"Like a Lion" or "They Pierced"? One Letter Splits Tahilim 22:16

Tahilim (Psalms) 22:16 is one of the most argued lines in the whole text, and the argument comes down to a single letter. One reading says "like a lion my hands and my feet." The other says "they pierced my hands and my feet." Kaari, like a lion, or Karu, they pierced. One letter, and the whole meaning of the verse turns on it.

The word, in the oldest writing we have

Before English, and before the Square Script, it was written in an older form of the letters, the Paleo Script. Here are the two forms side by side:

What the two words are

The two readings differ by the final letter. Kaari ends in the letter Yod and reads "like a lion." Karu ends in the letter Waw and reads as a verb, "they dug" or "they pierced." Yod and Waw are two of the most easily confused letters in the hand-copied text, a short stroke and a long one. So a single stroke separates a lion from a piercing.

Read it in the text

Tahilim 22 begins, "My Al, my Al, why have You forsaken me," and describes one surrounded, poured out like water, bones out of joint, stared at by enemies. Verse 16 then reads either: "For dogs have surrounded me, a band of evil ones have encircled me, like a lion my hands and my feet," or: "they pierced my hands and my feet." The surrounding context is a body in agony, hands and feet named, which is why both readings have been defended for so long.

What the English did to it, both ways

Here is the honest part, and it cuts against easy answers on both sides. Many English Bibles print "they pierced" with full confidence, as if there were no question. Other traditions print "like a lion" with equal confidence. But the source itself carries a real difference between manuscript lines: the reading with the Waw supports "they pierced/dug," and the reading with the Yod supports "like a lion." Confidence was printed where the manuscripts actually show a genuine variant. The reader was handed one answer and never told there was a fork in the text at all.

How this connects to the Turah

Here is the thread. The Turah itself gives the command that governs this whole study: do not add to the word, and do not take away from it. That command is exactly why a single disputed letter must be handled with honesty, not covered over. Whichever reading a person weighs, the Turah's rule is the same: guard the word as written, mark where the witnesses differ, and do not pretend a certainty the text does not give. To restore is to show the fork, not to hide it under one confident English line.

Let us be honest about what is proven

Proven: the two readings differ by a single final letter, Waw versus Yod, letters easily confused in copying. Karu (with Waw) supports "they dug/pierced"; Kaari (with Yod) supports "like a lion." Both readings exist in the manuscript witness of Tahilim 22:16.

Not overclaimed: we are not declaring here which reading is original, and we are not pretending the question is settled either way. The honest ground is that a real variant exists, and the reader deserves to know it rather than be handed one side as if there were no other.

Now sit with it

You were handed one line, "like a lion," or "they pierced," and told it was simply the verse. But the text holds a genuine fork here, one letter wide, and both readings are old.

Go look at Tahilim 22:16 in more than one Bible and watch the line change. Then ask the question they never put to you:

If a single letter can turn a lion into a piercing, and the translators knew it, why were you shown only one side and never told there was a choice?

Words in this teaching (how to say them)