David gives utterance to his longing for the sanctuary; and in both Psalms he speaks of himself as king (vid., Symbolae, p. 56). All the three Psalms, Psa 61:1, were composed during the time of Absalom; for we must not allow ourselves to be misled by the inscription, A Psalm, by David, when he was in the wilderness of Judah (also lxx, according to the correct reading and the one preferred by Euthymius, τῆς Ἰουδαίας, not τῆς Ἰδουμαίας), into transferring it, as the old expositors do, to the time of Saul. During that period David could not well call himself “the king” and even during the time of his persecution by Absalom, in his flight, before crossing the Jordan, he tarried one or two days בערבות המדבר, in the steppes of the desert (2Sa 15:23, 2Sa 15:28; 2Sa 17:16), i.e., of the wilderness of Judah lying nearest to Jerusalem, that dreary waste that extends along the western shore of the Dead Sea. We see clearly from 2Sa 16:2 (היּעף בּמּדבּר) and 2Sa 16:14 (עיפים, that he there found himself in the condition of a עיף. The inscription, when understood thus, throws light upon the whole Psalm, and verifies itself in the fact that the poet is a king; that he longs for the God on Zion, where he has been so delighted to behold Him, who is there manifest; and that he is persecuted by enemies who have plotted his ruin. The assertion that he is in the wilderness (Psa 63:1) is therefore no mere rhetorical figure; and when, in 2Sa 16:10, he utters the imprecation over his enemies, “let them become a portion for the jackals,” the influence of the desert upon the moulding of his thoughts is clearly seen in it.

We have here before us the Davidic original, or at any rate the counterpart, to the Korahitic pair of Psalms, Psa 42:1-11, Psa 43:1-5. It is a song of the most delicate form and deepest spiritual contents; but in part very difficult of exposition. When we have, approximately at least, solved the riddle of one Psalm, the second meets us with new riddles. It is not merely the poetical classic character of the language, and the spiritual depth, but also this half-transparent and half-opaque covering which lends to the Psalms such a powerful and unvarying attractiveness. They are inexhaustible, there always remains an undeciphered residue; and therefore, though the work of exposition may progress, it does not come to an end. But how much more difficult is it to adopt this choice spiritual love-song as one’s own prayer! For this we need a soul that loves after the same manner, and in the main it requires such a soul even to understand it rightly; for, as the saintly Bernard says, lingua amoris non amanti barbara est. Psa 63:1-3

If the words in Psa 63:2 were אלהים אתּה אשׁחרך, then we would render it, with Böttcher, after Gen 49:8 : Elohim, Thee do I seek, even Thee! But אלי forbids this construction; and the assertion that otherwise it ought to be, “Jahve, my God art Thou” (Psa 140:7), rests upon a non-recognition of the Elohimic style. Elohim alone by itself is a vocative, and accordingly has Mehupach legarme. The verb שׁחר signifies earnest, importunate seeking and inquiring (e.g., Psa 78:34), and in itself has nothing to do with שׁחר, the dawn; but since Psa 63:7 looks back upon the night, it appears to be chosen with reference to the dawning morning, just as in Isa 26:9 also, שׁחר stands by the side of אוּה בלּילה. The lxx is therefore not incorrect when it renders it: πρὸς δὲ ὀρθρίζω (cf. ὁ λαὸς ὤρθριζεν πρὸς αὐτὸν, Luk 21:38); and Apollinaris strikes the right note when he begins his paraphrase, Νύκτα μετ ̓ ἀμφιλύκην σὲ μάκαρ μάκαρ ἀμφιχορεύσω -

At night when the morning dawns will I exult around Thee, most blessed One.

The supposition that בּארץ is equivalent to כּאשׁר בּארץ, or even that the Beth is Beth essentiae (“as a,” etc.), are views that have no ground whatever, except as setting the inscription at defiance. What is meant is the parched thirsty desert of sand in which David finds himself. We do not render it: in a dry and languishing land, for ציּה is not an adjective, but a substantive - the transition of the feminine adjective to the masculine primary form, which sometimes (as in 1Ki 19:11) occurs, therefore has no application here; nor: in the land of drought and of weariness, for who would express himself thus? ואיף, referring to the nearest subject בּשׂרי, continues the description of the condition (cf. Gen 25:8). In a region where he is surrounded by sun-burnt aridity and a nature that bears only one uniform ash-coloured tint, which casts its unrefreshing image into his inward part, which is itself in much the same parched condition, his soul thirsts, his flesh languishes, wearied and in want of water (languidus deficiente aqua), for God, the living One and the Fountain of life. כּמהּ (here with the tone drawn back, כּמהּ, like בּחר, 1Ch 28:10, עמד, Hab 3:11) of ardent longing which consumes the last energies of a man (root כם, whence כּמן and כּמס to conceal, and therefore like עטף, עלף, proceeding from the idea of enveloping; Arabic Arab. kamiha, to be blind, dark, pale, and disconcerted). The lxx and Theodotion erroneously read כּמּה (how frequently is this the case!); whereas Aquila renders it ἐπετάθη, and Symmachus still better, ἱμείρεται (the word used of the longing of love). It is not a small matter that David is able to predicate such languishing desire after God even of his felsh; it shows us that the spirit has the mastery within him, and not only forcibly keeps the flesh in subjection, but also, so far as possible, draws it into the realm of its own life - an experience confessedly more easily attained in trouble, which mortifies our carnal nature, than in the midst of the abundance of outward prosperity. The God for whom he is sick [lit. love-sick] in soul and body is the God manifest upon Zion.

Now as to the כּן in Psa 63:3 - a particle which is just such a characteristic feature in the physiognomy of this Psalm as אך is in that of the preceding Psalm - there are two notional definitions to choose from: thus = so, as my God (Ewald), and: with such longing desire (as e.g., Oettinger). In the former case it refers back to the confession, “Elohim, my God art Thou,” which stands at the head of the Psalm; in the latter, to the desire that has just been announced, and that not in its present exceptional character, but in its more general and constant character. This reference to what has immediately gone before, and to the modality, not of the object, but of the disposition of mind, deserves the preference. “Thus” is accordingly equivalent to “longing thus after Thee.” The two כן in Psa 63:3 and Psa 63:5 are parallel and of like import. The alternation of the perfect (Psa 63:3) and of the future (Psa 63:5) implies that what has been the Psalmist’s favourite occupation heretofore, shall also be so in the future. Moreover, בארץ ציה and בּקּדשׁ form a direct antithesis. Just as he does not in a dry land, so formerly in the sanctuary he looked forth longingly towards God (חזה with the conjoined idea of solemnity and devotion). We have now no need to take לראות as a gerundive (videndo), which is in itself improbable; for one looks, peers, gazes at anything just for the purpose of seeing what the nature of the object is (Psa 14:2; Isa 42:18). The purpose of his gazing upon God as to gain an insight into the nature of God, so far as it is disclosed to the creature; or, as it is expressed here, to see His power and glory, i.e., His majesty on its terrible and on its light and loving side, to see this, viz., in its sacrificial appointments and sacramental self-attestations. Such longing after God, which is now all the more intense in the desert far removed from the sanctuary, filled and impelled him; for God’s loving-kindness is better than life, better than this natural life (vid., on Psa 17:14), which is also a blessing, and as the prerequisite of all earthly blessings a very great blessing. The loving-kindness of God, however, is a higher good, is in fact the highest good and the true life: his lips shall praise this God of mercy, his morning song shall be of Him; for that which makes him truly happy, and after which he even now, as formerly, only and solely longs, is the mercy or loving-kindness (חסד) of this God, the infinite wroth of which is measured by the greatness of His power (עז) and glory (כבוד). It might also be rendered, “Because Thy loving-kindness is better than life, my lips shall praise Thee;” but if כּי is taken as demonstrative (for), it yields a train of thought that that is brought about not merely by what follows (as in the case of the relative because), but also by what precedes: “for Thy loving-kindness...my lips shall then praise Thee” (ישׁבּחוּנך with the suffix appended to the energetic plural form ûn, as in Isa 60:7, Isa 60:10; Jer 2:24).