A Symposium on Psalm 137:9 Psalm 137 small A Verse to Criticize A Historical-Critical Reading

Prof. Marc Zvi Brettler

Personal Preface: The Difficulty with
Dispassionate Analysis of Horrific Texts

Many believe that scholars of antiquity, including biblical scholars, are supposed to be objective, and that they should convey the meaning of the past to the present generation dispassionately.  For me this is impossible when exploring texts such as Psalm 137:9, one of the most horrific biblical texts, which to paraphrase Alice (of Alice in Wonderland), only gets worser and worser the more deeply it is examined. 
Given that the Bible functions as a source of inspiration, it is not sufficient to ask the typical scholarly questions about this verse—what the text meant in context, how v. 9 fits in the broader psalm, what the psalm’s structure is, when and why Psalm 137 was written, how its sentiments relate to other ancient psalms from this period, etc.—all the sorts of questions that biblical scholars are taught to ask.  Nevertheless, the immediate horror of the verse does not obviate the need to ask these questions, some of which I explore below.

Composition History

Scholars debate the compositional history of Psalm 137, and how its final verses relate to the larger whole.  Many, quite plausibly to my mind, suggest that vv. 1-6 comprised the original psalm, to which the last three verses have been appended.  The evidence for this is suggestive, but not definitive.  Vv. 1-6 must derive from the post-exilic period—Babylon is שָׁ֣ם, “there,” implying that the author is already back in Judah. On the other hand, the raw sentiments of vv. 7-9 imply a setting soon after the Babylonian exile.^[1]  In other words, vv. 7-9 likely existed as part of (separate) composition, written in the Babylonian exile, and they were later appended to vv. 1-6 of the psalm, resulting in the current nine verse psalm incorporated in the Psalter.
Yet, vv. 7-9 are now well-integrated into the psalm, through the repetition of the root ז-כ-ר, “to remember.”  In its current form the psalm suggests that God must remember (ז-כ-ר) and punish Babylonian babies in return for “our” remembering Zion so very effectively: v. 1, בְּזָכְרֵ֗נוּ אֶת־צִיּֽוֹן (as we remembered Zion) and v. 6, תִּדְבַּ֥ק־לְשׁוֹנִ֨י ׀ לְחִכִּי֮ אִם־לֹ֪א אֶ֫זְכְּרֵ֥כִי (let my tongue stick to my palate if I cease to remember you).  Additionally, in its final form, Ps 137 is a measure for measure (מידה כנגד מידה) psalm, as is made explicit in v. 8b, which leads right into v. 9: אַשְׁרֵ֥י שֶׁיְשַׁלֶּם־לָ֑ךְ אֶת־גְּ֝מוּלֵ֗ךְ שֶׁגָּמַ֥לְתְּ לָֽנוּ׃, “a blessing^[2] on him who repays you in kind what you have inflicted on us.”  The root ג-מ-ל is used in the Bible to express measure for measure retribution.

אַשְׁרֵ֤י שֶׁיֹּאחֵ֓ז וְנִפֵּ֬ץ אֶֽת עֹ֝לָלַ֗יִךְ אֶל הַסָּֽלַע
Lexical Observations

The Use of the Word אשרי
Verse 8b lexically and syntactically prepares us for v. 9. It begins as well with אַשְׁרֵ֤י, a strong exclamatory form, which may be rendered as “O for the happiness of!” or “Blessings upon!” Elsewhere, אַשְׁרֵ֤י expresses joy for those who are saved by God (e.g. Deut 33:9), patiently wait for God’s deliverance (e.g. Isa 30:8), follow the path of the righteous (e.g. Ps 1:1), trust in God (e.g. Ps 34:9), reside in the Temple (e.g. Ps 84:5) or have lots of children (e.g. Ps 127:5). 
Like the אַשְׁרֵ֤י of 8b, the same word in 9 is followed by the (late Biblical Hebrew) relative particle שֶׁ (rather than the earlier אֲשֶׁ֖ר), an imperfect (future) verb (שֶׁיְשַׁלֶּם שֶׁיֹּאחֵ֓ז) and a third person singular pronoun (לָ֑ךְ and the suffix of עֹ֝לָלַ֗יִךְ).  This connects verses 8 and 9, thereby anchoring v. 9 well into the psalm.^[3]

Seizing and Dashing
Uniquely in the Bible, v. 9 uses in conjunction the two verbs א-ח-ז, “to seize” and נ-פ-צ, “to smash or dash.”  Seizing is not sufficient, smashing is not sufficient—both of these actions need to be accomplished for true happiness or blessing (אַשְׁרֵ֥י) to reign.
Furthermore, the second verb נ-פ-צ  is in the pi‘el conjugation.  It is not the case, as so many might have been taught in Hebrew school, that the main function of the pi‘el is to intensify the qal.  One function of the pi‘el is “pluralising,” namely indicating “the action…involves either multiple subjects or objects.”^[4]  In other words, the pi‘el of נ-פ-צ draws a picture of fragmentation; it is not just that the babies are smashed, but that this dashing results in shattered baby fragments.

Children or Babies
It is hard to determine exactly what age range עֹלָלַ֗יִךְ designates, though Lamentations 4:4, עוֹלָלִים שָׁאֲלוּ לֶחֶם (“little children beg for bread”), suggests that these are not babes, but old enough to speak, likely toddlers.  Thus, grasping them and smashing them again and again against a rock would require significant effort, and extreme callousness, as they are old enough to understand what is being done to them, and old enough to ask for mercy.

The Rock: A Geographical Location
The final word of the psalm is marked as definite (הַסָּֽלַע)—literally, “the rock.”  Yet, English and Hebrew use definite articles such as “the” very differently. Furthermore, does the singular סלע indicate one rock, or is it being used generically or collectively, as “rocks”?  These different possibilities are reflected in various translations, e.g. the JPS translates, “and dashes them against the rocks!” while the NRSV renders, “and dash them against the rock!” 
To complicate matters even further— הַסָּֽלַע is known as a geographical location in Edom—The Rock.  Near there, according to 2 Kings 14:7, the Judean King Amaziah massacred 10,000 Edomites; according to the parallel version in 2 Chr 25:12,

וַעֲשֶׂ֨רֶת אֲלָפִ֜ים חַיִּ֗ים שָׁבוּ֙ בְּנֵ֣י יְהוּדָ֔ה וַיְבִיא֖וּם לְרֹ֣אשׁ הַסָּ֑לַע וַיַּשְׁלִיכ֛וּם מֵֽרֹאשׁ־הַסֶּ֖לַע וְכֻלָּ֥ם נִבְקָֽעוּ:

Another 10,000 the men of Judah captured alive and brought to the top of Sela. They threw them down from the top of Sela and every one of them was burst open.

Thus, this psalm may conclude with a macabre pun:  the Babylonian children are being smashed to pieces either on (a/the) rock(s) or at Sela, an important site of their Edomite allies.^[5] A smashing baby pun!

Parallel Language with Jeremiah
A careful look at the uses of the vocabulary of v. 9 elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible brings us to Jeremiah 50-51, a long oracle against Babylon, which at some point originally concluded the book.^[6]  Most significantly, about half of the uses of the verb נ-פ-צ are found in Jeremiah 51:20-23:

נא:כ מַפֵּץ־אַתָּ֣ה לִ֔י כְּלֵ֖י מִלְחָמָ֑ה וְנִפַּצְתִּ֤י בְךָ֙ גּוֹיִ֔ם וְהִשְׁחַתִּ֥י בְךָ֖ מַמְלָכֽוֹת: נא:כא וְנִפַצְתִּ֣י בְךָ֔ ס֖וּס וְרֹֽכְב֑וֹ וְנִפַּצְתִּ֣י בְךָ֔ רֶ֖כֶב וְרֹכְבֽוֹ: נא:כב וְנִפַּצְתִּ֤י בְךָ֙ אִ֣ישׁ וְאִשָּׁ֔ה וְנִפַּצְתִּ֥י בְךָ֖ זָקֵ֣ן וָנָ֑עַר וְנִפַּצְתִּ֣י בְךָ֔ בָּח֖וּר וּבְתוּלָֽה: נא:כג וְנִפַּצְתִּ֤י בְךָ֙ רֹעֶ֣ה וְעֶדְר֔וֹ וְנִפַּצְתִּ֥י בְךָ֖ אִכָּ֣ר וְצִמְדּ֑וֹ וְנִפַּצְתִּ֣י בְךָ֔ פַּח֖וֹת וּסְגָנִֽים:

51:20 You are My war club, [My] weapons of battle; With you I clubbed nations, With you I destroyed kingdoms; 51:21 With you I clubbed horse and rider, With you I clubbed chariot and driver, 51:22 With you I clubbed man and woman, With you I clubbed graybeard and boy, With you I clubbed youth and maiden; 51:23 With you I clubbed shepherd and flock, With you I clubbed plowman and team, With you I clubbed governors and prefects.

The vocabulary overlap between our psalm’s last three verses and Jeremiah 50-51 suggests that the author of Ps 137:7-9 likely knew Jeremiah 50-51, and based his addition, imprecating Babylon and Edom, on these chapters.^[7] In other words, the images he uses and develops are traditional, and he is not at all original; like many ancient authors, in the Bible and elsewhere, he reuses earlier sources. 

Smashing Babies in the Bible

Our authors’ dependence on the passage in Jeremiah likely explains why he pairs‘עולל with נ-פ-צ, rather than the expected ר-ט-ש, the more common verb used for describing smashed toddlers: 

2 Kings 8.2	וַיֹּ֣אמֶר חֲזָאֵ֔ל מַדּ֖וּעַ אֲדֹנִ֣י בֹכֶ֑ה וַיֹּ֡אמֶר כִּֽי־יָדַ֡עְתִּי אֵ֣ת אֲשֶׁר־תַּעֲשֶׂה֩ לִבְנֵ֨י יִשְׂרָאֵ֜ל רָעָ֗ה מִבְצְרֵיהֶ֞ם תְּשַׁלַּ֤ח בָּאֵשׁ֙ וּבַחֻֽרֵיהֶם֙ בַּחֶ֣רֶב תַּהֲרֹ֔ג וְעֹלְלֵיהֶ֣ם תְּרַטֵּ֔שׁ וְהָרֹתֵיהֶ֖ם תְּבַקֵּֽעַ:	“Why does my lord weep?” asked Hazael. “Because I know,” he (=Elisha) replied, “what harm you will do to the Israelite people: you will set their fortresses on fire, put their young men to the sword, dash their little ones in pieces, and rip open their pregnant women.”
Hosea 14:1	תֶּאְשַׁם֙ שֹֽׁמְר֔וֹן כִּ֥י מָרְתָ֖ה בֵּֽאלֹהֶ֑יהָ בַּחֶ֣רֶב יִפֹּ֔לוּ עֹלְלֵיהֶ֣ם יְרֻטָּ֔שׁוּ וְהָרִיּוֹתָ֖יו יְבֻקָּֽעוּ:	Samaria must bear her guilt, for she has defied her God. They shall fall by the sword, their infants shall be dashed to death, and their women with child ripped open.
Nahum 3:10	גַּם־הִ֗יא לַגֹּלָה֙ הָלְכָ֣ה בַשֶּׁ֔בִי גַּ֧ם עֹלָלֶ֛יהָ יְרֻטְּשׁ֖וּ בְּרֹ֣אשׁ כָּל חוּצ֑וֹת וְעַל נִכְבַּדֶּ֙יהָ֙ יַדּ֣וּ גוֹרָ֔ל וְכָל גְּדוֹלֶ֖יהָ רֻתְּק֥וּ בַזִּקִּֽים:	Yet even she was exiled, she went into captivity. Her babes, too, were dashed in pieces at every street corner. Lots were cast for her honored men, and all her nobles were bound in chains.
Isaiah 13:16	וְעֹלְלֵיהֶ֥ם יְרֻטְּשׁ֖וּ לְעֵֽינֵיהֶ֑ם יִשַּׁ֙סּוּ֙ בָּֽתֵּיהֶ֔ם וּנְשֵׁיהֶ֖ם (תשגלנה) [תִּשָּׁכַֽבְנָה]:	And their babes shall be dashed to pieces in their sight, their homes shall be plundered, and their wives shall be raped.

In Kings and Hosea, the graphic parallel of ripping babies out of pregnant women is used, and in Isaiah—also an oracle against Babylon—the horrific element of לְעֵֽינֵיהֶ֑ם, “in their sight” is added. Some modern scholars, viewing such smashed baby verses as a group, suggest that they partake in a common literary trope that would not have been distressing to those who heard it.  I find this suggestion apologetic and even offensive.  Do such images ever lose their power?

Conclusion: Two Senses of the Phrase “Bible Critic”

Too often people accuse me of being a “Bible critic” because I engage in historical-critical research on the Bible. But in that phrase, “critical” does not mean to criticize, but to examine in a free and independent fashion, without particular religious preconceptions.^[11] Thus, my main goal in using the tools of historical-critical methodology is to understand the Bible, in its wonderful and extensive variety—the good and bad, the beautiful and the ugly, within its ancient contexts. 

But at times I am also a Bible critic, criticizing what the Bible says—and I would like to criticize Psalm 137:9 with all my heart, soul, and being.  Applying critical tools to understand it well shows that it is even worse than it seems:

• It is worse than the Assyrian texts to which it is often compared,
• It makes a bad pun while discussing smashing toddlers to pieces,
• It exalts this action in the same way that elsewhere the Bible lauds having lots of children or following the divine path (אשרי).

Heaven help us all if we ignore the savageness of this text, and instead discuss it only as historical-critical philologists, in a dispassionate manner.

Violent Retribution in the Bible

If the psalm empathizes, it stops short of mandating violent retribution on Israel’s enemies. Nevertheless, other parts of the Bible do precisely that.

• Genocide of Canaanites – Deuteronomy, at the same time as it sets out an idealized system of law designed to establish an equitable and compassionate society, calls for the extermination of the tribes of Canaan (7:2; 20:16-18).

• Genocide of Amalekites – Saul kills every Amalekite other than their king, Agag, including women and children, and is only castigated for failing to kill the king and for taking spoils (1 Sam 15).

• Slaughtering Midianite women and children – Moses (Numbers 31:2, 15-18) orders the cold-blooded slaughter of the captive women and boys of Midian.

• Indiscriminate killing of enemies – David (1 Samuel 27:9) “leaves no man or woman alive” on his random raids into Geshurite, Amalekite, and Gizrite territory, which he does to deceive Achish about where he has been campaigning.

• Capital punishment for religious infractions – The Torah mandates death sentences for Sabbath breaking (Exod 31:14, Num 15:35), male homosexual acts (Lev 20:13), and a host of other transgressions.

The modern ‘believers’, nurtured on ideals of religious freedom and universal human rights, is left bewildered and uncomfortable, cornered by their own conscience into a defensive position.

Rabbinic Critique of Biblical Texts

Although reading the Bible with a critical moral eye may seem untraditional, in fact it is a time-honored exegetical method of many rabbinic commentators and much of halakhic tradition.

• Akeidat Yitzhak – Talmudic rabbis didn’t hesitate to claim that Abraham was in error in his attempt to sacrifice his son (b. Ta’anit 4a; Genesis Rabbah 55:5 and 56:8; Pesikta Zutra 44), while later liturgists transformed the message of the akedah into a prayer for God’s kindness and compassion.

• Slaughter of Shechemites – Jacob cursed the unrestrained violence of Shimon and Levi (Gen 49:5-7).

• Pinchas’ Zealotry – In a remarkable inversion of Bible’s praise of Pinhas, the Babylonian and Palestinian sages claimed his zealotry ran counter to the wisdom of the rabbis and it was only the direct intervention of the divine voice that saved him from execution as a murderer (b. Sanhedrin 82a; j. Sanhedrin 9:7).

• Annihilating Amalekites and the Seven Nations – The Babylonian sages effectively rendered inoperative the commandment to exterminate the Canaanites and Amalekites ( Yadayim 4:4; b. Berakhot 28a), and later in the 12^th century Maimonides redefined this disturbing mitzvah to refer only to enemies implacably committed to war on Israel (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings and their Wars, 6:1 and 6:4).

• The Beautiful Captive – The rabbis understood the law of the captive war bride as a lamentable concession to the aggressive “evil urge” that is unleashed in war (BT, Qiddushin 21b).

• David’s Adultery – While one talmudic rabbi, Shmuel bar Nahmani, tried to exonerate David for his adultery and lethal scheming (b. Shabbat 56a), the Bible itself makes abundantly clear that David’s sin is grave (2 Samuel 12:9-14) and the Talmud considers his fit punishment to be nearly unbearable (b. Yoma 22b).

→ Critiquing the Moral Failings in the Bible:
by Rabbi Dr. Eugene Korn

_____________

Professor Marc Zvi Brettler is Bernice & Morton Lerner Professor of Judaic Studies at Duke University, and Dora Golding Professor of Biblical Studies (Emeritus) at Brandeis University. He is author, most recently, of How to Read the Jewish Bible (also published in Hebrew), co-editor of The Jewish Study Bible and The Jewish Annotated New Testament, and co-author of The Bible and the Believer, all published by Oxford University Press. He is cofounder of Project TABS (Torah and Biblical Scholarship) -TheTorah.com.

02/28/2015
[1] See most recently John Ahn, “Psalm 137: Complex Communal Laments,” Journal of Biblical Literature 127 (2008), 285-6.
[2] This is not the place for discussing when אַשְׁרֵ֤י  should be translated as “blessed” versus “for the happiness of,” and the relation between these two possibilities.
[3] Note also the use of אַשְׁרֵ֤י in consecutive verses elsewhere in the Psalter (Pss. 32.1-2; 84.5-5; 119.1-2).
[4] See e.g. Paul Joüon and T. Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute 2006), 144.
[5] For more on Sela and its location, see http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-sites-places/biblical-archaeology-sites/the-edomite-stronghold-of-sela/.  The fact that both Chronicles and Psalms share certain details may be a coincidence; these details are not sufficient to prove that the two texts are related. If, however, one did know the other, it seems more likely that Chronicles was aware of our psalm and made use of its imagery to write a new scene, not found in Kings, in the war between Amaziah and the Edomites (as was the Chronicler’s wont). It seems unlikely to me that the story in Chronicles is historical or preserves an old tradition that the psalmist might have known.  
[6]  Ch. 52 is an appendix, added mostly from the Book of Kings; it deals with the final years of Judah and its destruction, proving that Jeremiah was a true prophet since his predictions of doom came true.  Note that Jer 51:64b reads: עַד־הֵ֖נָּה דִּבְרֵ֥י יִרְמְיָֽהוּ׃,  “Thus far the words of Jeremiah.”
[7] For other commonalities between these units, see e.g. Frank-Lotha Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, Psalms 3 (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2011), 520 and Erhard S. Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, and Lamentations (FOTL 16; Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 2001), 393, with additional supporting literature cited there. 
[8] Many of these are collected in http://faculty.uml.edu/ethan_Spanier/Teaching/documents/CP6.0AssyrianTorture.pdf , from which this is quoted.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Nor do they, like the Bible, highlight ripping open pregnant women; see Mordecahi Cogan, “‘Ripping open Pregnant Women’ in Light of an Assyrian Analogue,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 103 (1983), 755-7.  Concerning children, on p. 755 he does mention a text from Assurnasirpal that states “I burnt their adolescent boys (and) girls,” but the emphasis in these Assyrian documents is on more general horror, rather than horror perpetrated against the very young.

[11] See John Barton, The Nature of Biblical Criticism (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2007).