40 A NOTE ON THE MEANING OF ",'" IN THE PSALMS

A note on the meaning of ",'" in the Psalms

David G Firth (UP)

ABSTRACr
Mitchell Dahood has proposed that the word ",v.t should be translated as
'slanderer' rather than as its more traditional renderings of 'foe' or 'watchful foe'.
A degree of support has emerged for this proposal. The suggestion is tested here by
means of an examination of al/ occu"ences of the tenn. This evidence suggests that
Dahood's definition is too nan-ow, though the traditional definition is too broad, and
that ",v.t should instead be seen as a tenn defining a group of enemies actively
conspiring against someone.

A INTRODUCTION
Reproduced by Sabinet Gateway under licence granted by the Publisher (dated 2009).

Although many of the novel suggestions made by Mitchell Dahood in terms of re-
interpreting certain words in the Psalms have not gained general assent, there are
some suggestions of his for which a supporting consensus has arisen. Among these is
his proposal to understand the word ",'" as meaning 'slanderer' as opposed to the
more traditional interpretation of 'enemy, one who lies in wait' (Dahood 1968:42).
Support for Dahood's position may be seen in the commentary of Tate (1990:65)
and the comparatively conservative English translation, the New International
Version (NIV). It should be noted, however, that the NIV is not consistent in its
translation of the term and only adopts Dahood's suggestion at 54:7, 56:3 and 59: 11.
In the other three occurrences of "'''', at 5:9, 27:11 and 92:12, it adopts a more
traditional rendering. In this, however, it follows Dahood himself on Psalms 5:9 and
27:11, though it should be noted that he only made his observation on the meaning
of the word in his exegesis of Psalm 54. On the basis of evidence we shall note
below, there is good reason not to include Psalm 92:12 amongst our examples.
Whilst it is possible to understand slander as a means by which an enemy might
wait for an opponent, perhaps by means of setting a trap, it is undeniable that
Dahood's suggestion involves a considerable increase in precision in our under-
standing of the word if it can be sustained. The purpose of this paper is to assess
 OLD TESTAMENT ESSAYS 11/1 (1998), 40-49 41

this suggestion, so as to determine whether or not this is a valid suggestion. From

this discussion, some preliminary observations can be made in terms of the semantic
field 'enemy' in the Psalms.

B METHOD

Since ,,'1/1 only occurs in the Psalms, it is possible to use the features of Hebrew
poetry for guiding us in its interpretation. As is well known, Hebrew poetry tends to
express itself by means of parallelism, with the major forms since the initial work of
Robert Lowth being described as synonymous, antithetic and synthetic parallelism.
Debates about the various forms have continued (Kugel 1981: 1-58; Longman
1987:122-128), whilst new precision has also arisen with the recognition of other
forms of parallelism (Watson 1986:114-159). It is not necessary for us to offer an
exact definition of parallelism here (cf Watson 1986: 114-121). What is important
for our purpose is to note that the phenomenon itself is helpful in determining the
semantic field of a word, since the terms with which it is used in parallel will tend to
define that field, either by means of words that tend towards being antonyms or
synonyms. Obviously, in the case of synthetic parallelism we are not able to draw as
Reproduced by Sabinet Gateway under licence granted by the Publisher (dated 2009).

clear an inference, but some guidance will nevertheless be provided. However, the
context for the interpretation of the word is still provided by the psalm as a whole,
and it is arguable that the use of synonyms throughout provides a part of the
parallelism. Though our initial concern will in each case be with the immediate
parallelism; since it provides the most immediate point of contact, we shall also
need to examine the wider setting of each psalm.
Before moving to that point, some observation on the derivation of the word
needs to be made. Traditionally, the lexica (e g BDB) have derived ",'" from the
root ""', 'to lie in wait', and hence offering something like 'incipient watcher' as the
suggested translation. This is reflected in the NEB's 'my watchful foes'. However,
the article in BDB is somewhat apologetic for this derivation, understanding it as
a polel with the initial mem having been dropped (GKC 52s, cf KB). The student
lexicon of Harkavy, however, derives the word from ""', 'to bind, oppress', and
hence offers 'oppressor' as the best translation. BDB, on the other hand, only allows
for ,,'" as meaning 'hard' from which it suggests several possible nouns, though
mostly related to human anatomy. Harkavy also distinguishes the reference in Psalm
 42 A NOTE ON THE MEANING OF "1V1 IN THE PSALMS

92:12 from the other occurrences of the word, suggesting that the form there, "1V1,
can indeed be derived from '1V1. BDB sees "1V1 as being dubious, and so suggests
that we should correct the reading to ' "1V1 (cf BHS), and thus make the form
consistent with the other occurrences.
These variations, and the level of uncertainty to which they attest, indicate that
Dahood was correct in trying to reinterpret the word, though it will be seen that his
own conclusions do not agree with those of the other lexicographers. He argues that
it is related to the word sam in the El Amarna usage where it has the sense of
'slander, defame'. Such an observation makes appropriate use of cognate data, but it
must be tested in the context of Hebrew usage since it is the context in which the
word is used that must finally define its meaning. Dahood's case does not depend
upon the etymology alone as he also adduces points of contact within the psalms
that could provide contextual support for such a meaning. That being so, we shall
also examine the word only in terms of its use and not on the basis of a hypothetical
root, especially as the relationship to a root is not entirely clear and may lead to our
imposing a semantic range on the word that is not appropriate.
Reproduced by Sabinet Gateway under licence granted by the Publisher (dated 2009).

We may also observe, given the uncertainty about its derivation, that the term in
Psalm 92: 12 is formally distinct from the other five references and ought to be set to
one side in this examination. It is, after all, an unwise procedure to use an emended
form in assessing the meaning of the word. We therefore must turn to the indis-
putable examples of the occurrence of the term to assess the validity of Dahood's
interpretation.

C AN EXAMINATION OF THE RELEVANT TEXTS

1 Psalms 5:9 and 27:11

As the wording of these two verses is very similar, it is appropriate that we consider
them together. The text of Psalm 5:9 reads as follows:

'l)np'~J 'JnJ il1il'

"'1V1 lYIl
~J" , J!Jr, 1V11il

Leaving the key term untranslated, we could translate the verse as:
 OLD TESTAMENT ESSAYS 11/1 (1998), 40-49 43

Yahweh, lead me in your righteousness

On account of my ",.,
Make your path straight before me.

Psalm 27: 11 is phrased in similar terms:

'i)J" n,n' '3"n

"~'n n'XJ '3n3'
""111 pm;
We could trartSlate the verse as follows:

Yahweh, teach me your way

Lead me on a straight path
On account of my "'111.
The interpretation of "'111
in these verses obviously indicates that the
reference is to an enemy of some kind, and indeed in Psalm 27:12 the same people
are described as 'U. In verse 3 of this psalm we also have reference to 'J'K and
Reproduced by Sabinet Gateway under licence granted by the Publisher (dated 2009).

, ,~. though given the questions that surround the composition of the psalm
(Lindstrom 1994:153. but cf Van Uchelen 1971:183 and Ridderbos 1972:210ff) it
would be unwise to press these terms into the discussion. No other direct terms for
the field 'enemy' occur in Psalm 5, though those described in verses 5-7 would
certainly be regarded as the enemies of the psalmist. In neither of these psalms does
the immediate parallelism provide any direct information on the meaning of "'111
apart from the fact that they are clearly regarded as an enemy of some sort. as is
apparent from the fact that in both cases the deliverance that is requested is T~m;
""111.
When we turn to the wider context of these psalms, it does provide us with some
additional information. In Psalm 5 we have references to the wicked as a general
class in verses 5-7. They are variously categorised as arrogant, workers of evil
CT'X "lI!l), liars, bloodthirsty and deceitful. Dahood (1968:25) seizes on the refe-
rence to 'liars' as evidence that these enemies are slanderers, but in the midst of
such a general catalogue of evil it is doubtful that we can take only one of these
terms as providing evidence for the meaning of "'111,especially since it is context-
ually too remote to provide a defining reference. What is clear, however, is that the
 44 A NOTE ON TIlE MEANING OF ",VJ IN THE PSALMS

imprecation in verses 10-11 depends upon the fact that their speech is not to
be trusted, for which God is to declare them guilty. This speech is also defined
as rebellion (l1VJ~) against Yahweh, and not just as speech against the psalmist.
Nevertheless, one should agree with Beyerlin (1970:90ff) that the setting of the
psalm is in the institution of the prayers of the accused, so that the speech against
the psalmist is also construed as rebellion against God. However, the catalogue in
verses 5-7 would caution against the interpretation of the word only in the sense of
defaming speech - what lies have been uttered are understood to function within a
wider range of actions aimed against the psalmist. Defaming speech is thus an
element of the actions of the enemies, but it is not legitimate to limit it to this aspect
alone.
The context of Psalm 27 would suggest a similar line of interpretation. Leaving
aside the generalised references in the first six verses, we note only the reference to
",VJ in verse 11, and the essentially parallel reference to "I'~ in verse 12, the latter
term also being in parallel with 'false witnesses' (1pvJ-"I1l1). Were we to interpret
Psalm 27 as a psalm of the accused (so Kraus 1988:333) then we would perhaps see
Reproduced by Sabinet Gateway under licence granted by the Publisher (dated 2009).

slander as an appropriate definition of the term at this point. However, the absence
of a plea for decision makes this improbable, and it is better to read the psalm as
a general prayer for protection (Firth 1996:97). This is especially so because of the
fact that these enemies are said to be breathing out violence, which would not be
defaming speech about the psalmist, even though this could be a component, but
rather speech that is directed against the psalmist, with some further form of
violence being expected as the outcome. Threatening speech is thus much more
likely.
In neither case is the parallelism of the psalm helpful in providing guidance on
the semantic field of ",VJ, there being no particular term in parallel. It merely
reveals that they are an enemy of some sort. However, the investigation of the
context of these psalms reveals a situation in which the enemies are characterised by
actions that are directed against the psalmist, actions that include some form of false
speech, but which are not to be limited to false speech. Further, in both cases the
term refers to enemies who cooperate with one another in actions against the indivi-
dUal.
 OLD TESTAMENT ESSAYS 11/1 (1998), 40-49 45

2 Psalm54:7
The text of Psalm 54:7 reads as follows:

'11vtJ 111iT J,III'

Dm ll~iT 'lJnll~J

Although there is some variation between the kethib and the qere, the variation
does not affect the argument here, so the kethib has been retained. We could trans-
late the verse as follows:

Let evil recoil to my "'D,

Destroy them in your faithfulness.

Although we have a more precise parallelism in this verse than in the two inves-
tigated already, it is apparent that it sheds little direct light on the word 11111. Here,
it is used in parallel with 'them', which in this case is no more than a pronominal
suffix. What is clear, of course, is that the 11111 are to be regarded as enemies since
the psalmist asks that their own evil return (J,III) on them.
Reproduced by Sabinet Gateway under licence granted by the Publisher (dated 2009).

The wider context of this psalm, however, provides us with some guidance as to
the identity of these foes. In particular, they are described as 'strangers' (D'1T, v 5,
probably not foreigners, contra Birkeland 1955:12) who have risen up against the
psalmist, an action that clearly constitutes some form of attack. Although this is not
necessarily to be interpreted as immediate physical violence, the goal of these
enemies is understood as being the psalmist's life. This attack may take place within
the context of the prayers of the accused (Kraus 1988:514), or simply as a
generalised prayer for protection (cf Croft 1987:41). In either case, it is divine
intervention against the 11111 that is sought. The closing verse also looks to the
enemies (J'~) of the psalmist, and these are clearly to be identified with the 11111.
In terms of Dahood's hypothesis, it is striking to note that none of the clear
references to the activities of these enemies relates to speech - indeed, slander as an
action is somewhat out of place here and since it has not been mentioned in the
psalm before the 11111 are introduced in verse 7, it is difficult to see how it could be
included in that which is to recoil on the enemies. Although the wider context of the
psalm is somewhat vague, it would once again point to the 11111 as being enemies
who conspire against the psalmist. In this instance they are said to be in active
 46 A NOTE ON mE MEANING OF '"VJ IN mE PSALMS
engagement. There is thus no evidence here to support the interpretation of
'slanderer' as the meaning of the term. Indeed, the evidence provided by the wider
context of this psalm would suggest that 'slanderer' cannot be the meaning here.

3 Psalm 56:3
The text of Psalm 56:3 reads as follows:

c,'n-;J '",VJ ,~
C"D ,; c'nn; C'J'-'J
This text poses a number of text-critical problems, not least of which being the
presence of the almost unintelligible C"IJ at the end of the second line and the
polyvalent verb~. Given that the verb here describes characteristic actions of the
enemies who have not yet defeated the psalmist, 'pursue' is the more likely meaning.
More difficult is CnD. The LXX's reading of tmo Uljlovl; presumably understood it
to read CnllD, the initial mem having perhaps been dropped out by haplography. If
we follow this reading, and take the initial 'J in the second line as asseverative
(GKC 15gee), and understand the preposition on ,; as a; of respect (GKC 119u),
Reproduced by Sabinet Gateway under licence granted by the Publisher (dated 2009).

the verse could be understood as:

My ",vJ pursue me all the day

many fight against me from on high.

Again, the parallelism does little to clarify the actual meaning of "nl beyond
indicating that they are the enemies of the psalmist, and that their opposition is
expressed by specific activity and not just by watching. Given the textual uncertain-
ties, it is not wise to press any of the terms in the verse to provide more specific
information about their identity.
The wider context of this psalm does, however, provide considerable informa-
tion about the activities of these enemies. After the initial description of the
continual pursuit of the psalmist by the enemies (also called J',2ot in v 9) in which
the figure of warfare is used in verse 2, the psalm breaks into a refrain (cf Raabe
1990:98ff) which serves to affirm the psalmist's trust in God in the face of such
pursuit. It also serves to divide the initial characterisation of the enemies from the
more direct description of their activities in verses 6-7. The 'pursuit' that is
 OLD TESTAMENT ESSAYS 11/1 (1998), 40-49 47

described here includes the twisting of the psalmist's words and a range of activities
associated with an act of conspiracy aimed against the psalmist's life. The twisting of
words could, of course, relate to slanderous activity, but it is still placeD within a
wider range of activities that are aimed against the psalmist. Indeed, th~' t'erse accu-
sations of verses 6-7 are sufficiently broad in character so that it is inappropriate to
single out anyone of them as representing the definition of the "'111 in this
instance. Rather, we need to take these accusations as a whole if we are to under-
stand the character of these enemies, and then it becomes apparent that they are
perceived as a group in active conspiracy against the psalmist. Thus, although
slander may well be one of the instruments used by these enemies, we cannot take
the evidence of this psalm as pointing to 'slanderer' as the appropriate translation of
,,'111.
4 Psalm59:11
The text of Psalm 59: 11 rearls as follows:

'In,p' "on 'n~

~"'IIIJ 'l~" D'n;
Reproduced by Sabinet Gateway under licence granted by the Publisher (dated 2009).

Although tbere is some difference in the first line between the kethib reading
above and the qere's ',on,
such distinctions need not detain us here. Preference
should perhaps be given to the qere, especially when we note that this is the reading
in verse 18. However, the sense for our purposes is not affected, and we can
adequately render the kethib as:

My God, his steadfast love will meet me,

God will cause me 10 look on my 11111.

Once again, the immediate parallelism does not provide us with any informa-
tion on the meaning of "'111
other than for the fact that those so described are
clearly to be identified as enemies of the psalmist. It is notable that Tate, who
generally accepts Dahood's proposal, is unwilling to offer 'slanderer' in his trans-
lation here (1990:92). The,1III are to be equated with the J'~ of verse 2.
Where this psalm is particularly helpful is in the extent of the description of the
activities of the enemies. As a prayer for protection, such descriptions are to be
 48 A NOTE ON THE MEANING OF ",VI IN THE PSALMS
expected, though not necessarily as extensively as we find here.
In the wider description of the activities of the enemies we should note that
there are references to the speech activities of the enemies in verses 8 and 13.
Closer inspection, however, indicates that the references in verse 8 do not refer to
slander, but rather are descriptions of the hubris of the enemies, a denial of the role
of God in life rather than speech directed against the psalmist. Similarly, although
they are accused of cursing and lying in verse 13, there is no evidence that this is
against the psalmist. Indeed, since they have already been accused of speech that is
a denial of God's presence in verse 8 it is far more likely that we are to understand
the sins of speech here in those terms. There is thus no indication of slander as an
activity within the psalm.
What we do find which is consistent with the other psalms that we have
examined is that there are once again elements of conspiracy involved, and speci-
fically a conspiracy (J'K) that is aimed against the life of the psalmist. Hence, the
enemies are also described as D'IJ' 'VllK (v 3) and portrayed as those ready to
pounce if there is evidence of weakness on the part of the psalmist. In this sense the
Reproduced by Sabinet Gateway under licence granted by the Publisher (dated 2009).

image of the prowling dog recurs in verses 7 and 15, describing the approach of the
enemies, indicating how they are ready to pounce.
The evidence of this psalm cannot, therefore, be regarded as providing support
for Dahood's proposal. There is no indication of slander in any of the actions of the
enemies. Although the enemies are involved in actions which also involve speech,
these are more consistent with hubris rather than slander. The enemies are,
however, involved in conspiratorial actions that are aimed against the life of the
psalmist.

E CONCLUSION

The results of this investigation are both negative and suggestive. Negatively, we
have not found any evidence within the psalms themselves to support Dahood's
suggestion that ",VI should be rendered as 'slanderer'. The evidence of Psalm 54 is
particularly clear, but the pattern is clearly present in each of the texts examined.
Although we cannot rule out slander as an aspect of the actions of the enemies, it is
altogether too narrow a definition of the term.
Suggestively, however, we find evidence that could indicate that ,,'VI is also to
 OW TESTAMENT ESSAYS 11/1 (1998), 40-49 49

be defined more narrowly than might be suggested by the more traditional render-
ing of 'enemy, foe'. Given the wide use of synonyms such as 0'0' 'IIIJ~,"~
1'~' J'~, 1:X and the like, we cannot entirely distinguish the term from others
within the semantic field 'enemy'. However, it was notable that in each case, the
",111 were associated with some form of conspiratorial activity aimed against the
life of the psalmist. We might thus regard them as foes whose position is identifiable
by the way in which they work with others in a conspiracy against someone's life.
This is thus more than simply being 'watchful foes' since it implies that direct action
is being taken. Even if they cannot therefore be distinguished absolutely from all
the other enemies, they would still appear to represent a specific group within the
field 'enemy', and studies of the enemies should therefore recognise this distinction.

BmuOGRAPHY

Beyerlin, W 1970. Die Rettung der Bedriillgtell in dell Feindpsalmen der Einzeillen auf illJtitutionelle
Zusammenhiillge untersucht. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Birkeland, H 1955. The evildoers in the Book of Psalms. Oslo: Kommisjon Hos Jacob Dybwad.
Croft, S J L 1987. The identity of the individual in the Psalms. Sheffield: JSOT Press.
Dahood, M 1968. Psalms II: 51-100. Garden City: Doubleday.
Reproduced by Sabinet Gateway under licence granted by the Publisher (dated 2009).

Firth, D G 1996. Responses to violence in Lam.ent Psalms of the individual. Ph.D Thesis, University
of Pretoria.
Kraus, H-J 1988. Psalms 1-59, tr by H C Oswald. Minneapolis: Augsburg.
Kugel, J L 1981. The idea of Biblical poetry. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Longman, T III 1987. LiterlllJl approaches to Biblical interpretation. Leicester: Apollos.
Lindstrom, F 1994. Suffering and sin: Interpretations of illness in the individual Complaint Psalms.
Stockholm: Ahnqvist & Wiskell.
Raabe, P R 1990. Psalm structures: A study of Psalms with refrains. Sheffield: JSOT Press.
Ridderbos, N H 1972. Die Psalmen. Stilistiche Vetfahren undAufbau mit besonderer Beriicksichtigullg
von Pa 141. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Van Uche1en, N A 1971. Psalmen L Nijkerk: G F CaJlenbach.
Tate, M E 1990. Psalms 51-100. Dallas: Word.
Watson, W G E 1986. Classical Hebrew poetry. 2 Sheffield: JSOT Press.

David G Firth, POBox 614, 5t Ives, N5W 2075, Australia.

E-mail: dgfirth@ozemtlllcom.au