Tehilim 146: Do Not Trust in Noble Benefactors

This can be read as a standalone post, but is also a follow-up to How to Learn Tehilim (Psalms), which I recommend reading first if you haven't already done so.

Click here for a printer-friendly version of this blog post.

Artwork: Noble Benefactor, by DiTerlizzi
(note that the word nedivim can be translated as "nobles," "benefactors," or "generous people"

Tehilim 146: Do Not Trust in Noble Benefactors

תהלים פרק קמו

(א) הַלְלוּיָהּ הַלְלִי נַפְשִׁי אֶת יְיָ: (ב) אֲהַלְלָה יְיָ בְּחַיָּי אֲזַמְּרָה לֵאלֹהַי בְּעוֹדִי: (ג) אַל תִּבְטְחוּ בִנְדִיבִים בְּבֶן אָדָם שֶׁאֵין לוֹ תְשׁוּעָה: (ד) תֵּצֵא רוּחוֹ יָשֻׁב לְאַדְמָתוֹ בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא אָבְדוּ עֶשְׁתֹּנֹתָיו: (ה) אַשְׁרֵי שֶׁאֵל יַעֲקֹב בְּעֶזְרוֹ שִׂבְרוֹ עַל יְיָ אֱלֹהָיו: (ו) עֹשֶׂה שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ אֶת הַיָּם וְאֶת כָּל אֲשֶׁר בָּם הַשֹּׁמֵר אֱמֶת לְעוֹלָם: (ז) עֹשֶׂה מִשְׁפָּט לַעֲשׁוּקִים נֹתֵן לֶחֶם לָרְעֵבִים יְיָ מַתִּיר אֲסוּרִים: (ח) יְיָ פֹּקֵחַ עִוְרִים יְיָ זֹקֵף כְּפוּפִים יְיָ אֹהֵב צַדִּיקִים: (ט) יְיָ שֹׁמֵר אֶת גֵּרִים יָתוֹם וְאַלְמָנָה יְעוֹדֵד וְדֶרֶךְ רְשָׁעִים יְעַוֵּת: (י) יִמְלֹךְ יְיָ לְעוֹלָם אֱלֹהַיִךְ צִיּוֹן לְדֹר וָדֹר הַלְלוּיָהּ:

Here is the text of Tehilim 146, which we say every morning after Ashrei:

(1) Halleluyah, praise Hashem, O my soul! (2) I will praise Hashem during my lifetime; I will sing to my God while I am still [alive]: (3) "Do not trust in noble benefactors - in a human being, for he holds no salvation. (4) His spirit will depart; he will return to his earth; on that day his plans will perish. (5) Happy is the one whose help is the God of Jacob; his hope is on Hashem, his God. (6) He is the maker of the heavens and the earth, the sea and everything that is in it, Who guards truth forever. (7) He does justice for the exploited, He gives bread to the hungry, Hashem releases the bound, (8) Hashem gives sight to the blind, Hashem straightens the bent, Hashem loves the righteous, (9) Hashem guards strangers, He encourages the orphan and the widow, but He twists the path of the wicked. (10) Hashem will reign as king forever – your God, O Zion – from generation to generation, Halleluyah."

Time to tackle our four questions! (see How to Learn Tehilim for a full presentation of the methodology we will be using)

Question #1: What is this perek (chapter) about as a whole?

As usual, we will start start by identifying the pivot point. I believe the pivot point is between verses 4 and 5. The first part of the perek seems to be about the mortality of man. David acknowledges his own mortality, and then urges people not to trust in mortal man:

(1) Halleluyah, praise Hashem, O my soul! (2) I will praise Hashem during my lifetime; I will sing to my God while I am still [alive]: (3) "Do not trust in noble benefactors - in a human being, for he holds no salvation. (4) His spirit will depart; he will return to his earth; on that day his plans will perish.

The rest of the perek expresses the praises of God, with an emphasis on how He helps those who are weak or disadvantaged:

(5) Happy is the one whose help is the God of Jacob; his hope is on Hashem, his God. (6) He is the maker of the heavens and the earth, the sea and everything that is in it, Who guards truth forever. (7) He does justice for the exploited, He gives bread to the hungry, Hashem releases the bound, (8) Hashem gives sight to the blind, Hashem straightens the bent, Hashem loves the righteous, (9) Hashem guards strangers, He encourages the orphan and the widow, but He twists the path of the wicked. (10) Hashem will reign as king forever – your God, O Zion – from generation to generation, Halleluyah."

The major question is: What is the unity of these two themes? 

[If you're playing along at home, now's the time to pause the tape and think about the main idea on your own. When you're ready, continue watching!]

Here is the 1-4 sentence summary of the main idea, according to our understanding:

This perek is about why (and how) we should place our bitachon (trust/security/reliance) in Hashem rather than in man. Man is a mortal - and, therefore, a contingent - being; no matter how grandiose his plans may be, they can all be brought to an end in an instant with his death, and there is nothing he can do to stop it. The only One in Whom we can place our bitachon is "the maker of the heavens and the earth" - the Being Who is not contingent, but upon Whom everything else depends for its continued existence. The way to develop our trust in Hashem is to recognize mortality and vulnerability of all human beings, and that all goodness and salvation is dependent on Hashem; the truth of this recognition should be reinforced through praise and song, as David does here.

Question #3: Is this perek true, in whole or in part?

As I did in my write-up of Tehilim 23, I'm going to address Question #3 before Question #2, since there are a couple of questions on the main idea we need to resolve in order to fully appreciate the particulars.

Perhaps the most glaring question on this perek is: "Really? Are you really telling me that if I am wrongfully exploited then I shouldn't trust my lawyer ("[Hashem] does justice for the exploited"), or if I have a problem with my eyes then I shouldn't trust my ophthalmologist ("Hashem gives sight to the blind"), or if my back is sore then I shouldn't trust my orthopedic specialist ("Hashem straightens the bent")  - all because these human beings might die? Isn't that going kind of overboard?"

In order to answer this question, we need to understand the unrealistically high expectations associated with psychological security and insecurity. Wikipedia actually does a fairly good job of providing an operational definition of "emotional insecurity":

Emotional insecurity or simply insecurity is a feeling of general unease or nervousness that may be triggered by perceiving of oneself to be vulnerable or inferior in some way, or a sense of vulnerability or instability which threatens one's self-image or ego.

Accordingly, the level of emotional security we seek is absolute. So long as there is any sense of vulnerability whatsoever, then the insecurity can take hold. We do not feel secure until we feel totally secure.

With this foundation, we can answer our question. David isn't saying that you shouldn't trust in a particular person because you should be worried that he's going to suddenly drop dead. When it comes to practical decision-making, it is rational to operate on the basis of probability, and unless you have reason to assume that a person will drop dead, then you should practically rely on that person. Rather, David's aim is to shatter our absolute trust in human beings by pointing out the one vulnerability we can't escape: death. In other words, it's not that we should assume that the people we trust are going to die, but the fact that they can die invalidates them as the basis for our bitachon.

The second major question on the main idea has to do with free will, and may be stated as follows: "How is it possible to practically rely on human beings and simultaneously have bitachon in Hashem? Isn't a contradiction? If you truly trust in Hashem, then what does it mean 'to rely on human beings,' and if you are relying on human beings, how can you trust in Hashem?"

The Radak [1] answers our question in his commentary on verse 3:

"Do not trust in noble benefactors - in accordance with Yirmiyahu's approach of: "[Thus said Hashem: Accursed is the man who trusts in people and makes flesh his strength] and turns his heart away from Hashem" (Yirmiyahu 17:5). Rather, if he trusts in man, he should place his fundamental trust in God (blessed is He) Who instilled in the noble benefactor the desire to help him.

The Radak understands [2] the pasuk in Yirmiyahu to mean that a person is only curse-worthy if he removes his heart from Hashem completely, and only trusts in human beings. If, however, a person trusts in human beings with the recognition that their dependability is, itself, dependent on Hashem, then this is acceptable.

This raises yet another question: How is their dependability dependent on Hashem? The second half of the Radak's commentary on verse 3 answers this. Even though the individual human being is the one who ultimately makes the decision to help, the desire - or disposition, or impetus, or enabling circumstance - to help was given to that person by Hashem. Were it not for that person's upbringing, or his genetics, or his exposure to certain people or teachings which influenced the development of his generosity, or the situation he was in, or the situation you were in, etc. etc. he would not have displayed the generosity in question. It all traces back to Hashem.

A chavrusa of mine gave an analogy which might help illustrate this point. Imagine working hard to beat a difficult video game and finally doing it. Your natural reaction would be to rejoice in your victory and to feel proud of your accomplishment. However, upon reflection, you would realize that the path to victory only succeeded because of the specific parameters set by the programmer. Had the programmer wished to increase the difficulty level, or change the path to victory to make it impossible for you to win, he could have done so, and you would not have accomplished what you did. Thus, even though you can take credit for the decisions you made in order to beat the game, the credit for the victory does not belong entirely to you. In fact, a rather large measure goes to the programmer.

Now, imagine if the programmer had live access to the game, and could respond to each in-game decision you made by allowing it to succeed as you envisioned it, or by modifying the conditions to thwart your ambition in real-time. Clearly if this were the case, you would not be able to take full credit in your victory, since it was clear that you were only able to win because your programmer opponent allowed for it.

The same is true in our world. You - or the person you rely upon - might be tempted to take full credit for your success or salvation. But upon further contemplation you will realize that this success or salvation was only made possible by the Programmer of the laws of nature, and allowed by His decision not to intervene. This recognition leads to a humble mentality, in which one recognizes that ultimately, success and salvation belong to "the Maker of the heavens and the earth" - not to mankind.

Once we recognize this, the particular praises in verses 7-9 make sense. Although these salvations (i.e. justice for the exploited, bread for the hungry, releasing for the bound, etc.) are brought about through human agency, it is Hashem Who makes this possible - whether by the laws of nature, or by His personal supervision. This recognition enables us to trust in Hashem, even when relying on human beings.

Question #2: What is being said in detail, and how?

As I did last time, I will now provide a brief commentary on each pasuk with the goal of showing how each part develops or reflects the main idea.

(1) Halleluyah, praise Hashem, O my soul! At first glance this sounds like a vanilla expression of praise of the kind we usually see in Tehilim. Upon closer examination we realize that David is urging himself to praise Hashem. Why would he do that? The fact that he has to tell himself to praise Hashem suggests that there is some resistance on his part which must be overcome. I believe that this resistance stems from the old enemy: the mentality of "kochi v'otzem yadi"  - "my ability and the strength of my own hand made me this wealth" (Devarim 8:17). So long as a person takes credit for his own successes, it is impossible to place one's trust in Hashem. The first step must be to overcome this self-glorification by forcing oneself to recognize that it is Hashem "Who gives you the ability to make wealth" (ibid. 8:18). 

(2) I will praise Hashem during my lifetime; I will sing to my God while I am still [alive]: But even within the act of praising Hashem there is ample room for distortion. It is very easy to fall into the mode praising Hashem as "the One Who gives me good things" while simultaneously preserving an illicit feeling of independence - as if "I exist independently but I get stuff from God." In order to counteract this, David incorporates the recognition of his own mortality into his praise of Hashem. He recognizes that insofar as Hashem is the continual cause of his own existence, it would only be proper to devote what life he has to praising the "the Life of the worlds." This is the true level of praise: to recognize that not only the good I receive comes from Hashem, but that the I who receives this good is sustained by Hashem.

(3) Do not trust in noble benefactors. David specifies the class of "nedivim" (which may be translated as "nobles," "benefactors," or "generous people"), since they are the ones in whom we are most likely to take security. Next, he clarifies that the reason why we shouldn't place our security in them, for a noble is but a human being, who holds no salvation. Why does he hold no salvation? Because ...

(4) His spirit will depart; he will return to his earth; on that day his plans will perish. The Radak offers a poetic commentary on this pasuk, saying: "How could salvation 'belong to man' if he can't even save his own spirit?! For his spirit can depart immediately, and return to his earth, and whatever he had planned, he will not be able to do, because the spirit that sustained him has departed!" This is in line with our explanation in our answer to Question #3.

(5) Happy is the one whose help is the God of Jacob; his hope is on Hashem, his God.  Here David introduces the theme of trusting in Hashem. He refers to Him as "the God of Jacob" either because Yaakov demonstrated trust in Hashem, or because he lived a life of suffering, and frequently had to implement the principles of this perek. 

(6) Why is Hashem, alone, the One in Whom we can trust? Because He is the maker of the heavens and the earth, the sea and everything that is in it. Everything that happens in the world can only happen in accordance with His will, whether by the laws of nature or by Hashem's personal supervision. Who guards truth forever - that is to say, His will is absolutely reliable, since it operates in accordance with chochmah (wisdom), tzedek (righteousness), and mishpat (justice).

(7) He does justice for the exploited, He gives bread to the hungry, Hashem releases the bound, (8) Hashem gives sight to the blind, Hashem straightens the bent, Hashem loves the righteous, (9) Hashem guards strangers, He encourages the orphan and the widow, but He twists the path of the wicked. Undoubtedly there are insights to be gained here about how Hashem operates, but the general purpose of these pesukim is to illustrate the derech (method) by which we develop bitachon in Hashem - namely, by praising Him and recognizing that He is the ultimate cause of all forms of salvation and rehabilitation. The methodological premise of both Tehilim and Mishlei are illustrated here: the only way to affect the emotions is to go over example after example of particulars. I don't even think there's a necessity to say that the praises in these pesukim constitute a complete set or reflect a unified idea. I think these are just examples of David carrying out the directive he stated in the opening pasuk: "praise Hashem, O my soul!" (which is why, in my translation, I placed pesukim 3-10 in quotation marks).

(10) Hashem will reign as king forever – your God, O Zion – from generation to generation, Halleluyah." This is the only pasuk I don't understand in light of the approach we've taken. I understand it according to those meforshim who learn our perek to be about Bnei Yisrael at the time of moshiach, but I don't understand why "your God, O Zion" would be invoked if the perek is about bitachon in Hashem for all human beings, as the rest of the perek suggests. Perhaps this pasuk is directed specifically towards the Jew who, by virtue of his knowledge and practice of Torah, his membership in the Jewish people, his following in the footsteps of the Avos, has access to a greater degree of Divine protection, and can reach even higher levels of bitachon. 

Question #4: What of it?

The practical implications of this perek are clear. David's objective is for us to wean ourselves from trust in human beings, and to rewire our bitachon to attach to Hashem. In addition to providing the arguments to back his claim, he also shows us that our praising of Hashem is a mechanism by which we can cultivate this bitachon.

At first I was skeptical about this - until I realized that we do this with human beings all the time. Imagine you were just diagnosed with a rare medical condition. All of the insecurities begin to creep in. A friend of yours mentions the name of doctor. You aren't moved, since you don't know anything about this doctor, so you ask around. You begin hearing things: "Oh, Dr. So-and-so? He's the BEST!" "Dr. So-and-so is regarded as the top doctor in his field!" "My aunt had the same condition, and Dr. So-and-so was able to help her make a full recovery." As you hear more and more praises, your view begins to change. You suddenly find yourself taking security in Dr. So-and-so. How did that change come about? Through praise, and praise alone.

David is suggesting that we take the same approach when praising Hashem. By contemplating and verbalizing these praises of Hashem - on a daily basis, and when faced with situations of vulnerability, adversity, and lack - we slowly but surely build up our bitachon in Him. And the more we recognize the fragility of human beings, the more we wean ourselves from bitachon in man.

Concluding Thoughts

Fortunately, Tehilim 146 is something we say every day, as part of Pesukei d'Zimra. As such, we have a unique opportunity to incorporate these ideas into our worldview. For this reason, it is especially important to think into the ideas of this perek - the main idea and the particular pesukim - and get them crystal clear, so that every morning we can review them, internalize them, and live by them.

[1] Rabbeinu David Kimchi (Radak), Commentary on Sefer Tehilim 146:3
[2] ibid. Commentary on Sefer Yirmiyahu 17:5. Also, see Rabbeinu Avraham ben ha'Rambam's Ha'Maspik l'Ovdei Hashem: Shaar ha'Bitachon, where he elaborates on this interpretation. I would have incorporated it into this blog post, but I don't have access to all of my books at the present time. I believe he says something to the effect of: "If the pasuk only said, 'Accursed is the man who trusts in people' then the majority of humanity would be doomed! Instead, it added: 'and turns his heart away from Hashem.' In other words, the navi is only condemning those who trust exclusively in man, but those who trust in man and in Hashem are not accursed."