Verse 21 of Psalm 9 is a troublesome one for translators, and they have produced wildly different results. The reason, though, is a simple one: the similarity of two Hebrew words, מוֹרֶה (moreh) and מוֹרָא (mora'). The first of these words means "teacher" or "lawgiver;" the second word means "fear, terror." In the Masoretic text that we have today (which goes back to the Leningrad Codex of 1010 CE), there is a mixed reading: מוֹרָה, which does not correctly correspond to either of these words, or indeed to any Hebrew word. Perhaps the Masoretes, faced with an impossible decision, decided to take a middle path. In the critical apparatus to the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS, see illustration), we are told that some (nonnuli) manuscripts (Mss), in addition to Jerome's Hebrew-based version and a couple of other texts, support the "terror" reading, while others, including the Greek of the Septuagint (LXX) and the Syriac (Aramaic) of the Peshitta, support the "teacher, lawgiver" reading.
How can we know for sure which reading is correct? The short answer is that we can't. But we can, and must, consider any clues that are available. In doing so, we will learn a lot about the history of the Hebrew text of this psalm.
The Peshitta (ca. 500 CE) supports the "teacher, lawgiver" reading. This is very important because Aramaic, a sister language of Hebrew, generally follows the Hebrew text of the OT. It is also important because at that time both Hebrew and Aramaic texts lacked vowel pointing. The two words in question, if spelled correctly, are already differentiated by their consonants, without any vowel pointing. For these reasons, a great deal of weight must be given to support from the Peshitta.
The Greek of the Septuagint (LXX, ca. 200 BCE) gives a word that means "lawgiver." We know that the Hebrew text underlying the LXX was in a better state of conservation than our Masoretic text (it includes, for example, the "missing" Nun-verse of the acrostic Psalm 145). It is also the oldest OT text that we have. For these reasons, the reading of the LXX must be given a lot of weight.
This brings us to the question of the state of conservation of the Hebrew text. By 1010 CE, the date of the Leningrad Codex, it was already defective. Some of the missing verses were known from other sources, but the Masoretes were afraid to supply them. Jerome's "Iuxta Hebraeos" version (392 CE), based on the Hebrew text of his time, gives us an interesting picture of the situation. In the edition of Harden (1922), which I think is the best edition, we find "terrorem" in verse 21. The scribal error (as I see it) had already crept into the Hebrew textual tradition by 392 CE. We need to see an earlier text. Unfortunately, the Dead Sea Scrolls are too fragmentary in the Psalms to be of help here. We have to go back to a time 600 years before Jerome did his Vulgate translations, to the Septuagint (LXX, ca. 200 BCE).
In the Vulgate translation of the Psalms (the version based on the LXX), The verset in question reads as follows:
constitue Domine legislatorem super eos (Set, O Lord, a legislator over them)
This was the version approved for use in the liturgy for some 1600 years, and so was familiar to all reciters of the Divine Office in the Breviarium Romanum.
I feel that "legislator" in the LXX and in the Vulgate is overly specific, since the Hebrew word מוֹרֶה can mean either teacher or legislator. Not knowing the intention of the psalmist, and because the second half of the verse has to do with "knowing," I have selected the broader term, "teacher," for inclusion in the verse.
It should also be noted, with regard to the second half of verse 21, that the word "only" should not be part of any translation of the verse. It is not present in the Hebrew, the Greek, or in either of the Latin versions. Indeed, it leaves open the possibility of a positive valuation of what it means to be human.
57_-16.jpg)
Text Copyright © 2023 by Donald C. Traxler. (I do not, of course, own any rights in the BHS.)
