Psalm 15 - The Religious Ideal

TEXT

A Psalm. Of David.

1 LORD, who may sojourn in Your tent, who may dwell on Your holy mountain?
2 He who walks blamelessly, who does what is right, and speaks truth in his heart;
3 who slanders not with his tongue, who has not done evil to his fellow, who has cast no slur on his neighbor.
4 In his eyes, a debased man is abhorrent, but those who fear the LORD he honors; if he vows to his detriment, he does not recant;
5 His money he does not lend at interest, and bribes against the innocent he does not accept. He who does these things will not stumble.

COMMENTARY

All cultures should have their ideal person—the model to be held up to children and adults alike, the goal of education, and the aspirations of the society. Psalm 15 articulates that ideal. The Talmud (Makot) thus calls this psalm an eleven-item summary of all 613 commandments (the traditional full number).

I again use both form and content to try to elucidate this psalm and deal, respectively, with the following: the subject of the poem (proposal and revision); the (startling) content or “contention”; the subject of the psalm as refined; and reflections on whether the origin of this ideal is human or divine.

The Subject: A Proposal and a Revision

Literalists, who, for reasons beyond my understanding, like to read the poetry of Psalms prose devoid of metaphor, have pigeonholed Psalm 15 as a “liturgy of entrance”—a warning or even a qualification exam for those who would set foot on the Temple Mount on pilgrimage or for sacrifice. Such a construct is the work of their creative minds, as there is no historical indication of such a practice. Further, we recall that all had access to the Temple Mount, even sinners! This literal reading of the first sentence not only invents history, but also turns a blind eye to the use of these terms in Psalms. The contexts of similar requests, for eternally living with God (e.g., Psalms 23:6; 27:4; 61:5) indicate a desire for spiritual rather than physical proximity. We have here the question of who merits God’s closeness, not who gets entrance rights to the Temple.

A further indication of this aspect of the poem is the use of the verbs “sojourn” and “dwell” (verse 1). No amount of twisting can make these verbs, particularly the latter, mean a “visit.” The reference is to a long-standing arrangement. As non-Levites did not sleep over on the Temple Mount, the “dwelling with God” referred to, then, is not in the Temple, but rather wherever the individual happens to be.

The Israeli scholar-poet Hamotal bar Yosef suggests that the poem might indeed have been a song recited by pilgrims, not as a clearance for entry and not as a threat, but rather as a reminder of what one could make of his or her visit. If one behaves properly, then the visit transforms into something permanent, and the visitors carrying the Temple "presence" away with them. Although such a use is also speculation and may not reflect the original composition, it does properly suggest the psalm’s emphasis on what life should be like.

The Content or Contention

The most compelling aspect of Psalm 15 needs no complex analysis. In defining the person meriting God’s accompaniment, as many have noted, the poet chooses matters neither of ritual nor of belief. Instead, the focus is on how one treats his or her fellow humans. A person achieves godliness by caring about others! Entrance into the Divine Presence is reserved for the ethical individual. Certainly, this is one of the most inspiring and thought provoking of the assertions in Psalms. (It may be that the starkness of the message is reflected here in the total absence of metaphor.)

Similarly remarkable and blatant is the absence of serious felonies—murder, theft, false testimony, sexual crimes, and so on. The poet has opted for the everyday attitudes and faults that are both the causes for and indications of a society gone astray. (Other commentators suggest two other possible common denominators: (a) that most of the crimes noted can be committed in secret, or (b) that we can understand them to be ethical demands beyond the letter of the law. All of these are possible, and the composite picture is indeed attractive.)

The message is buttressed by an intricate structure. Verses 2, 3, and 4 each list three qualities. The presentation is not so rigid as to conform to well-defined categories, but is uniform enough to promote speculation. If we were to list the verses as 2, 3, 4 and the order of the elements as a, b, c, for ease of understanding, one might suggest a reading such as the following: (2) general qualities, broadly stated; (3) prohibited attributes, all concerned with not hurting another; (4) either mind-set or acting against self-interest (if the “debased” of the beginning of the verse are those in power, as several commentators suggest); (a) life style; (b) actions; (c) words. Granted that the categories do not hold rigidly and that other suggestions may be equally valid, the tone does remain one of comprehensiveness, a complete picture. In every way, the poem seems to say, this person is worthy of his or her place.

The final two listings, in verse 5 (not taking interest and not accepting bribes) are commonly paired as economic crimes. It is probably better, however, to note that they share profiting at the expense of another person’s loss, an appropriate conclusion to such a list.

I note an alternative overview, suggested by Bar Yosef. Verse 2, she suggests, offers the three main categories, and the next three verses provide details in an order from abstract to concrete. Thus “speaks truth in his heart” of verse 2 is detailed in verse 3; “walks blamelessly” of verse 2 is detailed in verse in 4; and “does what is right” of verse 2 is detailed in verse 5.

The Subject, as Refined

As in many psalms, so in Psalm 15 the final verse seems out of place. Here, the conclusion does not match the opening question. Ostensibly having spent four verses responding to the opening query, seeking God's presence, the poet indicates that the result of all these attitudes, thoughts, and actions is the ability to withstand, that is, not to “stumble.”

At first, this change leads to thoughtful reactions. Perhaps the first goal is in fact unattainable. Is the poet so informing us by changing the goal? Is he contending that we cannot achieve such closeness, but that we can at least achieve the strength to survive?

However, another psalm gives us reason to think that the two goals are actually one and the same. In Psalm 16:8 the psalmist states, “He (God) is at my right hand, I shall not stumble.” Whether the second phrase is a restatement or a consequence is moot. In either case, presence with God and survival are integrally connected. If one applies this logic to the end of Psalm 15, then, there would not be a diminution of verse 1, but a restatement or strengthening. The psalm is about being with God, that is, not stumbling. This makes for a fascinating contention, namely, that ethical behavior grants one the wherewithal to stand firm (against the vicissitudes of life?).

Whence this List?

Over and above the use of the ethical to define God’s ideals, there is yet another interesting interplay of the divine and human here, with the emphasis again on the human being. The psalm opens with a question to God. As the answer unfolds, we might assume it is divine in origin, that is, that God speaks, until we reach the phrase “those who fear the LORD,” when it becomes probable that the speaker is offering the list, since he refers to the Lord in the third person. Not only is care for one’s fellow given priority, but the very articulation of the qualifications is offered by human hands! (Also to be noted: the two uses of the LORD’s name in the psalm are in the question addressed to Him by humans and in the phrase “those who fear the LORD,” referring to humans. All aspects of this psalm reflect a focus on human beings.)

Psalm 15 is, in short, an expression of a religious humanism. Whether it was meant as a challenge to more ritualistic or faith-oriented concepts of religion remains a question beyond the limits of the psalm itself.

* * * * * * * * *

An Additional Thought – Begin with the Negative

The word “no” (“not”) is repeated seven times in the psalm—six things this ideal person does not do and the fact that he does not stumble. Seven repetitions often indicate emphasis within biblical literature. We also note Weiss’s insight (“Scriptures”) that the verbs associated with what this person does not do are all in the perfect (the tense that spans past into present), whereas the other qualities are either adjectives or imperfect (which spans present into future). This, he suggests, indicates that one first has to avoid what he or she is not to do, and then go on to the positives. (He makes a similar point about Psalm 1.) (A friend suggests an alternative explanation: we humans simply find it easier to say what one should not do or not be than to deal with the opposite, positive side of the equation.)


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.