Page:04.BCOT.KD.PoeticalBooks.vol.4.Writings.djvu/718

 them, the futures that follow in Psa 68:10, Psa 68:11 are to be understood as referring to the synchronous past; but hardly so that Psa 68:10 should refer to the miraculous supply of food, and more especially the rain of manna, during the journeyings through the wilderness. The giving of the Law from Sinai has a view to Israel being a settled, stationary people, and the deliverance out of the land of bondage only finds its completion in the taking and maintaining possession of the Land of Promise. Accordingly Psa 68:10, Psa 68:11 refer to the blessing and protection of the people who had taken up their abode there. The נחלהּ of God (genit. auctoris, as in 2 Macc. 2:4) is the land assigned by Him to Israel as an inheritance; and גּשׁם נדבות an emblem of the abundance of gifts which God has showered down upon the land since Israel took up its abode in it. נדבה is the name given to a deed and gift springing from an inward impulse, and in this instance the intensive idea of richness and superabundance is associated therewith by means of the plural; גּשׁם נדבות is a shower-like abundance of good gifts descending from above. The Hiphil הניף here governs a double accusative, like the Kal in Pro 7:17, in so far, that is, as נחלתך is drawn to Psa 68:10; for the accentuation, in opposition to the Targum, takes נחלתך ונלאה together: Thine inheritance and that the parched one (Waw epexeget. as in 1Sa 28:3; Amo 3:11; Amo 4:10). But this “and that” is devoid of aim; why should it not at once be read הנּלאה? The rendering of Böttcher, “Thy sickened and wearied,” is inadmissible, too, according to the present pointing; for it ought to be נחלתך or נחלתך. And with a suffix this Niphal becomes ambiguous, and more especially so in this connection, where the thought of נחלה, an inherited possession, a heritage, lies so naturally at hand. נחלתך is therefore to be drawn to Psa 68:10, and Psa 68:10 must begin with ונלאה, as in the lxx, καὶ ἠσθένησε σὺ δὲ κατεερτίσω αὐτήν. It is true נלאה is not a hypothetical preteriet equivalent to ונלאתה; but, as is frequently the case with the anarthrous participle (Ew. §341, b), it has the value of a hypothetical clause: “and if it (Israel's inheritance) were in a parched, exhausted condition (cf. the cognate root להה, Gen 47:13), then hast Thou always made it again firm” (Psa 8:4; Psa 15:1-5 :17), i.e., strengthened, enlivened it. Even here the idea of the inhabitants is closely associated with the land itself; in Psa 68:11