Word & World

Supplement Series 5
2006

Joy and the Art of Cosmic

Maintenance: An Ecology of Play
in Psalm 104
WILLIAM P. BROWN

y far the most extensive creation psalm in the Psalter, Ps 104 rivals Gen 1 in
B scope and rhetorical power. For what the psalm lacks in systematic presenta­
tion it more than compensates in poetic energy. The psalm bursts at the seams with
combustible joy, punctuated by three exclamations that laud God’s “honor and
majesty” (v. 1), creation’s manifold nature (v. 24), and God’s glory and joy (v. 31).
The latter two jubilations, not coincidentally, are embedded in a sweeping pano­
ramic survey of natural life. From coneys and cedars to lions and Leviathan, the
psalm’s catalogue of the natural order is matched only by God’s extensive answer
to lob (lob 38-42).
Yet for all of its wide-eyed wonder over nature’s goodness, Ps 104 has re­
pulsed modern readers by its dour ending. After celebrating the diversity of life in
toto, the psalmist exhorts God to vanquish the wicked (v. 35). The psalm’s cosmic
purview, which includes even the monstrous Leviathan within the orbit of God’s
providential care, has no room for the wicked. The imprecation that concludes the
psalm sticks out as an intractable “damned spot.” But for the ancient listener, it made
perfect sense in a world that was otherwise perceived as harmoniously vibrant, not­
withstanding the one human glitch. The wicked have a nasty habit of fragmenting
the totalizing goodness of creation in much the same way that the imprecation spoils
the psalm’s picturesque poetry. Positively, this grim conclusion rescues the psalm
from donning a sentimental, rose-colored view of the world. Here is an authentic as­
sessment of creation as it stands, not as it once was or will be, a world in which the
purveyors of chaos are not theriomorphic but genuinely human monsters.1

^f. Pss 74:13-15; 89:9-10; Isa 27:1; 51:9. All citations of the psalms are from the NRSV numbering.
God’s Rejoicing in Creation
In comparison to other psalms, particularly those that contain imprecations
against the wicked or wish-filled assurances of their demise, what is remarkable in
Ps 104 is that so little “ink” is spilled on the wicked.2 The psalm’s primary focus is
not on the wicked but on God, the creator and sustainer of life. The motivational
center of the psalm, thus, is encapsulated in v. 31. While v. 24 proclaims the
psalm’s thesis, namely, that creation is remarkably “many” (^ISI), v. 31 provides the
overarching motive for the psalmist’s “meditation”:
May the glory of the LORD endure forever;
may the LORD rejoice (TOUT) in his works!3

The second half of the verse is unusual. Whereas the command to praise God for the
bounty of creation is given earlier in the psalm (v. 1), here the psalmist commends
God’s rejoicing in creation. The language of unabashed joy is rarely attributed to
God.4 With the exception of Isa 9:17, which is textually suspect, the verb nQt27 (“be
joyful”) nowhere else in the Hebrew canon has God as its subject.5 Typical subjects of
“rejoicing” in the psalms range from the individual speaker (104:34) and the wor­
shiping community (126:3) to the extremities of the earth (“coastlands,” 97:1). But
rarely is God said, much less exhorted (albeit politely), to rejoice!6 Liturgically, the
verb most often refers to created agency “rejoicing” in or before the deity (9:2; 32:11;
96:11-13; 104:34). Here, however, the reverse applies: the creator rejoices in crea­
tion.
An intriguing nonbiblical parallel is found in the Baal Epic, the most exten­
sive epic narrative recovered from the royal archives of Ugarit. In the story, the
high god El expresses joy when he discovers in a dream that Baal, in the form of
autumnal rains, lives despite his defeat by Mot, the god of the underworld:
In the dream of Beneficent El the Kind-H[earted]
in the vision of the Creator of Creatures,
The heavens rain oil,
the wadis run with honey.
Beneficent El, the Kind-Hearted One, rejoices (sra/z);
his feet on his footstool he stamps.
He breaks into a smile and laughs (yshq);
he raises his voice and declares:
“I can sit and I can rest,
and my spirit within can rest.

2Cf., e.g., Pss 37:9-15; 109:2-20; 137:7-9.

Translations, where they differ from the NRSV, are the author’s own.
4Erhard S. Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, and Lamentations (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001) 225.
5On the other hand, the related verbs pDFI (“to delight”) and Hin (“to be pleased”) are applied to God, par­
ticularly in contexts of sacrifice and human integrity (e.g., Pss 5:4; 18:19; 35:27; 37:23; 40:13; 41:11; 51:16, 19;
147:10). The verb “rejoice” signals, however, a more heightened, ecstatic level of emotion.
6The closest parallel is found in Zeph 3:17 (“[YHWH] will rejoice over you with gladness [Hnftta
fcrfcr]”).
 For Mightiest Baal lives,
the prince, Lord of the Earth, is alive.”7

By witnessing the return of life-giving rain, El discovers that Baal is once again alive
and rejoices. As storm-god and “Lord of the Earth,” Baal ensures the earth’s fertility,
prompting both joy and “rest” for the high god.
In Canaanite myth, the high god El is no otiose, recessive figure, though ad­
mittedly he is known to suffer occasionally from impotence and drunkenness.8 The
chief deity of the Canaanite pantheon is known as the supreme patriarch and pro­
genitor, frequently given the epithets, among others, “father” (ab),9 “father of hu­
mankind” (ab adm),10 *“father ofyears” (ab snm),n and “king” (raZfc).12 Though Baal
is described as the “mightiest of warriors” and “our king” by several divine charac­
ters in the narrative, El remains the “king who created him” (i.e., Baal).13 14 El,
moreover, is the “creator of creatures” (bny bnwt)and, in the capacity as creator,
El is distinguished from the other gods by his great wisdom and judgment: “your
decree, O El, is wisdom; your wisdom is eternal” (cf. Ps 104:24b).15 His “gray hair”
and flowing “soft beard” are signs of his supreme sagacity.16 With such wisdom, El
is regarded as having ultimate authority and unsurpassed judgment. Within the
narrative, El appoints kings, arbitrates disputes, grants permission for building
projects, issues decrees, and intervenes when two of his children are locked in mor­
tal combat.17 But even in the august position of the chief god, El shamelessly dis­
plays pathos, ranging from mourning to rejoicing.18 In order to get her way, the

7Andrée Herdner, ed., Corpus des tablettes en cunéiformes alphabétiques découvertes à Ras Shamra-Ugarit de
1929à 1939, Mission de Ras Shamra 10 (Paris, 1963) 1.6 III10-21 (hereafter CTA). Based on Marks. Smith’s trans­
lation in Ugaritic Narrative Poetry, ed. Simon B. Parker (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997) 158. Ail citations from the
Ugaritic material are drawn from Smith’s translation.
8On the profile of El and its relationship to the character of Israel’s God, the scholarly literature is volumi­
nous, but a representative sample can be found among the classical treatments by F. M. Cross, Canaanite Myth and
Hebrew Epic (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973) 60-75; Patrick D. Miller, “El the Warrior,” Harvard
Theological Review 60 (1967) 411-433; and in the more recent works by Mark S. Smith, The Early History of God:
Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002) 32-43; John Day, Yahweh
and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan (London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002) 13-41.
9See, e.g., CTA 1.2 III 15-16, 19, 21.
10See, e.g., CTA 1.14 III 32.
nSee, e.g., CTA 1.2 III 5; 1.4 VI 24.
12See, e.g., CTA 1.4 VI 24.
13E.g., CTA 1.3 V 35.
14See, e.g., CTA 1.4 II11; 1.6 III 5,11; 1.17124. The translation has been called into question with the discov­
ery of RS (Ras Shamra) 24.244 and 24.251, and several take the noun frmvtto mean “virility, engendering power” (S.
Segert, A Basic Grammar ofthe Ugaritic Language [Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984] 191). See W. Herr­
mann, “El,” in Dictionary ofDeities and Demons in the Bible, ed. Karel van der Toorn et al. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1999) 275-276. The simplest solution, however, is to take the construction as a feminine plural passive participle
(banuwatu) meaning “created things,” thus highlighting El as creator in some sense. See Daniel Sivan, A Grammar of
the Ugaritic Language (Leiden: Brill, 1997) 122.
15CTA 1.3 V 30-31; cf. 1.4 IV 41-42.
16CTA 1.4 V 3-5.
17CTA 1.6 VI 22-29.
18CTA 1.5 VI 14-25; CTA 1.6 III 14-21.
adolescent goddess Anat brazenly commands El not to “rejoice” in the “building of
[his] house,”19 which assumes that El’s palatial abode is an object of pride and joy.
Finally, El seems particularly adept at hosting feasts for the gods.20 Elsewhere, El is a
healer.21 According to his epithets, El’s rule is beneficent or gentle (Itpn) and com­
passionate (pidf No divine warrior engaged in mortal combat is he. Yet El remains
the ultimate source of blessing for human flourishing.
This elder god of Canaanite lore, whose wisdom and creative power are
matched only by his generous spirit, finds peculiar resonance with Israel’s God in
Ps 104, the creator of all life.22 As Paul Dion has argued, YHWH acts in the manner
of Baal, the storm god, as much as in the manner of the solar Aten of the well-
known Egyptian hymn.23 However, “Canaanite” influence is not limited to casting
YHWH exclusively in the image of Baal. YHWH also bears the mantle of El in the
psalm. Particularly in relation to Leviathan (see below) and to the world as a whole,
YHWH takes on some of the attributes of the high god. As El’s joy signals the im­
pending renewal of the land, so YHWH’s rejoicing in Ps 104 has everything to do
with the sustenance of creation, of creatio continuata. Wisdom and joy characterize
the divine way for both deities. Unlike Baal, neither El nor YHWH has real enemies.
Novel to this biblical psalm is the claim that creation is sustained or guaran­
teed not by solemn covenantal commitment but by unabashed joy. According to
Gen 9, God formalizes an unconditional pledge never again to destroy the created
order (w. 8-17). Yet, conceivably, God could opt out of the covenant. In the
pointed words of Jon Levenson, “Humanity’s only hope is that God will spurn that
option, fail to exercise his freedom, and consider himself bound by his word to
Noah. Creation has become a corollary of covenant.”24
Perhaps in recognition of the problem, the psalmist prefers the language of
delight over that of covenantal fidelity, replacing solemn formulation with the po­
etry of pathos, the negative with the positive. But she does so at a cost: her exhorta­
tion allows more fully for the frightful possibility that unconditional covenant­
making attempts to preclude. If, God forbid, the creator were to stop enjoying crea­
tion, the cosmos would suffer collapse. The psalmist’s commendation of divine joy
in v. 31b smacks of urgency, as indicated in the following verse, which highlights
God’s destructive, theophanic power. God could, at any moment, turn creation
into a quivering mass of chaos. What then, would bring God to the brink of doing so?
The possibility of cosmic demise in the psalm is attributed not to divine wrath

i9CTA 1.3 V 19-21. See also the fragmentary version of Anat’s threat in CTA 1.18 I 7-8.
2QCTA 1.1 IV 28-32; 1.114.
21CTA 1.16 V 23-50.
22In Phoenician and Israelite traditions, El (identified with YHWH in the Old Testament) was known as the
creator-god (e.g., H. Donner and W. Röllig, Kanaanäische und aramäische Inschriften, 2nd ed. [Wiesbaden,
1966-1969] 26 A III 18; Gen 14:19, 22).
23P. E. Dion, “YHWH as Storm-god and Sun-god: The Double Legacy of Egypt and Canaan as Reflected in
Psalm 104,” Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 103/1 (1991) 43-69.
24Jon D. Levenson, Creation and the Persistence ofEvil: The Jewish Drama ofDivine Omnipotence (San Fran­
cisco: Harper & Row, 1988) 14.
against a resistant or hostile creation but to something seemingly more benign,
namely, to God’s abstaining from joy. In Genesis, God’s anger, provoked by crea­
tion’s wickedness, unleashed the floodwaters to cleanse the earth of violence (Gen
6:11-13). In the aftermath, God becomes resigned to the intractable “inclination
(H2T) of the human heart” to do “evil,” and it is out of such resignation that God
promises to “never again curse the ground because of humankind” (8:21; cf. 9:11,
15), an assurance that rests entirely upon divine restraint rather than activity. For the
psalmist, however, resignation is not what ensures the world’s perdurability. God has
a much more active, personal stake in creation, and so do human beings.
To respond fully to the question of what would prevent God from rejoicing in
creation, it is paramount first to determine what it is about creation, in the psalm­
ist’s view, that warrants God’s continued delight. One clue is given at the conclu­
sion of the psalm, where the term for “rejoice” (FIDt? in the qal) is used the only
other time in the psalm (the piel occurs in v. 15):
May my meditation be pleasing (□"!!?) to him;
I rejoice (nfttf?) in the LORD. (v. 34)

Here, the psalmist’s rejoicing is declared either in response to or as a reason for the
acceptability of her “meditation” (FTi?) to God. In either case, the occasion for such
joy is the psalmist’s poetic liturgy, itself an act of creativity intended to bring pleasure
to God. God’s joy and the psalmist’s joy (w. 31 and 34) are in some sense parallel: as
the psalmist rejoices in God, so God is to rejoice in creation. The psalmist’s work is a
labor of love; as an offering to God, the “meditation” is an act of thanksgiving, as well
as an indirect petition. To be sure, the psalmist rejoices not in her own work, but in
God, her creator. To say otherwise would call one-sided attention to the psalmist’s
creative agency. Rather, the poet’s handiwork is offered to God as testimony to God's
handiwork. Pleasure taken by God in the psalmist’s poem is bound up with God’s
delight in all of creation. Like the ships mentioned in v. 26a, human creativity is sub­
sumed under God's creativity, human culture under divine creation.25 The parallel
between God’s joy and the psalmist’s joy further suggests that creation itself bears
poetic nuance. As the contours of the psalm reflect a certain balance and vividness,
so does creation itself. God’s creation is akin to the psalmist’s poetic rendering of the
world, rerendered in the act of liturgical performance. And satisfaction, indeed un­
bridled joy, is the result. For the psalmist, creation is the corollary not of covenant
but of pathos! Indeed, the psalmist sees her own poetic handiwork playing a crucial
role in preserving God’s enjoyment of creation, providing sufficient motivation for
the maintenance of the cosmos, as if all creation were hanging in the balance, de­
pendent upon the acceptability of a single poem.
Another clue toward unpacking the motivation behind God’s rejoicing in
creation is found in the particular values the poet celebrates about creation. Fore-
25See Patrick D. Miller, “The Psalter as a Book of Theology,” in Psalms in Community: Jewish and Christian
Textual, Liturgical, and Artistic Traditions, ed. Harold W. Attridge and Margot E. Fassler (Atlanta: Society of Biblical
Literature, 2003) 87-98.
most is the sheer diversity of life, both flora and fauna. If human beings can find
satisfying work by exercising a wide range of skills, such as cultivating fields, con­
structing ships, and crafting works of poetry, how much more enjoyment is to be
gained in creating, maintaining, and renewing life in all its wondrous plurality.
Closely related to such work is wisdom. As ships presume human ingenuity
(v. 26a), so all creation, the psalmist claims, reflects God’s wisdom (v. 24b). The
psalmist discerns divine wisdom not only in the earth’s biodiversity, but also in
what enables life’s flourishing, namely, provision and domain. The poet takes
pains, for example, to identify the homes of various species. From tree nests to
mountain crags, from reclusive caves to the heavenly abode, the establishment of
home is essential to the living, created order. Home, specifically God’s home, is the
first explicit act of creation in the psalm (w. 2b-3a).26 Even the waters have their
appointed place (w. 8-9). Home serves as both boundary and basis for flourishing.
Creation is habitat for divinity as well as for humanity and all life.
Regarding provision, the psalmist vividly demonstrates the sufficiency of
God’s care for creation: springs for the wild animals (w. 10-11), vegetation for
land animals, including humans (w. 14-15); food for all (w. 27-28); rain for the
mountains and trees (w. 13a, 16); living space for the various creatures (w. 12,
17-18); renewal of the earth (v. 30); and the daily rhythms of life that enable the
pursuit of provision and, in the case of humans, vocation (w. 19-23). God’s pri­
mary work is the care and feeding of all life, and lavishly so. However, the suste­
nance for life is not the only value the psalmist celebrates. Also part and parcel
of the created order is joy itself. From plants come “wine that gladdens the hu­
man heart” and “oil to make the face shine” (v. 15). Rooted in the abundance of
provision, both utility and enjoyment (Latin uti and frut) characterize God’s
providential care. In short, God’s “hand” is not clenched, but open and giving
(v. 28b), and God finds pleasure in such giving. God is not duty-bound to crea­
tion but freely giving. The sustenance of creation is, according to the psalmist, a
matter not so much of “remembering” covenant (Gen 9:14-16) as of reveling in
pleasure.

LEVIATHAN: FROM MONSTER TO PLAYMATE

God’s delight is nowhere more vividly portrayed than in v. 26, which juxta­
poses two entirely opposite entities that share the same domain, namely, water:
There go the ships,
as well as Leviathan, with which you fashioned to play (pnto1?)!

Another psalm presents an entirely different picture of this formidable creature in

creation:

26Unless, of course, one counts “light” in v. 2a (cf. Gen 1:3) as an act of creation, but here the language is not
of creation but of divine majesty. For nonbiblical parallels, see EnUma Elish Tablet 168,138, in which the gods don,
as markers of their divinity, “mantles of radiance” or effulgent “auras.”
 Yet God my King is from of old,
working salvation in the earth.
You divided the sea by your might;
you broke the heads of the dragons in the waters.
You crushed the heads of Leviathan;
you gave him as food for the creatures of the wilderness.
You cut openings for springs and torrents;
you dried up ever-flowing streams. (74:12-15)

This exilic lament reminds God of the power over chaos exercised in the primordial
age to bring about creation. Leviathan is a Hydra, the Semitic version of a multi­
headed sea monster. It is by its destruction that wild creatures are fed and springs
gush forth. Such power, the psalmist intones, is precedent for divine action against
the perpetrators of Jerusalem’s destruction (w. 2-11). Leviathan’s defeat sets the
stage for God’s victory over the Babylonians. In Ps 74, Leviathan is a primordial crea­
ture destined at the outset for destruction; in Isaiah, however, God’s victory over the
sea monster is placed in the end times (Isa 27:1). Whether set in Urzeit (primordial
time) or Endzeit (end time), Leviathan is a creature clearly not for play but for mortal
combat. Its formidable nature is celebrated in Job 41:1-34. It is a creature “without
equal” in its fierceness (v. 33), one targeted by God, according to Ps 74 and Isa 27, but
allowed to reign freely in Job (see 41:33-34).
Leviathan not only plays an important role in ancient Israelite lore; it also ap­
pears in the epic traditions of the larger Canaanite culture. Leviathan’s cognate
counterpart in the Baal Epic, Litan, is neither kinder nor gentler. In the reference
below, the god of the underworld, Mot, challenges Baal to mortal combat first by
reminding Baal of Litan’s defeat at Baal’s hands:
When you killed Litan, the Writhing Serpent,
annihilated the Twisting Serpent,
The Potentate with Seven Heads,
the heavens grew hot; they withered.
But let me tear you to pieces;
let me eat flanks, innards, forearms.
Surely you will descend into Divine Mot’s throat,
into the gullet of El’s Beloved (ydd il)> the Hero. (CTA 1.5 I 1-8)

Mot forges a fateful analogy: as Baal annihilated Litan, so Mot will kill Baal and more
so; he will devour him like lunch. Call it Baal’s “just des(s)erts.” Mot, the personified
monster of death, is explicitly indicated as “the Beloved of El.” Elsewhere, the cosmic
nemesis Yamm (“Sea”) is also marked as El’s “Beloved.”27 The “Twisting Serpent” is
also implicated. Though Baal’s (and Anat’s) mortal enemy, the sea monster enjoys
favored status from the high god El.28
Similarly, Ps 104 renders from God’s perspective an entirely positive profile

27CTA 1.3 III 38-43, where Anat boasts other victory over “Yamm” and the “Twisting Serpent.”
28For discussion, see Mark S. Smith, The Memoirs ofGod: History, Memory, and the Experience ofthe Divine in
Ancient Israel (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004) 92-94.
of Leviathan in two decisive ways. First, reference to this sea monster is literarily
distanced from the one hint of creation’s resistance to God in the psalm, namely,
the containment of the waters in w. 6-9. God’s “rebuke” or “blast” sends the wa­
ters fleeing to a designated spot in order to preserve the dry land. No hint of com­
bat is present here. Second, the terse yet potently suggestive relationship between
God and Leviathan described in v. 26b lacks any hint of animosity. Rather than en­
emy, Leviathan is God’s playmate! In this instance, YHWH sheds the mantle of Baal
entirely and takes on the demeanor of the high god El.29 Otherwise, Leviathan
would be a “goner.”
Like the verb “rejoice” in v. 31b, the verb for “play” in v. 26b (pntlZ or pl"i2£ in
the piel) with God as the subject is rare.30 The verb’s field of context is wide ranging:
Ishmael and Isaac are caught playing by a scornful mother (Gen 21:9); Isaac and
Rebekah are caught in foreplay (or worse) by a peeping king (Gen 26:8). In these
examples, “play” designates a mutual form of engagement. Most suggestive is the
reference to Wisdom’s play in Prov 8:
I was daily [YHWH’s] delight,
playing (pnto) before him always,
playing (pfltZ?) in his inhabited world,
and delighting in the human race. (Prov 8:30b-31)

Although God is not the subject of the passage, Wisdom’s “playing” is understood as
in some way reciprocated by God, since God’s “delight” is found in Wisdom. In­
deed, creation itself, as described in Prov 8, is constructed by God as Wisdom’s play­
house.31
The closest parallel to the psalmic text is found in lob 41:5 [Heb 40:29], part
of YHWH’s answer to Job.
Will you play (pfltf?) with it as with a bird,
or will you put it on leash for your girls?

Because the question constitutes YHWH’s challenge to Job, who is powerless, it is un­
derstood that playing with Leviathan is what only YHWH does or can do. But in Ps
104, delight, rather than defeat, is God’s design for Leviathan.
Given the Ugaritic parallels, God’s “joy” and “play” in creation reflect not the
struggles of a lesser god, but rather the beneficent concern of the high god of the
cosmos, the one who glories in all creation and manages its operations, the one
who is set above the fray of conflict yet intensely concerned with creation’s ongoing
maintenance. Such joy binds God to the world to ensure its continued existence.

29The parallel of Ps 104:25-26 in the Aten Hymn (lines 49-52), which makes reference only to “ships” and
“fish,” further underscores the uniqueness of the reference to Leviathan.
30The qal form of the verb denotes derisive laughter, which can be attributed to God against nations and ene­
mies of Zion (Pss 2:4; 59:8; cf. Prov 1:26).
31See William P. Brown, The Ethos of the Cosmos: The Genesis ofMoral Imagination in the Bible (Grand Rap­
ids: Eerdmans, 1999) 271-316.
The God Who Plays
To return, then, to our initial question: What would constitute God’s cessa­
tion of joy? Perhaps frolicking Leviathan holds the most important clue. Leviathan
brings out God’s playful side, but such play is no isolated moment in God’s engage­
ment with the world. To the contrary, it supports all creation. As the poet of Ps 104
knows all too well, it is play that makes possible creativity, a fact confirmed by Brit­
ish pediatrician and psychoanalyst D. W. Winnicott.32 Were this monster of the
deep to reassume its traditional role as primordial adversary, then God’s delight
would cease and the ancient cosmogonic script of the battle with chaos would be
“replayed.” The joy of play would be replaced with violent struggle, like children
taking an innocent game of cops and robbers far too seriously.33 34 From the psalm­
ist’s perspective, it is the “wicked” of v. 35 who refuse to play, by choosing, rather,
to continue the struggle against God, thereby becoming purveyors of chaos. But
another option is available: Leviathan could simply refuse to play with God and act,
as it were, like an inert rubber ducky! There is no play in “playing dead.” God’s joy
in caregiving may not endure if God’s way were to prove either arduous or boring
in a world bent on denying its dependence or refusing to “play back” in response to
God’s providential initiative. And if God gives up the play, then only God knows
what would happen next. At best, the cosmos would be left to its own devices, a fate
equal to any devastating judgment that could be given.
The psalmist’s choice to identify joy and play, rather than covenantal com­
mitment, as the rationale for creation’s perdurability is both good news and warn­
ing. The good news is that God’s work in the world is not drudgery. God’s delight
provides a model for human interaction with the world and God. Delighting, as the
poet does on the occasion of her poetic “meditation” and as God does in all of crea­
tion, counters all manner of treating the world solely in terms of utility. The psalm­
ist makes, in effect, a startling ecological claim: equally important to conserving,
recycling, and shaping economic policies that help to sustain rather than exploit
the earth’s resources is crafting poems and prayers (“meditations”) about the cos­
mos and finding other ways to delight in the goodness of creation. Ecology, at root,
is an exercise of joy. Delight celebrates the abundance that God provides for the
world, but resists the temptation to treat such abundance as a commodity. The
creatures from whom God withdraws life-giving provision do not respond by sav­
agely grabbing what little is left; rather, they die as they lived, fully dependent upon
the God in whom they have their being.
Thus, the warning: the pathos of delight, rather than covenant-prescribed

32D. W. Winnicott, Playing and Reality (London: Tavistock, 1982). Thanks to Brent A. Strawn for bringing
this resource to my attention and commenting on an earlier draft of this paper.
33Thanks to my colleague Kathy Dawson for this suggestive analogy.
34Levenson cites a student (unnamed), who applied this phrase to Leviathan in this psalm {Creation and the
Persistence ofEvil, 17). Contra Levenson (and his student), Leviathan in Ps 104 is neither a rubber ducky nor a subju­
gated beast, but a fitting playmate for the divine. For genuine play to occur, Leviathan must be fully alive and func­
tioning.
fidelity, is an ephemeral state. Whereas covenantal remembrance in the case of
Noah is a one-sided affair—God sees the bow, “remembers,” and enforces a self­
restraining order (Gen 9:14-17)—delight and play require reciprocal engagement
on the part of the creature and the creator. Call it perhaps a “covenant” of play, of
mutual engagement, whereby joy lays the foundation for human responsibility.
God’s active delight in sustaining creation paradoxically heightens human agency.
But no guarantee is given that God’s joy will last forever, hence the psalmist’s ur­
gent exhortation. It is incumbent upon God’s creatures to ensure that divine de­
light is sustained so that the world be sustained. The psalmist adds to this effort by
poetically (re)describing the world as God’s playfield. As long as the psalmist re­
joices in God and God rejoices in God’s handiwork, the “play” continues to sustain
the world. May it forever be so. (J)

WILLIAM P. BROWN is professor of Old Testament at Columbia Theological Seminary, Deca­

tur, Georgia.
 License and Permissible Use Notice

These materials are provided to you by the American Theological Library Association, operating as Atla,
in accordance with the terms of Atla’s agreements with the copyright holder or authorized distributor of
the materials, as applicable. In some cases, Atla may be the copyright holder of these materials.

You may download, print, and share these materials for your individual use as may be permitted by the
applicable agreements among the copyright holder, distributors, licensors, licensees, and users of these
materials (including, for example, any agreements entered into by the institution or other organization
from which you obtained these materials) and in accordance with the fair use principles of United States
and international copyright and other applicable laws. You may not, for example, copy or email these
materials to multiple web sites or publicly post, distribute for commercial purposes, modify, or create
derivative works of these materials without the copyright holder’s express prior written permission.

Please contact the copyright holder if you would like to request permission to use these materials, or
any part of these materials, in any manner or for any use not permitted by the agreements described
above or the fair use provisions of United States and international copyright and other applicable laws.
For information regarding the identity of the copyright holder, refer to the copyright information in
these materials, if available, or contact Atla using the Contact Us link at www.atla.com.

Except as otherwise specified, Copyright © 2021 Atla.