Thijs Booij, «Psalm 127,2b: a Return to Martin Luther», Vol. 81 (2000) 262-268

In Ps 127,2b )n# (s\e4na4)) tells about the manner of giving (H. Irsigler); it does so by denoting the state of the dydy when he is receiving God’s gift. The particle Nk, as related to Ntn, means ‘according to that’, referring to the notion of toil. The tenor of v. 2b is to underscore that it is God who ‘builds the house’, ‘keeps the city’. What humans receive is not the outcome of toil, not a divine reward for it, but an expression of favour, a gift just like that. Translation: ‘To his beloved one He gives it in sleep’.

J.A. Emerton, accepting the existence of a Hebrew root  hn#$ ‘be high, be exalted’ (HALAT: hn#$ III), argues for ‘high estate’ or ‘honour’¹⁸. It seems to be a drawback of Dahood’s proposal that Syriac s\ayna4) means ‘peace, tranquility’, rather than ‘prosperity’; Emerton’s suggestion, on the other hand, does not explain the aleph of )n#¹⁹. It seems unnecessary, however, to enter at length into the linguistic matter, since the actual difficulty is an interpretative one. It is problematic in both proposals that a notion is added which, in view of vv. 1.2a, is not essential in the text. According to Dahood’s explanation God gives prosperity; in Emerton’s interpretation he gives high estate, or honour. However, it is not the pursuit of prosperity, high estate or honour that the text is about²⁰, but human effort in general.

        I think we may have faith in tradition reading )n# as ‘sleep’. In itself the notion ‘sleep’ has the advantage of being in opposition to the toiling pictured in v. 2a. As to the form )n#, in six or seven other cases the feminine ending -a4 is denoted by aleph, apparently by Aramaic influence²¹. The Aramaic form does not necessarily go back to the author; in an early stage of the textual tradition it may have crept in²².

II

        If indeed the word )n# means ‘sleep’, the problem of its function remains to be solved. H. Irsigler, in my view, made an important contribution by supporting Martin Luther’s interpretation²³ and pointing out that )n#, taken as ‘in sleep’, is not about time (as if God’s gifts would be granted only in resting time), but about the manner of giving. This, I think, is the most important thing to be said. Two clarifications may still be in order.

        In Irsigler’s view )n# is a modal adjunct²⁴. It is true that )n# tells about the way in which God gives; in itself, however, it rather designates the state of the ‘beloved’ when he is receiving God’s gift; by mentioning that state, the manner of giving is indicated. More Biblical Hebrew texts have this kind of modifier. The following instances are taken from Gesenius – Kautzsch’s grammar, §118q²⁵: