¹ tn Heb “you are handsome from the sons of man.” The preposition “from” is used in a comparative (“more than”) sense. The peculiar verb form יָפְיָפִיתָ (yafyafita) is probably the result of dittography of יפ (yod-pe) and should be emended to יָפִיתָ (yafita). See GKC 152 §55.e.

¹ tn Heb “Who is this man, the one who fears the Lord? He will instruct him in the way he should choose.” The singular (note “man”) is representative here (see v. 14, where the plural is used), and has thus been translated as a plural (“followers…they”).

¹ tc Heb “Protect me like the pupil, a daughter of an eye.” The noun בַּת (bat, “daughter”) should probably be emended to בָּבַת (bavat, “pupil”). See Zech 2:12 HT (2:8 ET) and HALOT 107 s.v. *בָּבָה.

¹ tn Heb “the counsel of the oppressed you put to shame.” Using a second person plural verb form, the psalmist addresses the wicked. Since the context indicates their attempt to harm the godly will be thwarted, the imperfect should be taken in a subjunctive (cf. NASB, NRSV) rather than an indicative manner (cf. NIV). Here it probably expresses their desire or intent (“want to humiliate”).

¹ tn Heb “by the work of his hands [the] wicked [one] was ensnared.” The singular form רָשָׁע (rashaʿ, “wicked”) is collective or representative here (see vv. 15, 17). The form נוֹקֵשׁ (noqesh) appears to be an otherwise unattested Qal form (active participle) from נָקַשׁ (naqash), but the form should be emended to נוֹקַשׁ (noqash), a Niphal perfect from יָקַשׁ (yaqash).

¹ tn Traditionally, “my shield is upon God” (cf. NASB). As in v. 8, עַל (ʿal) should be understood as a divine title, here compounded with “God” (cf. NIV, “God Most High”). See M. Dahood, Psalms (AB), 1:45-46. The shield metaphor pictures God as a protector against deadly attacks.

² sn The world was conceived of as having bases and pillars, but these poetic descriptions should not be pressed too far (e.g., see Ps 24:2, which may be worded as much for its polemics against Canaanite mythology as anything).

² tc This reading involves a change in the text, for in MT “men” is in the construct. It would be translated “all men whom he made” (i.e., “all men of his making”). This is the translation followed by the NIV and NRSV. Olshausen suggested that the word should have been אֲנָשִׁים (ʾanashim) with the final ם (mem) being lost to haplography.

¹ tn The verb is the Piel imperfect of כָּזַב (kazav), meaning “to lie.” It could be a question: “Should I lie [against my right?]—when I am innocent.” If it is repointed to the Pual, then it can be “I am made to lie,” or “I am deceived.” Taking it as a question makes good sense here, and so emendations are unnecessary.

¹ tc The word רֻטֲפַשׁ (rutafash) is found nowhere else. One suggestion is that it should be יִרְטַב (yirtav, “to become fresh”), connected to רָטַב (ratav, “to be well watered [or moist]”). It is also possible that it was a combination of רָטַב (ratav, “to be well watered”) and טָפַשׁ (tafash, “to grow fat”). But these are all guesses in the commentaries.

² tn The point is that if he has raised his arm against the oppressed it should be ripped off at the joint. The MT has “let fall my shoulder [כְּתֵפִי, k^etefi] from the nape of the neck [or shoulder blade (מִשִּׁכְמָה, mishikhmah)].”

¹ sn In the public square. The area referred to here should not be thought of in terms of modern western dimensions. The wide space, plaza, or public square mentioned here is the open area in the gate complex where legal and business matters were conducted. The area could be as small as a few hundred square feet.

² tn The form בְּהִלּוֹ (b^ehillo) is unusual; it should be parsed as a Hiphil infinitive construct with the elision of a ה (he). The proper spelling would have been בַּהֲהִלּוֹ (bahahillo). If it were Qal, it would just mean “when his light shone.”

² tn The poem opens with כִּי (ki). Some commentators think this should have been “for,” and that the poem once stood in another setting. But there are places in the Bible where this word occurs with the sense of “surely” and no other meaning (cf. Gen 18:20).

² tc In place of “light” here the LXX has “his ambush,” perhaps reading אֹרְבוֹ (ʾor^evo) instead of אוֹרֵהוּ (ʾorehu, “his light”). But while that captures the idea of troops and warfare, the change should be rejected because the armies are linked with stars and light. The expression is poetic; the LXX interpretation tried to make it concrete.

³ tc The MT has a very brief and strange reading: “they take as a pledge upon the poor.” This could be taken as “they take a pledge against the poor” (ESV). Kamphausen suggested that instead of עַל (ʿal, “against”) one should read עוּל (ʿul, “suckling”). This is supported by the parallelism. “They take as pledge” is also made passive here.

² sn The figure now changes to a tree for the discussion of the finality of death. At least the tree will sprout again when it is cut down. Why, Job wonders, should what has been granted to the tree not also be granted to humans?

¹ tn The Hebrew says “heights of heaven, what can you do?” A. B. Davidson suggested this was an exclamation and should be left that way. But most commentators will repoint גָּבְהֵי שָׁמַיִם (govhe shamayim, “heights of heaven”) to גְּבֹהָה מִשָּׁמַיִם (g^evohah mishamayim, “higher than the heavens”) to match the parallel expression. The LXX may have rearranged the text: “heaven is high.”

¹ tn The verb יַחֲלֹף (yakhalof) is literally “passes by/through” (NIV “comes along” in the sense of “if it should so happen”). Many accept the emendation to יַחְתֹּף (yakhtof, “he seizes,” cf. Gordis, Driver), but there is not much support for these.

¹ tc The LXX, Targum Job, Symmachus, and Vulgate all assume that the vocalization of רֹב (rov, “abundance”) should be רַב (rav, “great”): “great of words.” This would then mean “one who is abundant of words,” meaning, “a man of many words,” and make a closer parallel to the second half. But the MT makes good sense as it stands.