Interpretation of the Psalms

From the exegetical comments of St. Athanasius the Great is most famous for his “Commentary on the Psalms” (366-373), which is a short commentary on each psalm. In total, the saint interpreted 148 psalms. In explaining the text, in contrast to dogmatic-polemical works, the allegorical method of interpretation is used. St. Athanasius reveals both the historical and spiritual-moral side of each psalm. In particular, it explains why some believe that all the psalms belong to David. The saint sees the reason for this in the psalmist king himself: “He chose singers; and therefore, as the founder, he was given the honor that everything said by other singers was attributed to David” (“Forewarning of the Psalms”). The interpretations also contain instructions, consolations and advice in relation to the external and internal state of a Christian: “In the psalms we recognize the movements of our soul, and all of them seem to be spoken about us and are, as it were, our own words, serving ... to correct our own life” (“Epistle to Marcellinus on the interpretation of the psalms”, chapter 12). *The title of the work in Greek is Ἐξηγήσεις εἰς τοὺς Ψαλμοὺς. *The title of the work in Latin is Expositiones in Psalmos. Contents Advice on the Psalms Psalm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 Psalm 1 Warning In the Jewish book of Psalms they are all written without adding numbers and in a different form; some are united into one, and others are divided. Thus, the first and second psalms according to the Hebrew text are combined into one psalm; and conversely, the ninth, which with us constitutes one psalm, is divided into two psalms in the Hebrew text. The entire book of Psalms is divided into five parts. It should also be noted that the order of the psalms does not agree with the historical sequence of time, and in many ways deviates from the order of time, as the book of Kings shows. Since idolatry intensified among the Jewish people, it led them to oblivion of the paternal writings, so that the book of the Law of Moses remained unknown, and they did not preserve at all their paternal piety. They also killed the Prophets who exposed their wickedness, for which they were first delivered into captivity by the Assyrians. Later, one of the Prophets, being jealous of their Synagogue, collected the book of Psalms along with other books, finding them not all at once, but at different times, and at the beginning he placed those psalms that were found first. Therefore, we find that not all the psalms of David are in order, but between them we find placed in the book, either the psalms of the sons of Korah and Asaph, and Solomon, and Moses, and the Israelite Etham, and Eman, then again the psalms of David, not because they were written in this order, but because that is how they were found. We find the same thing among the Prophets in the placement of parts of their books. About the psalms after the first and twelfth that are not inscribed, or that have an inscription, but without indicating whose they are, the Jews say that they belong to the one whose name is placed in the psalms preceding the uninscribed ones. Regarding the first and second, which make up one psalm, I think that they are David’s, because all the psalms that follow them in the first part are David’s, and all from the third to the fortieth are inscribed by David. Therefore, it seems to me that the first and second psalms belong to David. This opinion is justified by the book of the Apostolic Acts, in which it is said: “Master, you created the heavens and the earth and the sea and everything that is in them: with the Holy Spirit the mouth of our father David, your servant, said: In this world the nations are reeling, and men have learned in vain” (Acts 4:24-25)? And this clearly confirms that the second psalm is David’s. The name of David is silent in his presence, probably because the psalm contains an explicit prophecy about the Lord in what is said: “against the Lord and against His Christ” (Ps. 2:2), after which it is added on behalf of Christ himself: “The Lord said to Me: You are My Son” (Ps. 2:7). There are one hundred and fifty psalms in all. Some think that they all belong to blessed David. But there is no indication of this. For although all the psalms are known under the name of David, the inscriptions show to whom any psalm belongs. For David chose four chief singers and two hundred and eighty-eight servants of them (1 Chron. 25:7). Therefore, the psalms of these four leaders are found, as can be seen from the inscriptions. And when it is said: a psalm to the sons of Korah, to Etham, to Asaph, and to Eman; then it is signified that they sing the psalm, that is, the sons of Kore, Etham, Asaph and Eman. When it is said: a psalm of Asaph, then it is shown that this psalm was spoken by Asaph himself. And when it is said: the psalm of Idithum, then it means that Idithum himself sings it. When it is said: a psalm of David, it is shown that the speaker was David himself. When it is said: a psalm to David, then it means that others are speaking about David. There are one hundred and fifty psalms in all. Of these, seventy-two are David's, nine are David's, twelve are Asaph's, twelve are Korah's sons, one is Jedithum's, one is Etham's, one is Eman's, one is Solomon's, two are Haggai and Zechariah, thirty-nine are not written and one is Moses'. All one hundred and fifty. Therefore, we must delve into the mysterious reason why, when the singers are different and the psalms are not all Davidic, they are all attributed to David. And we will pass this in silence. This inscription was made because David himself was the reason for this. He chose singers; and therefore, as the founder, he was likened to the honor that everything said by other singers was attributed to David. Since David was a Prophet, his inner eyes were open, and he knew that evil spirits rejoice at the fall of people, and on the contrary, they grieve when people overcome them; then, without a doubt, mentally arming himself against them, he prayed for the correction of people, applying to the evil spirits what he said about visible enemies. For if we do not explain to ourselves the intention of the Prophets in this way, then not only from what they say will we not receive any edification to acquire meekness, but we will even acquire some kind of harsh disposition that is contrary to the Gospel teaching, when we often pray for the destruction of our enemies and do not love them; because David says a thousand times: let all my enemies be ashamed and put to shame, and let me not be ashamed. Let us not think that the Prophets and friends of God said this in a sense other than the one stated above. For such an understanding is befitting of a careful researcher, as soon as he finds that the Prophet is praying for the destruction of his enemies; that is, he must apply what was said about visible enemies to mental enemies. Moreover, the ascetic must try to understand each saying. This article was published in the original for the first time in the book: Collecltio nova Patrum et Scriptonum T. II. Ed. de Montfaucon, Parisis an. 1707. In the same book were printed those additions to the interpretation of the psalms, which Migne noted in brackets [ ] in his edition. In Ming, all these additions were introduced entirely and placed into the text completely mechanically, without connection with the previous and subsequent ones. That is why in its edition there are many literal repetitions, and often the explanation of the last verses of one or another psalm comes before the explanation of the first verses. To avoid this inconvenience, in the present translation Montfaucon's additions are not taken in their entirety, but only “in places” where they actually fill in what is missing in the Benedictine edition of 1698; and at the same time they are introduced into the text not only in an external way, as in Min, but are brought into internal connection with the rest of the text, as required by the meaning of the speech. You might be interested in: