regimen of עד־אנה, תרצחו is to be read as a Piel; and, as the following figures show, is to be taken, after Psa 42:11, in its primary signification contundere (root רץ).[1]
The sadness of the poet is reflected in the compressed, obscure, and peculiar character of the expression. אישׁ and כּלּכם (a single one-ye all) stand in contrast. כּקיר וגו, sicut parietem = similem parieti (cf. Psa 63:6), forms the object to תּרצּחוּ. The transmitted reading גּדר הדּחוּיה, although not incorrect in itself so far as the gender (Pro 24:31) and the article are concerned (Ges. §111, 2, a), must apparently be altered to גּדרה דחוּיה (Olshausen and others) in accordance with the parallel member of the verse, since both גּדרה and גּדר are words that can be used of every kind of surrounding or enclosure. To them David seems like a bent, overhanging wall, like a wall of masonry that has received the thrust that must ultimately cause its fall; and yet they rush in upon him, and all together they pursue against the one man their work of destruction and ruin. Hence he asks, with an indignation that has a somewhat sarcastic tinge about it, how long this never-satiated self-satisfying of their lust of destruction is meant to last. Their determination (יעץ as in Isa 14:24) is clear. It aims only or entirely (אך, here tantummodo, prorsus) at thrusting down from his high position, that is to say from the throne, viz., him, the man at whom they are always rushing (להדּיח = להדּיחו). No means are too base for them in the accomplishment of their object, not even the mask of the hypocrite. The clauses which assume a future form of expression are, logically at least, subordinate clauses (EW. §341, b). The Old Testament language allows itself a change of number like בּפיו instead of בּפיהם, even to the very extreme, in the hurry of emotional utterance. The singular is distributive in this instance: suo quisque ore, like לו in Isa 2:20, ממּנּו, Isa 5:23,
- ↑ The reading of Ben-Asher תּרצּחוּ is followed by Aben-Ezra, Kimchi, and others, taking this form (which could not possibly be anything else) as Pual. The reading of Ben-Naphtali תּרצּחוּ is already assumed in B. Sanhedrin 119a. Besides these the reading תּרצּחוּ without Dag.) is also found, which cannot be taken as a resolved Piel, since the Metheg is wanting, but is to be read terotzchu, and is to be taken (as also the reading מלשׁני, Psa 101:5, and ויּחלקם, 1Ch 23:6; 1Ch 24:3) as Poal (vid., on Psa 94:20; Psa 109:10).
