People, (populos.) God loves and watches over all, but particularly (Calmet) over the nation which he has chosen. (Chaldean) See Wisdom iii. 1., and Isaias xlix. 16.

Doctrine. It was formerly the custom for disciples to sit at their master’s feet, (Acts xxii. 3,) as it is still in the eastern countries. (Bellon. iii. 12.) Septuagint, “and these are under thee;” (Haydock) subject to thy orders. (Calmet)

Hebrew is here extremely confused: “Yea, he loved the people; all his saints are in thy hand, and they eat down at thy feet; every one shall receive of thy words.” Moses here addresses the Lord. How could he say therefore, all his, &c.? whose saints, and in whose hand? The Vulgate and Chaldean have not the same difficulty, as they read, in his hand, bidu. But the Syriac has, “and he blessed all his saints.” Boroc is not very unlike the present Hebrew bidoc, (Kennicott) r and d being frequently mistaken for each other, and i as often neglected by the Hebrew copyists. (Haydock)

The Samaritan version confirms this alteration; and the text also has the v, and, at the beginning, which makes the whole to be clearly connected, particularly if we allow that c, which stands for thy, has been substituted for v, his, in the following words, thy feet and thy words, which ought to be his, as all the context speaks of God in the third person. This is agreeable to the Vulgate and to the Septuagint also, in the last instance. In the former, the Hebrew is printed thy foot, though the Samaritan and several manuscripts read thy feet. Instead of yissa, “he shall receive,” (Haydock) the plural ought to be substituted, v being omitted both at the beginning and end, as it is in the name of Benaihu, 1 Paralipomenon xi. 22. See 2 Kings xxiii. 20. The Samaritan, Syriac, and Arabic, read and they received, (Kennicott) and the Vulgate, they shall receive. The Septuagint seem to refer this to Moses, “And Moses received from his words, the law which he enjoined to us.” (Haydock)

That Moses should speak of himself, in this manner, seems very unaccountable, and therefore a word may perhaps have crept in, on account of its resemblance with the following term, Mursse. If it has not, Moses must have assumed the title of king, (ver. 5,) which he seems nevertheless to have disclaimed; (chap. xvii. 14,) and there was none in Israel before Saul, 1 Kings viii. 7. (Kennicott)

We may, however, suppose that he puts these words in the mouths of the people, who would repeat this blessing after he was dead, and mention with gratitude, how Moses had delivered to them so excellent a law, and administered the affairs of state with all the power and dignity of a king. (Haydock)