Restore Us, Shepherd of Israel, and Revive the Vine You Planted

Psa 80:4-7 In the second strophe there issues forth bitter complaint concerning the form of wrath which the present assumes, and, thus confirmed, the petition rises anew. The transferring of the smoking (עשׁן) of God’s nostrils = the hard breathing of anger (Psa 74:1, Deu 29:19), to God Himself is bold, but in keeping with the spirit of the Biblical view of the wrath of God (vid.

, on Psa 18:9), so that there is no need to avoid the expression by calling in the aid of the Syriac word עשׁן, to be strong, powerful (why art Thou hard, why dost Thou harden Thyself...) The perfect after עד־מתי has the sense of a present with a retrospective glance, as in Exo 10:3, cf. עד־אנה, to be understood after the analogy of חרה בּ (to kindle = to be angry against any one), for the prayer of the people is not an object of wrath, but only not a means of turning it aside.

While the prayer is being presented, God veils Himself in the smoke of wrath, through which it is not able to penetrate. The lxx translators have read בתפלת עבדיך, for they render ἐπὶ τὴν προσευχήν τῶν δούλων σου (for which the common reading is τοῦ δούλου σου). Bread of tears is, according to Psa 42:4, bread consisting of tears; tears, running down in streams upon the lips of the praying and fasting one, are his meat and his drink.

השׁקה with an accusative signifies to give something to drink, and followed by Beth , to give to drink by means of something, but it is not to be translated: potitandum das eis cum lacrymis trientem (De Dieu, von Ortenberg, and Hitzig). שׁלישׁ (Talmudic, a third part) is the accusative of more precise definition (Vatablus, Gesenius, Olshausen, and Hupfeld): by thirds (lxx ἐν μέτρῳ, Symmachus μέτρῳ); for a third of an ephah is certainly a very small measure for the dust of the earth (Isa 40:12), but a large one for tears.

The neighbours are the neighbouring nations, to whom Israel is become מדון, an object, a butt of contention. In למו is expressed the pleasure which the mocking gives them.

Psa 80:4-7 In the second strophe there issues forth bitter complaint concerning the form of wrath which the present assumes, and, thus confirmed, the petition rises anew. The transferring of the smoking (עשׁן) of God’s nostrils = the hard breathing of anger (Psa 74:1, Deu 29:19), to God Himself is bold, but in keeping with the spirit of the Biblical view of the wrath of God (vid.

, on Psa 18:9), so that there is no need to avoid the expression by calling in the aid of the Syriac word עשׁן, to be strong, powerful (why art Thou hard, why dost Thou harden Thyself...) The perfect after עד־מתי has the sense of a present with a retrospective glance, as in Exo 10:3, cf. עד־אנה, to be understood after the analogy of חרה בּ (to kindle = to be angry against any one), for the prayer of the people is not an object of wrath, but only not a means of turning it aside.

While the prayer is being presented, God veils Himself in the smoke of wrath, through which it is not able to penetrate. The lxx translators have read בתפלת עבדיך, for they render ἐπὶ τὴν προσευχήν τῶν δούλων σου (for which the common reading is τοῦ δούλου σου). Bread of tears is, according to Psa 42:4, bread consisting of tears; tears, running down in streams upon the lips of the praying and fasting one, are his meat and his drink.

השׁקה with an accusative signifies to give something to drink, and followed by Beth , to give to drink by means of something, but it is not to be translated: potitandum das eis cum lacrymis trientem (De Dieu, von Ortenberg, and Hitzig). שׁלישׁ (Talmudic, a third part) is the accusative of more precise definition (Vatablus, Gesenius, Olshausen, and Hupfeld): by thirds (lxx ἐν μέτρῳ, Symmachus μέτρῳ); for a third of an ephah is certainly a very small measure for the dust of the earth (Isa 40:12), but a large one for tears.

The neighbours are the neighbouring nations, to whom Israel is become מדון, an object, a butt of contention. In למו is expressed the pleasure which the mocking gives them.

Psa 80:8-19 The complaint now assumes a detailing character in this strophe, inasmuch as it contrasts the former days with the present; and the ever more and more importunate prayer moulds itself in accordance therewith. The retrospective description begins, as is rarely the case, with the second modus , inasmuch as “the speaker thinks more of the bare nature of the act than of the time” (Ew.

§136, b ). As in the blessing of Jacob (Gen 49:22) Joseph is compared to the layer (בּן) of a fruitful growth (פּרת), whose shoots (בּנות) climb over the wall: so here Israel is compared to a vine (Gen 49:22; גּפן פּריּח, Psa 128:3), which has become great in Egypt and been transplanted thence into the Land of Promise. הסּיע, lxx μεταίρειν, as in Job 19:10, perhaps with an allusion to the מסעים of the people journeying to Canaan (Psa 78:52).

Here God made His vine a way and a place (פּנּהּ, to clear, from פּנה, to turn, turn aside, Arabic fanija , to disappear, pass away; root פן, to urge forward), and after He had secured to it a free soil and unchecked possibility of extension, it (the vine) rooted its roots, i. e. , struck them ever deeper and wider, and filled the earth round about (cf. the antitype in the final days, Isa 27:6).

The Israelitish kingdom of God extended itself on every side in accordance with the promise. תּשׁלּח (cf. Eze 17:6, and vegetable שׁלח, a shoot) also has the vine as its subject, like תּשׁרשׁ. Psa 80:11-12 state this in a continued allegory, by the “mountains” pointing to the southern boundary, by the “cedars” to the northern, by the “sea” to the western, and by the “river” (Euphrates) to the eastern boundary of the country (vid.

, Deu 11:24 and other passages). צלּהּ and ענפיה are accusatives of the so-called more remote object (Ges. §143, 1). קציר is a cutting = a branch; יונקת, a (vegetable) sucker = a young, tender shoot; ארזי־אל, the cedars of Lebanon as being living monuments of the creative might of God. The allegory exceeds the measure of the reality of nature, inasmuch as this is obliged to be extended according to the reality of that which is typified and historical.

But how unlike to the former times is the present! The poet asks “wherefore? ” for the present state of things is a riddle to him. The surroundings of the vine are torn down; all who come in contact with it pluck it (ארה, to pick off, pluck off, Talmudic of the gathering of figs); the boar out of the wood (מיער with עין תלויה, Ajin ) cuts it off (כּרסם, formed out of כּסם = גּזם viz.

, with its tusks; and that which moves about the fields (vid. , concerning זיז, Psa 50:11), i. e. , the untractable, lively wild beast, devours it. Without doubt the poet associates a distinct nation with the wild boar in his mind; for animals are also in other instances the emblems of nations, as e. g. , the leviathan, the water-serpent, the behemoth (Isa 30:6), and flies (Isa 7:18) are emblems of Egypt.

The Midrash interprets it of Seîr-Edom, and זיז שׂדי, according to Gen 16:12, of the nomadic Arabs. In Psa 80:15 the prayer begins for the third time with threefold urgency, supplicating for the vine renewed divine providence, and a renewal of the care of divine grace. We have divided the verse differently from the accentuation, since שׁוּב־נא הבּט is to be understood according to Ges.

§142. The junction by means of ו is at once opposed to the supposition that וכּנּה in Psa 80:16 signifies a slip or plant, plantam (Targum, Syriac, Aben-Ezra, Kimchi, and others), and that consequently the whole of Psa 80:16 is governed by וּפקד. Nor can it mean its (the vine’s) stand or base, כּן (Böttcher), since one does not plant a “stand. ” The lxx renders וכנה: καὶ κατάρτισαι, which is imper.

aor . 1. med. , therefore in the sense of כּוננה. But the alternation of על (cf. Pro 2:11, and Arab. jn ‛lâ , to cover over) with the accusative of the object makes it more natural to derive כנה, not from כּנן = כּוּן, but from כּנן Arab. kanna = גּנן, to cover, conceal, protect (whence Arab. kinn , a covering, shelter, hiding-place): and protect him whom...

or: protect what Thy right hand has planted. The pointing certainly seems to take כנה as the feminine of כּן (lxx, Dan 11:7, φυτόν); for an imperat. paragog. Kal of the form כּנּה does not occur elsewhere, although it might have been regarded by the punctuists as possible from the form גּל, volve , Psa 119:22. If it is regarded as impossible, then one might read כנּה.

At any rate the word is imperative, as the following אשׁר, eum quem , also shows, instead of which, if כנה were a substantive, one would expect to find a relative clause without אשׁר, as in Psa 80:16 . Moreover Psa 80:16 requires this, since פּקד על can only be used of visiting with punishment. And who then would the slip (branch) and the son of man be in distinction from the vine?

If we take בנה as imperative, then, as one might expect, the vine and the son of man are both the people of God. The Targum renders Psa 80:16 thus: “and upon the King Messiah, whom Thou hast established for Thyself,” after Psa 2:1-12 and Dan 7:13; but, as in the latter passage, it is not the Christ Himself, but the nation out of which He is to proceed, that is meant.

אמּץ has the sense of firm appropriation, as in Isa 44:14, inasmuch as the notion of making fast passes over into that of laying firm hold of, of seizure. Rosenmüller well renders it: quem adoptatum tot nexibus tibi adstrinxisti. The figure of the vine, which rules all the language here, is also still continued in Psa 80:17; for the partt. fem. refer to גּפן ot refer, - the verb, however, may take the plural form, because those of Israel are this “vine,” which combusta igne, succisa (as in Isa 33:12; Aramaic, be cut off, tear off, in Psa 80:13 the Targum word for ארה; Arabic, ksḥ , to clear away, peel off), is just perishing, or hangs in danger of destruction (יאבדוּ) before the threatening of the wrathful countenance of God.

The absence of anything to denote the subject, and the form of expression, which still keeps within the circle of the figure of the vine, forbid us to understand this Psa 80:17 of the extirpation of the foes. According to the sense תּהי־ידך על coincides with the supplicatory כנה על. It is Israel that is called בּן in Psa 80:16, as being the son whom Jahve has called into being in Egypt, and then called out of Egypt to Himself and solemnly declared to be His son on Sinai (Exo 4:22; Hos 11:1), and who is now, with a play upon the name of Benjamin in Psa 80:3 (cf.

Psa 80:16), called אישׁ ימינך, as being the people which Jahve has preferred before others, and has placed at His right hand for the carrying out of His work of salvation; who is called, however, at the same time בּן־אדם, because belonging to a humanity that is feeble in itself, and thoroughly conditioned and dependent. It is not the more precise designation of the “son of man” that is carried forward by ולא־נסוג, “and who has not drawn back from Thee” (Hupfeld, Hitzig, and others), but it is, as the same relation which is repeated in Psa 80:19 shows, the apodosis of the preceding petition: then shall we never depart from Thee; נסוג being not a participle, as in Psa 44:19, but a plene written voluntative: recedamus , vowing new obedience as thanksgiving of the divine preservation.

To the prayer in Psa 80:18 corresponds, then, the prayer תּחיּנוּ, which is expressed as future (which can rarely be avoided, Ew. §229), with a vow of thanksgiving likewise following: then will we call with Thy name, i. e. , make it the medium and matter of solemn proclamation. In v. 20 the refrain of this Psalm, which is laid out as a trilogy, is repeated for the third time.

The name of God is here threefold.

Psa 80:8-19 The complaint now assumes a detailing character in this strophe, inasmuch as it contrasts the former days with the present; and the ever more and more importunate prayer moulds itself in accordance therewith. The retrospective description begins, as is rarely the case, with the second modus , inasmuch as “the speaker thinks more of the bare nature of the act than of the time” (Ew.

§136, b ). As in the blessing of Jacob (Gen 49:22) Joseph is compared to the layer (בּן) of a fruitful growth (פּרת), whose shoots (בּנות) climb over the wall: so here Israel is compared to a vine (Gen 49:22; גּפן פּריּח, Psa 128:3), which has become great in Egypt and been transplanted thence into the Land of Promise. הסּיע, lxx μεταίρειν, as in Job 19:10, perhaps with an allusion to the מסעים of the people journeying to Canaan (Psa 78:52).

Here God made His vine a way and a place (פּנּהּ, to clear, from פּנה, to turn, turn aside, Arabic fanija , to disappear, pass away; root פן, to urge forward), and after He had secured to it a free soil and unchecked possibility of extension, it (the vine) rooted its roots, i. e. , struck them ever deeper and wider, and filled the earth round about (cf. the antitype in the final days, Isa 27:6).

The Israelitish kingdom of God extended itself on every side in accordance with the promise. תּשׁלּח (cf. Eze 17:6, and vegetable שׁלח, a shoot) also has the vine as its subject, like תּשׁרשׁ. Psa 80:11-12 state this in a continued allegory, by the “mountains” pointing to the southern boundary, by the “cedars” to the northern, by the “sea” to the western, and by the “river” (Euphrates) to the eastern boundary of the country (vid.

, Deu 11:24 and other passages). צלּהּ and ענפיה are accusatives of the so-called more remote object (Ges. §143, 1). קציר is a cutting = a branch; יונקת, a (vegetable) sucker = a young, tender shoot; ארזי־אל, the cedars of Lebanon as being living monuments of the creative might of God. The allegory exceeds the measure of the reality of nature, inasmuch as this is obliged to be extended according to the reality of that which is typified and historical.

But how unlike to the former times is the present! The poet asks “wherefore? ” for the present state of things is a riddle to him. The surroundings of the vine are torn down; all who come in contact with it pluck it (ארה, to pick off, pluck off, Talmudic of the gathering of figs); the boar out of the wood (מיער with עין תלויה, Ajin ) cuts it off (כּרסם, formed out of כּסם = גּזם viz.

, with its tusks; and that which moves about the fields (vid. , concerning זיז, Psa 50:11), i. e. , the untractable, lively wild beast, devours it. Without doubt the poet associates a distinct nation with the wild boar in his mind; for animals are also in other instances the emblems of nations, as e. g. , the leviathan, the water-serpent, the behemoth (Isa 30:6), and flies (Isa 7:18) are emblems of Egypt.

The Midrash interprets it of Seîr-Edom, and זיז שׂדי, according to Gen 16:12, of the nomadic Arabs. In Psa 80:15 the prayer begins for the third time with threefold urgency, supplicating for the vine renewed divine providence, and a renewal of the care of divine grace. We have divided the verse differently from the accentuation, since שׁוּב־נא הבּט is to be understood according to Ges.

§142. The junction by means of ו is at once opposed to the supposition that וכּנּה in Psa 80:16 signifies a slip or plant, plantam (Targum, Syriac, Aben-Ezra, Kimchi, and others), and that consequently the whole of Psa 80:16 is governed by וּפקד. Nor can it mean its (the vine’s) stand or base, כּן (Böttcher), since one does not plant a “stand. ” The lxx renders וכנה: καὶ κατάρτισαι, which is imper.

aor . 1. med. , therefore in the sense of כּוננה. But the alternation of על (cf. Pro 2:11, and Arab. jn ‛lâ , to cover over) with the accusative of the object makes it more natural to derive כנה, not from כּנן = כּוּן, but from כּנן Arab. kanna = גּנן, to cover, conceal, protect (whence Arab. kinn , a covering, shelter, hiding-place): and protect him whom...

or: protect what Thy right hand has planted. The pointing certainly seems to take כנה as the feminine of כּן (lxx, Dan 11:7, φυτόν); for an imperat. paragog. Kal of the form כּנּה does not occur elsewhere, although it might have been regarded by the punctuists as possible from the form גּל, volve , Psa 119:22. If it is regarded as impossible, then one might read כנּה.

At any rate the word is imperative, as the following אשׁר, eum quem , also shows, instead of which, if כנה were a substantive, one would expect to find a relative clause without אשׁר, as in Psa 80:16 . Moreover Psa 80:16 requires this, since פּקד על can only be used of visiting with punishment. And who then would the slip (branch) and the son of man be in distinction from the vine?

If we take בנה as imperative, then, as one might expect, the vine and the son of man are both the people of God. The Targum renders Psa 80:16 thus: “and upon the King Messiah, whom Thou hast established for Thyself,” after Psa 2:1-12 and Dan 7:13; but, as in the latter passage, it is not the Christ Himself, but the nation out of which He is to proceed, that is meant.

אמּץ has the sense of firm appropriation, as in Isa 44:14, inasmuch as the notion of making fast passes over into that of laying firm hold of, of seizure. Rosenmüller well renders it: quem adoptatum tot nexibus tibi adstrinxisti. The figure of the vine, which rules all the language here, is also still continued in Psa 80:17; for the partt. fem. refer to גּפן ot refer, - the verb, however, may take the plural form, because those of Israel are this “vine,” which combusta igne, succisa (as in Isa 33:12; Aramaic, be cut off, tear off, in Psa 80:13 the Targum word for ארה; Arabic, ksḥ , to clear away, peel off), is just perishing, or hangs in danger of destruction (יאבדוּ) before the threatening of the wrathful countenance of God.

The absence of anything to denote the subject, and the form of expression, which still keeps within the circle of the figure of the vine, forbid us to understand this Psa 80:17 of the extirpation of the foes. According to the sense תּהי־ידך על coincides with the supplicatory כנה על. It is Israel that is called בּן in Psa 80:16, as being the son whom Jahve has called into being in Egypt, and then called out of Egypt to Himself and solemnly declared to be His son on Sinai (Exo 4:22; Hos 11:1), and who is now, with a play upon the name of Benjamin in Psa 80:3 (cf.

Psa 80:16), called אישׁ ימינך, as being the people which Jahve has preferred before others, and has placed at His right hand for the carrying out of His work of salvation; who is called, however, at the same time בּן־אדם, because belonging to a humanity that is feeble in itself, and thoroughly conditioned and dependent. It is not the more precise designation of the “son of man” that is carried forward by ולא־נסוג, “and who has not drawn back from Thee” (Hupfeld, Hitzig, and others), but it is, as the same relation which is repeated in Psa 80:19 shows, the apodosis of the preceding petition: then shall we never depart from Thee; נסוג being not a participle, as in Psa 44:19, but a plene written voluntative: recedamus , vowing new obedience as thanksgiving of the divine preservation.

To the prayer in Psa 80:18 corresponds, then, the prayer תּחיּנוּ, which is expressed as future (which can rarely be avoided, Ew. §229), with a vow of thanksgiving likewise following: then will we call with Thy name, i. e. , make it the medium and matter of solemn proclamation. In v. 20 the refrain of this Psalm, which is laid out as a trilogy, is repeated for the third time.

The name of God is here threefold.

Psa 80:8-19 The complaint now assumes a detailing character in this strophe, inasmuch as it contrasts the former days with the present; and the ever more and more importunate prayer moulds itself in accordance therewith. The retrospective description begins, as is rarely the case, with the second modus , inasmuch as “the speaker thinks more of the bare nature of the act than of the time” (Ew.

§136, b ). As in the blessing of Jacob (Gen 49:22) Joseph is compared to the layer (בּן) of a fruitful growth (פּרת), whose shoots (בּנות) climb over the wall: so here Israel is compared to a vine (Gen 49:22; גּפן פּריּח, Psa 128:3), which has become great in Egypt and been transplanted thence into the Land of Promise. הסּיע, lxx μεταίρειν, as in Job 19:10, perhaps with an allusion to the מסעים of the people journeying to Canaan (Psa 78:52).

Here God made His vine a way and a place (פּנּהּ, to clear, from פּנה, to turn, turn aside, Arabic fanija , to disappear, pass away; root פן, to urge forward), and after He had secured to it a free soil and unchecked possibility of extension, it (the vine) rooted its roots, i. e. , struck them ever deeper and wider, and filled the earth round about (cf. the antitype in the final days, Isa 27:6).

The Israelitish kingdom of God extended itself on every side in accordance with the promise. תּשׁלּח (cf. Eze 17:6, and vegetable שׁלח, a shoot) also has the vine as its subject, like תּשׁרשׁ. Psa 80:11-12 state this in a continued allegory, by the “mountains” pointing to the southern boundary, by the “cedars” to the northern, by the “sea” to the western, and by the “river” (Euphrates) to the eastern boundary of the country (vid.

, Deu 11:24 and other passages). צלּהּ and ענפיה are accusatives of the so-called more remote object (Ges. §143, 1). קציר is a cutting = a branch; יונקת, a (vegetable) sucker = a young, tender shoot; ארזי־אל, the cedars of Lebanon as being living monuments of the creative might of God. The allegory exceeds the measure of the reality of nature, inasmuch as this is obliged to be extended according to the reality of that which is typified and historical.

But how unlike to the former times is the present! The poet asks “wherefore? ” for the present state of things is a riddle to him. The surroundings of the vine are torn down; all who come in contact with it pluck it (ארה, to pick off, pluck off, Talmudic of the gathering of figs); the boar out of the wood (מיער with עין תלויה, Ajin ) cuts it off (כּרסם, formed out of כּסם = גּזם viz.

, with its tusks; and that which moves about the fields (vid. , concerning זיז, Psa 50:11), i. e. , the untractable, lively wild beast, devours it. Without doubt the poet associates a distinct nation with the wild boar in his mind; for animals are also in other instances the emblems of nations, as e. g. , the leviathan, the water-serpent, the behemoth (Isa 30:6), and flies (Isa 7:18) are emblems of Egypt.

The Midrash interprets it of Seîr-Edom, and זיז שׂדי, according to Gen 16:12, of the nomadic Arabs. In Psa 80:15 the prayer begins for the third time with threefold urgency, supplicating for the vine renewed divine providence, and a renewal of the care of divine grace. We have divided the verse differently from the accentuation, since שׁוּב־נא הבּט is to be understood according to Ges.

§142. The junction by means of ו is at once opposed to the supposition that וכּנּה in Psa 80:16 signifies a slip or plant, plantam (Targum, Syriac, Aben-Ezra, Kimchi, and others), and that consequently the whole of Psa 80:16 is governed by וּפקד. Nor can it mean its (the vine’s) stand or base, כּן (Böttcher), since one does not plant a “stand. ” The lxx renders וכנה: καὶ κατάρτισαι, which is imper.

aor . 1. med. , therefore in the sense of כּוננה. But the alternation of על (cf. Pro 2:11, and Arab. jn ‛lâ , to cover over) with the accusative of the object makes it more natural to derive כנה, not from כּנן = כּוּן, but from כּנן Arab. kanna = גּנן, to cover, conceal, protect (whence Arab. kinn , a covering, shelter, hiding-place): and protect him whom...

or: protect what Thy right hand has planted. The pointing certainly seems to take כנה as the feminine of כּן (lxx, Dan 11:7, φυτόν); for an imperat. paragog. Kal of the form כּנּה does not occur elsewhere, although it might have been regarded by the punctuists as possible from the form גּל, volve , Psa 119:22. If it is regarded as impossible, then one might read כנּה.

At any rate the word is imperative, as the following אשׁר, eum quem , also shows, instead of which, if כנה were a substantive, one would expect to find a relative clause without אשׁר, as in Psa 80:16 . Moreover Psa 80:16 requires this, since פּקד על can only be used of visiting with punishment. And who then would the slip (branch) and the son of man be in distinction from the vine?

If we take בנה as imperative, then, as one might expect, the vine and the son of man are both the people of God. The Targum renders Psa 80:16 thus: “and upon the King Messiah, whom Thou hast established for Thyself,” after Psa 2:1-12 and Dan 7:13; but, as in the latter passage, it is not the Christ Himself, but the nation out of which He is to proceed, that is meant.

אמּץ has the sense of firm appropriation, as in Isa 44:14, inasmuch as the notion of making fast passes over into that of laying firm hold of, of seizure. Rosenmüller well renders it: quem adoptatum tot nexibus tibi adstrinxisti. The figure of the vine, which rules all the language here, is also still continued in Psa 80:17; for the partt. fem. refer to גּפן ot refer, - the verb, however, may take the plural form, because those of Israel are this “vine,” which combusta igne, succisa (as in Isa 33:12; Aramaic, be cut off, tear off, in Psa 80:13 the Targum word for ארה; Arabic, ksḥ , to clear away, peel off), is just perishing, or hangs in danger of destruction (יאבדוּ) before the threatening of the wrathful countenance of God.

The absence of anything to denote the subject, and the form of expression, which still keeps within the circle of the figure of the vine, forbid us to understand this Psa 80:17 of the extirpation of the foes. According to the sense תּהי־ידך על coincides with the supplicatory כנה על. It is Israel that is called בּן in Psa 80:16, as being the son whom Jahve has called into being in Egypt, and then called out of Egypt to Himself and solemnly declared to be His son on Sinai (Exo 4:22; Hos 11:1), and who is now, with a play upon the name of Benjamin in Psa 80:3 (cf.

Psa 80:16), called אישׁ ימינך, as being the people which Jahve has preferred before others, and has placed at His right hand for the carrying out of His work of salvation; who is called, however, at the same time בּן־אדם, because belonging to a humanity that is feeble in itself, and thoroughly conditioned and dependent. It is not the more precise designation of the “son of man” that is carried forward by ולא־נסוג, “and who has not drawn back from Thee” (Hupfeld, Hitzig, and others), but it is, as the same relation which is repeated in Psa 80:19 shows, the apodosis of the preceding petition: then shall we never depart from Thee; נסוג being not a participle, as in Psa 44:19, but a plene written voluntative: recedamus , vowing new obedience as thanksgiving of the divine preservation.

To the prayer in Psa 80:18 corresponds, then, the prayer תּחיּנוּ, which is expressed as future (which can rarely be avoided, Ew. §229), with a vow of thanksgiving likewise following: then will we call with Thy name, i. e. , make it the medium and matter of solemn proclamation. In v. 20 the refrain of this Psalm, which is laid out as a trilogy, is repeated for the third time.

The name of God is here threefold.

Psa 80:8-19 The complaint now assumes a detailing character in this strophe, inasmuch as it contrasts the former days with the present; and the ever more and more importunate prayer moulds itself in accordance therewith. The retrospective description begins, as is rarely the case, with the second modus , inasmuch as “the speaker thinks more of the bare nature of the act than of the time” (Ew.

§136, b ). As in the blessing of Jacob (Gen 49:22) Joseph is compared to the layer (בּן) of a fruitful growth (פּרת), whose shoots (בּנות) climb over the wall: so here Israel is compared to a vine (Gen 49:22; גּפן פּריּח, Psa 128:3), which has become great in Egypt and been transplanted thence into the Land of Promise. הסּיע, lxx μεταίρειν, as in Job 19:10, perhaps with an allusion to the מסעים of the people journeying to Canaan (Psa 78:52).

Here God made His vine a way and a place (פּנּהּ, to clear, from פּנה, to turn, turn aside, Arabic fanija , to disappear, pass away; root פן, to urge forward), and after He had secured to it a free soil and unchecked possibility of extension, it (the vine) rooted its roots, i. e. , struck them ever deeper and wider, and filled the earth round about (cf. the antitype in the final days, Isa 27:6).

The Israelitish kingdom of God extended itself on every side in accordance with the promise. תּשׁלּח (cf. Eze 17:6, and vegetable שׁלח, a shoot) also has the vine as its subject, like תּשׁרשׁ. Psa 80:11-12 state this in a continued allegory, by the “mountains” pointing to the southern boundary, by the “cedars” to the northern, by the “sea” to the western, and by the “river” (Euphrates) to the eastern boundary of the country (vid.

, Deu 11:24 and other passages). צלּהּ and ענפיה are accusatives of the so-called more remote object (Ges. §143, 1). קציר is a cutting = a branch; יונקת, a (vegetable) sucker = a young, tender shoot; ארזי־אל, the cedars of Lebanon as being living monuments of the creative might of God. The allegory exceeds the measure of the reality of nature, inasmuch as this is obliged to be extended according to the reality of that which is typified and historical.

But how unlike to the former times is the present! The poet asks “wherefore? ” for the present state of things is a riddle to him. The surroundings of the vine are torn down; all who come in contact with it pluck it (ארה, to pick off, pluck off, Talmudic of the gathering of figs); the boar out of the wood (מיער with עין תלויה, Ajin ) cuts it off (כּרסם, formed out of כּסם = גּזם viz.

, with its tusks; and that which moves about the fields (vid. , concerning זיז, Psa 50:11), i. e. , the untractable, lively wild beast, devours it. Without doubt the poet associates a distinct nation with the wild boar in his mind; for animals are also in other instances the emblems of nations, as e. g. , the leviathan, the water-serpent, the behemoth (Isa 30:6), and flies (Isa 7:18) are emblems of Egypt.

The Midrash interprets it of Seîr-Edom, and זיז שׂדי, according to Gen 16:12, of the nomadic Arabs. In Psa 80:15 the prayer begins for the third time with threefold urgency, supplicating for the vine renewed divine providence, and a renewal of the care of divine grace. We have divided the verse differently from the accentuation, since שׁוּב־נא הבּט is to be understood according to Ges.

§142. The junction by means of ו is at once opposed to the supposition that וכּנּה in Psa 80:16 signifies a slip or plant, plantam (Targum, Syriac, Aben-Ezra, Kimchi, and others), and that consequently the whole of Psa 80:16 is governed by וּפקד. Nor can it mean its (the vine’s) stand or base, כּן (Böttcher), since one does not plant a “stand. ” The lxx renders וכנה: καὶ κατάρτισαι, which is imper.

aor . 1. med. , therefore in the sense of כּוננה. But the alternation of על (cf. Pro 2:11, and Arab. jn ‛lâ , to cover over) with the accusative of the object makes it more natural to derive כנה, not from כּנן = כּוּן, but from כּנן Arab. kanna = גּנן, to cover, conceal, protect (whence Arab. kinn , a covering, shelter, hiding-place): and protect him whom...

or: protect what Thy right hand has planted. The pointing certainly seems to take כנה as the feminine of כּן (lxx, Dan 11:7, φυτόν); for an imperat. paragog. Kal of the form כּנּה does not occur elsewhere, although it might have been regarded by the punctuists as possible from the form גּל, volve , Psa 119:22. If it is regarded as impossible, then one might read כנּה.

At any rate the word is imperative, as the following אשׁר, eum quem , also shows, instead of which, if כנה were a substantive, one would expect to find a relative clause without אשׁר, as in Psa 80:16 . Moreover Psa 80:16 requires this, since פּקד על can only be used of visiting with punishment. And who then would the slip (branch) and the son of man be in distinction from the vine?

If we take בנה as imperative, then, as one might expect, the vine and the son of man are both the people of God. The Targum renders Psa 80:16 thus: “and upon the King Messiah, whom Thou hast established for Thyself,” after Psa 2:1-12 and Dan 7:13; but, as in the latter passage, it is not the Christ Himself, but the nation out of which He is to proceed, that is meant.

אמּץ has the sense of firm appropriation, as in Isa 44:14, inasmuch as the notion of making fast passes over into that of laying firm hold of, of seizure. Rosenmüller well renders it: quem adoptatum tot nexibus tibi adstrinxisti. The figure of the vine, which rules all the language here, is also still continued in Psa 80:17; for the partt. fem. refer to גּפן ot refer, - the verb, however, may take the plural form, because those of Israel are this “vine,” which combusta igne, succisa (as in Isa 33:12; Aramaic, be cut off, tear off, in Psa 80:13 the Targum word for ארה; Arabic, ksḥ , to clear away, peel off), is just perishing, or hangs in danger of destruction (יאבדוּ) before the threatening of the wrathful countenance of God.

The absence of anything to denote the subject, and the form of expression, which still keeps within the circle of the figure of the vine, forbid us to understand this Psa 80:17 of the extirpation of the foes. According to the sense תּהי־ידך על coincides with the supplicatory כנה על. It is Israel that is called בּן in Psa 80:16, as being the son whom Jahve has called into being in Egypt, and then called out of Egypt to Himself and solemnly declared to be His son on Sinai (Exo 4:22; Hos 11:1), and who is now, with a play upon the name of Benjamin in Psa 80:3 (cf.

Psa 80:16), called אישׁ ימינך, as being the people which Jahve has preferred before others, and has placed at His right hand for the carrying out of His work of salvation; who is called, however, at the same time בּן־אדם, because belonging to a humanity that is feeble in itself, and thoroughly conditioned and dependent. It is not the more precise designation of the “son of man” that is carried forward by ולא־נסוג, “and who has not drawn back from Thee” (Hupfeld, Hitzig, and others), but it is, as the same relation which is repeated in Psa 80:19 shows, the apodosis of the preceding petition: then shall we never depart from Thee; נסוג being not a participle, as in Psa 44:19, but a plene written voluntative: recedamus , vowing new obedience as thanksgiving of the divine preservation.

To the prayer in Psa 80:18 corresponds, then, the prayer תּחיּנוּ, which is expressed as future (which can rarely be avoided, Ew. §229), with a vow of thanksgiving likewise following: then will we call with Thy name, i. e. , make it the medium and matter of solemn proclamation. In v. 20 the refrain of this Psalm, which is laid out as a trilogy, is repeated for the third time.

The name of God is here threefold.

Psa 80:8-19 The complaint now assumes a detailing character in this strophe, inasmuch as it contrasts the former days with the present; and the ever more and more importunate prayer moulds itself in accordance therewith. The retrospective description begins, as is rarely the case, with the second modus , inasmuch as “the speaker thinks more of the bare nature of the act than of the time” (Ew.

§136, b ). As in the blessing of Jacob (Gen 49:22) Joseph is compared to the layer (בּן) of a fruitful growth (פּרת), whose shoots (בּנות) climb over the wall: so here Israel is compared to a vine (Gen 49:22; גּפן פּריּח, Psa 128:3), which has become great in Egypt and been transplanted thence into the Land of Promise. הסּיע, lxx μεταίρειν, as in Job 19:10, perhaps with an allusion to the מסעים of the people journeying to Canaan (Psa 78:52).

Here God made His vine a way and a place (פּנּהּ, to clear, from פּנה, to turn, turn aside, Arabic fanija , to disappear, pass away; root פן, to urge forward), and after He had secured to it a free soil and unchecked possibility of extension, it (the vine) rooted its roots, i. e. , struck them ever deeper and wider, and filled the earth round about (cf. the antitype in the final days, Isa 27:6).

The Israelitish kingdom of God extended itself on every side in accordance with the promise. תּשׁלּח (cf. Eze 17:6, and vegetable שׁלח, a shoot) also has the vine as its subject, like תּשׁרשׁ. Psa 80:11-12 state this in a continued allegory, by the “mountains” pointing to the southern boundary, by the “cedars” to the northern, by the “sea” to the western, and by the “river” (Euphrates) to the eastern boundary of the country (vid.

, Deu 11:24 and other passages). צלּהּ and ענפיה are accusatives of the so-called more remote object (Ges. §143, 1). קציר is a cutting = a branch; יונקת, a (vegetable) sucker = a young, tender shoot; ארזי־אל, the cedars of Lebanon as being living monuments of the creative might of God. The allegory exceeds the measure of the reality of nature, inasmuch as this is obliged to be extended according to the reality of that which is typified and historical.

But how unlike to the former times is the present! The poet asks “wherefore? ” for the present state of things is a riddle to him. The surroundings of the vine are torn down; all who come in contact with it pluck it (ארה, to pick off, pluck off, Talmudic of the gathering of figs); the boar out of the wood (מיער with עין תלויה, Ajin ) cuts it off (כּרסם, formed out of כּסם = גּזם viz.

, with its tusks; and that which moves about the fields (vid. , concerning זיז, Psa 50:11), i. e. , the untractable, lively wild beast, devours it. Without doubt the poet associates a distinct nation with the wild boar in his mind; for animals are also in other instances the emblems of nations, as e. g. , the leviathan, the water-serpent, the behemoth (Isa 30:6), and flies (Isa 7:18) are emblems of Egypt.

The Midrash interprets it of Seîr-Edom, and זיז שׂדי, according to Gen 16:12, of the nomadic Arabs. In Psa 80:15 the prayer begins for the third time with threefold urgency, supplicating for the vine renewed divine providence, and a renewal of the care of divine grace. We have divided the verse differently from the accentuation, since שׁוּב־נא הבּט is to be understood according to Ges.

§142. The junction by means of ו is at once opposed to the supposition that וכּנּה in Psa 80:16 signifies a slip or plant, plantam (Targum, Syriac, Aben-Ezra, Kimchi, and others), and that consequently the whole of Psa 80:16 is governed by וּפקד. Nor can it mean its (the vine’s) stand or base, כּן (Böttcher), since one does not plant a “stand. ” The lxx renders וכנה: καὶ κατάρτισαι, which is imper.

aor . 1. med. , therefore in the sense of כּוננה. But the alternation of על (cf. Pro 2:11, and Arab. jn ‛lâ , to cover over) with the accusative of the object makes it more natural to derive כנה, not from כּנן = כּוּן, but from כּנן Arab. kanna = גּנן, to cover, conceal, protect (whence Arab. kinn , a covering, shelter, hiding-place): and protect him whom...

or: protect what Thy right hand has planted. The pointing certainly seems to take כנה as the feminine of כּן (lxx, Dan 11:7, φυτόν); for an imperat. paragog. Kal of the form כּנּה does not occur elsewhere, although it might have been regarded by the punctuists as possible from the form גּל, volve , Psa 119:22. If it is regarded as impossible, then one might read כנּה.

At any rate the word is imperative, as the following אשׁר, eum quem , also shows, instead of which, if כנה were a substantive, one would expect to find a relative clause without אשׁר, as in Psa 80:16 . Moreover Psa 80:16 requires this, since פּקד על can only be used of visiting with punishment. And who then would the slip (branch) and the son of man be in distinction from the vine?

If we take בנה as imperative, then, as one might expect, the vine and the son of man are both the people of God. The Targum renders Psa 80:16 thus: “and upon the King Messiah, whom Thou hast established for Thyself,” after Psa 2:1-12 and Dan 7:13; but, as in the latter passage, it is not the Christ Himself, but the nation out of which He is to proceed, that is meant.

אמּץ has the sense of firm appropriation, as in Isa 44:14, inasmuch as the notion of making fast passes over into that of laying firm hold of, of seizure. Rosenmüller well renders it: quem adoptatum tot nexibus tibi adstrinxisti. The figure of the vine, which rules all the language here, is also still continued in Psa 80:17; for the partt. fem. refer to גּפן ot refer, - the verb, however, may take the plural form, because those of Israel are this “vine,” which combusta igne, succisa (as in Isa 33:12; Aramaic, be cut off, tear off, in Psa 80:13 the Targum word for ארה; Arabic, ksḥ , to clear away, peel off), is just perishing, or hangs in danger of destruction (יאבדוּ) before the threatening of the wrathful countenance of God.

The absence of anything to denote the subject, and the form of expression, which still keeps within the circle of the figure of the vine, forbid us to understand this Psa 80:17 of the extirpation of the foes. According to the sense תּהי־ידך על coincides with the supplicatory כנה על. It is Israel that is called בּן in Psa 80:16, as being the son whom Jahve has called into being in Egypt, and then called out of Egypt to Himself and solemnly declared to be His son on Sinai (Exo 4:22; Hos 11:1), and who is now, with a play upon the name of Benjamin in Psa 80:3 (cf.

Psa 80:16), called אישׁ ימינך, as being the people which Jahve has preferred before others, and has placed at His right hand for the carrying out of His work of salvation; who is called, however, at the same time בּן־אדם, because belonging to a humanity that is feeble in itself, and thoroughly conditioned and dependent. It is not the more precise designation of the “son of man” that is carried forward by ולא־נסוג, “and who has not drawn back from Thee” (Hupfeld, Hitzig, and others), but it is, as the same relation which is repeated in Psa 80:19 shows, the apodosis of the preceding petition: then shall we never depart from Thee; נסוג being not a participle, as in Psa 44:19, but a plene written voluntative: recedamus , vowing new obedience as thanksgiving of the divine preservation.

To the prayer in Psa 80:18 corresponds, then, the prayer תּחיּנוּ, which is expressed as future (which can rarely be avoided, Ew. §229), with a vow of thanksgiving likewise following: then will we call with Thy name, i. e. , make it the medium and matter of solemn proclamation. In v. 20 the refrain of this Psalm, which is laid out as a trilogy, is repeated for the third time.

The name of God is here threefold.

Psa 80:8-19 The complaint now assumes a detailing character in this strophe, inasmuch as it contrasts the former days with the present; and the ever more and more importunate prayer moulds itself in accordance therewith. The retrospective description begins, as is rarely the case, with the second modus , inasmuch as “the speaker thinks more of the bare nature of the act than of the time” (Ew.

§136, b ). As in the blessing of Jacob (Gen 49:22) Joseph is compared to the layer (בּן) of a fruitful growth (פּרת), whose shoots (בּנות) climb over the wall: so here Israel is compared to a vine (Gen 49:22; גּפן פּריּח, Psa 128:3), which has become great in Egypt and been transplanted thence into the Land of Promise. הסּיע, lxx μεταίρειν, as in Job 19:10, perhaps with an allusion to the מסעים of the people journeying to Canaan (Psa 78:52).

Here God made His vine a way and a place (פּנּהּ, to clear, from פּנה, to turn, turn aside, Arabic fanija , to disappear, pass away; root פן, to urge forward), and after He had secured to it a free soil and unchecked possibility of extension, it (the vine) rooted its roots, i. e. , struck them ever deeper and wider, and filled the earth round about (cf. the antitype in the final days, Isa 27:6).

The Israelitish kingdom of God extended itself on every side in accordance with the promise. תּשׁלּח (cf. Eze 17:6, and vegetable שׁלח, a shoot) also has the vine as its subject, like תּשׁרשׁ. Psa 80:11-12 state this in a continued allegory, by the “mountains” pointing to the southern boundary, by the “cedars” to the northern, by the “sea” to the western, and by the “river” (Euphrates) to the eastern boundary of the country (vid.

, Deu 11:24 and other passages). צלּהּ and ענפיה are accusatives of the so-called more remote object (Ges. §143, 1). קציר is a cutting = a branch; יונקת, a (vegetable) sucker = a young, tender shoot; ארזי־אל, the cedars of Lebanon as being living monuments of the creative might of God. The allegory exceeds the measure of the reality of nature, inasmuch as this is obliged to be extended according to the reality of that which is typified and historical.

But how unlike to the former times is the present! The poet asks “wherefore? ” for the present state of things is a riddle to him. The surroundings of the vine are torn down; all who come in contact with it pluck it (ארה, to pick off, pluck off, Talmudic of the gathering of figs); the boar out of the wood (מיער with עין תלויה, Ajin ) cuts it off (כּרסם, formed out of כּסם = גּזם viz.

, with its tusks; and that which moves about the fields (vid. , concerning זיז, Psa 50:11), i. e. , the untractable, lively wild beast, devours it. Without doubt the poet associates a distinct nation with the wild boar in his mind; for animals are also in other instances the emblems of nations, as e. g. , the leviathan, the water-serpent, the behemoth (Isa 30:6), and flies (Isa 7:18) are emblems of Egypt.

The Midrash interprets it of Seîr-Edom, and זיז שׂדי, according to Gen 16:12, of the nomadic Arabs. In Psa 80:15 the prayer begins for the third time with threefold urgency, supplicating for the vine renewed divine providence, and a renewal of the care of divine grace. We have divided the verse differently from the accentuation, since שׁוּב־נא הבּט is to be understood according to Ges.

§142. The junction by means of ו is at once opposed to the supposition that וכּנּה in Psa 80:16 signifies a slip or plant, plantam (Targum, Syriac, Aben-Ezra, Kimchi, and others), and that consequently the whole of Psa 80:16 is governed by וּפקד. Nor can it mean its (the vine’s) stand or base, כּן (Böttcher), since one does not plant a “stand. ” The lxx renders וכנה: καὶ κατάρτισαι, which is imper.

aor . 1. med. , therefore in the sense of כּוננה. But the alternation of על (cf. Pro 2:11, and Arab. jn ‛lâ , to cover over) with the accusative of the object makes it more natural to derive כנה, not from כּנן = כּוּן, but from כּנן Arab. kanna = גּנן, to cover, conceal, protect (whence Arab. kinn , a covering, shelter, hiding-place): and protect him whom...

or: protect what Thy right hand has planted. The pointing certainly seems to take כנה as the feminine of כּן (lxx, Dan 11:7, φυτόν); for an imperat. paragog. Kal of the form כּנּה does not occur elsewhere, although it might have been regarded by the punctuists as possible from the form גּל, volve , Psa 119:22. If it is regarded as impossible, then one might read כנּה.

At any rate the word is imperative, as the following אשׁר, eum quem , also shows, instead of which, if כנה were a substantive, one would expect to find a relative clause without אשׁר, as in Psa 80:16 . Moreover Psa 80:16 requires this, since פּקד על can only be used of visiting with punishment. And who then would the slip (branch) and the son of man be in distinction from the vine?

If we take בנה as imperative, then, as one might expect, the vine and the son of man are both the people of God. The Targum renders Psa 80:16 thus: “and upon the King Messiah, whom Thou hast established for Thyself,” after Psa 2:1-12 and Dan 7:13; but, as in the latter passage, it is not the Christ Himself, but the nation out of which He is to proceed, that is meant.

אמּץ has the sense of firm appropriation, as in Isa 44:14, inasmuch as the notion of making fast passes over into that of laying firm hold of, of seizure. Rosenmüller well renders it: quem adoptatum tot nexibus tibi adstrinxisti. The figure of the vine, which rules all the language here, is also still continued in Psa 80:17; for the partt. fem. refer to גּפן ot refer, - the verb, however, may take the plural form, because those of Israel are this “vine,” which combusta igne, succisa (as in Isa 33:12; Aramaic, be cut off, tear off, in Psa 80:13 the Targum word for ארה; Arabic, ksḥ , to clear away, peel off), is just perishing, or hangs in danger of destruction (יאבדוּ) before the threatening of the wrathful countenance of God.

The absence of anything to denote the subject, and the form of expression, which still keeps within the circle of the figure of the vine, forbid us to understand this Psa 80:17 of the extirpation of the foes. According to the sense תּהי־ידך על coincides with the supplicatory כנה על. It is Israel that is called בּן in Psa 80:16, as being the son whom Jahve has called into being in Egypt, and then called out of Egypt to Himself and solemnly declared to be His son on Sinai (Exo 4:22; Hos 11:1), and who is now, with a play upon the name of Benjamin in Psa 80:3 (cf.

Psa 80:16), called אישׁ ימינך, as being the people which Jahve has preferred before others, and has placed at His right hand for the carrying out of His work of salvation; who is called, however, at the same time בּן־אדם, because belonging to a humanity that is feeble in itself, and thoroughly conditioned and dependent. It is not the more precise designation of the “son of man” that is carried forward by ולא־נסוג, “and who has not drawn back from Thee” (Hupfeld, Hitzig, and others), but it is, as the same relation which is repeated in Psa 80:19 shows, the apodosis of the preceding petition: then shall we never depart from Thee; נסוג being not a participle, as in Psa 44:19, but a plene written voluntative: recedamus , vowing new obedience as thanksgiving of the divine preservation.

To the prayer in Psa 80:18 corresponds, then, the prayer תּחיּנוּ, which is expressed as future (which can rarely be avoided, Ew. §229), with a vow of thanksgiving likewise following: then will we call with Thy name, i. e. , make it the medium and matter of solemn proclamation. In v. 20 the refrain of this Psalm, which is laid out as a trilogy, is repeated for the third time.

The name of God is here threefold.

Psa 80:8-19 The complaint now assumes a detailing character in this strophe, inasmuch as it contrasts the former days with the present; and the ever more and more importunate prayer moulds itself in accordance therewith. The retrospective description begins, as is rarely the case, with the second modus , inasmuch as “the speaker thinks more of the bare nature of the act than of the time” (Ew.

§136, b ). As in the blessing of Jacob (Gen 49:22) Joseph is compared to the layer (בּן) of a fruitful growth (פּרת), whose shoots (בּנות) climb over the wall: so here Israel is compared to a vine (Gen 49:22; גּפן פּריּח, Psa 128:3), which has become great in Egypt and been transplanted thence into the Land of Promise. הסּיע, lxx μεταίρειν, as in Job 19:10, perhaps with an allusion to the מסעים of the people journeying to Canaan (Psa 78:52).

Here God made His vine a way and a place (פּנּהּ, to clear, from פּנה, to turn, turn aside, Arabic fanija , to disappear, pass away; root פן, to urge forward), and after He had secured to it a free soil and unchecked possibility of extension, it (the vine) rooted its roots, i. e. , struck them ever deeper and wider, and filled the earth round about (cf. the antitype in the final days, Isa 27:6).

The Israelitish kingdom of God extended itself on every side in accordance with the promise. תּשׁלּח (cf. Eze 17:6, and vegetable שׁלח, a shoot) also has the vine as its subject, like תּשׁרשׁ. Psa 80:11-12 state this in a continued allegory, by the “mountains” pointing to the southern boundary, by the “cedars” to the northern, by the “sea” to the western, and by the “river” (Euphrates) to the eastern boundary of the country (vid.

, Deu 11:24 and other passages). צלּהּ and ענפיה are accusatives of the so-called more remote object (Ges. §143, 1). קציר is a cutting = a branch; יונקת, a (vegetable) sucker = a young, tender shoot; ארזי־אל, the cedars of Lebanon as being living monuments of the creative might of God. The allegory exceeds the measure of the reality of nature, inasmuch as this is obliged to be extended according to the reality of that which is typified and historical.

But how unlike to the former times is the present! The poet asks “wherefore? ” for the present state of things is a riddle to him. The surroundings of the vine are torn down; all who come in contact with it pluck it (ארה, to pick off, pluck off, Talmudic of the gathering of figs); the boar out of the wood (מיער with עין תלויה, Ajin ) cuts it off (כּרסם, formed out of כּסם = גּזם viz.

, with its tusks; and that which moves about the fields (vid. , concerning זיז, Psa 50:11), i. e. , the untractable, lively wild beast, devours it. Without doubt the poet associates a distinct nation with the wild boar in his mind; for animals are also in other instances the emblems of nations, as e. g. , the leviathan, the water-serpent, the behemoth (Isa 30:6), and flies (Isa 7:18) are emblems of Egypt.

The Midrash interprets it of Seîr-Edom, and זיז שׂדי, according to Gen 16:12, of the nomadic Arabs. In Psa 80:15 the prayer begins for the third time with threefold urgency, supplicating for the vine renewed divine providence, and a renewal of the care of divine grace. We have divided the verse differently from the accentuation, since שׁוּב־נא הבּט is to be understood according to Ges.

§142. The junction by means of ו is at once opposed to the supposition that וכּנּה in Psa 80:16 signifies a slip or plant, plantam (Targum, Syriac, Aben-Ezra, Kimchi, and others), and that consequently the whole of Psa 80:16 is governed by וּפקד. Nor can it mean its (the vine’s) stand or base, כּן (Böttcher), since one does not plant a “stand. ” The lxx renders וכנה: καὶ κατάρτισαι, which is imper.

aor . 1. med. , therefore in the sense of כּוננה. But the alternation of על (cf. Pro 2:11, and Arab. jn ‛lâ , to cover over) with the accusative of the object makes it more natural to derive כנה, not from כּנן = כּוּן, but from כּנן Arab. kanna = גּנן, to cover, conceal, protect (whence Arab. kinn , a covering, shelter, hiding-place): and protect him whom...

or: protect what Thy right hand has planted. The pointing certainly seems to take כנה as the feminine of כּן (lxx, Dan 11:7, φυτόν); for an imperat. paragog. Kal of the form כּנּה does not occur elsewhere, although it might have been regarded by the punctuists as possible from the form גּל, volve , Psa 119:22. If it is regarded as impossible, then one might read כנּה.

At any rate the word is imperative, as the following אשׁר, eum quem , also shows, instead of which, if כנה were a substantive, one would expect to find a relative clause without אשׁר, as in Psa 80:16 . Moreover Psa 80:16 requires this, since פּקד על can only be used of visiting with punishment. And who then would the slip (branch) and the son of man be in distinction from the vine?

If we take בנה as imperative, then, as one might expect, the vine and the son of man are both the people of God. The Targum renders Psa 80:16 thus: “and upon the King Messiah, whom Thou hast established for Thyself,” after Psa 2:1-12 and Dan 7:13; but, as in the latter passage, it is not the Christ Himself, but the nation out of which He is to proceed, that is meant.

אמּץ has the sense of firm appropriation, as in Isa 44:14, inasmuch as the notion of making fast passes over into that of laying firm hold of, of seizure. Rosenmüller well renders it: quem adoptatum tot nexibus tibi adstrinxisti. The figure of the vine, which rules all the language here, is also still continued in Psa 80:17; for the partt. fem. refer to גּפן ot refer, - the verb, however, may take the plural form, because those of Israel are this “vine,” which combusta igne, succisa (as in Isa 33:12; Aramaic, be cut off, tear off, in Psa 80:13 the Targum word for ארה; Arabic, ksḥ , to clear away, peel off), is just perishing, or hangs in danger of destruction (יאבדוּ) before the threatening of the wrathful countenance of God.

The absence of anything to denote the subject, and the form of expression, which still keeps within the circle of the figure of the vine, forbid us to understand this Psa 80:17 of the extirpation of the foes. According to the sense תּהי־ידך על coincides with the supplicatory כנה על. It is Israel that is called בּן in Psa 80:16, as being the son whom Jahve has called into being in Egypt, and then called out of Egypt to Himself and solemnly declared to be His son on Sinai (Exo 4:22; Hos 11:1), and who is now, with a play upon the name of Benjamin in Psa 80:3 (cf.

Psa 80:16), called אישׁ ימינך, as being the people which Jahve has preferred before others, and has placed at His right hand for the carrying out of His work of salvation; who is called, however, at the same time בּן־אדם, because belonging to a humanity that is feeble in itself, and thoroughly conditioned and dependent. It is not the more precise designation of the “son of man” that is carried forward by ולא־נסוג, “and who has not drawn back from Thee” (Hupfeld, Hitzig, and others), but it is, as the same relation which is repeated in Psa 80:19 shows, the apodosis of the preceding petition: then shall we never depart from Thee; נסוג being not a participle, as in Psa 44:19, but a plene written voluntative: recedamus , vowing new obedience as thanksgiving of the divine preservation.

To the prayer in Psa 80:18 corresponds, then, the prayer תּחיּנוּ, which is expressed as future (which can rarely be avoided, Ew. §229), with a vow of thanksgiving likewise following: then will we call with Thy name, i. e. , make it the medium and matter of solemn proclamation. In v. 20 the refrain of this Psalm, which is laid out as a trilogy, is repeated for the third time.

The name of God is here threefold.

Psa 80:8-19 The complaint now assumes a detailing character in this strophe, inasmuch as it contrasts the former days with the present; and the ever more and more importunate prayer moulds itself in accordance therewith. The retrospective description begins, as is rarely the case, with the second modus , inasmuch as “the speaker thinks more of the bare nature of the act than of the time” (Ew.

§136, b ). As in the blessing of Jacob (Gen 49:22) Joseph is compared to the layer (בּן) of a fruitful growth (פּרת), whose shoots (בּנות) climb over the wall: so here Israel is compared to a vine (Gen 49:22; גּפן פּריּח, Psa 128:3), which has become great in Egypt and been transplanted thence into the Land of Promise. הסּיע, lxx μεταίρειν, as in Job 19:10, perhaps with an allusion to the מסעים of the people journeying to Canaan (Psa 78:52).

Here God made His vine a way and a place (פּנּהּ, to clear, from פּנה, to turn, turn aside, Arabic fanija , to disappear, pass away; root פן, to urge forward), and after He had secured to it a free soil and unchecked possibility of extension, it (the vine) rooted its roots, i. e. , struck them ever deeper and wider, and filled the earth round about (cf. the antitype in the final days, Isa 27:6).

The Israelitish kingdom of God extended itself on every side in accordance with the promise. תּשׁלּח (cf. Eze 17:6, and vegetable שׁלח, a shoot) also has the vine as its subject, like תּשׁרשׁ. Psa 80:11-12 state this in a continued allegory, by the “mountains” pointing to the southern boundary, by the “cedars” to the northern, by the “sea” to the western, and by the “river” (Euphrates) to the eastern boundary of the country (vid.

, Deu 11:24 and other passages). צלּהּ and ענפיה are accusatives of the so-called more remote object (Ges. §143, 1). קציר is a cutting = a branch; יונקת, a (vegetable) sucker = a young, tender shoot; ארזי־אל, the cedars of Lebanon as being living monuments of the creative might of God. The allegory exceeds the measure of the reality of nature, inasmuch as this is obliged to be extended according to the reality of that which is typified and historical.

But how unlike to the former times is the present! The poet asks “wherefore? ” for the present state of things is a riddle to him. The surroundings of the vine are torn down; all who come in contact with it pluck it (ארה, to pick off, pluck off, Talmudic of the gathering of figs); the boar out of the wood (מיער with עין תלויה, Ajin ) cuts it off (כּרסם, formed out of כּסם = גּזם viz.

, with its tusks; and that which moves about the fields (vid. , concerning זיז, Psa 50:11), i. e. , the untractable, lively wild beast, devours it. Without doubt the poet associates a distinct nation with the wild boar in his mind; for animals are also in other instances the emblems of nations, as e. g. , the leviathan, the water-serpent, the behemoth (Isa 30:6), and flies (Isa 7:18) are emblems of Egypt.

The Midrash interprets it of Seîr-Edom, and זיז שׂדי, according to Gen 16:12, of the nomadic Arabs. In Psa 80:15 the prayer begins for the third time with threefold urgency, supplicating for the vine renewed divine providence, and a renewal of the care of divine grace. We have divided the verse differently from the accentuation, since שׁוּב־נא הבּט is to be understood according to Ges.

§142. The junction by means of ו is at once opposed to the supposition that וכּנּה in Psa 80:16 signifies a slip or plant, plantam (Targum, Syriac, Aben-Ezra, Kimchi, and others), and that consequently the whole of Psa 80:16 is governed by וּפקד. Nor can it mean its (the vine’s) stand or base, כּן (Böttcher), since one does not plant a “stand. ” The lxx renders וכנה: καὶ κατάρτισαι, which is imper.

aor . 1. med. , therefore in the sense of כּוננה. But the alternation of על (cf. Pro 2:11, and Arab. jn ‛lâ , to cover over) with the accusative of the object makes it more natural to derive כנה, not from כּנן = כּוּן, but from כּנן Arab. kanna = גּנן, to cover, conceal, protect (whence Arab. kinn , a covering, shelter, hiding-place): and protect him whom...

or: protect what Thy right hand has planted. The pointing certainly seems to take כנה as the feminine of כּן (lxx, Dan 11:7, φυτόν); for an imperat. paragog. Kal of the form כּנּה does not occur elsewhere, although it might have been regarded by the punctuists as possible from the form גּל, volve , Psa 119:22. If it is regarded as impossible, then one might read כנּה.

At any rate the word is imperative, as the following אשׁר, eum quem , also shows, instead of which, if כנה were a substantive, one would expect to find a relative clause without אשׁר, as in Psa 80:16 . Moreover Psa 80:16 requires this, since פּקד על can only be used of visiting with punishment. And who then would the slip (branch) and the son of man be in distinction from the vine?

If we take בנה as imperative, then, as one might expect, the vine and the son of man are both the people of God. The Targum renders Psa 80:16 thus: “and upon the King Messiah, whom Thou hast established for Thyself,” after Psa 2:1-12 and Dan 7:13; but, as in the latter passage, it is not the Christ Himself, but the nation out of which He is to proceed, that is meant.

אמּץ has the sense of firm appropriation, as in Isa 44:14, inasmuch as the notion of making fast passes over into that of laying firm hold of, of seizure. Rosenmüller well renders it: quem adoptatum tot nexibus tibi adstrinxisti. The figure of the vine, which rules all the language here, is also still continued in Psa 80:17; for the partt. fem. refer to גּפן ot refer, - the verb, however, may take the plural form, because those of Israel are this “vine,” which combusta igne, succisa (as in Isa 33:12; Aramaic, be cut off, tear off, in Psa 80:13 the Targum word for ארה; Arabic, ksḥ , to clear away, peel off), is just perishing, or hangs in danger of destruction (יאבדוּ) before the threatening of the wrathful countenance of God.

The absence of anything to denote the subject, and the form of expression, which still keeps within the circle of the figure of the vine, forbid us to understand this Psa 80:17 of the extirpation of the foes. According to the sense תּהי־ידך על coincides with the supplicatory כנה על. It is Israel that is called בּן in Psa 80:16, as being the son whom Jahve has called into being in Egypt, and then called out of Egypt to Himself and solemnly declared to be His son on Sinai (Exo 4:22; Hos 11:1), and who is now, with a play upon the name of Benjamin in Psa 80:3 (cf.

Psa 80:16), called אישׁ ימינך, as being the people which Jahve has preferred before others, and has placed at His right hand for the carrying out of His work of salvation; who is called, however, at the same time בּן־אדם, because belonging to a humanity that is feeble in itself, and thoroughly conditioned and dependent. It is not the more precise designation of the “son of man” that is carried forward by ולא־נסוג, “and who has not drawn back from Thee” (Hupfeld, Hitzig, and others), but it is, as the same relation which is repeated in Psa 80:19 shows, the apodosis of the preceding petition: then shall we never depart from Thee; נסוג being not a participle, as in Psa 44:19, but a plene written voluntative: recedamus , vowing new obedience as thanksgiving of the divine preservation.

To the prayer in Psa 80:18 corresponds, then, the prayer תּחיּנוּ, which is expressed as future (which can rarely be avoided, Ew. §229), with a vow of thanksgiving likewise following: then will we call with Thy name, i. e. , make it the medium and matter of solemn proclamation. In v. 20 the refrain of this Psalm, which is laid out as a trilogy, is repeated for the third time.

The name of God is here threefold.

Psa 80:8-19 The complaint now assumes a detailing character in this strophe, inasmuch as it contrasts the former days with the present; and the ever more and more importunate prayer moulds itself in accordance therewith. The retrospective description begins, as is rarely the case, with the second modus , inasmuch as “the speaker thinks more of the bare nature of the act than of the time” (Ew.

§136, b ). As in the blessing of Jacob (Gen 49:22) Joseph is compared to the layer (בּן) of a fruitful growth (פּרת), whose shoots (בּנות) climb over the wall: so here Israel is compared to a vine (Gen 49:22; גּפן פּריּח, Psa 128:3), which has become great in Egypt and been transplanted thence into the Land of Promise. הסּיע, lxx μεταίρειν, as in Job 19:10, perhaps with an allusion to the מסעים of the people journeying to Canaan (Psa 78:52).

Here God made His vine a way and a place (פּנּהּ, to clear, from פּנה, to turn, turn aside, Arabic fanija , to disappear, pass away; root פן, to urge forward), and after He had secured to it a free soil and unchecked possibility of extension, it (the vine) rooted its roots, i. e. , struck them ever deeper and wider, and filled the earth round about (cf. the antitype in the final days, Isa 27:6).

The Israelitish kingdom of God extended itself on every side in accordance with the promise. תּשׁלּח (cf. Eze 17:6, and vegetable שׁלח, a shoot) also has the vine as its subject, like תּשׁרשׁ. Psa 80:11-12 state this in a continued allegory, by the “mountains” pointing to the southern boundary, by the “cedars” to the northern, by the “sea” to the western, and by the “river” (Euphrates) to the eastern boundary of the country (vid.

, Deu 11:24 and other passages). צלּהּ and ענפיה are accusatives of the so-called more remote object (Ges. §143, 1). קציר is a cutting = a branch; יונקת, a (vegetable) sucker = a young, tender shoot; ארזי־אל, the cedars of Lebanon as being living monuments of the creative might of God. The allegory exceeds the measure of the reality of nature, inasmuch as this is obliged to be extended according to the reality of that which is typified and historical.

But how unlike to the former times is the present! The poet asks “wherefore? ” for the present state of things is a riddle to him. The surroundings of the vine are torn down; all who come in contact with it pluck it (ארה, to pick off, pluck off, Talmudic of the gathering of figs); the boar out of the wood (מיער with עין תלויה, Ajin ) cuts it off (כּרסם, formed out of כּסם = גּזם viz.

, with its tusks; and that which moves about the fields (vid. , concerning זיז, Psa 50:11), i. e. , the untractable, lively wild beast, devours it. Without doubt the poet associates a distinct nation with the wild boar in his mind; for animals are also in other instances the emblems of nations, as e. g. , the leviathan, the water-serpent, the behemoth (Isa 30:6), and flies (Isa 7:18) are emblems of Egypt.

The Midrash interprets it of Seîr-Edom, and זיז שׂדי, according to Gen 16:12, of the nomadic Arabs. In Psa 80:15 the prayer begins for the third time with threefold urgency, supplicating for the vine renewed divine providence, and a renewal of the care of divine grace. We have divided the verse differently from the accentuation, since שׁוּב־נא הבּט is to be understood according to Ges.

§142. The junction by means of ו is at once opposed to the supposition that וכּנּה in Psa 80:16 signifies a slip or plant, plantam (Targum, Syriac, Aben-Ezra, Kimchi, and others), and that consequently the whole of Psa 80:16 is governed by וּפקד. Nor can it mean its (the vine’s) stand or base, כּן (Böttcher), since one does not plant a “stand. ” The lxx renders וכנה: καὶ κατάρτισαι, which is imper.

aor . 1. med. , therefore in the sense of כּוננה. But the alternation of על (cf. Pro 2:11, and Arab. jn ‛lâ , to cover over) with the accusative of the object makes it more natural to derive כנה, not from כּנן = כּוּן, but from כּנן Arab. kanna = גּנן, to cover, conceal, protect (whence Arab. kinn , a covering, shelter, hiding-place): and protect him whom...

or: protect what Thy right hand has planted. The pointing certainly seems to take כנה as the feminine of כּן (lxx, Dan 11:7, φυτόν); for an imperat. paragog. Kal of the form כּנּה does not occur elsewhere, although it might have been regarded by the punctuists as possible from the form גּל, volve , Psa 119:22. If it is regarded as impossible, then one might read כנּה.

At any rate the word is imperative, as the following אשׁר, eum quem , also shows, instead of which, if כנה were a substantive, one would expect to find a relative clause without אשׁר, as in Psa 80:16 . Moreover Psa 80:16 requires this, since פּקד על can only be used of visiting with punishment. And who then would the slip (branch) and the son of man be in distinction from the vine?

If we take בנה as imperative, then, as one might expect, the vine and the son of man are both the people of God. The Targum renders Psa 80:16 thus: “and upon the King Messiah, whom Thou hast established for Thyself,” after Psa 2:1-12 and Dan 7:13; but, as in the latter passage, it is not the Christ Himself, but the nation out of which He is to proceed, that is meant.

אמּץ has the sense of firm appropriation, as in Isa 44:14, inasmuch as the notion of making fast passes over into that of laying firm hold of, of seizure. Rosenmüller well renders it: quem adoptatum tot nexibus tibi adstrinxisti. The figure of the vine, which rules all the language here, is also still continued in Psa 80:17; for the partt. fem. refer to גּפן ot refer, - the verb, however, may take the plural form, because those of Israel are this “vine,” which combusta igne, succisa (as in Isa 33:12; Aramaic, be cut off, tear off, in Psa 80:13 the Targum word for ארה; Arabic, ksḥ , to clear away, peel off), is just perishing, or hangs in danger of destruction (יאבדוּ) before the threatening of the wrathful countenance of God.

The absence of anything to denote the subject, and the form of expression, which still keeps within the circle of the figure of the vine, forbid us to understand this Psa 80:17 of the extirpation of the foes. According to the sense תּהי־ידך על coincides with the supplicatory כנה על. It is Israel that is called בּן in Psa 80:16, as being the son whom Jahve has called into being in Egypt, and then called out of Egypt to Himself and solemnly declared to be His son on Sinai (Exo 4:22; Hos 11:1), and who is now, with a play upon the name of Benjamin in Psa 80:3 (cf.

Psa 80:16), called אישׁ ימינך, as being the people which Jahve has preferred before others, and has placed at His right hand for the carrying out of His work of salvation; who is called, however, at the same time בּן־אדם, because belonging to a humanity that is feeble in itself, and thoroughly conditioned and dependent. It is not the more precise designation of the “son of man” that is carried forward by ולא־נסוג, “and who has not drawn back from Thee” (Hupfeld, Hitzig, and others), but it is, as the same relation which is repeated in Psa 80:19 shows, the apodosis of the preceding petition: then shall we never depart from Thee; נסוג being not a participle, as in Psa 44:19, but a plene written voluntative: recedamus , vowing new obedience as thanksgiving of the divine preservation.

To the prayer in Psa 80:18 corresponds, then, the prayer תּחיּנוּ, which is expressed as future (which can rarely be avoided, Ew. §229), with a vow of thanksgiving likewise following: then will we call with Thy name, i. e. , make it the medium and matter of solemn proclamation. In v. 20 the refrain of this Psalm, which is laid out as a trilogy, is repeated for the third time.

The name of God is here threefold.

Psa 80:8-19 The complaint now assumes a detailing character in this strophe, inasmuch as it contrasts the former days with the present; and the ever more and more importunate prayer moulds itself in accordance therewith. The retrospective description begins, as is rarely the case, with the second modus , inasmuch as “the speaker thinks more of the bare nature of the act than of the time” (Ew.

§136, b ). As in the blessing of Jacob (Gen 49:22) Joseph is compared to the layer (בּן) of a fruitful growth (פּרת), whose shoots (בּנות) climb over the wall: so here Israel is compared to a vine (Gen 49:22; גּפן פּריּח, Psa 128:3), which has become great in Egypt and been transplanted thence into the Land of Promise. הסּיע, lxx μεταίρειν, as in Job 19:10, perhaps with an allusion to the מסעים of the people journeying to Canaan (Psa 78:52).

Here God made His vine a way and a place (פּנּהּ, to clear, from פּנה, to turn, turn aside, Arabic fanija , to disappear, pass away; root פן, to urge forward), and after He had secured to it a free soil and unchecked possibility of extension, it (the vine) rooted its roots, i. e. , struck them ever deeper and wider, and filled the earth round about (cf. the antitype in the final days, Isa 27:6).

The Israelitish kingdom of God extended itself on every side in accordance with the promise. תּשׁלּח (cf. Eze 17:6, and vegetable שׁלח, a shoot) also has the vine as its subject, like תּשׁרשׁ. Psa 80:11-12 state this in a continued allegory, by the “mountains” pointing to the southern boundary, by the “cedars” to the northern, by the “sea” to the western, and by the “river” (Euphrates) to the eastern boundary of the country (vid.

, Deu 11:24 and other passages). צלּהּ and ענפיה are accusatives of the so-called more remote object (Ges. §143, 1). קציר is a cutting = a branch; יונקת, a (vegetable) sucker = a young, tender shoot; ארזי־אל, the cedars of Lebanon as being living monuments of the creative might of God. The allegory exceeds the measure of the reality of nature, inasmuch as this is obliged to be extended according to the reality of that which is typified and historical.

But how unlike to the former times is the present! The poet asks “wherefore? ” for the present state of things is a riddle to him. The surroundings of the vine are torn down; all who come in contact with it pluck it (ארה, to pick off, pluck off, Talmudic of the gathering of figs); the boar out of the wood (מיער with עין תלויה, Ajin ) cuts it off (כּרסם, formed out of כּסם = גּזם viz.

, with its tusks; and that which moves about the fields (vid. , concerning זיז, Psa 50:11), i. e. , the untractable, lively wild beast, devours it. Without doubt the poet associates a distinct nation with the wild boar in his mind; for animals are also in other instances the emblems of nations, as e. g. , the leviathan, the water-serpent, the behemoth (Isa 30:6), and flies (Isa 7:18) are emblems of Egypt.

The Midrash interprets it of Seîr-Edom, and זיז שׂדי, according to Gen 16:12, of the nomadic Arabs. In Psa 80:15 the prayer begins for the third time with threefold urgency, supplicating for the vine renewed divine providence, and a renewal of the care of divine grace. We have divided the verse differently from the accentuation, since שׁוּב־נא הבּט is to be understood according to Ges.

§142. The junction by means of ו is at once opposed to the supposition that וכּנּה in Psa 80:16 signifies a slip or plant, plantam (Targum, Syriac, Aben-Ezra, Kimchi, and others), and that consequently the whole of Psa 80:16 is governed by וּפקד. Nor can it mean its (the vine’s) stand or base, כּן (Böttcher), since one does not plant a “stand. ” The lxx renders וכנה: καὶ κατάρτισαι, which is imper.

aor . 1. med. , therefore in the sense of כּוננה. But the alternation of על (cf. Pro 2:11, and Arab. jn ‛lâ , to cover over) with the accusative of the object makes it more natural to derive כנה, not from כּנן = כּוּן, but from כּנן Arab. kanna = גּנן, to cover, conceal, protect (whence Arab. kinn , a covering, shelter, hiding-place): and protect him whom...

or: protect what Thy right hand has planted. The pointing certainly seems to take כנה as the feminine of כּן (lxx, Dan 11:7, φυτόν); for an imperat. paragog. Kal of the form כּנּה does not occur elsewhere, although it might have been regarded by the punctuists as possible from the form גּל, volve , Psa 119:22. If it is regarded as impossible, then one might read כנּה.

At any rate the word is imperative, as the following אשׁר, eum quem , also shows, instead of which, if כנה were a substantive, one would expect to find a relative clause without אשׁר, as in Psa 80:16 . Moreover Psa 80:16 requires this, since פּקד על can only be used of visiting with punishment. And who then would the slip (branch) and the son of man be in distinction from the vine?

If we take בנה as imperative, then, as one might expect, the vine and the son of man are both the people of God. The Targum renders Psa 80:16 thus: “and upon the King Messiah, whom Thou hast established for Thyself,” after Psa 2:1-12 and Dan 7:13; but, as in the latter passage, it is not the Christ Himself, but the nation out of which He is to proceed, that is meant.

אמּץ has the sense of firm appropriation, as in Isa 44:14, inasmuch as the notion of making fast passes over into that of laying firm hold of, of seizure. Rosenmüller well renders it: quem adoptatum tot nexibus tibi adstrinxisti. The figure of the vine, which rules all the language here, is also still continued in Psa 80:17; for the partt. fem. refer to גּפן ot refer, - the verb, however, may take the plural form, because those of Israel are this “vine,” which combusta igne, succisa (as in Isa 33:12; Aramaic, be cut off, tear off, in Psa 80:13 the Targum word for ארה; Arabic, ksḥ , to clear away, peel off), is just perishing, or hangs in danger of destruction (יאבדוּ) before the threatening of the wrathful countenance of God.

The absence of anything to denote the subject, and the form of expression, which still keeps within the circle of the figure of the vine, forbid us to understand this Psa 80:17 of the extirpation of the foes. According to the sense תּהי־ידך על coincides with the supplicatory כנה על. It is Israel that is called בּן in Psa 80:16, as being the son whom Jahve has called into being in Egypt, and then called out of Egypt to Himself and solemnly declared to be His son on Sinai (Exo 4:22; Hos 11:1), and who is now, with a play upon the name of Benjamin in Psa 80:3 (cf.

Psa 80:16), called אישׁ ימינך, as being the people which Jahve has preferred before others, and has placed at His right hand for the carrying out of His work of salvation; who is called, however, at the same time בּן־אדם, because belonging to a humanity that is feeble in itself, and thoroughly conditioned and dependent. It is not the more precise designation of the “son of man” that is carried forward by ולא־נסוג, “and who has not drawn back from Thee” (Hupfeld, Hitzig, and others), but it is, as the same relation which is repeated in Psa 80:19 shows, the apodosis of the preceding petition: then shall we never depart from Thee; נסוג being not a participle, as in Psa 44:19, but a plene written voluntative: recedamus , vowing new obedience as thanksgiving of the divine preservation.

To the prayer in Psa 80:18 corresponds, then, the prayer תּחיּנוּ, which is expressed as future (which can rarely be avoided, Ew. §229), with a vow of thanksgiving likewise following: then will we call with Thy name, i. e. , make it the medium and matter of solemn proclamation. In v. 20 the refrain of this Psalm, which is laid out as a trilogy, is repeated for the third time.

The name of God is here threefold.

Psa 80:8-19 The complaint now assumes a detailing character in this strophe, inasmuch as it contrasts the former days with the present; and the ever more and more importunate prayer moulds itself in accordance therewith. The retrospective description begins, as is rarely the case, with the second modus , inasmuch as “the speaker thinks more of the bare nature of the act than of the time” (Ew.

§136, b ). As in the blessing of Jacob (Gen 49:22) Joseph is compared to the layer (בּן) of a fruitful growth (פּרת), whose shoots (בּנות) climb over the wall: so here Israel is compared to a vine (Gen 49:22; גּפן פּריּח, Psa 128:3), which has become great in Egypt and been transplanted thence into the Land of Promise. הסּיע, lxx μεταίρειν, as in Job 19:10, perhaps with an allusion to the מסעים of the people journeying to Canaan (Psa 78:52).

Here God made His vine a way and a place (פּנּהּ, to clear, from פּנה, to turn, turn aside, Arabic fanija , to disappear, pass away; root פן, to urge forward), and after He had secured to it a free soil and unchecked possibility of extension, it (the vine) rooted its roots, i. e. , struck them ever deeper and wider, and filled the earth round about (cf. the antitype in the final days, Isa 27:6).

The Israelitish kingdom of God extended itself on every side in accordance with the promise. תּשׁלּח (cf. Eze 17:6, and vegetable שׁלח, a shoot) also has the vine as its subject, like תּשׁרשׁ. Psa 80:11-12 state this in a continued allegory, by the “mountains” pointing to the southern boundary, by the “cedars” to the northern, by the “sea” to the western, and by the “river” (Euphrates) to the eastern boundary of the country (vid.

, Deu 11:24 and other passages). צלּהּ and ענפיה are accusatives of the so-called more remote object (Ges. §143, 1). קציר is a cutting = a branch; יונקת, a (vegetable) sucker = a young, tender shoot; ארזי־אל, the cedars of Lebanon as being living monuments of the creative might of God. The allegory exceeds the measure of the reality of nature, inasmuch as this is obliged to be extended according to the reality of that which is typified and historical.

But how unlike to the former times is the present! The poet asks “wherefore? ” for the present state of things is a riddle to him. The surroundings of the vine are torn down; all who come in contact with it pluck it (ארה, to pick off, pluck off, Talmudic of the gathering of figs); the boar out of the wood (מיער with עין תלויה, Ajin ) cuts it off (כּרסם, formed out of כּסם = גּזם viz.

, with its tusks; and that which moves about the fields (vid. , concerning זיז, Psa 50:11), i. e. , the untractable, lively wild beast, devours it. Without doubt the poet associates a distinct nation with the wild boar in his mind; for animals are also in other instances the emblems of nations, as e. g. , the leviathan, the water-serpent, the behemoth (Isa 30:6), and flies (Isa 7:18) are emblems of Egypt.

The Midrash interprets it of Seîr-Edom, and זיז שׂדי, according to Gen 16:12, of the nomadic Arabs. In Psa 80:15 the prayer begins for the third time with threefold urgency, supplicating for the vine renewed divine providence, and a renewal of the care of divine grace. We have divided the verse differently from the accentuation, since שׁוּב־נא הבּט is to be understood according to Ges.

§142. The junction by means of ו is at once opposed to the supposition that וכּנּה in Psa 80:16 signifies a slip or plant, plantam (Targum, Syriac, Aben-Ezra, Kimchi, and others), and that consequently the whole of Psa 80:16 is governed by וּפקד. Nor can it mean its (the vine’s) stand or base, כּן (Böttcher), since one does not plant a “stand. ” The lxx renders וכנה: καὶ κατάρτισαι, which is imper.

aor . 1. med. , therefore in the sense of כּוננה. But the alternation of על (cf. Pro 2:11, and Arab. jn ‛lâ , to cover over) with the accusative of the object makes it more natural to derive כנה, not from כּנן = כּוּן, but from כּנן Arab. kanna = גּנן, to cover, conceal, protect (whence Arab. kinn , a covering, shelter, hiding-place): and protect him whom...

or: protect what Thy right hand has planted. The pointing certainly seems to take כנה as the feminine of כּן (lxx, Dan 11:7, φυτόν); for an imperat. paragog. Kal of the form כּנּה does not occur elsewhere, although it might have been regarded by the punctuists as possible from the form גּל, volve , Psa 119:22. If it is regarded as impossible, then one might read כנּה.

At any rate the word is imperative, as the following אשׁר, eum quem , also shows, instead of which, if כנה were a substantive, one would expect to find a relative clause without אשׁר, as in Psa 80:16 . Moreover Psa 80:16 requires this, since פּקד על can only be used of visiting with punishment. And who then would the slip (branch) and the son of man be in distinction from the vine?

If we take בנה as imperative, then, as one might expect, the vine and the son of man are both the people of God. The Targum renders Psa 80:16 thus: “and upon the King Messiah, whom Thou hast established for Thyself,” after Psa 2:1-12 and Dan 7:13; but, as in the latter passage, it is not the Christ Himself, but the nation out of which He is to proceed, that is meant.

אמּץ has the sense of firm appropriation, as in Isa 44:14, inasmuch as the notion of making fast passes over into that of laying firm hold of, of seizure. Rosenmüller well renders it: quem adoptatum tot nexibus tibi adstrinxisti. The figure of the vine, which rules all the language here, is also still continued in Psa 80:17; for the partt. fem. refer to גּפן ot refer, - the verb, however, may take the plural form, because those of Israel are this “vine,” which combusta igne, succisa (as in Isa 33:12; Aramaic, be cut off, tear off, in Psa 80:13 the Targum word for ארה; Arabic, ksḥ , to clear away, peel off), is just perishing, or hangs in danger of destruction (יאבדוּ) before the threatening of the wrathful countenance of God.

The absence of anything to denote the subject, and the form of expression, which still keeps within the circle of the figure of the vine, forbid us to understand this Psa 80:17 of the extirpation of the foes. According to the sense תּהי־ידך על coincides with the supplicatory כנה על. It is Israel that is called בּן in Psa 80:16, as being the son whom Jahve has called into being in Egypt, and then called out of Egypt to Himself and solemnly declared to be His son on Sinai (Exo 4:22; Hos 11:1), and who is now, with a play upon the name of Benjamin in Psa 80:3 (cf.

Psa 80:16), called אישׁ ימינך, as being the people which Jahve has preferred before others, and has placed at His right hand for the carrying out of His work of salvation; who is called, however, at the same time בּן־אדם, because belonging to a humanity that is feeble in itself, and thoroughly conditioned and dependent. It is not the more precise designation of the “son of man” that is carried forward by ולא־נסוג, “and who has not drawn back from Thee” (Hupfeld, Hitzig, and others), but it is, as the same relation which is repeated in Psa 80:19 shows, the apodosis of the preceding petition: then shall we never depart from Thee; נסוג being not a participle, as in Psa 44:19, but a plene written voluntative: recedamus , vowing new obedience as thanksgiving of the divine preservation.

To the prayer in Psa 80:18 corresponds, then, the prayer תּחיּנוּ, which is expressed as future (which can rarely be avoided, Ew. §229), with a vow of thanksgiving likewise following: then will we call with Thy name, i. e. , make it the medium and matter of solemn proclamation. In v. 20 the refrain of this Psalm, which is laid out as a trilogy, is repeated for the third time.

The name of God is here threefold.

Psa 80:8-19 The complaint now assumes a detailing character in this strophe, inasmuch as it contrasts the former days with the present; and the ever more and more importunate prayer moulds itself in accordance therewith. The retrospective description begins, as is rarely the case, with the second modus , inasmuch as “the speaker thinks more of the bare nature of the act than of the time” (Ew.

§136, b ). As in the blessing of Jacob (Gen 49:22) Joseph is compared to the layer (בּן) of a fruitful growth (פּרת), whose shoots (בּנות) climb over the wall: so here Israel is compared to a vine (Gen 49:22; גּפן פּריּח, Psa 128:3), which has become great in Egypt and been transplanted thence into the Land of Promise. הסּיע, lxx μεταίρειν, as in Job 19:10, perhaps with an allusion to the מסעים of the people journeying to Canaan (Psa 78:52).

Here God made His vine a way and a place (פּנּהּ, to clear, from פּנה, to turn, turn aside, Arabic fanija , to disappear, pass away; root פן, to urge forward), and after He had secured to it a free soil and unchecked possibility of extension, it (the vine) rooted its roots, i. e. , struck them ever deeper and wider, and filled the earth round about (cf. the antitype in the final days, Isa 27:6).

The Israelitish kingdom of God extended itself on every side in accordance with the promise. תּשׁלּח (cf. Eze 17:6, and vegetable שׁלח, a shoot) also has the vine as its subject, like תּשׁרשׁ. Psa 80:11-12 state this in a continued allegory, by the “mountains” pointing to the southern boundary, by the “cedars” to the northern, by the “sea” to the western, and by the “river” (Euphrates) to the eastern boundary of the country (vid.

, Deu 11:24 and other passages). צלּהּ and ענפיה are accusatives of the so-called more remote object (Ges. §143, 1). קציר is a cutting = a branch; יונקת, a (vegetable) sucker = a young, tender shoot; ארזי־אל, the cedars of Lebanon as being living monuments of the creative might of God. The allegory exceeds the measure of the reality of nature, inasmuch as this is obliged to be extended according to the reality of that which is typified and historical.

But how unlike to the former times is the present! The poet asks “wherefore? ” for the present state of things is a riddle to him. The surroundings of the vine are torn down; all who come in contact with it pluck it (ארה, to pick off, pluck off, Talmudic of the gathering of figs); the boar out of the wood (מיער with עין תלויה, Ajin ) cuts it off (כּרסם, formed out of כּסם = גּזם viz.

, with its tusks; and that which moves about the fields (vid. , concerning זיז, Psa 50:11), i. e. , the untractable, lively wild beast, devours it. Without doubt the poet associates a distinct nation with the wild boar in his mind; for animals are also in other instances the emblems of nations, as e. g. , the leviathan, the water-serpent, the behemoth (Isa 30:6), and flies (Isa 7:18) are emblems of Egypt.

The Midrash interprets it of Seîr-Edom, and זיז שׂדי, according to Gen 16:12, of the nomadic Arabs. In Psa 80:15 the prayer begins for the third time with threefold urgency, supplicating for the vine renewed divine providence, and a renewal of the care of divine grace. We have divided the verse differently from the accentuation, since שׁוּב־נא הבּט is to be understood according to Ges.

§142. The junction by means of ו is at once opposed to the supposition that וכּנּה in Psa 80:16 signifies a slip or plant, plantam (Targum, Syriac, Aben-Ezra, Kimchi, and others), and that consequently the whole of Psa 80:16 is governed by וּפקד. Nor can it mean its (the vine’s) stand or base, כּן (Böttcher), since one does not plant a “stand. ” The lxx renders וכנה: καὶ κατάρτισαι, which is imper.

aor . 1. med. , therefore in the sense of כּוננה. But the alternation of על (cf. Pro 2:11, and Arab. jn ‛lâ , to cover over) with the accusative of the object makes it more natural to derive כנה, not from כּנן = כּוּן, but from כּנן Arab. kanna = גּנן, to cover, conceal, protect (whence Arab. kinn , a covering, shelter, hiding-place): and protect him whom...

or: protect what Thy right hand has planted. The pointing certainly seems to take כנה as the feminine of כּן (lxx, Dan 11:7, φυτόν); for an imperat. paragog. Kal of the form כּנּה does not occur elsewhere, although it might have been regarded by the punctuists as possible from the form גּל, volve , Psa 119:22. If it is regarded as impossible, then one might read כנּה.

At any rate the word is imperative, as the following אשׁר, eum quem , also shows, instead of which, if כנה were a substantive, one would expect to find a relative clause without אשׁר, as in Psa 80:16 . Moreover Psa 80:16 requires this, since פּקד על can only be used of visiting with punishment. And who then would the slip (branch) and the son of man be in distinction from the vine?

If we take בנה as imperative, then, as one might expect, the vine and the son of man are both the people of God. The Targum renders Psa 80:16 thus: “and upon the King Messiah, whom Thou hast established for Thyself,” after Psa 2:1-12 and Dan 7:13; but, as in the latter passage, it is not the Christ Himself, but the nation out of which He is to proceed, that is meant.

אמּץ has the sense of firm appropriation, as in Isa 44:14, inasmuch as the notion of making fast passes over into that of laying firm hold of, of seizure. Rosenmüller well renders it: quem adoptatum tot nexibus tibi adstrinxisti. The figure of the vine, which rules all the language here, is also still continued in Psa 80:17; for the partt. fem. refer to גּפן ot refer, - the verb, however, may take the plural form, because those of Israel are this “vine,” which combusta igne, succisa (as in Isa 33:12; Aramaic, be cut off, tear off, in Psa 80:13 the Targum word for ארה; Arabic, ksḥ , to clear away, peel off), is just perishing, or hangs in danger of destruction (יאבדוּ) before the threatening of the wrathful countenance of God.

The absence of anything to denote the subject, and the form of expression, which still keeps within the circle of the figure of the vine, forbid us to understand this Psa 80:17 of the extirpation of the foes. According to the sense תּהי־ידך על coincides with the supplicatory כנה על. It is Israel that is called בּן in Psa 80:16, as being the son whom Jahve has called into being in Egypt, and then called out of Egypt to Himself and solemnly declared to be His son on Sinai (Exo 4:22; Hos 11:1), and who is now, with a play upon the name of Benjamin in Psa 80:3 (cf.

Psa 80:16), called אישׁ ימינך, as being the people which Jahve has preferred before others, and has placed at His right hand for the carrying out of His work of salvation; who is called, however, at the same time בּן־אדם, because belonging to a humanity that is feeble in itself, and thoroughly conditioned and dependent. It is not the more precise designation of the “son of man” that is carried forward by ולא־נסוג, “and who has not drawn back from Thee” (Hupfeld, Hitzig, and others), but it is, as the same relation which is repeated in Psa 80:19 shows, the apodosis of the preceding petition: then shall we never depart from Thee; נסוג being not a participle, as in Psa 44:19, but a plene written voluntative: recedamus , vowing new obedience as thanksgiving of the divine preservation.

To the prayer in Psa 80:18 corresponds, then, the prayer תּחיּנוּ, which is expressed as future (which can rarely be avoided, Ew. §229), with a vow of thanksgiving likewise following: then will we call with Thy name, i. e. , make it the medium and matter of solemn proclamation. In v. 20 the refrain of this Psalm, which is laid out as a trilogy, is repeated for the third time.

The name of God is here threefold.

Ps 80, which looks back into the time of the leading forth out of Egypt, is followed by another with the very same Asaphic thoroughly characteristic feature of a retrospective glance at Israel’s early history (cf. More particularly Psa 81:11 with Psa 80:9). In Psalms 81 the lyric element of Ps 77 is combined with the didactic element of Ps 78. The unity of these Psalms is indubitable.

All three have towards the close the appearance of being fragmentary. Fro the author delights to ascend to the height of his subject and to go down into the depth of it, without returning to the point from which he started. In Ps 77 Israel as a whole was called “the sons of Jacob and Joseph;” in Ps 78 we read “the sons of Ephraim” instead of the whole nation; here it is briefly called “Joseph.

” This also indicates the one author. Then Psalms 81, exactly like Psa 79:1-13, is based upon the Pentateuchal history in Exodus and Deuteronomy. Jahve Himself speaks through the mouth of the poet, as He did once through the mouth of Moses - Asaph is κατ ̓ ἐξοχήν the prophet (חזה) among the psalmists. The transition from one form of speech to another which accompanies the rapid alternation of feelings, what the Arabs call talwı̂n el - chitab , “a colouring of a speech by a change of the persons,” is also characteristic of him, as later on of Micah (e.

g. , Mic 6:15.) This Psalms 81 is according to ancient custom the Jewish New Year’s Psalm, the Psalm of the Feast of Trumpets (Num 29:1), therefore the Psalm of the first (and second) of Tishri; it is, however, a question whether the blowing of the horn ( shophar ) at the new moon, which it calls upon them to do, does not rather apply to the first of Nisan, to the ecclesiastical New Year.

In the weekly liturgy of the Temple it was the Psalm for the Thursday. The poet calls upon them to give a jubilant welcome to the approaching festive season, and in Psa 81:7. Jahve Himself makes Himself heard as the Preacher of the festival. He reminds those now living of His loving-kindness towards ancient Israel, and admonishes them not to incur the guilt of like unfaithfulness, in order that they may not lose the like tokens of His loving-kindness.

What festive season is it? Either the Feast of the Passover or the Feast of Tabernacles; for it must be one of these two feasts which begin on the day of the full moon. Because it is one having reference to the redemption of Israel out of Egypt, the Targum, Talmud (more particularly Rosh ha - Shana , where this Psalm is much discussed), Midrash, and Sohar understand the Feast of Tabernacles; because Psa 81:2-4 seem to refer to the new moon of the seventh month, which is celebrated before the other new moons (Num 10:10), as יום התּרוּעה (Num 29:1, cf.

Lev 23:24), i. e. , to the first of Tishri, the civil New Year; and the blowing of horns at the New Year, is, certainly not according to Scripture, but yet according to tradition (vid. , Maimonides, Hilchoth Shophar Psa 1:2), a very ancient arrangement. Nevertheless we must give up this reference of the Psalm to the first of Tishri and to the Feast of Tabernacles, which begins with the fifteenth of Tishri: - (1) Because between the high feast-day of the first of Tishri and the Feast of Tabernacles on the fifteenth to the twenty-first (twenty-second) of Tishri lies the great day of Atonement on the tenth of Tishri, which would be ignored, by greeting the festive season with a joyful noise from the first of Tishri forthwith to the fifteenth.

(2) Because the remembrance of the redemption of Israel clings far more characteristically to the Feast of the Passover than to the Feast of Tabernacles. This latter appears in the oldest law-giving (Exo 23:16; Exo 34:22) as חג האסיף, i. e. , as a feast of the ingathering of the autumn fruits, and therefore as the closing festival of the whole harvest; it does not receive the historical reference to the journey through the desert, and therewith its character of a feast of booths or arbours, until the addition in Lev 23:39-44, having reference to the carrying out of the celebration of the feasts in Canaan; whereas the feast which begins with the full moon of Nisan has, it is true, not been entirely free of all reference to agriculture, but from the very beginning bears the historical names פּסח and חג המּצּות.

(3) Because in the Psalm itself, viz. , in Psa 81:6 , allusion is made to the fact which the Passover commemorates. Concerning על־הגּתּית vid. , on Psa 8:1. The symmetrical, stichic plan of the Psalm is clear: the schema is 11. 12. 12.

Psa 81:1-5 The summons in Psa 81:2 is addressed to the whole congregation, inasmuch as הריעוּ is not intended of the clanging of the trumpets, but as in Ezr 3:11, and frequently. The summons in Psa 81:3 is addressed to the Levites, the appointed singers and musicians in connection with the divine services, 2Ch 5:12, and frequently. The summons in Psa 81:4 is addressed to the priests, to whom was committed not only the blowing of the two (later on a hundred and twenty, vid.

, 2Ch 5:12) silver trumpets, but who appear also in Jos 6:4 and elsewhere (cf. Psa 47:6 with 2Ch 20:28) as the blowers of the shophar. The Talmud observes that since the destruction of the Temple the names of instruments שׁופרא and חצוצרתּא are wont to be confounded one for the other ( B. Sabbath 36 a , Succa 34 a ), and, itself confounding them, infers from Num 10:10 the duty and significance of the blowing of the shophar ( B.

Erachin 3 b ). The lxx also renders both by σάλπιγξ; but the Biblical language mentions שׁופר and חצצרה, a horn (more especially a ram’s horn) and a (metal) trumpet, side by side in Psa 98:6; 1Ch 15:28, and is therefore conscious of a difference between them. The Tôra says nothing of the employment of the shophar in connection with divine service, except that the commencement of every fiftieth year, which on this very account is called שׁנת היּבל, annus buccinae , is to be made known by the horn signal throughout all the land (Lev 25:9).

But just as tradition by means of an inference from analogy derives the blowing of the shophar on the first of Tishri, the beginning of the common year, from this precept, so on the ground of the passage of the Psalm before us, assuming that בּחרשׁ, lxx ἐν νεομηνίᾳ, refers not to the first of Tishri but to the first of Nisan, we may suppose that the beginning of every month, but, in particular, the beginning of the month which was at the same time the beginning of the ecclesiastical year, was celebrated by a blowing of the shophar, as, according to Josephus, Bell . iv.

9, 12, the beginning and close of the Sabbath was announced from the top of the Temple by a priest with the salpinx. The poet means to say that the Feast of the Passover is to be saluted by the congregation with shouts of joy, by the Levites with music, and even beginning from the new moon ( neomenia ) of the Passover month with blowing of shophars, and that this is to be continued at the Feast of the Passover itself.

The Feast of the Passover, for which Hupfeld devises a gloomy physiognomy, was a joyous festival, the Old Testament Christmas. 2Ch 30:21 testifies to the exultation of the people and the boisterous music of the Levite priests, with which it was celebrated. According to Num 10:10, the trumpeting of the priests was connected with the sacrifices; and that the slaying of the paschal lambs took place amidst the Tantaratan of the priests (long-drawn notes interspersed with sharp shrill ones, תקיעה תרועה וקיעה), is expressly related of the post-exilic service at least.

The phrase נתן תּף proceeds from the phrase נתן קול, according to which נתן directly means: to attune, strike up, cause to be heard. Concerning כּסה (Pro 7:20 כּסא) tradition is uncertain. The Talmudic interpretation ( B. Rosh ha-Shana 8 b , Betza 16 a , and the Targum which is taken from it), according to which it is the day of the new moon (the first of the month), on which the moon hides itself, i.

e. , is not to be seen at all in the morning, and in the evening only for a short time immediately after sunset, and the interpretation that is adopted by a still more imposing array of authorities (lxx, Vulgate, Menahem, Rashi, Jacob Tam, Aben-Ezra, Parchon, and others), according to which a time fixed by computation (from כּסה = כּסס, computare ) is so named in general, are outweighed by the usage of the Syriac, in which Keso denotes the full moon as the moon with covered, i.

e. , filled-up orb, and therefore the fifteenth of the month, but also the time from that point onwards, perhaps because then the moon covers itself, inasmuch as its shining surface appears each day less large (cf. the Peshîto, 1Ki 12:32 of the fifteenth day of the eighth month, 2Ch 7:10 of the twenty-third day of the seventh month, in both instances of the Feast of Tabernacles), after which, too, in the passage before us it is rendered wa - b - kese , which a Syro-Arabic glossary (in Rosenmüller) explains festa quae sunt in medio mensis .

The Peshîto here, like the Targum, proceeds from the reading חגּינוּ, which, following the lxx and the best texts, is to be rejected in comparison with the singular חגּנוּ. If, however, it is to be read chgnw, and כּסה (according to Kimchi with Segol not merely in the second syllable, but with double Segol כּסה, after the form טנא = טנא) signifies not interlunium , but plenilunium (instead of which also Jerome has in medio mense , and in Pro 7:20, in die plenae lunae , Aquila ἡμέρᾳ πανσελήνου), then what is meant is either the Feast of Tabernacles, which is called absolutely החג in 1Ki 8:2 (2Ch 5:3) and elsewhere, or the Passover, which is also so called in Isa 30:29 and elsewhere.

Here, as Psa 81:5 will convince us, the latter is intended, the Feast of unleavened bread, the porch of which, so to speak, is ערב פּסח together with the ליל שׁמּרים (Exo 12:42), the night from the fourteenth to the fifteenth of Nisan. In Psa 81:2, Psa 81:3 they are called upon to give a welcome to this feast. The blowing of the shophar is to announce the commencement of the Passover month, and at the commencement of the Passover day which opens the Feast of unleavened bread it is to be renewed.

The ל of ליום is not meant temporally, as perhaps in Job 21:30 : at the day = on the day; for why was it not ביום? It is rather: towards the day, but בכסה assumes that the day has already arrived; it is the same Lamed as in Psa 81:2, the blowing of the shophar is to concern this feast-day, it is to sound in honour of it.

Psa 81:1-5 The summons in Psa 81:2 is addressed to the whole congregation, inasmuch as הריעוּ is not intended of the clanging of the trumpets, but as in Ezr 3:11, and frequently. The summons in Psa 81:3 is addressed to the Levites, the appointed singers and musicians in connection with the divine services, 2Ch 5:12, and frequently. The summons in Psa 81:4 is addressed to the priests, to whom was committed not only the blowing of the two (later on a hundred and twenty, vid.

, 2Ch 5:12) silver trumpets, but who appear also in Jos 6:4 and elsewhere (cf. Psa 47:6 with 2Ch 20:28) as the blowers of the shophar. The Talmud observes that since the destruction of the Temple the names of instruments שׁופרא and חצוצרתּא are wont to be confounded one for the other ( B. Sabbath 36 a , Succa 34 a ), and, itself confounding them, infers from Num 10:10 the duty and significance of the blowing of the shophar ( B.

Erachin 3 b ). The lxx also renders both by σάλπιγξ; but the Biblical language mentions שׁופר and חצצרה, a horn (more especially a ram’s horn) and a (metal) trumpet, side by side in Psa 98:6; 1Ch 15:28, and is therefore conscious of a difference between them. The Tôra says nothing of the employment of the shophar in connection with divine service, except that the commencement of every fiftieth year, which on this very account is called שׁנת היּבל, annus buccinae , is to be made known by the horn signal throughout all the land (Lev 25:9).

But just as tradition by means of an inference from analogy derives the blowing of the shophar on the first of Tishri, the beginning of the common year, from this precept, so on the ground of the passage of the Psalm before us, assuming that בּחרשׁ, lxx ἐν νεομηνίᾳ, refers not to the first of Tishri but to the first of Nisan, we may suppose that the beginning of every month, but, in particular, the beginning of the month which was at the same time the beginning of the ecclesiastical year, was celebrated by a blowing of the shophar, as, according to Josephus, Bell . iv.

9, 12, the beginning and close of the Sabbath was announced from the top of the Temple by a priest with the salpinx. The poet means to say that the Feast of the Passover is to be saluted by the congregation with shouts of joy, by the Levites with music, and even beginning from the new moon ( neomenia ) of the Passover month with blowing of shophars, and that this is to be continued at the Feast of the Passover itself.

The Feast of the Passover, for which Hupfeld devises a gloomy physiognomy, was a joyous festival, the Old Testament Christmas. 2Ch 30:21 testifies to the exultation of the people and the boisterous music of the Levite priests, with which it was celebrated. According to Num 10:10, the trumpeting of the priests was connected with the sacrifices; and that the slaying of the paschal lambs took place amidst the Tantaratan of the priests (long-drawn notes interspersed with sharp shrill ones, תקיעה תרועה וקיעה), is expressly related of the post-exilic service at least.

The phrase נתן תּף proceeds from the phrase נתן קול, according to which נתן directly means: to attune, strike up, cause to be heard. Concerning כּסה (Pro 7:20 כּסא) tradition is uncertain. The Talmudic interpretation ( B. Rosh ha-Shana 8 b , Betza 16 a , and the Targum which is taken from it), according to which it is the day of the new moon (the first of the month), on which the moon hides itself, i.

e. , is not to be seen at all in the morning, and in the evening only for a short time immediately after sunset, and the interpretation that is adopted by a still more imposing array of authorities (lxx, Vulgate, Menahem, Rashi, Jacob Tam, Aben-Ezra, Parchon, and others), according to which a time fixed by computation (from כּסה = כּסס, computare ) is so named in general, are outweighed by the usage of the Syriac, in which Keso denotes the full moon as the moon with covered, i.

e. , filled-up orb, and therefore the fifteenth of the month, but also the time from that point onwards, perhaps because then the moon covers itself, inasmuch as its shining surface appears each day less large (cf. the Peshîto, 1Ki 12:32 of the fifteenth day of the eighth month, 2Ch 7:10 of the twenty-third day of the seventh month, in both instances of the Feast of Tabernacles), after which, too, in the passage before us it is rendered wa - b - kese , which a Syro-Arabic glossary (in Rosenmüller) explains festa quae sunt in medio mensis .

The Peshîto here, like the Targum, proceeds from the reading חגּינוּ, which, following the lxx and the best texts, is to be rejected in comparison with the singular חגּנוּ. If, however, it is to be read chgnw, and כּסה (according to Kimchi with Segol not merely in the second syllable, but with double Segol כּסה, after the form טנא = טנא) signifies not interlunium , but plenilunium (instead of which also Jerome has in medio mense , and in Pro 7:20, in die plenae lunae , Aquila ἡμέρᾳ πανσελήνου), then what is meant is either the Feast of Tabernacles, which is called absolutely החג in 1Ki 8:2 (2Ch 5:3) and elsewhere, or the Passover, which is also so called in Isa 30:29 and elsewhere.

Here, as Psa 81:5 will convince us, the latter is intended, the Feast of unleavened bread, the porch of which, so to speak, is ערב פּסח together with the ליל שׁמּרים (Exo 12:42), the night from the fourteenth to the fifteenth of Nisan. In Psa 81:2, Psa 81:3 they are called upon to give a welcome to this feast. The blowing of the shophar is to announce the commencement of the Passover month, and at the commencement of the Passover day which opens the Feast of unleavened bread it is to be renewed.

The ל of ליום is not meant temporally, as perhaps in Job 21:30 : at the day = on the day; for why was it not ביום? It is rather: towards the day, but בכסה assumes that the day has already arrived; it is the same Lamed as in Psa 81:2, the blowing of the shophar is to concern this feast-day, it is to sound in honour of it.

Psa 81:1-5 The summons in Psa 81:2 is addressed to the whole congregation, inasmuch as הריעוּ is not intended of the clanging of the trumpets, but as in Ezr 3:11, and frequently. The summons in Psa 81:3 is addressed to the Levites, the appointed singers and musicians in connection with the divine services, 2Ch 5:12, and frequently. The summons in Psa 81:4 is addressed to the priests, to whom was committed not only the blowing of the two (later on a hundred and twenty, vid.

, 2Ch 5:12) silver trumpets, but who appear also in Jos 6:4 and elsewhere (cf. Psa 47:6 with 2Ch 20:28) as the blowers of the shophar. The Talmud observes that since the destruction of the Temple the names of instruments שׁופרא and חצוצרתּא are wont to be confounded one for the other ( B. Sabbath 36 a , Succa 34 a ), and, itself confounding them, infers from Num 10:10 the duty and significance of the blowing of the shophar ( B.

Erachin 3 b ). The lxx also renders both by σάλπιγξ; but the Biblical language mentions שׁופר and חצצרה, a horn (more especially a ram’s horn) and a (metal) trumpet, side by side in Psa 98:6; 1Ch 15:28, and is therefore conscious of a difference between them. The Tôra says nothing of the employment of the shophar in connection with divine service, except that the commencement of every fiftieth year, which on this very account is called שׁנת היּבל, annus buccinae , is to be made known by the horn signal throughout all the land (Lev 25:9).

But just as tradition by means of an inference from analogy derives the blowing of the shophar on the first of Tishri, the beginning of the common year, from this precept, so on the ground of the passage of the Psalm before us, assuming that בּחרשׁ, lxx ἐν νεομηνίᾳ, refers not to the first of Tishri but to the first of Nisan, we may suppose that the beginning of every month, but, in particular, the beginning of the month which was at the same time the beginning of the ecclesiastical year, was celebrated by a blowing of the shophar, as, according to Josephus, Bell . iv.

9, 12, the beginning and close of the Sabbath was announced from the top of the Temple by a priest with the salpinx. The poet means to say that the Feast of the Passover is to be saluted by the congregation with shouts of joy, by the Levites with music, and even beginning from the new moon ( neomenia ) of the Passover month with blowing of shophars, and that this is to be continued at the Feast of the Passover itself.

The Feast of the Passover, for which Hupfeld devises a gloomy physiognomy, was a joyous festival, the Old Testament Christmas. 2Ch 30:21 testifies to the exultation of the people and the boisterous music of the Levite priests, with which it was celebrated. According to Num 10:10, the trumpeting of the priests was connected with the sacrifices; and that the slaying of the paschal lambs took place amidst the Tantaratan of the priests (long-drawn notes interspersed with sharp shrill ones, תקיעה תרועה וקיעה), is expressly related of the post-exilic service at least.

The phrase נתן תּף proceeds from the phrase נתן קול, according to which נתן directly means: to attune, strike up, cause to be heard. Concerning כּסה (Pro 7:20 כּסא) tradition is uncertain. The Talmudic interpretation ( B. Rosh ha-Shana 8 b , Betza 16 a , and the Targum which is taken from it), according to which it is the day of the new moon (the first of the month), on which the moon hides itself, i.

e. , is not to be seen at all in the morning, and in the evening only for a short time immediately after sunset, and the interpretation that is adopted by a still more imposing array of authorities (lxx, Vulgate, Menahem, Rashi, Jacob Tam, Aben-Ezra, Parchon, and others), according to which a time fixed by computation (from כּסה = כּסס, computare ) is so named in general, are outweighed by the usage of the Syriac, in which Keso denotes the full moon as the moon with covered, i.

e. , filled-up orb, and therefore the fifteenth of the month, but also the time from that point onwards, perhaps because then the moon covers itself, inasmuch as its shining surface appears each day less large (cf. the Peshîto, 1Ki 12:32 of the fifteenth day of the eighth month, 2Ch 7:10 of the twenty-third day of the seventh month, in both instances of the Feast of Tabernacles), after which, too, in the passage before us it is rendered wa - b - kese , which a Syro-Arabic glossary (in Rosenmüller) explains festa quae sunt in medio mensis .

The Peshîto here, like the Targum, proceeds from the reading חגּינוּ, which, following the lxx and the best texts, is to be rejected in comparison with the singular חגּנוּ. If, however, it is to be read chgnw, and כּסה (according to Kimchi with Segol not merely in the second syllable, but with double Segol כּסה, after the form טנא = טנא) signifies not interlunium , but plenilunium (instead of which also Jerome has in medio mense , and in Pro 7:20, in die plenae lunae , Aquila ἡμέρᾳ πανσελήνου), then what is meant is either the Feast of Tabernacles, which is called absolutely החג in 1Ki 8:2 (2Ch 5:3) and elsewhere, or the Passover, which is also so called in Isa 30:29 and elsewhere.

Here, as Psa 81:5 will convince us, the latter is intended, the Feast of unleavened bread, the porch of which, so to speak, is ערב פּסח together with the ליל שׁמּרים (Exo 12:42), the night from the fourteenth to the fifteenth of Nisan. In Psa 81:2, Psa 81:3 they are called upon to give a welcome to this feast. The blowing of the shophar is to announce the commencement of the Passover month, and at the commencement of the Passover day which opens the Feast of unleavened bread it is to be renewed.

The ל of ליום is not meant temporally, as perhaps in Job 21:30 : at the day = on the day; for why was it not ביום? It is rather: towards the day, but בכסה assumes that the day has already arrived; it is the same Lamed as in Psa 81:2, the blowing of the shophar is to concern this feast-day, it is to sound in honour of it.