Ps. 37.12-13 (the end of the wicked; the laughter of heaven)

“The wicked / plot against / the righteous – and gnash  / their teeth / upon them. – Yhwh / laughs / at them – for he has seen / that their time / has come.” The first verse is something very typical of the psalms we have seen thus far. The ‘plotting of the wicked’ is a continuous refrain; the ‘gnashing of the teeth’ has not been as common but has, nonetheless, been a frequently deployed image. What is interesting for us, though, is the introduction of Yhwh’s laughter. This we have seen once before. In Psalm 2 the nations congregate to make war against Yhwh and his anointed. They travel to the great mountain and begin to clamor. There is a brief pause and then a torrential laughter falls upon their head with a horrible declaration made soon thereafter. We find, in our verse here, the exact same laughter. It is saturated with mockery and derision. And, importantly, as with Psalm 2, it is the first moment in the psalm when it moves to the perspective of Yhwh himself. This movement is crucial to understanding this verse and the laughter. Until now the teacher has implored the student not to pay attention to the wicked for very practical reasons—their (the wicked’s) time is short. It has been a reasoned exhortation. Here, something else entirely emerges. No longer are we in the realm of exhortation but the expression of sovereign power and authority. At this juncture, and from this height, Yhwh does not need to nor will he engage in a defense of his plans. Most importantly, however, is the fact that Yhwh himself occupies, utterly, the position that the teacher believes the student should inhabit: that place where absolutely no credence is given to the wicked and, in fact, their position is seen to be, literally, laughable.  The purpose, then, is clear: to move the student into the realm of Yhwh and his laughter.

The source of the laughter is important to recognize as well. From Yhwh’s vantage point he sees that “their time has come”. In Psalm 2 the laughter rained down because from Yhwh’s perspective the schemes of the earthly kings were so ridiculous in the light of his overwhelming power over them. Here, something similar is at work, although it speaks from the vantage of time (the central theme of the psalm). The wicked obviously do not, and cannot, see that they have reached the end-point of their success. Their vision is much too limited. The teacher, on the other hand, has seen the final outcome o their schemes all along. Here, that perception is something that Yhwh himself is understood as having. There is an important difference between the teacher and Yhwh in this regard. The teacher has used his experience and has spoken from that vantage. He is certain it will happen, even soon, but he is not certain about when. For Yhwh, things seem different. It is as if he sees the wicked’s success like a string; and he knows when the string ends. It ‘has come’. Again, this subtle shift in emphasis lends itself to this overwhelmingly powerful vision of Yhwh, one that can even erupt into laughter at the schemes of the wicked.

Ps. 37.10-11(delight in great peace)

“But / a little while / and the wicked / will be / no more – And I will watch / his place / carefully / but he won’t / be there – And the meek / shall inherit / the land – and shall / take delight / in great peace.” A theme we have been tracing throughout the psalm is that of time. The psalm began with it: “for like grass they will wither quickly.” We also saw how, in the first section, the wicked will not only die ‘quickly’ but ‘out of season’: “like green sprouts they will die away”. There will be added to their natural ‘withering’ an element of ‘advanced destruction’. Conversely, the same is true for the righteous: just as ‘quickly’ as the wicked are destroyed will they be raised up to ‘their inheritance’ in the land. Here, these ideas are resumed and developed. First, as to time, the wicked’s destruction will be in “a little while”. While the destruction of the wicked was certain and even ‘quick’, the fact that it is soon to occur has not been present until now. This only buttresses the teacher’s argument to his student regarding his ‘fretting’ and ‘envy’: not only are the wicked sure to be brought down, but they will be brought down soon. Therefore, the ‘goods’ that they enjoy (the success they have), are not only not permanent but they are even more fleeting that we had originally thought. In effect, only a fool would envy what is about to be destroyed. Second, whereas in the first section the wicked were spoken of as ‘withered grass’, and as vegetation in the land that will be removed (or scorched at the revealing of the righteous), here, the image is less metaphoric: domicile destruction. The wicked’s homes, their dwelling places, will, like the ‘green sprouts’ be removed. Although the term ‘cut off’ is not used, the effect is the same.

The psalmist then moves into the idea of ‘watching’ the wicked’s deserted home. This is a crucial moment. If the wicked return to their homes then the ‘goods’ they enjoyed will have returned to them. His entire exhortation would therefore fail as they would have resumed their position of success. More importantly, however, it would appear that the wicked were enjoying the ‘perpetuity’ of goods that only Yhwh can provide. It is imperative, then, that when the wicked fall, they fall utterly and completely. When they are removed from their homes, they cannot return. This is the reverse of the central tenet of the psalm that Yhwh is the only one who provides goods in security and perpetuity. If that is the case, then those who are his enemies must experience the same totality (but in destruction and judgment).

There is a common image employed throughout the prophets and the psalms of Israel’s ‘inheriting’ the land. It is of Yhwh ‘clearing the ground’ like a gardener of all the weeds and making the land a suitable place to ‘grow his vineyard’. In these verses something similar is found: as the wicked are removed, and removed in such a way that they are certain to not return, the ‘meek inherit the land’. This image is actually closer to the historical books in its literal depiction of an abandoned home and dwelling and Israel’s subsequent ‘inheritance’ of the land. What is central to both (the historical books and this psalm) is that Yhwh is the one who removes the inhabitants and gives the land to Israel. Interestingly, if this is in fact in the background of the pslamist’s mind, he has taken this historical remembrance and is now applying it as a lesson in the present—in this way it is a type of abiding principle. The wicked will be removed (in the future) just as they were removed in the past (and just as utterly); likewise, the ‘righteous’ will come into their inheritance just as effortlessly as Israel did when they ‘inherited’ the land.

The final phrase is interesting: “shall take delight in great peace”.  This is a rather poignant expression of what we have argued all along: that ‘goods’ are ‘good’ only when given by Yhwh in safety and perpetuity. What we find here, though, in its context is something very interesting. Clearly, the wicked were strong, the ‘strong of the land’. When they were removed, the psalmist stood looking to see if they would return. This is a very anxious ‘looking’. If the wicked return it is not only that they will come back into possession of ‘goods’ but that they will again ‘lord it over’ the righteous. As time passes, the ‘meek’ gain confidence that, in fact, they are not returning. One can picture them very cautiously moving out of hiding and coming to look at the houses of the wicked, unsure of whether they should set foot in them for fear of what would happen if their former inhabitants came back. It is a very beautiful image of grace: inhabiting the dwellings of others due to Yhwh’s judgment of the wicked. They would be continuously reminded of the fact that these homes were not built by them. At some point, assurance would be so internalized and certain that the anxiety would be dispelled, celebration would occur and “the great peace” would begin.

Seen from this perspective, the inheritance of the promised land is but a foretaste of the eschatological ‘day of the lord’ when the entire world will be ‘cleansed’ and the righteous (here, “the meek”) will inherit it.  

Ps. 37.9 (hope, the land and the ascension)

“For / evil persons / will be / cut off – but / they that hope / in Yhwh / will inherit / the land.” Although we have already provided one reflection that incorporates this verse, there are two things that occurred to me after posting. First, when Israel is on the verge of entering into the Promised Land, Yhwh tells them that “today I put before you life and death; choose life so that you will live long in the land.” If they choose death, on the other hand, they will be ‘cut off’ and exiled. It seems to me that this psalm, patterned on wisdom sayings, is a type of meditation on that directive by Yhwh. The teacher is attempting to provide a rational as to why one would not look favorably (envy) those who are currently ‘growing’ (finding success) in the land—they are living under the curse of Yhwh and will be ‘cut off’. Actually, this is explicitly said later in the psalm: “Surely those whom he blesses shall inherit the land; but those whom he curses shall be cut off.” (vs. 22). Second, and it seems I repeat this ad naseum, but the ‘hope in Yhwh’ we find here is not one that incorporates detachment from worldly goods. Rather, precisely the opposite: the teacher is telling the student to, instead of envying the rich for their goods, hope in Yhwh that he will provide them (i.e. a long and fruitful life in the land, or, in the words of the psalm “will inherit the land”). Again, the end or goal of the wicked and the righteous is the same (goodness in the land). The difference is in understanding how it is obtained (wicked: through grasping; righteous: as gift from Yhwh). The righteous do not, as in other traditions, practice an interior ‘negation’ of the world, whereby one orients oneself solely to God by ‘negating’ the things of the world (largely by way of philosophical reflections on the impermanence of all things). Rather, the righteous looks to Yhwh as the sole provider of those goods and maintains an eager and hopeful (and trusting) attitude of love toward him. To stress again: underlying the psalmist’s wisdom is something largely foreign to philosophical reflection—that ‘goods’, devoid of being given by Yhwh, are not actually the proper object of philosophical reflection because they are not ‘fully themselves’. Rather, ‘goods’ are really only ‘goods’ when they are securely and in perpetuity given by Yhwh. This is why, if one were to seek the proper object of reflection as to ‘creation’ one would turn to “the land” and how it is intended by Yhwh (arguably, then, one would also need to turn to the Temple as well…). A further, more important, question is this: if this is true, can it re-orient our understanding of how Christ approached the Cross and of several of his teachings? It is common to speak of ‘building up treasure in heaven’ where ‘rust and the moth’ do not destroy, but what if what Christ was speaking of is essentially what this psalm is speaking: that endurable goods (the land) is something that can only come from Yhwh (or, in other words ‘from heaven’). To ‘build up treasure in heaven’ then is not meant as implying some type of otherworldly goods but of realizing that, as always, “the land” is something that is intended to be enjoyed free from anxiety (do not fret!) and in perpetuity. Second, if Christ carried with him this conviction as he mounted the Cross—indeed, if he died trusting that this psalm would be fulfilled—then he took with him, into Sheol, the light that renders this psalm possible (perpetual and enduring trust in Yhwh’s power to give the goods of the land). In so doing, he would have inaugurated the beginning of this psalm in his conquering (harrowing) of hell, his resurrection and, emphatically, in his resurrection as the ‘first fruits’ of “the land” when he ascended into the heavenly temple to ‘offer sacrifice’. Lastly, if that is the case, then (and this is impossible for me to reflect on now) this could drastically re-orient how ‘wisdom’ is to be understood in this context.

Ps. 37.8-9 (the land, the name and an inheritance)

“Cease from anger / and forget fury – do not fret / it only / brings grief! – For evil persons / will be / cut off – but / they that hope / in Yhwh / will inherit / the land.” For purposes of highlighting how central the idea of “the land” is to this psalm, I wanted to graph it out in the following manner:

1	plants	wither/die quickly
3	dwell in land/safe pasture
9	will inherit the land	will be cut off
11	meek shall inherit the land	will be no more
22	whom he blesses shall inherit the land	will be cut off
27	dwell securely	(28) posterity cut off
29	righteous shall inhert the land
29(b)	shall dwell in it forever
34	he will exalt you to take possession of the land	wicked are cut off
35	wicked flourish like luxuriant tree	he is no more/can't be found

Clearly, inhabiting the land is, perhaps, the central motif of the psalm. But saying that is not enough. In light of our previous reflections “the land” alone is but a ‘good’ that the wicked can come into possession of at almost any time. Rather “the land” must be something given by Yhwh before it can be the type of ‘good’ that can be enjoyed safely and in perpetuity. In effect, ‘the land’ and ‘time’ must be brought together, and that can only be done by faithful reliance upon Yhwh. Just to highlight this, the psalm will later say, regarding the land: “inheritance shall be forever”, “dwell securely”, “dwell in it forever”, “peaceful man has future”-“future of transgressors are cut off”.

This is the root of the teacher’s command to “not fret” (vs. 1, 7, 8). As we will see later, this is something he, the teacher, has ‘seen’. He knows the evil are robbed of their ‘goods’ and that the faithful end up safe in times of famine. Yet, it is also something he knows will come about and endure ‘forever’. The question is how he knows that this will continue ‘forever’. It would seem that the teacher takes an observable phenomenon—that the wicked are always ‘cut off’, while the righteous are provided for—and is able (how?) to see that state of affairs play out in perpetuity. And this, as we have argued, is the central tenet of the psalm. Without this, everything falls, including his directive to “not fret”. For, unless he can affirm this, there is no way of telling that the righteous man’s possession of the land will not, eventually, be taken from him and he, therefore, be subjected to the same vanity as the wicked.

I believe at least part of the answer lies in the name ‘Yhwh’. The psalmist is not merely a wisdom teacher who only meditates on the ‘current state of affairs’ and draws general conclusions (wisdom sayings) from it (i.e., a stitch in time saves nine…). One cannot pronounce the name “Yhwh” without a whole range of theological implications coming with it. For our purposes, and this is something new in our psalm reflections, Yhwh means “land Lord”. Yhwh is not only, as could have been implied before, the one who provides ‘goods in perpetuity and in security’. Rather, Yhwh is the one who provides a specific good—“the land”—in perpetuity and security. Just as the Temple could be seen as the generative principle in creation as a whole, so too can ‘the land’ be seen as the stage for the world stage. In other words, to understand the ‘givenness’ of all creation one must begin with the particular giving of ‘the land’ (just as one must begin with the particular Temple in order to come to see all of creation as a temple). Yhwh, it seems, elects the particular in order to make of it the redemptive center for the whole. In this way, these particulars (Israel, Temple, land, etc…) are something like a sacrament to the world. Interestingly, it could be argued that this upends worldly wisdom entirely: whereas wisdom tends to prize the abstract and general (however difficult it is to arrive there), by emphasizing the permanence of the particular Jewish wisdom says one must, first, make a ‘journey of the magi’ to this people, this land, this temple, these prophets. Paradoxically, that which is not accessible to man’s intellect (the particular election of Yhwh of this people/Temple/land) is that which actually provides the starting point for all wisdom. Seen from this perspective, ‘the land’ itself is a source of wisdom.

A second part of the answer lies in “the land” itself. For several reasons we should hear in this term the land Yhwh promised to Abraham and “his descendants forever” (i.e., the Promised Land). That being the case the teacher is then able to see this land being given in perpetuity because it is grounded in the prior covenantal promise of Yhwh to his people. In this way we see that his ‘people’ (Israel) are ‘made for’ the land; they ‘fit’ there. Likewise, we might say, the land was ‘made for’ them. It was to be the covenantal stage and act like a theophany of Yhwh’s loving concern and care for his people. Notice how the land is referred to ‘their inheritance’. It is something that Yhwh has fashioned for them, something he has made in order for it to be a perpetual gift to his people.

A third part of the answer is in the land being given as ‘an inheritance’. Clearly death is contemplated by the psalmist. That is not the problem, per se. He is not seeing Yhwh’s fulfillment of his promise of land as bestowing immortality. The ‘perpetuity’ we have spoken of is a familial perpetuity. Perpetuity is aligned with “inheritance”. Later the psalmist will say he has not “seen the righteous forsaken, nor his posterity seeking bread.” The emphasis is decidedly familial and not individual. For a parent: to simply know that their children will be provided for is enough to overshadow any lament that they themselves cannot personally benefit. Hence, when Moses was allowed to ‘see’ the promised land and Abraham bought a portion of the land (and, Jeremiah too), each of these men saw the ‘beginning’ of the promise worked out in them (either its initiation or its, in Jeremiah, restoration). It was the fact that ‘their posterity’ would now be able to benefit from ‘their inheritance’ that they saw the promise beginning (however small it was at first).  The problem is the perpetual gift of the land, generationally (not individually). With this one can clearly see how, when they are kicked off the land (when they are “cut off”), to even have some soil from the land would have been an appeasement, for they would have been carrying the promise (no matter how small…). This understanding of ‘perpetuity’ is not going to resolve the paradox we will note later. It does, though, reorient how we understand the psalmist’s perspective (as familial).

Ps. 37.7 (the balm of vanity)

“Be still / before Yhwh  - and wait patiently / for him. – Do not fret / because they make their way / successful – because people / carry out / their schemes.” On one level this verse seems to simply reiterate what has come before: the teacher directing the student to ‘trust in Yhwh’ or ‘commit your way to Yhwh’. While patience has been certainly implied in the previous directives, it is not until here that it plainly emerges. The import is that Yhwh will rectify the imbalance, that he will restore to the righteous the ‘success’ they see the wicked obtaining. The image of ‘stillness’, however, develops the theme in important ways. We have seen already, and is here repeated, that the student is not to ‘fret’ over the wicked’s success. It seems as if this internal agitation is what the teacher is encouraging the student to refrain from by ‘being still’. Furthermore, this ‘stillness’ is not merely one of internal detachment (as we have criticized in previous reflections) but of relational stillness ‘before Yhwh’. It is precisely because of the one in front of whom one is still that one can achieve this freedom from anxiety. And, furthermore, it is because Yhwh is going provide for the righteous enduring goods, something the wicked cannot obtain. A second important aspect to these verses is that the wicked “make their way successful”, they “carry out their schemes.” We have emphasized in previous reflections that enduring goods (goods that can be had without anxiety and that can be passed down through generations) is something that only Yhwh can provide. What this psalm recognizes, on the other hand, is that a world devoid of Yhwh’s ‘giving’ is one of anxiety and of the continuous oscillating nature of goods. This is why these verses emphasize that the wicked “make their way successful” and “carry out their plans”. Success can be had within the world—that is not questioned. What can’t be had apart from Yhwh making the way successful is enduring success. Notice the contrast with verse 5 (“Commit your way to Yhwh … and he will do it….he will make your righteousness come forth…”). The ‘wicked’ are those who operate under their own steam, and, according to this psalm (and many others) suffer from the ‘natural law’ of evil’s own instability and the fact that evil ‘boomerangs’ back onto the person who commits it. In a sense, evil naturally ‘withers’ out of season and dies quickly (vs. 1); one other hand, it is also something that Yhwh “cuts off” from the land. The point is that if the student wants goods that endure the present is a time of patience, trust, waiting and stillness. Were one to ‘fret’ during this time one may well find oneself “cut off”, “withering” and “dying quickly”.

Ps. 37.5-6(exposure to light)

“Commit your way / to Yhwh – and trust / in him / and he will do it. – And he will make / your righteousness / come forth / as a light – and your justice / like the midday sun.” If, as we have argued in the previous reflection, that the psalm is exploring the nature of ‘good things’ then here we find a confirmation of that with a deepening. This section begins in much the same way as the previous: “Trust in Yhwh and do good” is now “Commit your way to Yhwh and trust in him”. They seem to be saying much the same thing, imploring the student to proceed along ‘the way’, trusting and committing to Yhwh that their ‘way’ will end in Yhwh’s closing the gap between ‘the wrong people having the right things’ (i.e., that at the end of ‘the way’ Yhwh will provide them to the righteous). This is found by the affirmation “trust in him and he will do it.” At this point, though, the image shifts (and here is the deepening) to that of emerging light. To pause for a moment: if the light will ‘emerge’ at the end of ‘the way’ then the student is currently in darkness. This is another way of describing the ‘hiatus’ or ‘gap’: the fact that the goods of the world are currently in the possession of the wicked. There is something more important though: it would seem that to become light is to become noticed publicly. It is, in this way, to obtain the good of ‘renown’, ‘recognition’ and ‘glory’. It goes without saying perhaps that being ‘in dark’, from this perspective, is to be insignificant, unnoticed, disregarded and despised. Or, we might say it another way, “that which is lowly will be made high”. We must recognize, though, that it is “righteousness” and “justice” that are emerging into public light. As we saw in our first reflection, it is these things that will “cause the grass (of the wicked) to wither” and “die quickly”. There will be, as we always see, a double movement of judgment and redemption (the wicked will wither while the righteous will ascend and burn brightly). Furthermore, it is clear that this ‘light’ of “righteousness” and “justice” is currently lit, but not seen; it is hidden. As with ‘goods’ it will take Yhwh to “make them come forth as light like the midday sun”. All of these ideas can be summarized in this way: the student is dwelling in darkness of shame and insignificance and is tempted to make a grasp at the glory (the ‘goods’) the wicked posses. The teacher, on the other hand, is telling him that their glory is passing and short-lived and that the only way to truly obtain such glory is to ‘trust in Yhwh’. Only by doing so will one “dwell in the land” in safety and perpetuity, for only Yhwh can give goods in this manner (all other attempts to grasp them will be subject to vanity). Further, by ‘trusting in Yhwh’ one carries a hidden flame (“righteousness” and “justice”), one that will, through Yhwh, be brought out into full public view at which time the ‘wealth of nations’ will pour in, darkness will be banished, the gap closed and the wicked will be judged by that light (they will “wither” and “die quickly” because of its heat).

Ps. 37.3-4 (when goods are good)

“Trust in Yhwh / and do good; - dwell / in the land / and find / safe pasture / and take delight / in Yhwh – and he will / give you / your heart’s desires.” The first two verses focused on what is to be avoided (fretting and envy) due to the chasm that has opened up by the wicked/evil person’s success. Stated negatively, this was to be avoided because these men will “wither quickly” and “die away”. In other words, the ‘teacher’ is imploring his student to ignore these men because their time is short.  As we will see, this focus on time is a central feature of the psalm. Here, the teacher moves into the positive exhortations: trust…do good…dwell in the land…find safe pasture…take delight…heart’s desires. If the previous verse was asking the student to ‘turn away’ from the evil men, this verse is presenting him with an object to turn toward. And, the teacher is supplying the reversal of verses 1-2: “do not envy those who do wrong” – “trust in Yhwh and do good”; “like grass they will wither quickly” – “dwell in the land and find safe pasture”; “do not fret/envy” – “take delight in Yhwh”.  There is one thing in particular I want to focus on in this regard: Yhwh as the source of all good things.

Yhwh as source: the first two verses, if read alone, have the potential of being interpreted in a manner that is very inconsistent with the rest of the psalm. It could be read to say not to focus on the wicked nor desire what they have. If read this way the verses would be encouraging a form of detachment from the ‘goods’ the evil possess (including wealth, honor, prestige, family, etc…). However, that does not seem to be the point. Rather, the goods the evil have are goods. The problem is not what they have but that they have them at all. However, there is something to that reading that is partially true. Verses 3-4 encourage the student to, during this ‘hiatus’, “trust in Yhwh” and through such trust his “heart’s desires” will be given to him. In other words, trust in Yhwh that he will close the gap and provide for you the things the evil men now have. Within this time of patience, though, the student must come to see that the stability that comes with the goods (the fact that they will not, as with the wicked man, be taken away quickly) only comes if one “trusts in Yhwh” and “takes delight in Yhwh”. If the goods are focused on, in and of themselves, ‘fretting’ and ‘envy’ emerge because these goods can and do come into evil men’s possession. The point is not simply to possess them, but to possess them with security and perpetually. It is these further qualities of the goods (security and perpetuity) that only comes from Yhwh. This is where that truth of detachment emerges but in a very modified way: goods are not grounded in themselves but only when they are given by Yhwh. Detachment, in our sense, recognizes that goods are ‘good’ only when they can be securely enjoyed and passed on (as we will see later, the righteous are able to pass these on as “an inheritance”). Understood from this vantage point, it seems very telling that many prophecies (from the OT up to Revelation) envision wealth flowing to the righteous only eschatologically (i.e., once ‘everything is subjected to the father’; once ‘haven descends to earth” upon Christ’s return). It is only then that ‘goods’ will find their fulfillment in time (in perpetuity and security).

Ps.37.1-2 (wicked vegetation)

“Do not fret / because of / evil persons; - do not envy / those who do wrong. For / like grass / they will wither / quickly – and like green sprouts / they will die away.” As with most openings, these two verses represent a summation of the entire psalm. I want to focus on two things in this regard: the source of fret and envy; and the image of vegetation.

Fret and envy: It is not immediately apparent why the instruction to “not fret” is issued. What is about ‘evil persons’ that would cause this? Why would one envy those who do wrong? If we look at similar verses in the psalm an answer immediately emerges: the evil and ‘those who do wrong’ are successful. Their plans ‘prosper’ and they are like “luxuriant trees”. It would seem that all of the good things are in the wrong peoples hands. And it is precisely this divide that causes ‘fretting’ and ‘envy’. Fretting because it is infuriating and a cause of internal strife that those who are not in accord with goodness have goods. Envy because one does not have what, arguably, one should have. In the context of other psalms of lament we have spoke of a ‘hiatus’, a gulf that opens up when Yhwh ‘sees’ but ‘does not act’ (in some contexts it would be described as ‘forgetting’). Here, a similar hiatus opens up, and within that void there emerges, in some, ‘fretting’ and ‘envy’.  The wisdom teacher, however, is attempting to quell those concerns and pre-empt his student from attempting to close the gap on his own. Rather, he urges patience. And this leads into the image of vegetation.

Vegetation: these two images of grass and green sprouts at first seem to be parallel. However, they differ in important respects. First, the image of ‘green grass’ withering is used throughout the OT, and often in reference not to the life of the wicked but to live in general; it is often invoked as an image of the life of man in the face of Yhwh’s ever-living life. The point, though, is the fleeting nature of life. Here, the image is deployed to emphasize the fact that the wicked’s life will be short-lived, not in comparison necessarily with Yhwh’s life, but with that of the righteous. What is not stated but implied is that the sun’s rising and scorching heat is what causes the grass to wither. Later in the psalm, those who ‘commit their way to Yhwh’ will find their righteousness “come forth as a light, and your justice like the midday sun.’ This coheres well with the psalm as a whole: with the redemption of the righteous, the wicked will perish. This image is matched, or deepened, by the ‘green sprouts’ something else emerges. “Green sprouts” are young. For them to ‘die away’ would seem to be something that occurs ‘out of season’. Arguably, the withering of green grass is ‘natural’. Here, by contrast, the wicked are abruptly destroyed—as if by either a sudden famine, disease or trampling. Perhaps most important for this psalm is the fact that the wicked’s comparison to vegetation implies their being planted ‘in the land’. As we will see, there are no less than nine references to the wicked being “cut off” from the land, while the righteous will ‘inherit the land’. In this first verse, then, we find a combination of several images that will be thematically tied together as the psalm develops.

Ps. 36.10 (the question of endurance)

“Prolong your lovingkindness / to those / who know you – and your righteousness / to the upright of heart.” There is only one idea I want to pursue in this reflection: where the endurance of the wicked and the righteous comes from. In verse 1 we saw that the wicked ‘owned’ transgression; he nurtured it and it dwelt in the ‘midst of his heart’. We saw how these images of ‘ownership and heart’ revealed the continuous state of the wicked. It constituted the source of his being. Furthermore, we saw how the wicked is ‘sealed off’ within himself; there is no ‘fear of god before his eyes; he flatters himself too much in his own eyes to find his iniquity and hate it.” He is his own barrier to the world around him and, importantly, to himself. He begins and ends within himself. Finally, as we saw, the wicked is entirely, and only, a monologue. For the righteous, everything is reversed. And working in reverse order: these verses are a prayer. Importantly, the psalmist has been entirely and only focused on Yhwh in this hymn. The only time the psalmist himself appears is in the following verse where he appeals to Yhwh to protect him from the wicked. Likewise, whereas the wicked drew from himself for his strength, the psalmist finds it only in the covenantal bond with Yhwh. The terms themselves are purely relational (lovingkindness, righteousness) and they, and they alone, are what provide protection and assurance. This is the complete opposite of being ‘sealed off’ like the wicked. Indeed, this is transparency to Yhwh. And not simply that, the righteous understands that Yhwh’s act toward him is one that cannot be possessed at one point it time. Rather, one must petition that it be ‘prolonged’. For the wicked, stasis is achieved precisely in the fact that transgression can be owned and coddled in the heart. Yhwh’s benevolence toward man is never something that could be subject to man’s ownership. As a relationship, it is something must adhere to the relational bonds of dialogue and prayer. If there is anything ‘owned’ by the righteous it is this covenantal bond he possesses with Yhwh.

Ps. 36.8-9 (the Temple, the fountain and the light)

“They are refreshed / from the rich provision / of your house – and you make them / drink / from the river / of your delights. – For / with you / is the fountain / of life – and in your light / we shall see light.” This is, arguably, the central passage of the psalm. As we have seen in our analysis of this hymn, the previous verses seemed to be leading up to the Temple. First, we saw how Yhwh’s activity is manifested, or ‘housed’, in al of creation (heaven – sky – earth – deep). Then, Yhwh’s deliverance was enacted for all living things (man and beast alike). Finally, at the pinnacle (or, focus) we found man and the Temple. Here, in these verses, we now watch what occurs within the Temple itself. Here is the drama. Along these lines I would like to look at two aspects of this verse: the ‘house’ and sustenance; the light and the fountain.

Yhwh’s house: The first question would be who are “they”. As we have argued in our previous reflection, it is likely those men who come to Yhwh’s temple and find refuge underneath ‘his wings’. While in that verse ‘refuge’ was central, here ‘provision’ moves to the fore. Not only is the Temple a place of safety, it is also an object of delight and provision. Interestingly, we note, however, that the ‘provisions’ of Yhwh’s house are sacrifices brought to the Temple. And yet they are regarded as, in a way, part of the ‘store-houses’ of the Temple, as originating from the Temple and not as things owned, first, by man and then brought to the Temple. This is a rather profound point: when sacrifices are brought to the Temple one is not understood to be bringing what is one’s own but, in a very real way, what the Temple has given/provided. To bring sacrifices is, from this perspective, a type of returning, an offering over to Yhwh what is his. The Temple is what vivifies the earth, what produces its abundance, its ‘rich provision’. This is astonishing, but is in line with what we have already seen: the Temple is, in some way, the principle of creation, that which connects earth to the power of heaven and brings the power of heaven (as seen in the harvests and in the cattle) into the earth. (Can we catch a glimpse, then, of the effect the destruction of the Temple would have meant to the Jews? It would have been the withering and darkening of creation…). Second, when sacrifices were brought to the Temple they were cooked and distributed (unless it was a whole burnt offering). A ‘meal’ was enjoyed in the presence of Yhwh, with Yhwh acting as the host; he was, from his ‘rich provision’, now giving to the participants, the fruits they brought to him. Hence, at this gathering, they are ‘refreshed’ in much the same way that Abraham provided sustenance to the ‘angels’ outside of Sodom. It is an act of Yhwh’s hospitality. Can we speculate further? If what we have said is true (that in bringing to Yhwh’s house what is already its own) then it would mean that the creation itself is a type of temple. We know this from Genesis already. Second, if we chart out the movement it looks something like this: creation à given over to man to ‘cultivate’ à creation returned to Yhwh in the Temple as sacrifice à returned to man with Yhwh acting as host. This final movement is manifestly liturgical. It mimics the act of creation in the sense that Yhwh is, once again, handing over creation to man, except for this important element: man has participated within the act by and through sacrifice. We might summarize it this way: in creation Yhwh provides space for man to return to Yhwh what is his (Yhwh’s) and, in so doing, Yhwh gives creation back to man but, now, as the host of the meal. What we see here is that there is an elevation in each transaction (man: creature to cultivator to guest; Yhwh: Creator to Host), at the pinnacle of which stands Yhwh as host and man as guest/invitee. (A rather interesting image given the ‘meals’ that Jesus both called for and in which he gave himself…).

The fountain and the light: when one pays attention to the order of the words when the psalmist speaks of the fountain and the light, something interesting emerges. “For with you – is the fountain of life; in your light – we see light.” In both of these lines we see a qualification “with you…your light”. Generally speaking such a qualification of ownership would inherently limit what follows. As in, “in your light we see a light” or “for with you is a fountain of life.” This is what occurs in Proverbs 13.14, “the wise man is a fountain of life.” “Yours” almost always implies a limited form of ownership against someone else (your ego, your spirit, your family—all of these are, by definition, a limitation). Here, by contrast, life and light itself are “with” or “possessed” by Yhwh and yet not limited thereby. Furthermore, there seems to be a distinction between Yhwh and “life” and “light”. They are either ‘owned’ or ‘with’ him. The Gospel of John will eventually say something very similar: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God (coincidentally, it will go on to describe the Word made flesh as both “light” and a “fountain of life”)”. Lady Wisdom, in Proverbs 8 will also be described in similar ways as being with God from the beginning and as dancing before his throne. There is some sense, here, that life and light (wisdom?), are Yhwh and yet also something that is ‘with him’. As appealing as such meditations can go, I want to turn back to how this perception also applies to what we said about the Temple itself above---the Temple is Yhwh’s ‘home’ within creation and yet is itself the principle and source of creation. In this dynamic we see the Temple working in much the same way that ‘life’ and ‘light’ operate: although Yhwh can be ‘in creation’, his condescension only reveals more greatly how he is the source of all creation (the more one contemplates the Temple, the more one realizes that Yhwh’s home is itself the source of our ‘home’ (creation itself); the more one contemplates ‘light’, the more one comes to see that one is dwelling in Yhwh’s light; the more on contemplates ‘life’, the more one comes to see that one is dwelling in Yhwh’s ‘fountain of life’). And, most importantly: the more Yhwh condescends to ‘dwell’ with man, the more ‘potent’ that particular dwelling becomes. Temple---becomes source of creation; life—is a reflection/participation within Yhwh’s fountain of life; light—is Yhwh’s light. The movement is not toward the more abstract (from Yhwh’s light to ‘light itself’) but the other way around (from ‘light itself’ to Yhwh’s light; from creation to Temple).

How does this contrast with the wicked? As we saw in our reflections on the wicked fool, he is utterly turned in on himself. He is an enigma even within and to his own spirit (he can’t even find his own iniquity). Because he has been cut off (or, cut himself off) from the ‘fear of God’, the only thing that stands in front of him is—himself (he flatters himself “too much in his own eyes”). On his bed he “devises wickedness”. The point, as we saw, is that he is a self-destructive hole in creation. Everything sinks into him and his chaotic desire to destroy. Here, by contrast, the more one comes to see the outpouring of Yhwh the more one comes to see Yhwh. It is the precise opposite of wickedness. Whereas wickedness and folly draw into itself in order to consume and destroy, Yhwh pours outward (all of the images of water and light are of an abundant flowing forth from Yhwh) in creative giving. The wicked keeps everything to himself (including his own ‘ego’); Yhwh condescends and thereby reveals more and more how overflowing he is (how “potent” he is). Furthermore, what is given to the wicked is consumed; what is given to the Temple is ‘given back as rich provisions’. In this regard, too, the wicked is not only against wisdom, but against the mode of Temple offering itself (he is an anti-sacrifice).

Ps. 36.7 (the shadow of wings)

“You deliver / both man and beast / O Yhwh; - how precious / is your lovingkindness / O God – that human beings / find refuge / in the shadow / of your wings.” As with our last reflection I want to divide up the following in separate mediations: the contrasting of ‘deliverance’ with the wicked; why ‘man and beast’ are delivered but only ‘man’ finds refuge; and the difference between what the wicked and the righteous find as ‘precious’.

Deliverance: we mentioned last time how the current hymn stands on its own and yet, when placed within the context of the wicked man, takes on added dimensions. Here, with the idea of ‘deliverance’, new hues are cast that otherwise would have remained hidden. The idea of deliverance has been present in nearly every psalm we have looked at; it is the single most common thread weaving itself throughout them all. In this way we could say that it is the defining mark of Yhwh that these psalmist are attempting to either ignite or praise—and this from the personal and very individual laments to those of the king. From the top to the bottom, ‘deliverance’ has been the clarion call. And it is something that is uniquely Yhwh’s to perform. Of the many things we have noted about the idea is the fact that ‘deliverance’ is both an act of redemption and judgment; it redeems the righteous by judging the wicked (we never find these two movements separated). Furthermore, ‘deliverance’ can also be compared to or described as a form of healing—of restoration to the proper mode of being. And this ‘proper mode of being’ is not merely ‘health’ but ‘praise’. In other words, deliverance is often initiated by Yhwh in order to place his people back within a living and joyful state of praise to him; deliverance is for liturgy (as in the Exodus: the purpose was not merely their ‘freedom’ but so that they would ‘come and worship me’). When we cast our glance back toward the wicked, something entirely opposed to deliverance emerges. I hesitate to even say ‘opposite’ because that sounds like a contrasting color (like black and white). Rather, the wicked’s ‘heart’ works against deliverance. As we saw, it is an agent of transgression and chaos. It seeks out and devices wickedness. Perhaps most importantly: Yhwh’s act of deliverance is much like his act of creation. It is movement of love outside of himself for his own and for their goodness. Yhwh, as will be said explicitly in a later verse: is light in himself and provides room in that light for others (“in your light we see light itself”; vs. 9). The wicked embodies the contrary, in two movements: as to those around him he “devices wickedness”, as to himself, he is blind to the depths of his own depravity (“he cannot find his iniquity and hate it”). So, both internally and externally, he represents a consuming darkness (he is not only a black hole to his ‘neighbor’ but one to himself as well).

Precious: something we emphasized in verse 1-4 is that the fool/wicked man works directly opposite to the wise man. What we meant was that whereas the wise man both loves the right things (Yhwh’s instruction for example) and hates the wrong things (company of the wicked), the wicked man loves the wrong things (his own self: he flatters himself too much) and doesn’t hate the wrong things (he can’t ‘find his iniquity and hate it’; he does avoid what is wrong). Here, we find the psalmist engaging in wise love of Yhwh’s (God’s) lovingkindness. Just as he gave voice to the totality of Yhwh’s concern within creation, and to the totality of his concern to all living things: so, now, does this become, for him, a ‘precious thing’, an object of love and delight. For the wicked, he found nothing delightful but himself; for him, everything began and ended within himself and was not open to these covenantal modes of relationship and reception. The psalmist, by contrast, finds his delight not in himself but in Yhwh’s benevolence (and, not just to him but to all of the created order).

Man and beast: One thing we noted in our reflection on verse 5 is the fact that the geography is total (heaven, sky, earth, deep). Yhwh’s benevolence and activity are present everywhere (whereas the wicked is not even present to himself fully). Here, a similar image is deployed when focusing specifically on Yhwh’s deliverance. “Man and beast” represent, in the totality of the living realm. Therefore, while Yhwh’s activity is present everywhere in creation, so too is his deliverance manifested everywhere in the living order. For the psalmist, everywhere he looks he is met and encompassed by Yhwh’s loving concern for his creation and his creatures. The question, then, is why is it that only ‘man’ finds ‘refuge underneath his wings’? The answer is rather straightforward: the Temple, where the cherubim’s wings overstretch the arc of the covenant, is ‘man’s refuge’. The psalm then moves from the general deliverance enacted by the very act of creation to the particular form of deliverance given to man in the Temple, where Yhwh and man commune most intimately (indeed, where his Name dwells). The psalm has, therefore, been moving into an ever tighter circle: all of creation à living things à man/Temple. The Temple, scene from this perspective then, operates much like man does in creation: as the pinnacle and goal.

Ps. 36.5 (heaven and the heart)

“O Yhwh / your lovingkindness / is in the heavens; - your faithfulness / reaches to the clouds.” A category of analysis I forgot to include in the previous reflection involved the theme of ownership and how they are contrasted between the wicked and Yhwh. Verse 1 states that “transgression belongs to the wicked person/ it is in the midst of his heart.” We also saw in verse 2 how he has iniquity. Here, in verse 5, we see a different mode of possession: ‘lovingkindness and faithfulness’. The contrast couldn’t be sharper. For the wicked, what he owns is something that is inherently destructive and self-serving. Furthermore, it is blinding (it causes a “too much flattery” to smoke his eyes and prohibit him from “finding his iniquity and hating it). Most important, however, is that it is “in the midst of his heart”. As we saw in our reflection on verse 1, the heart is the seat of human power and seeing. It is what motivates and compels man forward. What is in man’s heart is what man is. For Yhwh, by contrast, what he “owns” is covenantal assurance and faithfulness. Yhwh’s ‘possession’ is something that is, inherently, overflowing towards the other and for the other. In other words, Yhwh is self-giving. Likewise, his lovingkindness (in contrast to ‘transgression’) is “in the heavens”. This is a crucial contrast to the ‘heart’. “Heaven” is the source, or seat, of all divine power. In this way it functions much like the ‘heart of man’. It is the originator of all movement (and good things). What we see, then, is the fact that while the wicked is entirely, and utterly, turned in toward himself in a type of cannibalistic self-destruction, Yhwh is and moves outward towards his creatures. The seat of Yhwh’s power is an overflowing being-for those with whom he has entered into covenant (which, incidentally, is all of creation).

Ps. 36.5-6 (filling creation)

“O Yhwh / your lovingkindness / is in the heavens; - your faithfulness / reaches to the clouds; - your righteousness / is like / the marvelous mountains; - your judgments / like the mighty deep.” There are three things in particular to notice about these lines: the contrasting tone with the previous verses; the geographical references and how that relates to the wicked; the placement of this hymn to Yhwh in regard to the opening and closing of the psalm.

Tone: if read alone, this hymn to Yhwh stands as a self-contained unit; meaning, it can be read without reference to the wicked. However, when read in its context, this hymn accomplishes a complete dramatic shift and the light thereby cast on the hymn is that much brighter. We ended our reflection on the wicked by remarking on how one feels almost claustrophobic at the end. Everything is focused on a tightly bound man who is utterly encased within himself. Furthermore, even within this cramped interior world of his, darkness is pervasive; he is blind to himself, to his own imbalance, and to the ultimate root of his heart. He is a cave within a cave. Importantly for later—he doesn’t ‘fill himself’ (there are crevices, caves and creatures of darkness that his own spirit is unaware of). All of this changes when we look to Yhwh. The first phrase, “O Yhwh”, opens up a massive breathing space. No longer are we witnessing some corrupt monologue of the wicked man (“he devises wickedness upon his bed”). Here, we are in the realm of prayer and dialogue. Furthermore, although we mentioned the word ‘wisdom’ quite frequently in our reflections, the word is never used (except to say the wicked has “given up being wise”). Rather, the first four verses are full of ‘transgression, wickedness, devises, deceit, iniquity, and flattery’. These are sordid, oppressive and leaden verses. Here, in verse 5, one is confronted immediately with “lovingkindness, faithfulness, righteousness and judgment”. This is the realm of praise and hymn, and as these verses emerge from the darkness of verses 1-4, there is an astonishing sense of liberation, purity and trustworthiness.  The psalmist, at this point, is obviously fully of joy and delight as he turns his gaze now to Yhwh and away from the wicked. Again, that soothing and intimate word “O” in “O Yhwh” is indicative of the entire feel of these verses. 

Geography: as already pointed out, the geography of the first four verses is the cave of the wicked man’s heart. It is solitary, it is dark, and it is ominous. At this point I want to emphasize something hinted at above: a man’s ‘spirit’ should be utterly aware of itself. A ‘wise man’ is light to himself; he is conscious of his actions as well as his intentions. The wicked man’s spirit, on the other hand, “cannot find his iniquity or hate it”. Unlike the wise man, the wicked man has caverns in his spirit, holes that he cannot peer into and is blind to. In verses 5 and 6, this is completely and utterly changed. Yhwh fills creation from top to bottom. The progression is thus: heavenàskyàearthàdeep. Everywhere, there is Yhwh. However, whereas the wicked was ‘full’ of rebellion, Yhwh is full of relational and covenantal love. This creation is now full of care and concern: lovingkindnessàfaithfulnessàrighteousnessàjudgment. The wicked is not at home in himself. Yhwh, by contrast, finds within creation a ‘home’ for his lovingkindness and faithfulness. Furthermore, in describing the wicked no analogies are used. For Yhwh, his righteousness is “like the marvelous mountains”, his judgment like “the deep”. The fact that Yhwh’s concern and governance of creation find an analogy within creation is important in light of verses 1-4. These analogies point to a correspondence between Yhwh’s ‘interior’ state and the ‘external’ world. If the wicked are marked by a transgression of boundaries, Yhwh is revealed by the careful correspondence to those boundaries. Although he ‘fills’ all of creation, creation itself is ordered and observes the categories established by Yhwh.

Positioning the hymn: This observation largely summarizes/confirms the above two thoughts on tone and geography. If one reads verse 1-4, skips the hymn to Yhwh, and reads veres11-12, one sees that it is very likely that the ‘wicked’ portion of the psalm was likely a single unit before the psalmist composed the psalm as we now have it. The reason this seems clear is that verse four leaves off with the wicked travelling ‘down a path’ that is not good while verse 11 begins with “may the foot of the proud not come against me.” What we see here is that the psalmist has inserted this hymn directly into the middle of the wicked, and he has chosen to insert it precisely at the point where the contrast would be most effective. What we see then (assuming this is correct) is that the psalmist wants us to ‘feel’ this contrast, this geographical expansion and concern of Yhwh as contrasted to the self-destructive and degenerate form of transgression displayed by the wicked. And, he is very effective in doing so. Lastly, are we also to see here something similar to Psalm 1, where the meditation on the ‘blessed man’ operated as a single unit that effectively split the wicked men in two? Is it that Yhwh is ‘unified’ in a way the wicked are not and that he severs them in half as well by his presence?

Ps. 36.4 (a bed and open rebellion)

 “He devises wickedness / upon his bed – he sets himself / on a path / that is not good – he does not reject / what is wrong.” In this final verse regarding the nature of the wicked we are, again, witnessing the reversal of wisdom and the degradation of folly. In many places of the psalms (particularly ps. 63) the wise and good man ‘meditates on Yhwh’s torah’ while on his bed; later rabbinic activities included studying the torah all night long (Nicodemus may have been engaged in this activity when he approached Christ). Here, by contrast, there is no ‘meditation on Torah’ but ‘devising wickedness’. Does this help us get closer to what ‘wickedness’ means? Verse 1 refers to transgression ‘belonging to the wicked’. There we saw how ‘transgression’ pointed to a state of rebellion against the order and function of the world and of Yhwh’s commandments; it was an agent of chaos and destruction. Verse 3 then says that the ‘words of his mouth are wickedness’. There we commented that ‘wickedness’ is juxtaposed to ‘wisdom’ (right living, and speech) and is probably closely aligned with ‘deceit’. This is not merely stating something inaccurate. It is speech that is designed to destroy what is good. It is a type of verbal death. And it degenerates into this chthonic realm precisely because the source of wisdom is absent (“fear of God”).  Here, in verse 4, things become more explicit—wickedness is a form of rebellion against Yhwh (Psalm 63.6: “on my bed I remember you…”). If, as we have been arguing throughout, the wicked have what they shouldn’t and don’t have what they should—here, the same principle follows: Yhwh should be present in his mind but instead he is ‘devising wickedness’. He is bringing forth, almost ‘birthing’, wickedness through his meditations. The following two lines are a perfect inversion of wisdom: “he sets himself on a path that is not good – he does not reject what is wrong.” Psalm 1, in describing the ‘blessed man’, is a good example of how wisdom is supposed to work and be applied: the rejection of the wicked, and the pursuit of Yhwh’s instruction (or, torah). Likewise, the ‘path’, as we saw in our reflection there, is a term for one’s ‘mode of living’ and is frequently described in wisdom sayings. Here, the wicked moves in the opposite direction from wisdom: he goes down a ‘path’ that is ‘not good’. And he does not reject what he should (and, by implication, courts I and allows it to keep company with him). One final thought; these four verses have focused exclusively on what the wicked man does (“he flatters himself; he speaks deceit; he gives up being wise; he devises wickedness; he sets himself on the wrong path”). There is the sense here that this man, along with his precious wickedness, are working ‘under their own steam’. One thing we have noted in other reflections on Yhwh’s judgment is how it is often (almost always) a ‘letting be’ of the wicked; of allowing their own wickedness to return to them. Yhwh does not need to ‘do’ anything in particular, except do nothing. Paul will later say that this is the preeminent form of Yhwh’s punishment (and wrath?): leaving men up to their own devises. In this constant refrain of what the wicked man does, are we to see in these lines man cut off and abandoned by Yhwh (due to their own heart of transgression)? In other words, are we to see here a latent judgment already (he has been described as blind to himself), even without reading the closing lines of the psalm? One cannot help but feel as if, in reading these verses, one were peering down into a cave where a solitary individual is living, unaware of his degradation and his isolation. There is almost no human contact in these lines and everything emanates solely from within the wicked man; these verses feel very claustrophobic. In fact, one could say that the only ‘companions’ of this man are ‘transgression’ (vs. 1) and himself (vs. 2). 

Ps. 36.3 (failure to communicate)

“The words / of his mouth / are wickedness / and deceitfulness; - he has given up / being wise / and doing good.” The previous verse began with what the wicked man does (“he flatters himself”) and concluded with what he could not do (“find his iniquity and hate it”). The same pattern is followed here. The first part speaks to what the wicked does (speaks wickedness and deceit). The second part of what he can’t do: be wise and do good. Again, we are seeing here the dual nature of wisdom as it is inverted by the wicked. The wise, as we have said, must do two things: love the right things and hate the wrong things. Here, the wicked man loves the wrong things and hates (or has given up on) the good things. He is like the photo negative of the wise and blessed man of Psalm 1. As to the first half: this is very familiar territory. The wicked are almost universally condemned not primarily for their actions but for their speech. Likewise, the wisdom literatures reveals a profound interest (we might even say a primary interest) in how one controls one’s tongue. It is, arguably, through one’s speech that one is identified as either a wise man or a fool. Here, when it comes to the wicked, their speech is both ‘wicked’ and ‘deceitful’. I admit I do not know what it “wicked” speech is; it is apparently different, although probably involves, ‘deceit’. Or, can these be words that, although ‘true’ are entirely self-serving, inappropriate and designed to destroy another person unjustly? Perhaps, too, we are to see the second half as working in parallel with the first: wickedness and deceit are juxtaposed to wisdom and doing good. If so, then speaking wickedness is the opposite of wisdom, as deceit would be the opposite of ‘doing good’. As to ‘deceit’: this is a constant refrain about the wicked. Their words mimic their interior state of being divided against themselves. They resemble one thing, but conceal the opposite. We should come to expect this based on what we have said already about the wicked: they “own transgression” but they cannot “find their iniquity”. In a way, the wicked, are themselves, walking lies (they cannot comprehend the magnitude of their breach of the created order and therefore their speech mimics their own interiorly disordered state of transgression). The second phrase roots this capacity for deceit and wickedness in what is essentially a failure of the will: “he has given up being wise and doing good”. Here we find the common conception of the fool in the ancient world: a person who knows the good but fails or refuses to do it. It is instructive that the wicked are, here, seen to be those who have ‘given up’, those who have surrendered in some way. Are we to see here that ‘wickedness’, this ‘state of transgression’, is a form of laxity, of a failure to persevere? Is it that man’s position is one of movement into wisdom and doing good, whereas when he ceases to do so he ‘sinks’ into transgression and wickedness?