Rashi’s Commentary on the Psalms: A Review

The Hebrew text of Rashi’s commentary on the Psalms, along with a translation, introduction, and notes by Mayer Gruber, has recently appeared in paperback at a reasonable price. Its appearance is a major event. There is no doubt that this volume belongs on the shelves of anyone who wishes to study the Psalms in the context of the canonical tradition of interpretation which Rashi summarized, adapted, and contributed to himself.

Mayer Gruber. Rashi’s Commentary on Psalms. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 2007. Paperback. 914 pages. List price: $50.00. Reprinted from the original cloth edition: Brill Reference Library of Judaism 18; Leiden: Brill, 2004.

The table of contents is available online here.

Mayer Gruber’s introduction and copious notes makes this volume indispensable to the serious student of Rashi’s commentary on the Psalms. The volume originally appeared as a hardback in 2004 and is still in print, with a list price of $237.00. Not your average stocking-stuffer.

The 2007 paperback edition might have benefited from a new preface in which two matters were addressed:

(1) An account of the extent of the differences between the text chosen by Gruber for his edition, Vienna 220, and the text of Rashi’s commentary provided in Psalms, Part 1 (ed. Menachem Cohen; Mikra’ot Gedolot 'Haketer' - MGH 8; Bar-Ilan University Press, 2003), and Psalms, Part 2 (ed. Menachem Cohen; Mikra’ot Gedolot 'Haketer' - MGH 9; Bar-Ilan University Press, 2004). I have not yet had the opportunity to make a comparison myself.

(2) An account of the extent of the differences in text and translation technique vis-à-vis A. J. Rosenberg’s edition of Rashi’ commentary, in Hebrew and English, online here. For example, Rosenberg begins his translation of the first lemma of Rashi’s commentary with the words: “Heb. אשרי les felicements (?) in Old French.” Vienna 220 has no equivalent to this. Gruber, who often discusses additions and other variants in the wider manuscript tradition, does not note the existence of this reading.

Gruber’s notes relate Rashi’s comments to other examples of traditional Jewish exegesis, and exegesis both ancient and modern reflected in translation, commentary, dictionaries, and other secondary literature. Gruber’s purpose is not to adjudicate between discrepant interpretations. The goal is to place Rashi’s comments in the context of the exegetical discussion that continues to this day, and let the reader decide to what extent and in what sense Rashi’s comments remain helpful.

I have two basic criticisms of Gruber’s volume.

(1) Rashi’s commentary in Hebrew is found at the back of the volume in one block. In the middle of the volume, a heavily footnoted translation of the commentary is given psalm-by-psalm. The result: it is often necessary to have one’s finger in three different places at once: the Hebrew, the translation of the Hebrew, and the notes to the translation.

A lemma-by-lemma (not psalm-by-psalm) diglot edition of the commentary and commentary thereto, would have been a far better way to make Rashi accessible to students of the Bible like myself who will never be experts in medieval rabbinic exegesis, but desire to benefit from it and quote from it in a responsible manner. An example of what I have in mind is offered below.

(2) Additions and other variants in the wider manuscript tradition, insofar as Gruber notes them, are offered in translation only.

It would have been better to have all significant textual variants in the manuscript tradition reported in Hebrew in an appendix, and/or in supercommentary to Rashi’s commentary as found in Vienna 220.

A truly user-friendly edition of Rashi’s commentary on the Psalms would proceed lemma-by-lemma, with the MT presented first, followed by a translation thereof according to the sense Rashi attributed to it; Rashi’s commentary; a translation of Rashi’s commentary; and finally, a supercommentary. With the advent of electronic typesetting, Hebrew can be presented as such without difficulty.

Here is an example of what I have in mind - translations and supercommentary are my own, and differ in detail but not in the essentials from those of Gruber:

[Lemma]

אשרי האיש

אשר לא הלך בעצת רשעים

ובדרך חטאים לא עמד

ובמושב לצים לא ישב

[Translation of the Lemma in accord with Rashi’s Interpretation]

The praises of a man are

that he did not walk in the counsel of wicked men,

and did not stand in the way of sinful men,

and did not sit in the seat of scorners.

[Rashi]

אשרי האיש

אישוריו ותהילותיו של אדם אלו

הן אשר לא הלך בעצת רשעים

כי מתוך שלא הלך לא עמד

ומתוך שלא עמד לא ישב

[Translation of Rashi’s commentary]

The praises of the man

The lauds and praises of a person are these,

namely, that he did not walk in the counsel of wicked men:

because he did not walk […], he did not stand […],

and because he did not stand […], he did not sit […].

[Supercommentary]

  The psalm opens with אשרי, the plural construct of a noun of disputed meaning nowhere attested in the singular. Rashi understands אשרי to be semantically equivalent to אישורי ‘lauds of, commendations of,’ and תהילות ‘praises of.’ The comment suggests his awareness of the synonymity of the parallel verbs D אשר ‘laud, congratulate, declare happy’ and D הלל ‘praise’ in Prov 31:28 and Cant 6:9. Rashi interprets the similar expression in Psalm 2:12, אשרי כל חוסי בו, in the same way: יהו נכרים אישורי החוסים בו ‘The praiseworthy qualities of those who take refuge in Him will be recognizable.’

LXX, Vulgate, Kimchi, and most modern translations understand the expression to be semantically related to אֹשֶׁר ‘happiness’ (Gen 30:13). On this interpretation, אשרי literally means ‘O the happinesses of.’ In idiomatic English: ‘Happy is.’ So NJPSV, NRSV, REB, NAB. NJB comes closer to Rashi’s interpretation: ‘How blessed is.’

The sense difference separating Rashi’s proposal from that of most other interpreters is akin to the difference between תחנה ‘a supplication for favor’ and חן ‘favor.’

Rashi understands the praises of the man to be that he does not walk / stand / sit. In accord with the use of the idiom אשרי איש and similar attested elsewhere, virtually all other interpreters treat ‘who does not . . .’ as modifying ‘the man,’ not ‘the happinesses / blessed qualities’ of the man.

Rashi follows a comment in Midrash Tehillim [footnote source] in which the three verbs of this verse are understood as three successive postures. The praise of a man is the following: because he does not do x, he also does not do y, and because he does not do y, he also does not do z.

Several mss. of Rashi’s commentary [footnote sources] add the following [provide the Hebrew and a translation, followed by discussion].

On another note, thanks to Dan Rabinowitz of the fabulous Seforim Blog, Mayer Gruber’s observations about Rashi the (alleged) vintner have received ample and occasionally dyspeptic comment. To join the fun, go here.

Comments

[Theophrastus]

Perhaps you would rather prefer the two-volum Rashi Tehillim by R' Herczeg and R' Kamenetsky ("The Onliner Edition"). Their formatting follows your basic guideline:

A truly user-friendly edition of Rashi’s commentary on the Psalms would proceed lemma-by-lemma, with the MT presented first, followed by a translation thereof according to the sense Rashi attributed to it; Rashi’s commentary; a translation of Rashi’s commentary; and finally, a supercommentary

except that the Hebrew psalter is presented in scansion, with a diglot English translation; the Rashi is presented phrase by phrase with a linear translation, a super-commentary set of footnotes, and interpolations in a different font.

A sample page of their work can be found on the here.

While I included links to the publisher's pages, it is cheaper to order from Amazon. At this moment, the two-volume R' Herczeg Rashi Tehillim is sold for $36.51 (ISBN 1598263811) and the R' Herczeg Rashi Chumash is sold for $100.59 (ISBN 1578191149).

(If you find R' Herczeg's work to be to your taste, or even promising, perhaps you may wish to make note of it in your main blog rather than having my suggestion buried in a comment to a post from 2007.)

[JohnFH]

Thanks, Theophrastus. I will definitely put this on my wish list.

[Theophrastus]

I'm sorry -- I must have had a formatting error in my previous comment, so parts of my comment were deleted.

I meant to say the following:

* In the Gruber translation, you say three fingers are required. Actually, five fingers are required -- in addition to the three you mention, one finger for the Hebrew and one finger for the English psalter.

* I find R' Herczeg's format particularly engaging. I find it as close as one can get with a book to a traditional havrusa experience (although, by ignoring the format, it is also possible to read in a passive way).

* R' Herczeg was also the editor of the Artscroll "Sapirstein Edition" Rashi Chumash (sample pages here). This work has achieved huge success (at least in the English-speaking Orthodox Jewish world.)

[JohnFH]

It is good to have you around again, Theo. It encourages me to spread the word more about all things Judaica. I'm really enjoying the Koren Siddur, for example, and ought to present it to the blogosphere.

[Theophrastus]

More photos and thoughts:

http://whatilearnedfromaristotle.blogspot.com/2010/04/story-of-two-rashi-tehillim.html