Psalm 90 is read every Sabbath and Holy Day in the morning service, and has as its opening the following rubric:
|
א תְּפִלָּה,
לְמֹשֶׁה אִישׁ-הָאֱלֹהִים: |
1 A Prayer of Moses the man of
God. |
This opening is very unusual.
Firstly, it is not labeled a ‘psalm’ – a מִזְמוֹר
– but rather a ‘prayer’ – a תְּפִלָּה: the
one and only such designation among all 150 psalms.
Secondly, it refers to Moses, that Moses of the Exodus,
as the author, using the tag “man of God” -- אִישׁ-הָאֱלֹהִים.
All the other of the 150 psalms are by David, King
Solomon (Psalm 72 and 127), Asaph, (David’s Levite appointee[i]:
12 psalms), the Levite sons of Korach (11 psalms), and later poets: even after
the Babylonian Exile of 586 BCE (Psalm 137).
Psalm 90’s rubric is, consequently, an anomaly.
Moses lived some 400 years before David[ii] and
the start of such religious poems.
To have Moses compose a psalm in praise of God that
was not included in the Chumash: alongside
Moses’ Song of the Sea (Exod. 15:1-18) or Haazinu
song (Deut. 32) or his poetic blessing of the 12 tribes (Duet. 33), seems to me
very suspect.
Chronologically it should be first: before any by
David or Solomon and the Levites named above.
But, in fairness, it is given primacy at the start of
Book IV: at the start of the remaining 60 psalms which mostly[iii] are
anonymous and fit the category ‘other psalms’.
As noted by the Art Scroll’s The Complete Art Scroll Siddur (1985 pocket version), p.412
commentary, there is a tradition that Psalm 90 through Psalm 100 were all
composed by Moses in a single scroll which David discovered and added to the
Book of Psalms. Art Scroll cites Radak for this but Rashi’s commentary to verse
1 already noted this tradition[iv].
Such a pre-existing scroll of psalms by Moses or the
even broader and more ancient authorships for the Book of Psalms’ anonymous poems -- as suggested in the Babylonian
Talmud, Bava Batra 14b (last section)
-- going back to Adam and Abraham, are all unsubstantiated and pious fiction.
Moses cannot have been the author of Psalms 94, 95 and
99:
·
Psalm 94 rages against the wicked who have taken
political and judicial control, oppressing the weak and helpless:
|
ה עַמְּךָ יְהוָה יְדַכְּאוּ;
וְנַחֲלָתְךָ יְעַנּוּ. |
5 They crush Thy people, O LORD, and
afflict Thy heritage. |
|
ו אַלְמָנָה וְגֵר
יַהֲרֹגוּ; וִיתוֹמִים יְרַצֵּחוּ. |
6 They slay the
widow and the stranger, and murder the fatherless. |
This is the concern only of the post- David prophets:
e.g., Jeremiah ch7:5-7, Isaiah ch
1:1-1, ch 33:14-15, Ezekiel ch 22:7 and Amos ch 2:6[v].
·
Psalm 97 and 99 mention Zion. But Zion (and Jerusalem)
was never part of the Israelite territories until conquered by King David[vi],
who had for 7 years already ruled Judah and, now, as king of all Israel
conquered the Jebusite stronghold for his palace capital – Zion -- and
adjoining city of Jerusalem.
Psalm
97
|
שָׁמְעָה וַתִּשְׂמַח, צִיּוֹן, וַתָּגֵלְנָה, בְּנוֹת יְהוּדָה-- |
8 Zion heard and was glad,
and the daughters of Judah rejoiced; {N} |
Psalm 99
|
ב יְהוָה, בְּצִיּוֹן גָּדוֹל; וְרָם הוּא, עַל-כָּל-הָעַמִּים. |
2 The LORD is great in Zion;
and He is high above all the peoples. |
So Psalm 97 and psalm 99 must be from David’s era or later.
Also, Psalm 99 in
verse 6 names Samuel the prophet.
|
ו מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן, בְּכֹהֲנָיו, וּשְׁמוּאֵל,
בְּקֹרְאֵי שְׁמוֹ; |
6 Moses and Aaron among His priests, and Samuel among them that call upon His name, |
Consequently, the
Moses tradition which Rashi and Radak --and subsequent texts such as the Art
Scroll Siddur -- have accepted does not hold up.
There have also been academic
arguments for Moses writing Psalm 90: based on commonalities in vocabulary and
ideas with Deut. 32 and Deut. 33.
As noted by the
Soncino The Psalms (10th
impression, 1071), p.297 commentary, Bible scholar A. Maclaren has argued the
psalm has many parallels in wording a ideas to Moses’ Haazinu song (Deuty.32[vii])
and should be accepted as a poem by Moses of the Exodus.
His position and
arguments, however, do not hold up either under close scrutiny.
Aside from the odd, 400 year antiquity of the psalm if
by Moses, verse 10 causes a major problem for such an authorship.
|
י יְמֵי-שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם
שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה, וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה-- |
10 The days of our years are threescore
years and ten, or even by reason of strength fourscore years; |
A lifespan maximum of 70 years or even 80 years
was not normal in Moses’ time.
Moses lived to 120 years.
Aaron, his older brother, lived to 123 years.
Joshua lived to age 110.
Joseph lived to age 110.
Jacob lived to age 147.
Isaac lived to age 180.
Sarah lived to age 127.
Abraham lived to age 175.
Only in King David’s time was seventy or eighty considered
a long lifetime.
David’s exact age at death is not recorded in either 1
Kings 2:11 nor 1 Chronicles 29:27-28 though both noted he reigned for 40 years
and died in old age.
But that David died at age 70 is based on the simple
calculation from 2 Samuel 5:4:
|
ד בֶּן-שְׁלֹשִׁים שָׁנָה דָּוִד,
בְּמָלְכוֹ; אַרְבָּעִים שָׁנָה, מָלָךְ. |
4 David was thirty years old when he
began to reign, and he reigned forty years. |
As for his heir, King Solomon, his age at death is never given. But most
likely he died in his 60s[viii]
after ruling for 40 years (1 Kings 11:42, 2 Chronicles 9:30).
[There is a tradition Solomon was just 12 when made
king: an interpretation of King David’s deathbed remarks in 1 Kings 2:2 that
Solomon was not yet a “man”, i.e., not yet Bar Mitzvah age 13 -- and so only 12
years old. Rashi suggests the same based
on a combination of dates. But that
Solomon was probably in his 20s is most
likely as his son and successor Rehoboam, was 41 years old at Solomon’s death (1 Kings 14:21). This would mean he was born a year before Solomon ascended the
throne. So having Solomon married and
have a son at age 11 is more than highly doubtful.
Josephus, at the other extreme, says Solomon died at
age 94 after reigning 80 years[ix].
A full discussion of the above and other scholarly age
suggestions is to be found at https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdf/10.1086/469162#:~:text=the%20twelfth%20year.-,There%20it%20is%20said%3A%20Solomon%20was%20King%20of%20Israel%20when,at%20seven%20years%20of%20age. ]
Rehoboam, Solomon’s son and successor, ruled for 17 years (1 Kings 14:
21) and died at age 58.
As for the
other kings of Judah or kings of Israel over the ensuing centuries most ruled under
20 years and the longest reign was that of Manasseh of Judah who ruled for 55
years starting at age 12 (2 Kings 21:1)[x]. He died at age 67.
Consequently, the psalm’s comments on human life
expectancy: 70 or at most 80, is consistent with the age limits of the time of
David and thereafter – but not Moses’ era.
Yet, some have argued that it is still Moses
'speaking’ in verse 10.
Rashi and the Radak suggest Moses, through the power
of prophecy, is referring to future generations such as their own eras:
when reaching age 70 and 80 was extremely rare[xi].
Maclaren, in defending Moses’ authorship, has
suggested verse 10 refers to the generation of the Exodus: who all died out
during the 40 years in the wilderness.[xii]
While Maclaren’s suggestion seems plausible at first
glance, it is, in fact, untenable.
It would mean that at the Exodus, the Israelites and
the mixed multitude who left with them and joined the nation were all under
40 years of age.
Moses himself was 80 on his return to Egypt and the Exodus.
His brother Aaron was 3 years older[xiii]
and his sister Miriam was even older: as she watched over baby Moses floating
in his basket upon the Nile and spoke to the princess of Egypt who found the
basket (Exod. 2:4-9). Tradition has her
7 years older[xiv].
Also, all the tribal leaders and “elders” whom Moses
came to see on his return to Egypt are unlikely to be as young as 40 and
probably well over age 60 or 70 (Exod. 3:16, 4:29).
Finally, Caleb, who was one of the spies alongside
Joshua, was 40 years old at the Exodus and the spy mission (Joshua 14:7) and a
very robust and vigorous warrior at age 85 after the conquest of Canaan (Joshua
14: 10-11).
Maclaren’s solution, consequently, is superficial, and
weak in its math.
And Rashi and Radak’s ‘prophetic’ solution is also suspect.
Links to Deut.
32 and 33
The arguments that Psalm 90 in its language and ideas
parallels Moses’ Haazinu song of
Deut.32 and even Deut. 33’s Blessing of the Tribes are all dubious.
Word choices
The parallels in wording suggested by Maclaren and
presented in detail by the Keil and Delitzsch OT Commentary[xv] are as follows:
- הָאֱלֹהִים אִישׁ מֹשֶׁה “Moses, the man of God” – this title is found at the start of Deut. 33:1[xvi]
However, the
designation, “man of God” is common for later prophets as noted by Soncino,
commentary to verse 1, p.297.
It is used for Elijah and his successor, Elisha.
Elijah
- 2 Kings 1:10, 11,12, 13
Elisha
- 2 Kings 5:8, 14, 15 and
2 Kings 6: 6, 9, 15
·
The Tetragrammaton appears only once (verse 13) and
all other references to the Divine are: םהִלאֱהָ, אֲדֹנָי, אֵל,
וּניהֵלֹאֱ יאֲדֹנָ -- which appear once
each.
It is true
that synonyms for God are commonly used in the Chumash and that in the Book
of Psalms the tetragrammaton is the normal, standard term.
BUT not
always.
Psalm 91, besides using the tetragrammaton once, refers to God as שׁדַּי and אֱלֹהַי and עֶלְיוֹן (the one up high).
And Psalm 77 NEVER uses the tetragrammaton but
abounds in synonyms: אֱלֹהִים (5 times), אֲדֹנָי
(2) and אֵל (3).
- מָעוֹן “dwelling place” (verse 1) parallels Deut:33:27 מְעֹנָה
While rare in the Chumash (appearing only again in Deut. 26: 15), it is used numerous
times in post-Chumash Scriptures: 1 Samuel 2:29 and 32, Psalm 26:8, Psalm 68:5,
Psalm 71:3, Psalm 91: 9, Jeremiah 9:11, 10:22, 25:30, 49;33, 51:37, Nachum 2:11,
Zechariah 2:13 and 2 Chronicles 30:7 and
36:15.
- וָדֹר בְּדֹר – “generation after generation” (verse 1) is used in Deut. 32:7
This repetitive form appears just two other
times in the Chumash: Exodus 3:15,
17:16, but it is used regularly in Psalms 10:6, 23:11,
45:17, 49:11, 61:6, 77: 8, 79:13, 85:5, 89:1, 89:4, 100:5, 102:12, 106:31,
119:90, 135:13, 145:4, 145:13, 146:10, and also in Isaiah 13:20, 34:17, 58:12,
60:15, 61;4, and even Jeremiah 50:39, Lamentations 5:19, Joel 2:2, 3:20 and
Esther 9:28.[xvii]
·
; וְתֵבֵל
אֶרֶץ לוַתְּחוֹלֵ; יֻלָּדוּ הָרִים
בְּטֶרֶם -- “before the mountains
were born; and before You formed the earth and the world.”
The order: mentioning mountains and only
thereafter the formation of the Earth, is seen as SIMILAR to Haazinu’s opening:
Deut. 32:1
|
א הַאֲזִינוּ הַשָּׁמַיִם, וַאֲדַבֵּרָה; {ס}
וְתִשְׁמַע הָאָרֶץ, אִמְרֵי-פִי. {ר} |
1 Give
ear, ye heavens, and I will speak; and let the
earth hear the words of my mouth. |
I.e., The Haazinu text has a similar inversion, even though the planet Earth was created BEFORE the sky/heaven.
But Haazinu speaks of Heaven and NOT mountains.
More likely, Moses in Haazinu is not interested in planet
formation chronology but rather is asking GOD in Heaven to be his witness first.
As with the famous line in Psalm 115:15-16:
Verse 15 uses the same reverse order as Haazinu and explains why in verse 16.
Haazinu’s Heaven before Earth order
also appears in the anonymous Psalm 146: 6; a psalm which, by mentioning Zion
in its ending, must be from David’s time or later.
|
עֹשֶׂה, שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ-- אֶת-הַיָּם
וְאֶת-כָּל-אֲשֶׁר-בָּם; |
6 Who made heaven
and earth, the sea, and all that in them is; who keepeth truth
for ever. |
So too in Psalm 135 verse 6 which mentions Heaven
before Earth; but no one has ever suggested it is Moses’ composition.
In fact, it is post-Babylonian exile and from the
Second Temple era [xviii].
- The use of לוֹלֵוַתְּח in the second half of the above verse of Psalm 90, as a synonym for the verse’s first half יֻלָּדוּ is again linked to Deut. 32:18.
But this verb is quite common: appearing 31
times in the first 4 books of the Chumash,
an additional 6 times in Deuteronomy and over 130 more times in the rest of
the Hebrew Bible[xix].
Summary re: word choices
Put
simply, the arguments re: word choices do not survive close scrutiny.
Even
when rare in the Chumash, these same
terms abound in all of the later Scriptures and especially in the Psalms.
So
just because common terms appear in this psalm and Deut, 32 or 33 is not proof of Moses’ authorship of Psalm 90.
Even the Keil and Delitzsch Biblical
Commentary on the Old Testament
noted briefly at its outset, the same terms and language used in Psalm 90 and in
Moses’ Deut. 32 and Deut. 33 also can readily be found in other Psalms, Isaiah, and Job.[xx]
Haazinu's Ideas
Haazinu (Deut. 32) is Moses’ formal
warning to the new generation and their future descendants.
Moses fears throughout his Deuteronomy’s sermons that
once in Canaan: where they would be exposed to the great, highly civilized
seven nations and their cultures and pagan gods, the new generation and/or
their descendants would fall into paganism and abandon God and his
commandments.
And such straying, once in God’s Holy Land, would provoke
the most severe Divine punishment.
Moses’ great fear was not baseless. Their parents
strayed with the Golden Calf even at Mount Sinai, and more recently, when
encamped near Moab and Midian, they again strayed with the idolatry of Baal
Peor (Num. 25:2-3).
This fear and potential divine retribution appear
succinctly in the second paragraph of the daily Shema Yisroel prayer.
Deut. Ch 11
|
טז הִשָּׁמְרוּ לָכֶם, פֶּן
יִפְתֶּה לְבַבְכֶם; וְסַרְתֶּם, וַעֲבַדְתֶּם אֱלֹהִים
אֲחֵרִים, וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוִיתֶם, לָהֶם. |
16 Take heed to yourselves, lest your
heart be deceived, and ye turn aside, and serve other
gods, and worship them; |
|
יז וְחָרָה אַף-יְהוָה
בָּכֶם, וְעָצַר אֶת-הַשָּׁמַיִם וְלֹא-יִהְיֶה מָטָר,
וְהָאֲדָמָה, לֹא תִתֵּן אֶת-יְבוּלָהּ; וַאֲבַדְתֶּם
מְהֵרָה, מֵעַל הָאָרֶץ הַטֹּבָה, אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה, נֹתֵן לָכֶם. |
17 and the anger
of the LORD be kindled against you, and He
shut up the heaven, so that there shall be no rain, and the ground shall not yield her fruit; and ye perish quickly from off the good land which the LORD
giveth you. |
In Haazinu,
Moses envisions such a future in lengthy poetic verse.
The people will fall into worshipping all kinds of pagan gods (verses 16-17), and God will respond by allowing enemies to invade and kill and take away Israelite survivors as captive slaves. (verses 20-26). The song ends with God punishing the invaders in turn: to avenge the blood of his Chosen People and devastated Holy Land. (verse 41-43).
It should be noted that both Hertz in his The Pentateuch and Haftorahs (1958) p.896 and the Art Scroll in their The Chumash (7th ed. 1997), p. 1100 introductory commentary, both state the song ends joyfully: with a promise of a future redemption of the Children of Israel.
I.e.,
Hertz: “a hymn of joy” and Art Scroll:
“the ultimate joy that will come with the final redemption”.
This,
at best, is a pious ‘wishful interpretation’ of the song’s last section based
on one, single word: יִתְנֶחָם – translated
as “repent”
or “relent” or “have mercy”.
|
לו כִּי-יָדִין יְהוָה עַמּוֹ, {ר}
וְעַל-עֲבָדָיו יִתְנֶחָם: {ס} כִּי
יִרְאֶה כִּי-אָזְלַת יָד, {ר} וְאֶפֶס עָצוּר וְעָזוּב. {ס} |
36 For the LORD will judge His people,
and repent Himself for His servants; when He
seeth that their stay is gone, and there is none remaining, shut up or left
at large. |
Later,
the Art Scroll, p. 1111, acknowledges this joyful redemption is only “implied by Moses”.
Yes, any such ‘happy ending’ is NOT what the text
states.
The reality is Haazinu
does NOT include any idea of remorse and repentance by the Children of Israel,
nor their salvation. No return to their homeland, and no happy and joyful
ending.
As with all of Moses’s warnings throughout the
Chumash, his focus is solely to forewarn that idol worship, abandoning God and
His commandments, will surely result in horrific punishment from God, the
Eternal.
The closing verses of the Haazinu song are not of joyful return but a clarion and thunderous
declaration that the Eternal is all powerful and controls all life and death. All stated in the FIRST PERSON.
Whether spoken by Moses as if he were God Himself – or
words suddenly inserted by God Himself -- the ending sends two simple messages:
In verses 39-42: Defy
God and He will respond with all the power and force of the universe which He controls.
In
modern vernacular: Cross God and you will pay dearly!
The final verse, verse 43, is about God in His awesome
power punishing the victorious nation He had sent to chastise His Chosen
People.
God will crush the conquering nation so that they cannot
gloat in their victory; and, simultaneously, to avenge the blood of His
Chosen People and the destruction His Holy Land.
The message: God is all powerful and controls history and
what happens to every nation.
Psycholgy of Haazinu
Think of Moses here as a parent with young children or
teenagers. There are established ‘rules’
that are to be followed, but there are numerous ‘temptations’ available all
around. So, as a good parent, Moses
reminds his children there will be serious consequences and punishment if they
stray.
Now imagine what would be the outcome from such a parental ‘stern warning’ if the parent ends by saying:
“If you later relent your wild behaviour, I will forgive you and all will be well again.”
Closing a ‘stern warning’ with such a ‘forgiveness’ message would be seen by any child or teenager as an ‘open door’ to explore the ‘wild side’; knowing that, in the end, joy and happiness will be restored.
Moses was no fool, and avoided adding a ‘happy ending’ to his stern warnings in Haazinu -- and throughout Deuteronomy.
This psychological reason is also why Moses is not likely to have composed Psalm 90 with its promise of a happy ending.
In brief, Psalm 90 is the voice of someone who has already reached the ‘fallen state’ and is suffering: at which point hope for future ‘restoration of order’ – of happiness and joy – is appropriate and helpful.
Put simply, downcast spirits need hope to continue on.
Psalm 90 Structure and Ideas
The new RCA Siddur
Avodat Halev (2018) commentary, pages 426-7, cites Rabbi Yitzchak Etshalom’s
view that the psalm is divided into two (2) parts and ideas. The first 9 verses
are the reflections of an old man: contrasting the brevity of human life with
the eternity of God. The last 8 verses urge
us to follow God’s ways: to be righteous and achieve lasting purpose and
meaning in our short lives.
The more academic Soncino, in the headings of its
commentary, pages 297-300, sees Psalm 90 as divided into three (3) separate
sections and ideas:
1.
God, the Eternal, is just that, eternal, while human
beings have brief lifespans of 70 to 80 years at most. (verses 1-6)
2.
When the Children of Israel abandon God and his
commandments, they will be defeated and their country conquered: with mass
death and captivity as punishment from God’s wrath. (verses 7 – 12)
3.
When the People will, in future, relent and return to
monotheism and the keeping of God’s ways, He will forgive them and make their
lives filled with happiness and joy. (verses 13-17)
While these three (3) main ideas are correct, they do
not really form ‘separate units’ but are rather interlaced and presented
in a structure which resembles more a Shakespearean 3-act play -- with numerous
‘foreshadowings’ -- before it reaches its climax and final message.
Psalm 90 makes the following points in the verses indicated.
Connections ‘missed’ in the above simplistic views are
marked in RED lettering.
1. 1. God, the Eternal, is just that: eternal (verses 1, 2,
4) while human beings have brief lifespans of 70 to 80 years at most. (verses
5, 6, 9, 10, 12)
2. 2. He is the sole Creator of the world and all its
contents. (verse 2)
3. Death is the final punishment for one’s accumulated sins. (verses 7,8, 9)
4. 4. Most people, in their pride, pursue trivial and vain
things instead of wisdom from God. (verses 10 and 12)
5. 5. Whenever humans sin and abandon God’s ways, they are greatly
punished by Him. (verse 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 15)
6. 6. But He mercifully accepts their return from evil and
sin (verse 3, 13, 14). And, when they return and
reconnect to God and follow his ways, He will give them anew a happy life.
(verse 14-17)
As the above breakdown shows, the poem is mostly about ideas 1, 5 and 6 and jumps from one to the other often – as well as ideas 3 and 4. They are interlaced for the first 15 verses.
In a play analogy, beside the interlaced ‘foreshadowing’s’,
the poem moves from a starting point (Act 1) stressing the difference between
God who is eternal and man whose lifespan is very brief, to how God will punish
those who abandon Him and his ways (Act 2) and concludes with the ‘restoration
of order’: when the prodigal nation someday returns to a forgiving God and is
blessed with happiness and joy (Act 3).
Idea #4 is also noteworthy for its cynicism
in verse 10 and poetic contrast in verse 12.
|
י יְמֵי-שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה, וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת
שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה-- |
10 The days of
our years are threescore years and ten, or even by reason of strength
fourscore years; {N} |
|
|
יב לִמְנוֹת יָמֵינוּ, כֵּן הוֹדַע; וְנָבִא, לְבַב חָכְמָה. |
12 So teach us
to number our days, that we may get us a heart of
wisdom. |
|
The message – so beautifully and poetically balanced
–is that Life is brief and is wasted by most as they, in their pride,
seek vain and trivial things.
Instead, what we should do during our short lives is
to learn wisdom from God.
Lastly, the poem, while using the ‘WE’/’US’ plural
in the first 12 verses, is really about each person and life as an
individual. But verse 13 and beyond
is the collective ‘WE’ as a nation (or humanity).
A transition common in psalms that Robert Alter calls
from the particular to the general[xxi].
Haazinu’s Structure and Ideas (Deut. 32: 1- 43).
Here, Moses strictly addresses the entire new
generation as a whole.
He forewarns them that once they inherit the land of
Canaan and its great cities and fruitful lands – all due to God’s intervention,
the people will become “fat” and “gross” and forsake God and worship all kinds
of pagan gods (verses 15-18).
And God --in His anger and wrath -- through a
foreign nation as His agent -- will punish them with invasion and defeat and mass
death and captivity as slaves for the few survivors (verses 19 – 26).
But, so that the nation He used to punish Israel
does not gloat how mighty it
is (verses 27-34), God will punish it in turn and avenge the blood of His Chosen People and destroyed Holy Land. (Verse 35 – 43).
Consequently, Maclaren and any others who see this Haazunu song as ‘identical’ to Psalm 90 in
its ideas have blinkered thinking.
Haazinu deals only
with one of the three main ideas Psalm 90 highlights: only God‘s wrath and
punishment.
It never mentions the brevity of individual lives or
the human pursuit of vanity instead of Divine wisdom. (An idea fully explored by King Solomon in
his Kohelet (Eccesiasties).
And it does not end with a joyful reconciliation as
stressed in Psalm 90.
Instead, Haazinu
ends with God destroying the nation He used to punish Israel: to ‘avenge the
blood’ of His Chosen People and defiled Holy Land.
As noted above, all of Moses Deuteronomy and his even
earlier concerns re: falling into pagan worship and customs NEVER envisions
that there may -- after such a fall – be a reconciliation and joyful ending as predicted
in Psalm 90.
So, put simply, Haazinu’s
ideas are not identical to Psalm 90 as it contains only ONE of Psalm 90’s THREE
main ideas.
Uniqueness
of Psalm 90 and Psalm 106
Psalm 90 and Psalm 106 are unique among the 150
psalms. These two alone discuss Israel’s fall into paganism, Divine wrath and
punishment and – most importantly -- a hoped for future reconciliation with God
and joyful outcome for the nation.
Yes, many other psalms speak of a ‘hoped for a happy
ending’, but they are not about the nation or humanity, but about
David’s personal, individual life.
Throughout David’s years of fleeing King Saul, hiding
among the Philistines and fleeing Absalom, many of his psalms pray for Divine
salvation and end with the hope of a happy outcome: of staying alive.
Most notable are Psalm 30 and Psalm 34 where David
rejoices at the actual achievement of such a hoped for outcome.
In Psalm 34, David’s gratitude to God the Eternal
stretches from verse 2 to the closing verse 23 in an almost unlimited
expression of joyful thanks.
Only verse 1 -- in cryptic fashion -- describes the
danger David had faced and how – through the Invisible Hand of God (marked by
the use of Vav Hahefuch) – he was saved; how he achieved the greatest gift of
all – staying alive ( a theme he often returns to in other psalms as
discussed in the blog on Psalm 30).
One would have had to be familiar with David’s
experiences as detailed in 1 Samuel 21:11-16 to understand this terse, one verse summary: namely, to flee
Saul and his henchmen, David fled to the Philistines, the people of Goliath,
and when his real identity was discovered and he faced certain death when
brought before the king, he escaped by feigning madness: a divine punishment
the king thought was worse than death.
And so David escaped dreaded death again (see blog
on Psalm 30 for this recurring dread) and retained the Divine gift of
Life. Worthy of 22 verses of thanks in
Psalm 34.
Psalm 30 is composed near the end of David’s life and
thanks God the Eternal for having saved him from all his deadly enemies, a
horrific illness and overcoming the sorrow of the tragic loss of one or more of
his children (Bath Sheba’s first child, Amnon and/or Absalom).
The last two verses are the culminating joyful
‘restoration’.
|
יב הָפַכְתָּ מִסְפְּדִי, לְמָחוֹל לִי: פִּתַּחְתָּ שַׂקִּי; וַתְּאַזְּרֵנִי שִׂמְחָה. |
12 Thou didst
turn for me my mourning into dancing; Thou didst loose my sackcloth, and gird me with gladness; |
|
יג לְמַעַן, יְזַמֶּרְךָ כָבוֹד-- וְלֹא יִדֹּם: |
13 So that my
glory may sing praise to Thee, and not be silent; |
David’s hopes were all personal. His psalms in
praise of God are beautiful and laudatory, but they are not about the nation
and its people as a whole.
Only Psalm 90 does so, alongside only one other: Psalm
106.
Psalm 106’s joyfully ends:
Verses 45-47
The Key verses 47-48, on reconciliation with God and the ‘restoration of
order’, are copied from from King
David’s public poem recorded in 1 Chronicles 16: 35-36.
Psalm 106 is probably by the same psalmist who
composed Psalm 105[xxii]
which also copies the first 15 verses of David’s composition in 1 Chronicles 16
as its own opening, and in its long, historical details is a match and foil to
Psalm 106.
David composed the original poem and read it aloud
to the assembled nation when he formally dedicated the return of the Ark of the
Covenant and its new tent residence in Jerusalem (1 Chronicles 16:1-37).
In the original context, David was speaking of his own
time and how he hoped that, with God’s help, under his kingship, the
defeats by and overlordship of the surrounding nations would come to an end.
And he did exactly that soon after this dedication
prayer. The Philistines, Moab, the king of Zobah, Syria and Edom were all defeated
and made subordinate to David’s kingdom[xxiii].
His ‘kingdom’ and domain, in fact, became the larger
in all of previous Jewish history and remained larger than all future Jewish
states: far larger than those of the
Maccabees and Herodians. Even the reborn
State of Israel in 1948 was no match.[xxiv]
So David accomplished all he asked for in the ending
verses of this dedication ceremony: with God’s help, he was able to defeat the
enemies of the Children of Israel and free and return home all those lost to
capture in war by enemies to the west, the south, the east and the north.
Psalm 106, however, refashions the setting and recasts
the intent of David’s words re: happy future.
They now appear at the end of a detailed litany enumerating all the
times the Children of Israel rebelled or murmured against Moses and God from
the Exodus through the forty years in the Wilderness, and abandoned God
repeatedly thereafter once in Canaan up to recent times.
This ‘backsliding’, in fact, worsened once in Canaan.
The Canaanites were not expelled fully, and became a
magnet seducing the Children of Israel to their pagan celebrations and pagan
worship: including sacrificing their own Israelite sons and daughters (verses
36-37).
The roller
coaster of Divine wrath and punishment, occasional repentance by the people, restored peace and joy, and then, again, descent into idolatry and sin, continued for generations (verses 39 -45, especially verse 43) and up to
the very moment of the poem’s composition.
A moment when the nation has been not only conquered,
but with most survivors taken into captive exile and the fleeing few dispersed
among other lands. (verses 46-47)
The glorious ending, the repeated quote from David’s
original poem (here verses 47-48), is a plea for Divine salvation and a permanent
‘restoration of order’ in the near future: from the low point of
defeat and exile.
A plea that, once and for all, the roller coaster would
end, and the nation would finally ‘smarten up’ and stay loyal to God.
When
were Psalm 106 and Psalm 90 composed?
Firstly, Psalm 90 and Psalm 106 (and matching Psalm
105) cannot be by the same author as they as different as day from night.
Psalm 90 is compact, speaks in generalities,
interweaves 6 themes and is written in the “WE/US’ mindset.
In contrast, Psalms 106 (and 105) is very lengthy,
filled with historical details in a linear progression, and liberally snatches
verses from King David’s long ago dedication speech.
Only in those copied verses does the “WE/US” mindset
appear, instead of the poems constant “THEY/THEM”.
As Psalm 106 is based on David’s poem from I
Chronicles 16 and complains about ongoing cycles of ‘backsliding’, it must be
very late in the history of the Kingdom of Judah at the earliest.
There is no evidence of such ‘backsliding’ in 2 Samuel and 1 Kings during David’s ensuing 33 year reign, nor during most of
the 40 years of Solomon’s reign.
However, as noted in I Kings 11: 1-8, near the end
of his life Solomon did allow pagan worship centres to be set up at the
behest of his numerous foreign wives – and he even participated in their pagan
ritual himself.
Soon after Solomon’s death, the kingdom was split as
ten of the tribes broke away under Jeroboam ben Nebat (1 Kings 12: 16-19) and
he immediately set up two temples: at Beth-El and Dan, so the people would not
need to go to Jerusalem. And in each, he
set up a Golden Calf for worship (1 Kings 12:28-33).
Thereafter, the northern Kingdom lapsed quickly into
all kinds of pagan worship until its destruction in 722 BCE. Most famously, the worship of the Phoenician
Baal: brought to the kingdom by princess/now queen Jezebel, and the Mount
Carmel confrontation between Elijah the prophet and the priests of Baal (1 Kings ch. 18).
Even in the kingdom of Judah, God was often abandoned
and pagan gods worshipped as recorded in 2 Chronicles 12 to 36, its end.
Of the 20 monarchs who reigned after Solomon[xxv],
eleven abandoned God and encouraged the worship of diverse pagan gods: starting
with Rehoboam, Solomon’s son and heir (ch 12).
Only nine (9) -- interspersed over the centuries -- were
faithful to God and tried to eradicate pagan worship among the people: King
Abijah (ch 13), King Asa (ch. 14-15), his heir, Jehoshaphat (ch. 17: he had
limited success), Joash (ch. 24), his heir Amaziah (ch 25: somewhat successful), Uzziah (ch 26),
Jotham (ch, 27), Hezekiah (ch 29), and Joshiah (ch. 34).
O Only these stood up for God and traditional Judaism, while eleven (11)
others -- incincluding the last few kings of Judah -- worshiped and encouraged
pagan deities and the rejection of God’s commandments.
This, then, is clearly the ‘roller coaster’ that the
author of Psalm 106 is referring too.
And verse 46 offers a notable clue to the specific time
of its composition.
|
מה וַיִּזְכֹּר לָהֶם בְּרִיתוֹ; וַיִּנָּחֵם, כְּרֹב חֲסָדָו. |
45 And He
remembered for them His covenant, and repented according to the multitude of
His mercies. |
|
מו וַיִּתֵּן אוֹתָם לְרַחֲמִים-- לִפְנֵי, כָּל-שׁוֹבֵיהֶם. |
46 He made them also to be pitied of all those that carried
them captive. |
The people in the proceeding verses/time periods/cycles
were only punished with being subdued and oppressed by other nations (verses
41-42).
But now, they have been taken into exile as captive slaves.(verse 46)
Only the
Babylonian exile, i.e., post-586 BCE, fits such a new situation.
Soncino, in its commentary introduction to Psalm
106, p. 351, suggests Psalm 106 was composed by someone among the returnees
to the Holy Land after Cyrus’ Edict of
Toleration. It sees this psalm as composed to encourage the returnees in
their challenging reconstruction work after 70 years of Babylonian exile.
However, I do not see anything in the poem, or final
verses copied from David, to suggest it was composed by a returnee.
All it states is that God now had mercy on the
captive exiles so they were treated better by their captors (verse
46 above).
A stage well documented in the Book of Daniel when he and three (3) others were trained and served in
Nebuchadnezzar’s royal palace and had prominent positions even under his
descendent Belshazzar [xxvi].
By the time Cyrus came to conquer Babylon in 539
BCE, the exiled Jews had lived there
for 47 years.
So, I believe Psalm 106 was composed after 586 BCE and
during the Babylonian exile: the ‘ultimate’ punishment of the roller coaster.
And composed by someone still living in exile in
Babylon.
Not a returnee more than five decades later.
[One might have expected a ‘hope’ for a
reconciliation and return in Psalm 137, “By the rivers of Babylon”, but its
ending – verses 7-9 – only hopes for God to punish the Babylonian victors and destroy them -- even
their infants -- in measure for measure.
As such, it is aligned with Haazinu’s
limited scope.]
Dating Psalm 90
Unlike Psalm 106
with its clear clues to a post-586 BCE exile creation, there is no such mention
of a roller coaster nor ‘ultimate disaster’ scenario in Psalm 90.
It merely states
that we have sinned and suffered God’s punishment; and now, God willing, after
we repent, we again can have days of joy and happiness under God. (verses
12-15).
Consequently Psalm
90 could have been composed any time after the death of Solomon: whenever the
people and their kings turned to pagan practices and idol worship and were
punished by God.
It is a timeless and
universal plea for forgiveness, reconciliation and the restoration of Divine
order and true happiness.
The
prophets and Psalm 90 and Psalm 106
Could Psalm 90 or Psalm 106 with their common,
hopeful endings have been composed by one of the prophets who envision such a
joyous reconciliation and happy ending?
The answer is NO.
The prophets who envisioned a Divine punishment for
the prodigal nation and joyful ending nearly all spoke of an End of Days scenario:
when the 10 tribes -- lost more than 130 years before – will return and unite
with Judah, when the House of David will again rule all Israel, when all the
nations of the world finally will come to Jerusalem and bow before the one and
only true God the Eternal and end idol worship.
This message and universal hope is the last half of
the daily prayer, Alenu.
It is the message of Isaiah ch 66, Jeremiah ch. 3,
22 and 30, Ezekiel ch 37, 38 and 48, Zephaniah[xxvii]
, Daniel ch 12, Hosea ch 3 and Joel ch 4.
Only two of the prophets hoped for a ‘return’ in more immediate
times.
The prophet Jeremiah, soon after the Babylonian
conquest of 586 BCE and the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple (accompanied
by mass slaughter and captive exile of the few survivors), composed a dirge, Aichah (Lamentations), which is read
every year on the 9th of Av to remember this awful moment in Jewish
history.
The long and mournful poem, however, in its closing lines speaks
-- oh so briefly -- of such a hoped for restoration soon:
Ch 5:
Jeremiah’s hope here is that, God willing, the nation will return to the Holy Land and a new Temple in Jerusalem, and life again that is filled with happiness and joy ‘as of old’.
What happened to change Jeremiah’s views as to timeline is unknown, but his prophecies – as noted above – are for the End of
Days.
The only other prophet to hope for a ‘joyful return’
in the imminent future is Zechariah.
He was one of the first returnees under the
leadership of Zerubbabel. And his prophecies were triggered by a royal Persian
decree that all work already begun on rebuilding Jerusalem’s walls and the
Second Temple stop immediately.
Complaints and lies by the Samaritans had triggered
this ban, and for many years, the work did not progress.
Zechariah’s prophecies: that the streets of
Jerusalem would soon be filled by old and young and that a rebuilt Temple would
soon have Priest and Levites carry out their duties as of old -- gave
encouragement to the returnees. (Zechariah 1:17, ch 3, ch 8, ch 10)
Zechariah’s prophecies were issued in the early
years of the new king, Darius (I) the Great.
It was Darius the Great who finally revoked the ban
and gave permission to complete Jerusalem’s walls, rebuild the city and
complete the Holy Temple – after a hiatus of 18 years.[xxviii]
So, Zachariah’s prophecies: that a new Temple and
rebuilt Jerusalem will arise soon was reasonable optimism.
More significantly, Psalm
90 and Psalm 106 do not seem to fit the style and wording of Jeremiah or
Zechariah and all the others.
The prophets in
their visions speak through allegorical and lengthy metaphorical images,
visible talking angels and other mystical creatures, and God the Eternal Himself
speaking exhortations in the FIRST PERSON (just as Moses’ Haazinu
ending).
Psalm 90 and Psalm
106 (and matching psalm 105) instead use ordinary and direct language to
develop a logical argument
with more than two ideas or proofs, leading to the happy ending.
It is a totally
different mindset and style from the prophets, and so the authors of Psalm 90
and Psalm 106 remain unknown.
Psalm 106 and Psalm 105
are in the historical narrative
tradition alongside the famous Psalm 136,
|
א הוֹדוּ לַיהוָה כִּי-טוֹב: כִּי לְעוֹלָם חַסְדּוֹ. |
1 O give thanks unto the LORD, for He is good,
for His mercy endureth for ever. |
As for Psalm 90,
there is only one other psalm that it resembles: David’s Psalm 30. The only other psalm which is compact,
contains more than two ideas, interweaves its ideas and ends on a happy note.
To these poets,
David’s poems were their inspiration and prototypes.
Psalm 106 (and Psalm
105) liberally copied David’s words from his public dedication speech/poem from
1 Chronicles 16, and Psalm 90 used David’s Psalm 30 as a template.
CONCLUSION
If Psalm 90 had appeared without a rubric – like one-third of all 150 psalms[xxix]
– no one would ever have suggested that
it was composed by Moses.
He lived over 400 years before David began to write
religious poems while hunted by King Saul and which tradition was continued by
King Solomon (Psalm 72 and 127) and the Levites who ministered in the
Temple. Choral singing of such creations
was integral to the daily services alongside animal sacrifices[xxx].
Arguments trying to link Psalm 90 to Deut. 32 and 33
based on vocabulary are extremely weak as the same words are commonplace in
other psalms and other post-Chumash Scriptures as detailed above.
As for ‘shared ideas’, Deut. 32 only has one idea
that is in Psalm 90: future Divine punishment when the nation strays.
Only one of three ideas of Psalm 90 that culminate
with the prodigal nation returning to God and his commandments, and being
rewarded for this reconnection with lives filled with gladness and joy.
Moses nowhere in Deut. 32 nor anywhere else in the Chumash ever speaks of such a future reconciliation. He is always
about the risk of going astray and its painful Divine punishment.
Even in the middle paragraph of Shema Yisrael that we say daily, only punishment for straying --
ending in exile (Deut. 11; 17) is mentioned and stressed.
Also, Psalm 90’s conscious design: switching from the
individual to the nation (particular to general) and always speaking of the WE/US,
reflect a mindset that is far different from Moses’ Deut. 32 and 33, and, in fact, all his other passages where he
separates himself from the ”YOU” or “THEM” of the nation.
Finally, Psalm 90’s statement that human life lasts at
most 70 to 80 years does not fit the Moses era – even during the 40 years in
the wilderness.
As suggested above, the ending: a hoped for return and joy in the future, is the kind of thinking that only occurs during a period of suffering and start of regret.
It is what people need to hear to keep going in their darkest moment.
Because of its generalities, Psalm 90 could have been composed at almost any time after the division of the kingdom soon after Solomon’s death: when the worship of the Golden Calf was revived in the northern 10 tribes as well as other pagan worship, and the numerous times after Solomon’s death that the kings of Judah and the people worshipped Canaanite and other deities and abandoned God and His commandments.
Consequently, Psalm 90’s rubric and link to Moses is a
pseudo-attribution,
and incorrect.
Just like the
erroneous rubric of Psalm 30 discussed in a previous blog.
The rubric’s addition,
however: whether by the actual composer or some later editor, was, I suspect, a
conscious effort to link Psalm 90 to Moses’ Haazinu:
to offer the ‘happy ending’ Moses did not include but which he should have
done.
A pious wish shared
by Rashi and Radak and Hertz and the Art Scroll and all others who wanted
Moses’ future vision to end happily: for God’s sake and for the sake of US, the
Children of Israel.
In closing, Psalm 90
is a truly elegant and eloquent psalm with messages for us all.
Its merit does not
depend on a false attribution to Moses.
Psalm
90 XC תְּהִלִּים https://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt2690.htm
(RED lettering
is my highlighting.)
[ii]
The calculation is based on 1
Kings 6:1 where it states Solomon, in his 4th year as king, began to
build the Temple: exactly 480 years after the Exodus. Deducting the 4 years of
Solomon = 476 years. As David reigned
for 40 years and began to write psalms before this, the earliest of David’s
compositions would have been some 400 years after the Exodus.
[iii] Book IV and V contain one by Solomon
(psalm 127) and an additional 18 psalms identified in their rubrics with David
(psalms 101,103,108,109,110, 122,124,131,132,133 and 138 to 145).
[iv]
Right sidebar at https://www.sefaria.org/Psalms.90.1?lang=bi&with=Rashi&lang2=en
[v] See fuller list at https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Oppression,-God~s-Attitude-To
[vii] Soncino incorrectly give Deut. 33 as
the matching text. That match is Deut.
32 is noted by Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
(https://biblehub.com/commentaries/deuteronomy/32-1.htm). Deut. 33
only contains the matching rubric phrase “Moses, man of God” (Deut. 33:1).
[viii]
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon#:~:text=Death%2C%20succession%20of%20Rehoboam%2C%20and%20kingdom%20division,-The%20United%20Monarchy&text=According%20to%20the%20Hebrew%20Bible%2C%20Solomon%20is%20the%20last%20ruler,son%2C%20Rehoboam%2C%20succeeds%20him.
[ix] https://www.sefaria.org/Psalms.90.1?lang=bi&with=Rashi&lang2=enhttp://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0146%3Abook%3D8%3Awhiston%20chapter%3D7
[x] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manasseh_of_Judah
[xi] See Sefaria commentaries – right
sidebar -- at https://www.sefaria.org/Psalms.90.10?lang=bi&with=Torah%20Temimah&lang2=en
[xii] Soncino, p. 299 commentary to verse
10.
[xiii]
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Aaron-biblical-figure
[xiv] https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/112396/jewish/Miriam.htm
[xv] https://biblehub.com/commentaries/kad/psalms/90.htm
[xvi] https://biblehub.com/hebrew/4583.htm
[xvii]
See https://biblehub.com/hebrew/strongs_1755.htm
[xviii]
Soncino, The Psalms, commentary to psalm 135, p.441.
[xix] https://biblehub.com/hebrew/2490.htm
and full listing at https://biblehub.com/hebrew/strongs_2490.htm
[xx] https://biblehub.com/commentaries/psalms/90-1.htm
[xxi]
See Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Poetry, revised ed. 2011,
Basic Books, N.Y.
[xxii]
Soncino, The Psalms,
introductory comment o Psalm 106, p. 351.
[xxiii]
The Concise Jewish Bible by Philip Birnbaum (1976}), p. 231.
[xxiv]
See map at https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.jewishvirtuallibrary.org%2Fmap-of-the-kingdom-of-israel-under-david-and-solomon&psig=AOvVaw1fSEwU64K228lYzIPzKeZp&ust=1623271701631000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCOC-5bv0iPECFQAAAAAdAAAAABAt
[xxvi]
The Concise Jewish Bible, pages 217- 8.
[xxviii]
See synopsis of the Book of Ezra in The Concise Jewish Bible, pages 225-6
[xxix]
Psalms 1,2,10,33, 43,66,
67,71, 91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,102,104,105,106,107, 111, 112, 113, 114,
115, 116,117, 118, 119, 120, 121,123,125, 126, 128, 129, 130, 134, 135, 136,
137, 146, 147,148, 149, 150.
[xxx] Our Shacharit morning service
includes 7 psalms sung by the Levites in the Temple on a 7 day rotation.
