Psalm 10 – The More Problematic Situation

TEXT

1. Why, O LORD, do you stand aloof, turning away in times of trouble?
2. The wicked in his arrogance hounds the lowly – let them be caught in the schemes they devise!
3. The wicked praises his deep cravings; the grasping man reviles and scorns the LORD.
4. The wicked, arrogant as he is, does not seek [Him]. All his schemes [presume]:"There is no God."
5. His ways prosper at all seasons; Your judgments are far beyond him; he snorts at all his foes.
6. He says in his heart, "I shall not be shaken, through all years never face evil times."
7. His mouth is full of oaths, deceit and fraud; mischief and iniquity are under his tongue.
8. He stays in outlying ambush; from hiding places he slays the innocent; his eyes spy out the hapless.
9. He hides in ambush, like a lion in his lair; waits in ambush to seize the lowly; he seizes the lowly as he pulls with his net;
10. he stoops, he crouches, and the hapless fall prey to his might.
11. He says in his heart, "God forgets. He hides His presence, He never1 sees."

12. Arise, O LORD! Exert Your power O God! Do not forget the lowly.
13. Why should the wicked man scorn God, saying in his heart You do not seek out?
14. You do see! You take note of mischief and vexation! To requite is in Your power. To You the hapless can abandon himself; the orphan - You have ever been his help.
15. O break the power of the wicked and the evil man, until You seek out his wickedness and find none.
16. The LORD is king forever and eternally; the nations will perish from His earth.
17. You listen to the craving of the lowly, O LORD - make their hearts firm, incline Your ear -
18. to judge the orphan and the oppressed, that men who are of the earth tyrannize no more.

Note
1. "Never" is "perpetually" not, same term as Psalm 9:7, 19



COMMENTARY

As I noted in commenting on Psalm 9, many interpreters combine Psalms 9 and 10. The reader is referred to that discussion and to my suggestion that it is best to think of the two poems as two movements of a single “symphony,” related yet separate. With one eye on the relationship between the two psalms (they share at least twenty-three roots and/or words), I first consider Psalm 10 independently and only at the end again discuss the two as a unit.

The Two Worldviews

The “modernity” of Psalm 10 is enticing. Ostensibly concentrating on the relationship of God to evildoers within the community (and therefore sharply differentiated from Psalm 9, which refers to external enemies), this psalm paints a picture of two radically different worldviews—that of the speaker and that of these evildoers. The speaker is sure that God will guarantee that all the plans of the evildoers will ultimately backfire, whereas they, in turn, openly contend that God pays no attention whatsoever to what goes on in this world, thus leaving them sovereign to act as they please. They have no fear. From verse 12 on, in two-sentence units following the order of the last four letters of the alphabet, the speaker’s assurance is transformed into a prayer-and-request. (Similarly, Psalm 9 begins its request with the same letter, koph.)

The author is well acquainted with other poetry in Psalms. Interpreters have noted the strong use of “formulaic” language in Psalm 10, and the many internal repetitions also testify to an “archetypical” psalm. The fascination comes from the sharp contrast of the two worldviews and the movement from assurance to request.

The reader is challenged because the evildoers base themselves on their experience, whereas the speaker bases himself on his deep faith. In the most immediate sense, the evildoers seem to have the empirical proof on their side. The poet describes a speaker who “creates” justice in the world by the force of conviction and prayer, and the reader is left to ponder this imposition of ethics on reality. In that regard, I note the comments of Walter Brueggemann (The Psalms: The Life of Faith, chapter 11) on Pss. 9–10. He senses that the speaker seeks to create a new reality that is different than the one observed: “The intent is not simply thanksgiving, but voicing of new modes of social power” (p. 222, on Psalm 9, but with added references to Psalm 10).

Does Form Reflect Content?

In light of the Psalm 9–Psalm 10 connection, and particularly the single acrostic that seems to appear in the combined texts, one notes the outstanding and most blatant element of the poem’s form. After Psalm 10 begins in continuation of Psalm 9 (the letter lamed of 10:1 following its predecessor, the letter kaph, of 9:19), one is sharply struck by the abandonment of the alphabetic order from 10:2–11. Fully six letters are skipped before the poem returns to the last four letters of the alphabet in order. If one is to attribute intent to this structure, one should consider the view of Ronald Ben Nun, who suggests that the disruption is purposeful, reflecting content: just as the evil disrupts the world, so it disrupts the structure of the poem. Only with the request to God that He act, does order return. (Ben Nun finds that the six missing letters are included, but scattered within the text.)

Renewed Consideration: Two Psalms as One

Psalms 9 and 10 share much—as I have noted. (Note also that those who investigate syllable and accent count find Psalm 9–Psalm 10 as a unit remarkably similar to Psalm 37, another accrostic psalm.) Less often recalled have been the parallel phenomena of requests beginning with the letter koph and the fact that each request ends with a use of the term of “enosh” (human being), which recalls our humanity. (In addition, Ben Nun points out that if we do not count the musical direction “selah,” even the word counts of the two psalms are identical.) These factors argue for unity.

The above not withstanding, the two psalms differ in their emphasis on the “other.” As noted, in Psalm 9 the other is clearly the external enemy, whereas in Psalm 10 the evildoers are among the people. The problems are therefore vastly different: in one case, the speaker seeks continued victory over the enemy and in the other he is looking for the triumph of good over evil in the internal moral sphere.

How then are the two related as two movements of a symphony? They are, in fact, obverse sides of the coin carried by the person of faith, not unrelated and yet not the same. Further, it makes sense that Psalm 9 precedes 10. In the former, domination over the enemies seems to have taken place at one point, and the speaker seeks continued support. In the latter, he can only testify to the problem (which may account for why the request section of Psalm 10 includes a statement of confidence, which seems “unnecessary” in Psalm 9). In binding the two halves into one work, the speaker “uses” this reassurance of Psalm 9 to deal with a much less clear situation, for, as noted above, the evildoers within seem to have empirical proof on their side. The failure of the external enemies in Psalm 9 (and the fact that their evil plans backfired—9:16) is a background of some reassurance for Psalm 10, namely, that the evildoers among the people will suffer a similar fate (10:2). The reader is left to judge the strength of that reassurance.

To Repeat – Repetition

Concerning the many terms which appear in both Psalms 9 and 10, I have tried to translate identical Hebrew roots with identical English terms (at the expense of mellifluence), to allow readers to explore comparison. Psalm 10 also has its internal pattern of repetition, with appropriate emphasis on "ambush," "schemes,'' "seizing," "scorn," "evil" and "mischief," on one hand; and "hapless" and "orphan" on the other. As so frequently, some repetition serves to allow comparison, such as the "cravings" of the lowly versus those of the wicked (verses 3, 17), and "seek" (verses 4, 13, 15), which traces the fate of the wicked from behavior to their final disappearance.


The author of these essays is Rabbi Benjamin Segal, former president of the Schechter Institute of Jewish Studies in Jerusalem and author of The Song of Songs: A Woman in Love (Jerusalem: Gefen, 2009). This material is copyright by the author, and may not be reproduced. If you are interested in using the texts for study groups, please be in direct contact with the author, at psalmblog@gmail.com.