Psalm 12 - Speaking of Speaking

(Initial note – some translations do not number the title verse.)

TEXT

1. For the leader; on the sheminith.1 A Psalm. Of David.

2. Save, O LORD! For the faithful are no more; the loyal have vanished from among humankind.
3. Men speak lies to one another; of smooth lip, they speak with two hearts.
4. May the LORD cut off all smooth lips, the tongue that speaks boastfully,
5. those who say, “By our tongues we shall prevail; our lips are our own, who can be our master?”
6. ‘‘Because of the plundering of the poor and the groans of the needy, I will now arise,” says the LORD; “I will grant him the salvation for which he longs.”
7. The sayings of the LORD are pure sayings, silver purged in an earthen crucible, refined sevenfold.
8. You, O LORD, do keep them; ever protect each from this generation.
9. Round about the wicked roam 2-as vileness-2 is exalted among humankind.

Notes
1. Hebrew uncertain. Possibly eight stringed lyre.
2. Hebrew uncertain

COMMENTARY

A poet explores the primary tools of his trade: words. Surprisingly, his conclusions cast doubt on their reliability.

On completing Psalm 12, the reader is thrown back to the beginning, told to read it over again. Until then, the progression seems clear: smooth-talking, self-confident evil speakers are set against God, Whose word is pure. He is expected to save the unfortunate and stop the evil speakers. The last verse, however, seems to indicate that the problem remains unsolved. Hence, the puzzled reader goes back to review the psalm as a whole.

That review reveals three literary devices—an inclusio, an emphasis through repetition, and overlapping structures—which together convey a strong tone of contrast.

Three Literary Devices

The inclusio (a term that appears at both the beginning and the end) is b’nei adam, “humankind,” pointing to a societal condition as the subject.

The repetitions dominate the middle, to which the inclusion points. While the inclusio emphasizes the societal illness, the rest of the poem is marked by an incredibly strong emphasis on speech—three uses each of dbr (speak) and safah (lips), four of ‘mr (say), and two of lashon (tongue). There is also one “groans.” The speaker is focused on words.

The structures – multiple repetitions together with a single theme allow for various divisions of the psalm. There does seem to be a clear break point in the middle between verses 5 and 6 (verse 1 is only the title), the statement of the evildoers (5) contrasted with the statement of God (6). Indeed, the poetic technique here changes: the first half is dominated by echoes of words or roots from one sentence to the next (“steps”), but there is very little of that in the second half. Some commentators try to further divide the psalm on the basis of meaning. Structure, however, proceeds first and foremost technically, and review reveals a more complex structure, schematically,by color:

2         6

3         7

4         8

5         9

Verses 2 and 9 both describe the sad situation, marked by the reference to “humanity.”

Verses 5 and 6 are the two opposing quotes.

Verses 4 and 8 are the two requests to the LORD, His name being dominant in both.

Verses 3 and 7 are a total contrast, the words of the evil and the speech of God. Both sentences are ten words long and both repeat terms for the act of speech.

The Contrasts

The effect of this structure is to highlight three contrasts, all of which are articulated in the text: (a) evil and God; (b) what bothers the speaker as opposed to what bothers God; and (c) expectation and reality:

a. The most obvious contrast is between the words of the evildoers and the words of God, starkly emphasized as we come to verses 6 and 7 set, respectively, against verses 5 and 3. Their speech is duplicitous (3); His is pure (7). They express total confidence in their supremacy (4); He takes the side of the oppressed (6). His words are totally pure, maximally refined silver; theirs are smooth and of two hearts (implying “duplicity,” with an overtone of them convincing themselves in their hearts that their words echo some truth—so Buber). The poet seems to imply that the veracity of words is primarily dependent on the speaker!

b. One also notes a radical difference in what bothers the concerned parties. The speaker is upset at the boasting and success of these braggarts and ungodly people. For God, it is not their speech that makes the impression, but rather the plight of the oppressed. (God reacts to none of the repeated terms for speech, but to the understated once-used “groans” of the poor.)

c. The third contrast is the most telling. Reality (the first and last verses) has not changed. This psalm's prayer is offered with some degree of confidence that it will be accepted (see below on the double meaning of verse 8), but as of the writing or reading, the wicked are still dominant. Although not quite an accusation against the LORD, it is clearly a challenge: “They have spoken, and You have spoken, and in the meantime they prowl on every side! At the same time, Your speech is supposed to be pure and perfect!" The poet walks a fine line. His speaker does not confront God directly, and one might assume that consciously his speaker does not confront God at all. On another level, the poet pictures a speaker who must be somewhat confused, and who takes refuge in prayer and in the future.

Through words, the speaker of Psalm 12 explores words, and finds them to be a less than solid platform. Sociologically, and then theologically, he wonders about their reliability. Thus it remains an intriguing challenge to today’s reader, who experiences no less a contrast.

* * * * * * * *

Additional Considerations

The speaker subtly builds his request to God. In verse 4, the request is in the third person, “May the LORD…” By the time the speaker gets to verse 8, having heard God’s spoken reassurance, and having confirmed the purity of God’s speech, the request moves up to the second person – “You, O LORD…” The reader is challenged to consider what allows for the greater intimacy.

Verse 6 has a partial parallel in Isaiah 33:10: “Now I will arise, says the Lord….” There it is a reaction to an external enemy, followed by a long section of reassurance to Israel, and a threat to the enemy. Here the same words are followed by a reassurance (to himself?) that the Lord’s promise is perfect, and then by a second prayer. Were the situations equally desperate?

Rhyme is not prevalent in biblical poetry, and is usually uncertain. (Our present vowel system was adopted many centuries after the text was set, so there is little confidence that our text was pronounced as we pronounce it.) All that said, I note that in Psalm 12 there are an unusual number of rhymes, as follows (breaking each verse as divided in the Masoretic text into four parts, a, b, c and d) – verses 3 (a, b [partial], d), 4 (b, d), 5 (a [partial], c, d with two words within b and c rhyming), 6 (a, b), 7 (three of first four words, in a and b) and the end of verses 8 and 9 which also rhyme with the end of verse 2. In a poem that has so much to do with words, such an inclusion is fascinating, though I know of no explanation that has been offered.

Understandings that Underlie this Interpretation

There are several extremely difficult Hebrew verses in Psalm 12, and the overall interpretation depends in no small degree on how one understands them. I note two that are basic to the interpretation above.

1. The end of verse 9 is very hard to understand. I follow many commentators and translators in seeing the verse as a restatement of the success of the evildoers – approximately “Round about the wicked roam, as baseness is exalted among men.”

In ending in this fashion, the poem shares with others psalms a dramatic development in the last sentence. This is more usually accomplished in Psalms by a sharp reversal, which the reader is challenged to understand. Here the challenge is accomplished by going back to the starting point of the psalm.

2. Verse 8 is interpreted above as a prayer ("May you"), but the verb is in the imperfect tense which can indicate present and/or future—"You do" and/or “You will.” The Hebrew can be read either way, and has been (RSV and Buttenwieser, a request; NJPS, a statement). It is best to assume that the poet had both in mind—a request and a reassurance. Owing to the parallel sentence structure I emphasize the request.

3. On sheminith in verse1, see Additional Notes, Psalm 6.


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.