We Heard in Ephrathah That We Found It in the Forested Field (Psalm 132:6)

Psalm 132:6 has been the subject of interesting traditional commentary and modern scholarship. If one is willing to recognize the possibility that King David wrote or was involved in the writing of at least some psalms, this verse may be a genuine memory of how David, as a youth, heard about the return of the Ark. Now, as king, he joyously brings the Ark to its new home in Jerusalem.

O LORD, remember in David’s favor His extreme self-denial. How he swore to the LORD, Vowed to the Mighty One of Jacob I will not enter my house, Nor will I mount my bed. I will not give sleep to my eyes, or slumber to my eyelids until I find a place for the LORD An abode for the Mighty One of Jacob. We heard it was in Ephrath We came upon it in the region of Jaar. (Ps. 132:1-6)

Let us focus on v. 6: We heard it was in Ephrath; We came upon it in the region of Jaar. This translation of Psalm 132 in NJPS (1985) footnotes I Samuel 7:1-2 and I Chronicles 13:5-6 which state that the men of Kirjath-jearim took the Ark of the Covenant from Beth-Shemesh to their town where it will remain for twenty years, NJPS renders “Jaar” as a reference to Kirjath-Jearim.

This translation is in good company.¹ Another group of translations state: “We found the Ark (covenant box/sacred chest) in the fields of Jaar (Jearim).”² Others, however, do not give the toponym “Jaar” or “Jearim” but “the fields of the wood/forest.”³

While these translations do not vary that much, many commentators do not share the assumptions involved. For example, one scholar states that the “it problem,” what the “it” is that was “heard” about and “found,” has “never been satisfactorily explained.”⁴ Indeed, the wide range of proposals to explain this verse demonstrate the difficulties involved. Some just give up; Buttenwieser excised our verse altogether from the psalm: “By no exegetical ingenuity can verse 6, supposedly the salient point of the story, be shown to have anything to do with the conveying of the Ark.”⁵ Gerstenberger first says that these are “enigmatic references that we do not understand in their significance to ancient worshippers,” but then says that “it” “definitely does not speak about the ark but about the temple already in existence.” He then says that the appearance of the Ark a few verses later is “all the more curious.”⁶

We can state some of the problems as they have been discussed in traditional Jewish commentaries and modern scholarship.

1. Does Ephrathah refer to Bethlehem, or some other place?

2. If so, why Ephrathah and not the more familiar name Bethlehem?

3. There is no antecedent to the “it’s,” so what do they refer to?

4. Who is the “we” who heard it in Ephrathah?

Ephrathah

According to many commentators, both traditional and modern, Ephrathah does not refer here to Bethlehem, the home of David (as in I Sam. 16, 17:12, Micah 5:2 Ruth 1:2, etc.), but to the region of the territory of Ephraim where Kiriath-Jearim was situated (I Sam.1:1 and I Chron. 2:50).⁷ This fits with the assumption that the word yā’ar in this verse refers to Kiriath-Jearim, in Ephraim.⁸

“Ephrathah” also has been taken as a reference to the earlier abode of the ark in Shiloh in Ephraim. Weiser states: “This cultic re-enactment of past events makes such a vivid impression on the members of the congregation that they imagine themselves seeing and hearing and experiencing at first hand the events of the past as things which actually happens in their presence.”⁹ This does not explain what was heard by whom and when since the Ark had not been in Shiloh for many years by David’s time.

Jewish interpretation begins with this passage in BT Zevachim 54b interpreting Psalm 132:6, “Rava explains the meaning of these words: In Ephrath; this is a reference to Joshua, who came from the tribe of Ephraim.” This alludes to the fact that David and Samuel were able to locate the highest place in Eretz Yisrael based on the book of Joshua.

Some modern scholars also have understood Ephrathah in Psalm 132:6 as synonymous with Ephraim and as an indirect reference to the Ephraimite sanctuary of Shiloh which had housed the ark until it was destroyed by the Philistines. Yet while there is no evidence at all that either the tribe or the territory of Ephraim was known as Ephrathah, there is positive evidence for associating Kiriath-jearim and Ephrathah to be found elsewhere in the Bible. I Chronicles 2:50-53 states that Shobal, a descendant of Caleb, was the father of Kiriath-Jearim, which can be taken to mean he was the founder of this town. Shobal is listed as a descendant of Caleb and a progenitor of a clan within the tribe of Judah, These were the descendants of Caleb. The sons of Hur the firstborn of Ephrathah: Shobal the father of Kiriath-jearim, Salma the father of Bethlehem, and Hareph the father of Beth-gader. This connection to Caleb, a significant figure in Israelite history, underscores Shobal’s importance in the tribal structure of Judah, and the deep roots of Kiriath-Jearim as Judahite. The city may have had importance regarding the intertribal boundaries of Judah and Benjamin (Josh. 15:9 and 18:14-15). It is the one Gibeonite city attributed to Judah (Josh. 9:17 and 15:6). Its population had an ethnic affinity with groups settled in Judah, particularly in or near Bethlehem. So Ephrathah, Kiriath-jearim and Bethlehem are clearly Judahite, and there is no reference to Ephraim.

Ibn Ezra and Radak explain Ephrathah as an allusion to David who came from Bethlehem/Ephrathah. Radak explains the verse to mean that “the old sages in Ephrath had taught, and we have heard from them, that God chose a special place that would eventually be revealed. And now today it has been revealed.” Yet who is “we”? Who were these sages in Ephrath? And on what authority or basis did they reveal this?

What Is “It”?

Ibn Ezra says that “we have heard that “it”, Jerusalem, is near Bethlehem/Ephrathah. There is no antecedent to the “it’s,” so this allows for interpretation. It is interesting that “it” in v. 6 is the first reference here to the Ark. I am not saying that “it” does not refer to the Ark; I am sure it does, the meaning of “it” as the Ark is clearly implied in this context. Translations that render “Ark/sacred chest/covenant box” impose the context of what follows in the psalm, where the Ark will be mentioned explicitly two verses later, and assume knowledge of the famous story about the return of the Ark. The Ark was the “it” of ancient Israel, a unique symbol that could create a center of the land that did not have any other religious shrine at the time. Bringing it to Jerusalem was a monumental accomplishment, as I shall explain below.

The Fields of Jaar? Kiriath-Jearim?

Again, many translators and commentators including Alter think that the phrase they render as the “fields of Jaar” refers to the town Kiriath-Jearim where the Ark was kept for twenty years (I Sam. 7:1 ff.; II Sam. 6:2 ff.).¹⁰ Commentators strive to make a connection from one or another element in our verse to Kiriath-Jearim. Since Ephrathah is mentioned as an ancestor of Kiriath-Jearim in I Chronicles 2:50, some suggest that it is a reference to Kiryat-Jearim. Alternatively, the fields of Yaar might be an allusion to Kiryat-Jearim, with Jaar being the name of a person, owner of the site.

Some who see that the last phrase refers to “forested fields” suggest that the field is not near Beth-shemesh but in Jerusalem. They identify the place with the site of the Temple based on the lumber from the forest of Lebanon used to build it (I Kgs. 5:28). In I Kings 7:2, Solomon builds the Palace of the Forest of Lebanon. Ibn Ezra and Radak say the reference is to the wooded area in Jerusalem that belonged to Araunah the Jebusite. Yet II Samuel 24:18 speaks of the threshing-floor of Araunah which seems to be in the city, not a forest or field. Still, Alschich says that this wooded area in Jerusalem was undeveloped and desolate, leading people to think that Bethlehem, David’s home, and an established Israelite community, would be the site of the Temple, and so they heard that “it”, the Temple, would be in Ephrathah. When, however, “they found it in a field,” that of Araunah in Jerusalem, they were surprised, as if to say: ‘Behold, we had heard it would be in Ephrathah and we found it in Jerusalem.’

Why do these commentators and scholars explore possibilities in interpretation that seem to resist the obvious? I think that the Jewish commentators want to make connections to other biblical passages, especially those about Jerusalem. And I think that some critical scholars create difficulties where they do not exist.

The background of Psalm 132 can be found in the story of the Ark of the Covenant in I and II Samuel. In order to understand our verse, we need to grasp why bringing the Ark into Jerusalem was such a dramatic and remarkable event, and what this tells us about David.

The Ark as Advance Guard

The Ark of the Covenant was a kind of mobile vanguard for the Israelites during their forty years in the desert (Num. 10:35-36). The Ark was carried before the people when they crossed the Jordan River into Canaan (Josh. 3:3; 4:18). At Jericho, the Ark was carried around the city once a day for six days. On the seventh day, the Ark was carried around the city seven times, and after a great shout, Jericho’s wall fell (Josh. 6). The people consulted the Ark at Bethel before they attacked the Benjaminites at the Battle of Gibeah (Judg. 20:27).

The Ark was then kept at Shiloh and administered to by Eli (I Sam. 3:3; :12-22; I Sam. 6:21). After a defeat at Eben-ezer, the Ark was taken into battle and was captured by the Philistines (I Sam. 4). Wherever the Philistines took the Ark in their land, Ashdod, Gath and Ekron, the people were stricken with disease (I Sam. 5). The Philistines became terrified and anxious to return the Ark. Their wise men told them to ready a new cart and two milch cows, place the Ark of the LORD in the cart, with tribute of gold (I Sam. 6:8-9). Where would the cows go? This was a quasi-scientific experiment: Was the LORD really responsible for their disease? The Philistines do as they are told, and the Ark goes back to Judah: The people of Beth-shemesh were reaping their wheat harvest in the valley. They looked up and saw the Ark, and they rejoiced when they saw it. The cart came into the field of Joshua of Beth-shemesh and it stopped there. I emphasize: the Ark came to a field owned by Joshua of Beth-Shemesh.

This is the field, I believe, that is referred to in our verse. The people of the land, including the people of Bethlehem Ephrathah, would have heard that the Ark was found in a field. A large stone was there, and the Levites took the Ark of the Lord and the gold objects and placed them on the large stone . . . The great stones on which the Ark of the LORD was set down, to this day, in the field of Joshua of Beth-Shemesh (I Sam. 6: 18). That field remained a known place “to this day,” that is, the time of the writing of this passage. It certainly would still have been known in David’s time.

But the travels and travails of the Ark were not over. Men of Beth-shemesh who gazed at the Ark were struck down by the Lord.

The Beth-shemites sent to Kirjath-jearim to remove the Ark and it was taken to the house of Abinadab, whose son Eleazar was sanctified to keep it. Kirjath-jearim remained the abode of the Ark for twenty years.

When David sought to bring the Ark from Kirjath-jearim amid great rejoicing, Uzzah, one of the drivers of the cart, put out his hand to steady the Ark, and was struck dead by God (II Sam. 6:3-8). Uzzah died because he touched the Ark which was forbidden to his hands. Perhaps he should have trusted in God’s power, especially after the miracle that the unmanned and driverless oxen had brought the Ark back to Israelite space.

David, in fear, diverted the Ark to the house of Obed-edom the Gittite where it stayed for three months. Finally, on hearing that God had blessed Obed-edom because of the presence of the Ark in his house, David brought the Ark to Jerusalem (II Sam. 6:11ff.).

I Chronicles 13:3 states that when David was going to transfer the Ark to Jerusalem, he said: For throughout the days of Saul we paid no regard to it. Saul let the Ark stay there even though it was the most sacred relic of the people and their tradition. Does it show Saul’s ineptitude as a leader that he did not see the galvanizing potential of a shrine that housed it? Was the Ark disrespected because it had failed to thwart the enemy? Was it in disrepute for its failure to achieve victory for the people as it was associated with war? Were the people so unconnected to their cult and tradition that they just didn’t care? Were they afraid of it? One cannot blame Saul or the Israelites for being afraid of the Ark. This only makes David’s courage more remarkable, and the scene of its entrance to Jerusalem more dramatic.

A Different Approach

We can attempt to understand these not-necessarily enigmatic references. Behold! We heard of it in Ephrathah; That it was found in a forested field.

I believe that, following Genesis 35:16 and 19, and Genesis 48:7, Ephrathah is the older name of Bethlehem, another indication of this psalm’s antiquity. Gen. 35:19 explicitly identifies Ephrath as Bethlehem, saying that Rachel was buried on the road to Ephrath – now Bethlehem. Ephrathah is the birthplace of David, the primary figure in this psalm. Modern commentators complain that “heard” and “find” are not parallels, and do not consider the possibility that the two poetic lines could be sequential, that years ago, back in Bethlehem/Ephrathah, David had heard that the Ark had been found in a forested field. While Sforno explains that David heard of the location of the future Temple (and not of the return of the Ark), he does say that David heard this in his youth in Bethlehem/Ephrathah. Since the psalm is about David bringing the Ark into Jerusalem, and David was famously from Bethlehem/Ephrathah, could this verse be a quote from David himself? Could it be that the ‘present-ness’ of this psalm, as if we are there, in that time and place, tells us what that time and place was? David now says: Behold! We heard of it in Ephrathah; That it was found in forested fields.

We focus on several elements. Behold! brings us back to an immediate, lived experience at a point in the past. When we heard of “it” in Ephrath. The “it”, is the “it” of ancient Israel, the Ark of the Covenant. The forested field. Commentators all emphasize the word ya’ar and connect it with Kiriath-Jearim, a town built near forests. It is true that the Ark remained in Kiriath-Jearim, a town west of Jerusalem, where the Ark remained for several generations (I Sam. 7:1-2; II Sam. 6:2; I Chron 13:5-6). But the Hebrew does not say “forests” in the plural but ya’ar/forest in the singular, as opposed to the plural Jearim and should not be rendered with the capital J in Jaar. We find the word sadeh/field in I Samuel 6:14. So it is not actually Kiryat-Jearim, but a field near Beth Shemesh where it was found. It was then taken to Kiryat-Jearim, after it had been found and after calamities had befallen the people of Beth Shemesh.

A later psalm would only draw on references and allusions in earlier texts. A later text would have referred to Bethlehem as the residence of David at the time when as a youth he first heard that the sacred Ark miraculously had come back to its home in Israel. And ever since then, unlike so many others including his predecessor, Saul, David has kept the Ark in his mind. No wonder God favored David who, for all his faults, loved God.

Perhaps this is a quote from David himself, saying: “(Years ago, when I was young) we heard in Ephrathah (Bethlehem), that it had been found in a forested field (through a miracle, the cows brought the Ark back to a field in Israelite territory).”

Psalm 132:6 in Context

Those who do not think that our verse fits in Psalm 132 should look at the verses before and after it. In vv. 1-5, David swears to God that he will practice physical self-denial until he finds a place for the Lord. After saying in our verse that he already had heard about the travels and temporary homes of the Ark in his youth, he now states that he will find a permanent home for it. The Ark, going all the way back to its construction, had never had a permanent home. As the Ark advanced through the journeys in the wilderness (as Jewish liturgy echoes to this day), he prays that God will advance to this home in Jerusalem: Advance, O LORD, to your resting-place, You and Your mighty Ark (v. 8). In vv. 11-18, God swears in response that He will make a covenant with David and his offspring and states: This is my resting place for all time, here I will dwell, for I desire it (v. 14). The psalm continues to this effect: ‘And now, after all these years and its long and difficult travels, the Ark will finally reach its permanent place in a new home. This is a day of great joy!’

Some of the prominent recent evaluations of King David portray him as a cunning politician with no moral scruples who uses the religious cult for cynical purposes.¹¹ While David was, no doubt, a complex personality, his religious fervor should not be dismissed. He wrote psalms and believed in God deeply. Since Psalm 132 presents an otherwise unknown aspect of a tradition about when David brought the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem and shows no hints of the post-exilic embellishments of this event in I Chronicles 13-14, we may understand this to be a very early psalm which portrays David’s religious passion in a very positive light.