Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - Psalms 139:1 - 139:1
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
The Aramaic forms in this strophe are the ἅπαξ λεγομ רֵעַ (ground-form רַעְיְ) in Psa 139:2 and Psa 139:17, endeavour, desire, thinking, like רְעוּת and רַעְיֹון in the post-exilic books, from רָעָה (רְעָא), cupere, cogitare; and the ἅπ. λεγ. רֶבַע in Psa 139:3, equivalent to רֵבֶץ, a lying down, if רִבְעִי be not rather an infinitive like בִּלְעִי in Job 7:19, since אָרְחִי is undoubtedly not inflected from אֹרַח, but, as being infinitive, like עָבְרִי in Deu 4:21, from אָרַח; and the verb אָרַח also, with the exception of this passage, only occurs in the speeches of Elihu (Job 34:8), which are almost more strongly Aramaizing than the Book of Job itself. Further, as an Aramaizing feature we have the objective relation marked by Lamed in the expression בַּנְתָּה לְרֵעִי, Thou understandest my thinking, as in Psa 116:16; Psa 129:3; Psa 135:11; Psa 136:19. The monostichic opening is after the Davidic style, e.g., Psa 23:1. Among the prophets, Isaiah in particular is fond of such thematic introductions as we have here in Psa 139:1. On וַתֵּדַע instead of וַתֵּדָעֵנִי vid., on Psa 107:20; the pronominal object stands once beside the first verb, or even beside the second (2Ki 9:25), instead of twice (Hitzig). The “me” is then expanded: sitting down, rising up, walking and lying, are the sum of human conditions or states. רֵעִי is the totality or sum of the life of the spirit and soul of man, and דְּרָכַי the sum of human action. The divine knowledge, as וַתֵּדַע says, is the result of the scrutiny of man. The poet, however, in Psa 139:2 and Psa 139:3 uses the perfect throughout as a mood of that which is practically existing, because that scrutiny is a scrutiny that is never unexecuted, and the knowledge is consequently an ever-present knowledge. מֵרָחֹוק is meant to say that He sees into not merely the thought that is fully fashioned and matured, but even that which is being evolved. זֵרִיתָ from זֵרָה is combined by Luther (with Azulai and others) with זֵר, a wreath (from זָרַר, constringere, cingere), inasmuch as he renders: whether I walk or lie down, Thou art round about me (Ich gehe oder lige, so bistu umb mich). זֵרָה ought to have the same meaning here, if with Wetzstein one were to compare the Arabic, and more particularly Beduin, drrâ, dherrâ, to protect; the notion of affording protection does not accord with this train of thought, which has reference to God's omniscience: what ought therefore to be meant is a hedging round which secures its object to the knowledge, or even a protecting that places it in security against any exchanging, which will not suffer the object to escape it.
(Note: This Verb. tert. Arab. w et y is old, and the derivative dherâ, protection, is an elegant word; with reference to another derivative, dherwe, a wall of rock protecting one from the winds, vid., Job, at Job 24:7, note. The II form (Piel) signifies to protect in the widest possible sense, e.g., (in Neshwân, ii. 343b), “[Arab.] drâ 'l-šâh, he protected the sheep (against being exchanged) by leaving a lock of wool upon their backs when they were shorn, by which they might be recognised among other sheep.”)
The Arabic ḏrâ, to know, which is far removed in sound, is by no means to be compared; it is related to Arab. dr', to push, urge forward, and denotes knowledge that is gained by testing and experimenting. But we also have no need of that Arab. ḏrâ, to protect, since we can remain within the range of the guaranteed Hebrew usage, inasmuch as זֵרָה, to winnow, i.e., to spread out that which has been threshed and expose it to the current of the wind, in Arabic likewise ḏrrâ, (whence מִזְרֶה, midhrâ, a winnowing-fork, like רַחַת, racht, a winnowing-shovel), gives an appropriate metaphor. Here it is equivalent to: to investigate and search out to the very bottom; lxx, Symmachus, and Theodotion, ἐξιξηνίασας, after which the Italic renders investigasti, and Jerome eventilasti. הִסְכִּין with the accusative, as in Job 22:21 with עִם: to enter into neighbourly, close, familiar relationship, or to stand in such relationship, with any one; cogn. שָׁכַן, Arab. skn. God is acquainted with all our ways not only superficially, but closely and thoroughly, as that to which He is accustomed.
In Psa 139:4 this omniscience of God is illustratively corroborated with כִּי; Psa 139:4 has the value of a relative clause, which, however, takes the form of an independent clause. מִלָּה (pronounced by Jerome in his letter to Sunnia and Fretela, §82, MALA) is an Aramaic word that has been already incorporated in the poetry of the Davidico-Salomonic age. כֻלָּהּ signifies both all of it and every one. In Psa 139:5 Luther has been misled by the lxx and Vulgate, which take צוּר in the signification formare (whence צוּרָה, forma); it signifies, as the definition “behind and before” shows, to surround, encompass. God is acquainted with man, for He holds him surrounded on all sides, and man can do nothing, if God, whose confining hand he has lying upon him (Job 9:23), does not allow him the requisite freedom of motion. Instead of דַּעְתְּךָ (XX ἡ γνῶσίς σου) the poet purposely says in Psa 139:6 merely דַּעַת: a knowledge, so all-penetrating, all-comprehensive as God's knowledge. The Kerî reads פְּלִיאָה, but the Chethîb פִּלְאִיָּה is supported by the Chethîb פִּלְאִי in Jdg 13:18, the Kerî of which there is not פָּלִיא, but פֶּלִי (the pausal form of an adjective פְּלִי, the feminine of which would be פְּלִיָּה). With מִמֶּנִּי the transcendence, with נִשְׂגְּבָה the unattainableness, and with לָהּ לֹא־אוּכַל the incomprehensibleness of the fact of the omniscience of God is expressed, and with this, to the mind of the poet, coincides God's omnipresence; for true, not merely phenomenal, knowledge is not possible without the immanence of the knowing one in the thing known. God, however, is omnipresent, sustaining the life of all things by His Spirit, and revealing Himself either in love or in wrath - what the poet styles His countenance. To flee from this omnipresence (מִן, away from), as the sinner and he who is conscious of his guilt would gladly do, is impossible. Concerning the first אָֽנָּה, which is here accented on the ultima, vid., on Psa 116:4.