כִּ֤י זֶ֨ה ׀ אֱלֹהִ֣ים אֱ֭לֹהֵינוּ עוֹלָ֣ם וָעֶ֑ד ה֖וּא יְנַהֲגֵ֣נוּ עַל־מֽוּת׃
Sapagkat ito ang Diyos, ang ating Diyos magpakailanman at kailanman; Siya ang papatnubay sa atin gaya noong ating kabataan.
Rashi
to brighten the youth Heb. על מות לבן. Some interpret על מות לבן, on the death of Absalom, but this interpretation is not plausible because he [David] states: לבן ; he does not state הבן. Others interpret על מות לבן [as referring to] Nabal. Neither is this plausible, to invert the name. Moreover, no mention is made of him in the psalm. (The preceding paragraph does not appear in most editions.) I saw in the Great Masorah that it is one word, judging by the fact that it is compared to (below 48:15): “He will lead us as in youth (על מות).” Menachem and Dunash interpreted what they interpreted, but it does not seem correct to me. I saw in the Pesikta (d’Rav Kahana, p. 25a) that the chapter deals with Amalek and Esau (as in verse 6): You rebuked nations; You destroyed a wicked man. But I say that this song, למנצח על מות לבן, is for the future, when the childhood and the youth of Israel will be brightened; their righteousness will be revealed and their salvation will draw near, that Esau and his seed will be erased, according to our Torah. (The last phrase does not appear in most editions.) על מות means childhood. לבן is like ללבן, to whiten. Menachem interpreted על מות לבן, melodies to teach, and this is its interpretation: To the conductor למנצח, to the conductor, melodies to teach, in which case לבן is equivalent to להבין ולבונן, to understand and to comprehend; על מות, named for a musical instrument called עלמות, as is stated (below 46:1): “on alamoth-shir.” Dunash (p. 15f) interpreted לבן as the name of a man whose name was Labben, who fought with David in those days, and the Psalmist’s statement, “You rebuked nations, You destroyed a wicked man”this wicked man is Labben, who slew innocent people. Although you do not come upon a man named Labben anywhere else but this place, you find the same with other names, which are found in Scripture only once. (This entire account of Dunash’s interpretation does not appear in early mss. Menachem’s interpretation is presented very briefly.)