Page:04.BCOT.KD.PoeticalBooks.vol.4.Writings.djvu/198

 blackness, misfortune, or also of a defective development of the senses: imbecility; and from this an adjective חלכּה = חלכּי, or also (cf. חפשׁי, עלפּה Eze 31:15 = one in a condition of languishing, עלף) חלכּה = חלכּי, plur. חלכּאים, after the form דּוּדאים, from דּוּדי, Ew. §189, g.

Verse 9
The picture of the רשׁע, who is become as it were a beast of prey, is now worked out further. The lustrum of the lion is called סך Jer 25:38, or סכּה Job 38:40 : a thicket, from סכך, which means both to interweave and to plait over = to cover (without any connection with שׂך a thorn, Arab. shôk, a thistle). The figure of the lion is reversed in the second line, the עני himself being compared to the beast of prey and the רשׁע to a hunter who drives him into the pit-fall and when he has fallen in hastens to drag him away (משׁך, as in Psa 28:3; Job 24:22) in, or by means of (Hos 11:4, Job 41:1), his net, in which he has become entangled.

Verses 10-11
The comparison to the lion is still in force here and the description recurs to its commencement in the second strophe, by tracing back the persecution of the ungodly to its final cause. Instead of the Chethîb ודכה (ודכה perf. consec.), the Kerî reads ידכּה more in accordance with the Hebrew use of the tenses. Job 38:40 is the rule for the interpretation. The two futures depict the settled and familiar lying in wait of the plunderer. True, the Kal דּכה in the signification “to crouch down” finds no support elsewhere; but the Arab. dakka to make even (cf. Arab. rṣd, firmiter inhaesit loco, of the crouching down of beasts of prey, of hunters, and of foes) and the Arab. dagga, compared by Hitzig, to move stealthily along, to creep, and dugjeh a hunter's hiding-place exhibit synonymous significations. The ταπεινώσει αὐτὸν of the lxx is not far out of the way. And one can still discern in it the assumption that the text is to be read ישׁח ודכה: and crushed he sinks (Aquila: ὁ δὲ λασθεὶς καμφθήσεται); but even דּכה is not found elsewhere, and if the poet meant that, why could he not have written דּכה? (cf. moreover Jdg 5:27). If דּכה is taken in the sense of a position in which one is the least likely to be seen, then the first two verbs refer to the sculker, but the third according to the usual schema (as e.g., Psa 124:5) is the