Ps. 15

Ps. 15

O Yhwh / who / may reside / in / your tent? Who / may dwell / on your / holy mountain? He / who walks / blamelessly, and does / what is / right, and / speaks truth / in / his heart. He / has not / tripped over / his tongue. He / has not / done evil / to his friend. He / has not / taken up / reproach / against / his neighbor. In / his eyes / the reprobate / is despised, but / he honors / those / who fear / Yhwh. He / has sworn / to do / no wrong / and / does not / falter. He / has not / lent / his money / on interest, nor / taken a bribe / against / the innocent. The one / doing these things / shall not / be shaken / forever. First, a few structural observations: the psalm opens with a question regarding admittance to Yhwh’s presence. Further, it is not simply ‘admittance’ but a desire to ‘reside’ in his ‘tent’. This is then paralleled by a question regarding who can ‘dwell’ on his ‘holy mountain’. The ‘answer’ to this question are ten ‘commandments’, an appropriate mixture of ‘shall not’ and ‘shall(s)’. It may be obvious at this point what the opening question is harkening back to—the Exodus and the approach of Israel to the ‘mountain of Yhwh’ from which he will ‘descend’ into their camp to ‘dwell’ in a ‘tent/tabernacle’. The ‘vehicle’ for his descent was the Ten Commandments. What may not be as obvious is that the Temple later took over the ‘tabernacle’ and was often, still, called Yhwh’s ‘tent’ and Zion became the ‘holy mountain’. In essence, the experience as Sinai became the perpetual presence of Yhwh in Jerusalem. When the pilgrim asks this question, then, he is not merely referring back to Sinai—Sinai is the temple mount. And, just as the people were commanded to stay away from the mountain lest they be struck dead, so too is this same dread at the heart of this opening question. The question, then, is an earnest one—what must one do in order to stand on such holy ground and not be destroyed. I can’t help but think here of a similar question in the NT, when the ‘rich man’ asks Jesus what he ‘must do to inherit eternal life’. Jesus responds in much the same way this psalm does. There is something rather striking about this list though: it makes no reference to the Ten Commandments nor does it in involve any ‘cultic’ references to purity nor does it seem to imply any of the covenantal commandments; one would expect, for example, if this was an entrance psalm to the Temple, that there would be included in the list regulations regarding cleanliness (as, for another example, was the main emphases in Exodus when Israel ‘approached the mountain’.) In fact, of the wording we have encountered in the Psalms it is most reminiscent of psalm 1, the wisdom psalm opening the entire psalter. If that is the case, and this is not so much an entrance psalm to the Temple, but a wisdom psalm that uses the form of entrance psalms in structure, then we have a very different reading of the psalm that emerges: it is almost ‘secularized’ in a certain manner, becoming a more universal psalm. Furthermore, if the psalm is a wisdom psalms, the final line is interpreted very differently: rather than being the ‘entrance’ to the Temple and a blessing, it is more of a promise regarding the outcome a person’s life who lives according to these standards, much like the end of Psalm 1. A second structural observation: the ‘does not’ and ‘does’ mirror each other.

Walks blamelessly – not ‘tripped’ over his tongue

Does what is right – not done evil to a friend

Speaks truth in heart – not taken up reproach against neighbor

Despises reprobate – honors those who fear Yhwh

Sworn no wrong – does not falter

Not lent money on interest – not taken a bribe

The mirroring is not merely a literary devise, or a way to easily remember the instruction (although they certainly are that), but the mirror image helps interpret the former. For example, if one wanders what it means to ‘walk blamelessly’, it means, in part, to ‘speak honestly’; to ‘do what is right’ entails ‘not doing evil to a friend’. Fascinatingly, the psalm can also be read in another pattern, like this:

He who walks blamelessly: A

And does what is right: B

And speaks truth in his heart: C

He has not tripped over his tongue: C1

He has not done evil to his friend: B1

He has not taken up reproach against his neighbor: A1

Read in this manner A and A1, B and B1, and C and C1 interpret each other, with C and C1 being the center. This would, in some way, show a ‘wisdom’ center to the psalm because of the wisdom literature’s focus on the power of tongue (evil and good). As to ‘speaking truth in the heart’, if we are to read ‘not tripping over the tongue’ as enhancing, or interpreting, it, we are probably on solid ground when we look back at previous psalms that speak of being ‘double-hearted’. In those psalms the ‘double-heart’ is not merely deceitful but oppressive and a force for injustice; it focuses primarily on how one who says one thing but intends another can confuse, oppress and take advantage of ‘the poor’. It is not merely ‘verbal’ but active. Here, speaking ‘truth in the heart’ does not twist that tongue into a knot so as the ‘trip’ over it later: either being caught in a contradiction or working evil on neighbor or friend. Notice how, if we are correct, the formal construction leads into speaking: the actions seem to hover around it or ‘spring’ from the mouth (again, a very prominent theme in wisdom literature). And it is not just in C and C1, A, B seem to point to ‘actions’, whereas after C1 the emphasis seems to be almost purely on speech. It is interesting in this regard how this psalm has used these ‘wisdom sayings’ and yet prefaced them with ‘entrance into Yhwh’s tent/Temple’. This type of ‘good living’ or ‘practical living’ has here been matched and, indeed, is seen as the preface to, Yhwh’s presence.

Another structural observation: in outlining the psalm it would look like this—

Introduction—question (v.1)

Answer—actions toward neighbor/friends (vs. 2-3)

Answer—who he values (v. 4a)

Answer—swearing and money (v. 4b-5a)

Conclusion—Blessing or acknowledgment (v. 5b)

We had the chance in Psalm 1 to comment on the ‘delight’ of the wise man. There, it was in ‘torah’ (or, instruction). Here, it is “those who fear Yhwh’. To gain entrance into Yhwh’s presence one must have the same attractions and dislikes as Yhwh: “In his eyes, the reprobate is despised, but he honors those who fear Yhwh.” Perhaps one of the most enlightening aspects for me of the psalms so far has been this constant emphasis on Yhwh’s despising of the wicked. It is obvious that this loathing is something the psalms are trying to impart, but here the ‘bridge’ so to speak is made explicit. One’s aesthetic impulses (what one finds beautiful and worthy of honor) are themselves just as much markers of admittance to Yhwh’s presence as the more ‘ethical’ or ‘moral’ prescriptions: not lying, walking blamelessly, etc… It is, quite literally, embedded fully within the midst of the other ‘commands’.

Conclusion :“the one doing these things shall not be shaken forever”. It would seem to be an odd conclusion to the psalm that asks how one ‘dwells’ in Yhwh’s tent. Were the final word removed, it would read much easier. However, it appears that the psalm is pointing us toward the fact that this ‘righteous’ man will not be free from trouble. He will, in fact, be ‘shaken’. His enemies will, at times, prevail over him. However, this being ‘shaken’ will not persist forever. The question is whether this means a point in time—at some point you will no longer suffer—or whether it is more of a principle---the righteous man will be sustained by the ‘presence’ of Yhwh. This may point to what we have seen, for example, in psalm 14 between the difference of the wicked man and the righteous: the wicked can’t ‘see from heaven’, whereas the righteous man knows Yhwh is watching over everything.

If the second approach is true then this is a wisdom approach to Yhwh’s presence that is bold in its re-working of traditional formulas to say something new: that living a life of ‘wisdom’ is similar to living a culticly pure life. Not that these are in opposition to each other, but there is a vein of thought that is mined here that is very rich.