Thijs Booij, «Psalm 133: "Behold, how good and how pleasant"», Vol. 83 (2002) 258-267

The opening line of Psalm 133 is, literally, about a social practice; the comparisons following it suggest that in fact a gathering of YHWH’s worshippers is meant. The latter is confirmed by the final line. V. 3a has a bridging function in that its last words ("on the mountains of Zion"), although belonging to the imagery of the comparison, are actually direct expression, relating to the statement of v. 1 (‘inversion’). The situation hinted at can hardly be other than the gathering in Jerusalem on the occasion of a religious festival. In view of the subtle structure and inner cohesion of Psalm 133, it is scarcely plausible that its present meaning is due to some form of adaptation.

gathering for one of the great festivals in Jerusalem¹³. Some authors take b#$y as ‘sitting’, suggesting that the text is about the ‘sitting together’ of pilgrims¹⁴, or about the communion at a sacrificial banquet¹⁵, or about the pleasures of a family meeting¹⁶. However, the particle Mg, ‘also’, points to a situation that suits brotherhood pre-eminently¹⁷; for a situation like that, ‘dwelling together’ qualifies better than a momentary ‘sitting together’. Some relate the ‘dwelling together’ to Nehemiah’s efforts to repeople Jerusalem¹⁸. With this understanding, of course, the reason why the dwelling was ‘good’ and ‘pleasant’ is that YHWH had sent his blessing to Zion (v. 3). It is hardly plausible, however, that the blessing would be restricted, or given by preference, to those Israelites living in Jerusalem. Accordingly, v. 1 does not speak of brothers ‘dwelling in Zion’, but of brothers ‘dwelling together’. Some assume that ‘brothers’ relates to Israel and Judah and that Psalm 133 is about their reunification or fraternization¹⁹. In itself, indeed, ‘brothers’ could be understood as indicating the two communities (cf. Num 20,14; 2 Sam 19,42); however, an explanation based on this understanding would need support from other elements in the text. It has been argued that ‘Hermon’ refers to the tribes of the north, ‘Zion’ to those of the south (v. 3a). As a reference to the northern tribes, however, ‘Hermon’ would be singular. Moreover, in the comparison in v. 2 references to Israel and Judah cannot be found. Should it be supposed that Aaron represents the south²⁰, then it is hard to understand why the beard is first mentioned by itself ("... the beard, the beard of Aaron").

        In 1907 a dissertation was published that turned out to be influential with regard to our subject. Sigismund Rauh, examining ancient Israelite family law, made a link between Ps 133,1 and the law on the levirate in Deuteronomy 25. According to that law, levirate is compulsory when "brothers dwell together (wdxy Myx) wb#$y), and one of them dies and has no son"