10 illustrates this structure

The Structure of Hebrew Poetry Parallelism

Isa 1: 10 illustrates this structure

Hear the word of the LORD, you rulers of Sodom;

Listen to the instruction of our God, you people of Gomorrah!

(our translation) The correspondences between these two lines are obvious. Their grammatical struc- tures are exactly alike-imperative + direct object and a vocative. Individual words also correspond to each other in meaning: “hear”/“listen to”; “word of the LORD”/

“law of our God”; and “rulers of Sodom”/“people of Gomorrah.”

As we said above, however, the second line is not simply a restatement of the first in different words; both lines betray subtle differences. For example, though some words overlap in meaning, they are not actually synonyms. “Law” (Heb.

tdd)

is not

really another way of saying “word” (dab&)

nor is “people” (

‘am) the

exact counterpart of “rulers”

(q&n).

The Bible associates uword” with the message of a prophet and “instruction ” with the teaching about the Law by a priest (see Jer 18:18). Similarly, “Sodom” and uGomorrahn are not simply two names for the same town; they designate separate, though proximate, cities (cf. Gen 10: 19; 14; 18).

At the same time, when mentioned together they designate “twin cities of sin.”

In our view, this combination of similarity and difference serves Isaiah’s rhe- torical purpose. On the one hand, it stresses that he wants to talk to everyone- both “rulers” and “people”-and cleverly implies that all are sinful (like residents of Sodom and Gomorrah). On the other hand, the change fkom uword” to “instruc- tion” indicates a subtle but significant development in Isaiah’s train of thought.

“Word” signals that what follows is a divine revelation, while “instruction” tells the hearers to accept Isaiah’s message as they would teaching by a priest.

This example underscores what Kugel emphasizes: the relationships between lines of Hebrew poetry are amazingly complex.41 The carell Bible student will determine what relationship exists between the poetic lines in each text taking care not to assume a simplistic notion that their unity boils down to one or two main principles.

Basic Units of Parallelism

Traditionally, scholars subdivided parallelism into three types-synonymous, antithetical, and synthetic-depending on whether the succeeding line restated, con- trasted, or developed the first, respectively. 42 Recent study, however, has tended to avoid those categories as overly simplistic and misleading. Sadly, no replacement scheme has yet won a consensus.

41Kugel 7&e Idea of Biblical Poetry, 2-7, provides an illustrative sample. As Alter warns (me Ad of Biblical Pocky, lS>, “the evidence of line after line of biblical verse suggests that we are too quick to infer automatic and formulaic rhetorical gesture of repetition when more than that is going on.”

Yf. conveniently Petersen and Richards, Zntepeting Hebrew Poetry, 24-27. ^As they point ouf

the traditional definition of synthetic parallelism proved to be very problematic.

General Rules of Hermeneutics-Old Testament Poetry 227 So we propose simply to suggest a few ways in which parallelism works. Our purpose is two-fold: (1) to sensitize students to the potential communicative power of parallelism, and (2) to help them thread their way through what otherwise might seem an impenetrable thicket of complexity. To do this we will first

need to con- sider how scholars

describe poetic lines. With this knowledge we will be able to distinguish poetic lines and, more important, to visualize the similarities and differ- ences between them.

The technical term for a single line of poetry is 6% (pronounced “stick”).43 Two parallel lines form a unit that scholars designate either as a

couplet

or a

ditiich.

Three parallel lines form a triplet or tristich. Just as the Bible’s subdivision into chapters and verses allows us to iden* its subparts, so scholars use letters for the subparts of a stich. Consider this example in which two stichs are filly synonymous (Psa 77:l):

a

I cried out a>

I cried out

b to God b’

to God

C

for help;

IrJ

to

hear me.

Both stichs have three parts labelled a,

b,

and c. Two schematic principles are at work here. First, in each stich the same letter designates elements that have the same meaning (are semantically parallel) or that play the same grammatical role in the sentence (are syntactically parallel). Second, the addition of J to a letter (e.g., a’, called “R prime”) shows that it belongs to the second stich.eq Thus, one would describe the structure of the first stich as

a b c, the

second as a’

6’ c’,

and that of the whole verse as

a b c / aJ b’ c’.

As a second example consider this verse in which the stichs express a contrast (Prov 14:34):

but

a

Righteousness

-a

Sin

b

exalts

-b

is a disgrace

C

a nation,

-C

to any people.

Syntactically, the two lines are parallel, but semantically they express opposite mean- ings. To indicate that contrast, we prefix the letters describing the second stich with a minus sign ( -). Hence, we describe its structure as -a

-b -c

and that of the entire verse as a

b c / -a -b -c.

Frequently, however, a second (or third) stich may omit items found in the first, a phenomenon called

ellipsis.

For example, it is common for the second stich

43From Gk. stichos “row, line (of writing)“; plural stichoi, “STICK-oy.” While many scholars Prefer the

term

“colon” (plural “cola”), Alter (73e Art of Biblical Poetry, 9) opts

Petersen and Richards favor “colon” or “line” (Interpreting Hebrew Poetry, 23). for “verset,” while 44Were there a third parallel line, each of its components would bear a double prime (e.g., a”or

“2 double prime”). Those of a fourth parallel line (a rare but possible occurrence> would have a triple

prime (e.g., a”>. c

228 Introduction to Biblical Interpretation

to assume the presence of the verb from the first stich but not to repeat it. This omission leaves the second stich without a verb. Study this example (Amos 8 : 1 0):45

a b ^C

I will turn your religious feasts into mourning,

B’ c’

and all your singing into weeping.

The second stich assumes but omits the verb “I will turn” from the first stich. Pre- sumably, the wording chosen for the second stich dictated the omission of the verb.

That omission does not mean, however, that the second stich is shorter than the first. It may, in fact, be about the same length and even be longer. When a succeed- ing element is longer than its parallel, we signal this with a capital letter (e.g., B’ [B heavy prime] vs. b above).

In other cases, the second stich may omit the verb and add elements unparal- leled in the first:

a b

He summons the heavens above,

6’ C

and the earth, that he may judge his people.

(Psa 50:4; cf. Amos 9:lO) The second stich omits (but assumes) the verb “he summons” but also adds a phrase that, quite significantly, specifies the purpose of that summons. In other words, rather than simply restate the point of the first stich, here the second one further develops it by stating its purpose .% This example has the structure a b/b’ c.

How Parallelism Works

The relationships that bind parallel stichs range across a continuum of increas- ing complexity-a complexity that is not adequately described by the traditional categories of parallelism (i.e., synonymous, antithetical, synthetic). At one end of the continuum are the rare cases of synonymous parallelism in which the second stich simply restates the first in different words (Prov 19:5):

A false witness will not got unpunished, and he who pours out lies will not go fi-ee.47

45We owe the first example to LaSor, et al., Old Testament Survey, 308, the second to Kugel, 7Ybe Idea of Biblical Poetry, 6. What we call “ellipsis,” Alter calls “ ‘hidden’ repetition” (T%e Art of Biblical Poetry, 23; cf. his illuminating discussion of the phenomenon, 24-26).

46Notice also the development from “heavens” to “earth,” that is, from the upper extreme of the created cosmos to the lower one. Such paired extremes (heaven and earth) are called merismus.

“‘Cf. Alter, 7%e Art of Biblical Poetry, 22; Job 27:4. Here belong also the even more extreme, rare exact parallelisms, that is, repeated refrains like “for his loyalty is forever” (Psa 136) or “praise him”

(Psa 150); cf. Berlin, I)ynamics, 130.

General Rules of Hermeneutics-Old Testament Poetry 229 The parallels are obvious: “false witness”/“he who pours out lies” and “not go unpunished”/“will not go fi-ee.” There is no perceptible development from the first line to the second. At the other end of the continuum are cases in which the second stich shows no similarity at all to the first (Psa 115: 18):

It is we who extol the LORD, both now and forevermore.

In this case, the second stich completes the first grammatically; the two stichs form a single sentence. 48 As we shall see, most biblical poetry falls somewhere between these two extremes. In order to determine where a stich should be placed on the continuum we need to understand the dynamics of parallelism-how does it work?

This understanding is crucial for an accurate analysis of poetry.

As Berlin has shown, parallel lines may interrelate grammatically, lexically and semantically, and phonologically.49 Some parallels are interrelated by only one of these factors, others by all three. The gammatical factor is the structural skeleton of parallelism. It concerns the elements of grammar (tense, mood, case, number, etc.) that appear in each stich of a parallel pair. For example, in comparing stichs, one might observe a change in nouns fkom singular to plural or in verbs from present to future tense. One stich might make a statement while its parallel stich asks a question; another stich might state something positively, while its parallel states it negatively.50

If grammar provides the skeleton, the lexical-semantic factor provides the flesh and blood.51 This aspect focuses on the relationship between the specific words in each parallel line. For example, like their linguistic kinsfolk at ancient Ugatit, He- brew poets otien built their poetry around “word pairs,” sets of words commonly associated together. 52 This explains why parallel lines commonly develop around pairs of synonyms (eat/drink, earth/dust) or antonyms (right/left, there is/there are not).53 At the same time, it also permits a poet to juxtapose two nonassociated words creatively for poetic effect (for examples, see below).

The phonologic factor refers to the use of words of similar sounds (e.g., word-play or paranomasia) either within a single stich or in parallel ones. En- glish speakers commonly use this delightful device for rhetorical effect. One popular joke, for example, tells of a man condemned to hang for continuously

4Rcf. Berlin, L?ynamics, 90, n. 42.

@Here we offer a simplified overview of Berlin’s excellent, detailed treatment (Dynamics, 31- 126; cf. also the summary paradigm, 29).

%f. the examples provided by Berlin, Dynamics, 56-57, 59: “For in Death there is no mention of you/In Sheol who can acclaim you?” (Psa 6:5 [Heb. 61). “My son, do not forget my teaching/And let your heart guard my commandments” (Prov 3:l).

5’Berlin, Dynamics, 64.

52For catalogues of this phenomenon, see M. Dahood, “Ugaritic-Hebrew Parallel Pairs,” Ras Sbamra Parallels [=RSPl (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1972), 1:71-382 (ed. L. R. Fisher); RSP (1975), 2:1-39 (ed. L. R. Fisher); RSP(1981), 3:1-206 (ed. S. Rummel). For its interpretation, see Berlin, Iat- namics, 65-102.

53Watson, Classical Hehreu~ Poetty. 131-32 (cf. also his fine overview, 12%44).

230 Introduction to Biblical Interpretation

making puns. As he stood on the scaffold, the merciful crowd commuted his sentence, to which he replied, “No noose is good news!” Of course, to access this aspect in the OT the student must read the Hebrew aloud, listening for similar sounds. Nevertheless, English Bible readers need to understand this phe- nomenon because biblical commentators often refer to it. Occasionally, footnotes in English translations point out puns on Hebrew names (in NIv, e.g., Jer 1:12;

19:7; Mic l:lO-15; etc.).

Types of Parallelism

How do parallel lines of Hebrew poetry interrelate? We have gleaned some examples from the studies of Alter, Berlin, and Kugel and have arranged them sys- tematically. The categories here are our own, and we intend to be illustrative rather than exhaustive. We also intend them to be descriptive rather than technical. This is by no means a full-scale taxonomy of parallelism. Admittedly, some of the catego- ries overlap, but they suggest the kinds of things the student must watch for. Our purpose is to train the reader’s eye to identify them and to provide some working descriptive categories for the student to understand how they function-key ele- ments in interpreting poetry.

1. Biblical poetry often displays a parallelism of subordination. In these cases one stich is grammatically subordinate to its parallel. In Psa 111:6, for example, the second stich describes the means by which Yahweh accomplished what the first stich

stated:54

He has shown his people the power of his works, giving them the lands of other nations.

In other words, the first stich leaves the reader with a question: how did Yahweh show his people his power? The second stich answers it: he displayed it by taking territory owned by other nations and giving it to his people.

It is also common for one stich to state the reason for the claims of the other, as Exod 15:21 shows:

Sing to the Lokn, for he is highly exalted.

The horse and its rider he has hurled into the sea.

(statement) (reason) (example)

Correct interpretation requires the reader carefully to follow the logic of each line.

“Sing to the LORD” demands that one burst into song. But why should one sing Yahweh’s praise? Because he is a “highly exalted” God (cf. also Psa 13:6). That is, he is the cosmic ruler of heaven and earth. But the verse answers one last question:

What evidence confirms his exalted position? “Horse and its rider he has hurled

%I Berlin, Qpzamics, 81

General Rules of Hermeneutics-Old Testament Poetry 231 into the Sean - a nallusion to Yahweh’s stunning defeat of Pharaoh at the Red Sea.

In sum, the poet supports his command with a reason, then supports his reason with an example (see also Psa 106: 1; 107: 1). To understand the poet’s meaning properly, one must walk through the stichs, sorting out each line as we did above.

In other cases, one stich specifies the time of its parallel:

By the rivers of Babylon

we sat and wept (statement)

when we remembered Zion. (Psa 137: 1) (temporal clause)55

Here the poet describes how exiled Israelites sat down and wept in Babylon. The temporal clause defines the time when they wept-when they remembered Zion, the holy mountain in their homeland. Implicitly, however, the temporal clause also reveals the reason for the people’s grief-memory of beloved Zion.56

2. A parallelism of contrrtst occurs when a poet juxtaposes stichs that contrast each other. Its best known form is the old “antithetical parallelism,” which Prov 11:20 (NCV) illustrates:

The LORD hates those with evil hearts

but is pleased with those who are innocent.

The verse sharply contrasts Yahweh’s response to two kinds of people. He “hates”

the wicked but “is pleased with” the righteous. We call this an “antithetical” con- trast because it speaks of opposites that share no common ground. In the Bible, good and evil are opposites engaged in deadly combat. Because of his nature, Yahweh cannot delight in the wicked nor detest the righteous. In passing, one should notice the double-edge this proverb wields-it both encourages and warns. On the one hand, it encourages the righteous to keep up their blameless lives. On the other, it warns the wicked to abandon their hateful conduct. Occasionally, parallel lines may convey a contrast that is not antithetical. (That, by the way, is why we define this category as one of “contrast,” not “antithesis.“57) Consider Judg 5:25:

He asked for water,

and she gave him milk. . . .

The line contrasts the water, which the Canaanite general Sisera sought, and the milk, which the Kenite woman, Jael, served him. Unlike the previous example, there is no antithesis here, for water and milk are acceptable alternatives, not direct opposites.

In sum, parallelism of contrast involves both simple contrast and actual antithesis.

55Cf. Psa 14:7b, “When the LORD restores the fortunes of his people [temporal clause]/ let Jacob rejoice and (let) Israel be glad!” [call to rejoice]. In this case, the statement also expresses the result of the temporal clause.

%f. also cases where one stich is a prepositional phrase subordinate to the other: “There on the poplars/we hung our harps” (Psa 137:2; so Alter, 7%e Ari of Biblical Poetry, 19). Cf. Judg 5:25b

57So Berlin, Dynamics, 95.

232 Introduction to Biblical Interpretation

The careful student must learn to distinguish both types and to interpret such cases accordingly.

3. In cases of parallelism of

continuation,

succeeding parallel lines present a progression of thought. For example, observe how Isa 40:9 creates the illusion of simple repetition but actually portrays progress:58

You who bring good tidings to Zion, go up on a high mountain.

You who bring

good tidings to Jerusalem, lift up

your voice with a shout, lift it up, do not be a&aid;

say to the towns of Judah,

“Here is your God!”

At first glance, repeated phrases and paraIle1 words create the impression that suc- ceeding lines restate the first in other words.59 Actually, the text paints the actions of the messenger in the order in which they would normally occur. First, he would ascend a high mountain to address a large area, then he would shout out his mes- sage. Only then would he say, “Here is your God! “-reserved here for the climactic last line. Hence, to understand such examples, the reader must see beyond the iIlu- sion of repetition and think through the logic of each line to discover how each interacts with its predecessor. Failure to work through this process will result in a misreading of the text.

4. In a parallelism of

comparison,

parallel lines form a simile, that is, a com- parison. (For similes, see below). Psa 103:13 illustrates this common parallelism:

As a father has compassion on his children,

so the LORD has compassion on those who fear him.

Here the psalmist describes the LORD% compassion by comparing it to that of a father toward his children. He explains the unknown (or lesser known)-the LORD’S compassion- by appeal to something well (or at least better) known-the compas- sion of a father. Through the comparison, the poet puts flesh on what otherwise would remain an abstract idea (“the LORD has compassion”). Implicitly, he recalls the reader’s own childhood experiences-how mercifully his or her father had glossed over glaring goofs with a smile and a hug. The reader now visualizes the LORD’S mercy along similar lines. And that is the point-“the LORD has compassion.”

Sometimes, however, the comparison is implicit rather than explicit. We say

“implicit” in these cases because the Hebrew text lacks the explicit signals of the simile-the words “like” or “as.” Instead, it simply aligns two stichs side-by-side without clarifying their connection (i.e., a metaphor). Consider how Psa 125:2 reads literally:

Xf. Berlin, Dynamics, W-91, who, however, offers a more technical linguistic discussion; cf.

also Isa 165.

Ye., “you who bring good tidings,” “lift up (your voice),” “Zion” / ‘Jerusalem.”

General Rules of Hermeneutics-Old Testament Poetry 233

Jerusalem-mountains surround it;

And YHWH surrounds his people.

. . .60

Why did the psalmist arrange these two stichs together? How do they interrelate?

Obviously, he juxtaposed “mountains” and “YHWH” (Yahweh) because they some- how compare. What do they have in common? Both protect Jerusalem from the attacks of her enemies. Hence, the couplet compares the protection both offer. As before, the poet speaks of an abstract idea in a concrete way. The line about Jerusalem’s mountains serves as a simile for the protection given by Yahweh. Rec- ognizing this, the

^NIV

rightly makes the implicit simile explicit by using the English grammatical marker “as”:

As the mountains surround Jerusalem so the LORD surrounds his people. . . .61

Pondering Yahweh’s protection, one imagines it to be a huge, towering wall of solid rock-impossible for enemies to penetrate. To understand the poet’s mean- ing, the reader must determine how mountains and the LORD compare, and whether the psalmist’s real focus is on the mountains or on the LORD (obviously, the latter). When the student interprets comparisons, care must be taken to avoid being preoccupied with the simile distinction (the meaning of umountainsn or “fa- ther”), as if

that

were the poet’s meaning. Rather, the student must seek to under- stand the main point (the LORD’S compassion or protection) in light of the simile’s portrait.

5. In the parallelism of

specification,

each succeeding stich makes more spe- cific what the opening stich states in general terms. In other words, the movement is fkom general to specific. 62 There are various forms of specification. Sometimes it has to do with spatial or geographic entities. Isa 45:12 illustrates this type

(NRSV, our

italics):

I

made the earth

and created hmankind upon it;

it was my hands that stretched out the heavens, and I commanded all their host.

@eneN (specific) (general) (specific)

In these two distichs, Yahweh afIirms that he created the universe.63 Observe how each first line concerns a general geographical realm (the earth, the heavens) while

@Ihe example and translation come from Berlin, Dynamics, 101 (cf. the entire discussion and other examples, KG101).

61Cf. also Prov 26:9.

%e owe much of what follows to Alter, 7&e Art of Biblical Poe&-y, 9-26; cf. his comment (19):

“The rule of thumb . . . is that the general term occurs in the first verset [i.e., stichl and a more specific instance of the general category in the second verset.”

%t context, the strophe provides evidence to banish his people’s doubt about his ability to bring them home from exile (see w. 11-13). The argument runs: “If my power made the whole massive cosmos, it can certainly redeem Israel from human hands.”