Job · Chapter 23

Explanation of the words of this response — 'Then Job answered and said.'

Introduction to the Fifteenth Speech — Job’s Reply to Eliphaz’s Third Speech Now, Eliphaz’s new approach comprises two things: • A] An answer to the suffering of the righteous: that it comes because he did not serve with wholehearted sincerity for the sake of Hashem alone, but harbored in his spirit ulterior motives — the hope of reward and the fear of punishment. Therefore Hashem refines him (Psalms 105:19) through suffering, to afflict him, to test him, so as to benefit him in the end (Deuteronomy 8:16), in the world to come. • B] An answer to the prosperity of the wicked: that it exists so that man may have free choice, to do good or to refrain — for if punishment came at once, people would be afraid to do evil, and there would be no [real] choice; moreover, worship would then not be for the sake of Heaven. He answers both of these decisively, in two statements: • Regarding the first, he says: how could it be that Hashem afflicted him with such harsh suffering on account of what was merely in his heart during his service — even an ulterior motive, of wanting to receive a reward — when in any case he had kept the charge of [Hashem’s] commandments and laws (Deuteronomy 11:1), and had done no evil deed for which so great a punishment would be warranted (Job 23:6-7)! Second, that if he could argue his case before Hashem, who knows the truth, it would become clear that his service had no ulterior motive whatsoever, but was for the sake of Hashem alone. For even though the thought sometimes crossed his mind, for a moment, that he depended on Hashem for the attainment of his needs and all his concerns, he would immediately catch himself and return to serving Him for His sake alone, with no motive at all. From this he proves that his righteousness had already been measured out and decreed from the outset by [Hashem’s] primordial, supernal knowledge — and so he received no reward for it, but was left to the chance workings of the celestial order and to the sufferings dictated by the constellation of his birth (Job 23:6-7). • In the second statement (Job 24), he refutes Eliphaz’s words concerning the tranquility of the wicked. Here he shows that there are wicked men who lay waste the settled world and disturb all the peace of mankind, and yet God does not trouble Himself (cf. Job 4:18) to destroy them and remove their evil, so that they not consume the world — for if there were [divine] providence, it would be proper for it to protect all mankind from such destroyers, such wreckers of civilization. Second, these savages dwell in the deserts and on islands of the sea, cut off from settled society, and from there they spread out from time to time to plunder, to murder, and to wipe out many lives; and if Hashem were to destroy them in the secrecy of their dwelling-places, no one would ever know of it, and it would do no harm to the matter of worship and free choice. This being so, it would have been fitting for Him to destroy them from under Hashem’s heaven (cf. Lamentations 3:66), by reason of His providence over man. From this he returns to his proof that Hashem does not oversee particular matters, and that everything depends on the celestial order; and over this he cries out bitterly (cf. Genesis 27:34) — why was he not hidden away before the darkness came, his utter non-existence being preferable to his existence (Job 23:16-17).

Job’s Reply Even today after all these consolations. my speech is bitter [The bitterness of my speech] remains in its place, for there is no consolation in your words. my wound is heavier The wound of my plague is stronger than my sigh, for I do not complain and cry about my wound.

'Even today my complaint is bitter' - the word describes my complaint as the bitterest of all complaints, similar to the phrase 'the affliction of Israel was very bitter' (II Kings 14:26); its use here is exceptional. 'my hand' - my wound, as in 'my hand streams at night and does not cease' (Psalms 77:2) - the sense being that my wound is heavier than my sighing.

'Is my complaint bitter' [meri sichi] — the intent is that I have been contentious and have gone to great excess in my anger, voicing much complaint over my calamity. 'My hand' [yadi] — meaning: my wound.

‘Even today’ — that is, even now, when I have multiplied my complaints and recounted my troubles in rebellion and defiance, my affliction is still heavier than my groaning can express — for the outcry is never equal to the pain.

'Bitter' — an expression of defiance and refusal. 'My complaint' — the recounting of my hardships. 'My hand' — my affliction; because it is customary to strike with the hand [so 'hand' stands for the blow].

‘Even today’ — that is, even today, though my complaint and my anger are very bitter from the abundance of my troubles, nevertheless my hand has been heavy, overpowering my groaning — that is, I have restrained myself with all my strength and have not groaned, if—

and I would find Him My Judge. the place prepared for Him The place prepared for His throne.

'that I might find Him' - referring to God. 'to His seat' - to the fixed place of His abode.

‘Oh that I knew’ — [oh, that] I knew the place of God, so that I might find Him; then I would come to the foundation of His dwelling.

'His seat' — an expression of ken ('base') and foundation.

‘Oh that I knew and could find Him’ — if I could find Hashem, to argue with Him face to face, I would master my groaning; I would debate with a settled mind, as though I had no complaint at all and my mind were clear and composed. ‘That I might come even to His seat’ — that is, if I could find Him in one of two ways: either I would meet Him on the way, if I knew to what place He was going, or I would be able to come to His fixed abode — that is, to His house, the place where He dwells. The figure is this: either I would reach Him by way of His governance, as He goes about conducting the governance of the world, or I would come to His fixed abode to reach Him in His own essence and His own concern.

case [i.e., my] argument.

'Arguments' [tochachot] — meaning: words of argument.

‘I would order’ — I would set my case in order before Him, to be judged with Him, and I would fill my mouth with words of argument.

‘I would order [my cause]’ — oh, that there were a time when I might come to Him: • A) that I would have permission to lay out a case before Him and debate with Him; • B) and that this be at the time of the debate.

I would know the words that He would answer me Even if He stops me from speaking before Him, perhaps He would speak with me and I would know the words He would answer me.

‘I would know’ — I would know what He would answer me, for I would understand His words; then, on every matter, I would respond to Him in turn.

‘I would know the words which He would answer me’ — that is, • C) that I would be able to understand the language and the words in which He speaks, that I would grasp the very substance of what He would say to me. That is to say: for now it is impossible for me — • A) to argue my case against Him, for He does not answer me in my dispute; • B) even if He were to answer me, to understand the words — for it seems to me that He would speak to me in a different language, foreign to me; • C) nor [would I grasp] the matter itself, which is deep and beyond human understanding.

with much power of words and rebukes for His sins [other editions read: my sins] will He contend with me? not...coercion smiting and coercion. He will not cast His coercion and His awe upon me. (It may also be interpreted:) Nothing but [this] will He cast on me, for He will not cast on me anything but the contest of the rebukes for my sins; [that,] but not false accusations.

'No, but He would give heed to me' - like [the phrase] 'they took note and gave heed'; none pays heed to me but Him.

'But He would give heed to me' [yasim bi] — the intent of this is: He would put strength in me.

‘Would He contend with me in His great power?’ — would He contend with me by sheer force, apart from the observance of justice? Surely not; rather, He would deal with me exactly as is proper, in strict observance of justice. The verse is terse, and its sense is understood on its own.

(Verses 6-7) ‘With His great power’ — the sense of the verse, [rearranged,] is: ‘There the upright would reason with Him’ — would it be ‘with His great power’ that He would contend with me? ‘No; but He would give heed to me’ — meaning: when I would stand with Him face to face, there the upright one would stand and debate with Him on my behalf, and would ask Him: is it truly because He did not merely give heed to me that He would contend with me with His great power? That is: you [Eliphaz] say that the sufferings that came upon me came because my service was not for the sake of Hashem alone, but that in my heart there were external motives — the hope of reward and the fear of punishment — so that my service was not whole, and that on this account He brought sufferings upon me. Is it truly fitting that on this account such great and bitter sufferings should come upon me, and that He should contend with me with His great power — because in my service He alone was not the sole purpose and intent of the service, since there was also in my mind the thought of reward and punishment, which is a motive serving my own benefit; and the thing He placed within me in my mind to serve Hashem — that is, the purpose and aim of the service — was not He alone, but there was, besides Him, another consideration as well, namely my own benefit? Is this so great a transgression that it warrants sufferings as great as these? Yet for all that, I did not transgress His commandments, nor did I commit a transgression so great as to deserve so great a punishment. This is the argument I would debate with Him, and by this claim I would escape forever from my Judge, for I would come out innocent on this plea of mine. And he chose the phrase ‘He would put [heed] in me’ in keeping with his own view that there is no free choice, and that whatever a person does in serving Hashem, Hashem placed within him and compelled him to it through His primordial foreknowledge; and [he asks] how, merely because He did not put within me that my service be for Him alone — that is, for His sake alone, without any external motive — should He on this account contend with me with His great power?

There in the place of our contest. integrity The propriety of my deeds will be proven, revealed, and it will appear with Him, i.e., before Him. proven and there I will extricate [myself] forever because He will find no iniquity in me.

'There' - the upright would see [Him] directly, face to face. 'and I would be delivered' - my soul, forever, and I would not be afraid; that is why I cannot find Him.

'Might reason with Him' [nokhach imo] — meaning: argues with Him. 'So should I be delivered' [va'aflatah] — myself and my flesh, or [alternatively] my soul.

‘There,’ etc. — there, in the place of judgment, the uprightness of my deeds would argue on my behalf, and I know that I would come forth vindicated and would be delivered forever from Him who judges me through suffering.

Behold...east it refers to the above (verse 3), “Would that I knew etc.” east as it is stated (Exod. 27: 13): “on the east side (קדמה), eastward.” and to the west Heb. ואחור. Since the east is the front of the world (קדמה), the west is found to be the back of the world (אחור).

'Behold, I go forward' - east. 'and backward' - west; and He formed the north [lit. 'the left side'] as well, and I cannot see Him there.

'Forward' [kedem] — meaning: east. 'Backward' [achor] — meaning: west.

‘Behold, I go forward’ — but I do not know where the place of His glory is: if I go to seek Him in the east, He is not there — meaning, I do not find Him; and if I go to seek Him in the west, I cannot perceive where He is.

'Forward' — this is the eastern direction, for a person's face is reckoned as facing toward the rising of the sun; and so the west is behind him, the north is to his left, and the south is to his right.

‘Behold’ — but I can neither find Him nor come to His seat. For if I go forward to seek Him on the east side, He is not there; and if I go backward to seek Him on the west side — even though the ancients pictured the Divine Presence as being in the west, and that the whole host of heaven, which travels from east to west, goes there to bow down before His throne of glory — still, even though it is there, I cannot understand Him so as to grasp Him.

north Heb. שמאוֹל, lit. left. when He made it When He created it, He did not make the place of His throne there, that I should see it there. see Heb. אחז, the Aramaic translation of אֶרְאֶה, I will see. Proof of this is that the accent is under the “aleph.” Now, if it were an expression of holding (אחיזה), the accent would be at the end of the word, under the “cheth.” He wraps up the south He covers the face of the south before me in order that I should not see Him.

'and He turns to the right' - and I do not see Him; and why would I deliver myself from my Judge, from Him, seeing that He is my Judge?

'On the left hand' [semol] — meaning: north. 'But I cannot behold Him' [lo achaz] — meaning: I do not see [Him]. 'He turns Himself' [ya'atof] — meaning: He covers and conceals Himself. 'To the right hand' [yamin] — meaning: south.

‘On the left, when He does work’ — even though He made and created the north as well, still I do not see Him there; and it is as though He wrapped Himself to conceal the south, so that I do not see Him there either.

'I cannot behold' — I shall see, as in, "and you shall seek out [from among all the people]" (Exodus 18). 'He turns Himself' — an expression of atifah ('wrapping') and covering.

‘On the left hand’ — the ancients pictured the north side as open, [meaning] that in that direction He did not bring Creation to its full completion — as though He left that side without covering, without wall, without enclosing partitions, like someone building a house who does not roof it over with cedar beams, and does not panel it with wood or wall it in all around. By this figure Job says that there too I cannot see, even though it is open — for at the time He made the left side and did not roof it over to close it off and cover it with cedar beams, at that very time He wrapped up the right: He enveloped and covered everything on the right side, so that there too I cannot see. All this is a figure of speech for the fact that Hashem cannot be apprehended from any side. (And in terms of the philosophical sense: apprehending Hashem from His own essence is called ‘frontal apprehension,’ and this no human being can ever attain or know the least part of; rather, apprehension can only come from the reverse side — that is, through the Creation that unfolds from Him, so that through Creation one apprehends the Creator, and from the effects one apprehends the supreme Cause, as it is written, ‘you will see My back, but My face shall not be seen’ (Exodus 33:23). And so he says that on the forward side — that is, in the truth of His essence in and of itself — He is not there, for this is hidden from human intellect, and from that side the Creator cannot be found at all; He can only be found from the reverse side, where He does exist, so that one can grasp that He exists — but one cannot understand Him, nor grasp His ways through one’s own reasoning. Now, the governance of the world by way of nature is called, in the Holy Scriptures, ‘the governance of the left,’ while governance by way of wonder and miracle is called ‘the right,’ as is stated in many places. And so he says: if one investigates the governance ordered by way of nature, there he finds it unroofed, the building unfinished — for there he will find that there is no proper order to the governance, since there is a righteous man to whom things go badly, and a wicked man to whom things go well; and if he looks to the right side — His miraculous governance, where the governance is whole — he does not see it, for all he perceives is the governance ordered since the six days of Creation, by way of nature and according to the celestial order, which is a shadow of death, with no order.)

Because He knows the way that is with me therefore, He does not come to contend with me. He has tested me that I will emerge like gold if He contends with me.

'For He knows the way that I take' - the path that I have walked, and I did not turn right or left.

‘For He knows’ — this is why He has hidden Himself from me: because He knows the way I have walked, and He has tested my deeds, and I have come forth clean as gold, without the dross of sin.

‘For He’ — but although I am unable to know His way and to find Him, does He not know the way to me? He is able to find me, and He knows the way by which He would come to me, to be with me. If so, then let Him test me, and I would come forth like gold that emerges from the assaying process without dross or impurity — so that no thought of piggul [a sacrifice invalidated by wrongful intent] would be found in my service.

to His path Heb. באשרו, to His path, like (below 31:7), “If my foot (אשרי) has turned away from the road”; (Ps. 40:3), “He has established my paths (אשרי).” and do not turn away I am not accustomed to turn away.

'His steps' [ba'ashuro] — meaning: his stride. 'And turned not aside' [lo at] — meaning: I did not turn aside [lo etteh].

‘To His steps’ — my foot has held fast to His footsteps, and I have kept His way, and have not turned aside from it.

'His steps' — in His stride, as in, "and walk in the way of understanding" (Proverbs 9:6). 'Turned aside' — an expression of turning away.

‘My foot has held fast to His steps’ — the treading of my feet was ‘in His steps’ [Malbim links ‘אשור,’ step, with ‘אושר,’ happiness] — that is, it was for the sake of the soul’s happiness, not for the sake of bodily success. I also ‘kept His way’ — I walked only in the way of Hashem, and did not turn aside to another way, meaning my actions accorded with Hashem’s way without straying from it, and the intent of my actions was only for His name and for the soul’s happiness. And this is what explains, corresponding to it, ‘His way have I kept.’

more than my daily bread I kept the words of His mouth More than my daily food I was eager to keep the words of His mouth. [The expression חקי] is like (Prov. 30:8), “my daily bread (לחם חקי),” my food.

'The commandment of His lips' - I performed. 'I have not gone back' - it was my portion to store up 'the words of His mouth' - meaning that they were hidden in my heart and would not stir from there.

'I have not gone back' [lo amish] — meaning: I did not turn away from it. Now, 'the commandment of His lips' attaches [in sense] to 'and turned not aside' [from the preceding verse], the meaning being: 'nor did I turn aside from the commandment of His lips, nor did I go back' — or alternatively, 'and turned not aside' attaches to 'His way have I kept,' while 'I have not gone back' attaches to 'the commandment of His lips,' with the vav of 've-lo amish' being extra, like the vav of 've'ayeh' and 've'anah'.

‘The commandment of His lips’ — this refers back to the word ‘I have kept’ stated in the preceding verse, as if to say: the commandment of His lips I have kept, and I have not removed it from my heart; and more than my allotted bread, I have treasured up the words of His mouth. And because of this, He refrains from arguing with me.

'Gone back' — I shall turn aside, as in, "did not depart" (Exodus 13). 'Than my necessary food' — a fixed and needed thing is called a chok ('allotment'). 'Treasured up' — I have hidden away.

‘[I have not gone back from] the commandment of His lips’ (I have kept) — I did not depart from it, acting only according to the commandment of Hashem, not according to human reasoning and understanding. And corresponding to ‘My foot has held fast to His steps,’ he says: ‘I have treasured up the words of His mouth more than my necessary food’ — for I kept the words of His mouth more than my necessary food and my other needs: the commandments themselves — keeping the words of His mouth — were more precious to me than securing my necessary food, my sustenance, and all my wants, so much so that it cannot be said that my service was performed in order to secure, by means of it, my necessary food and my bodily needs.

But He Since He is One in the world and knows the knowledge and the thoughts of the creatures, and what they have to reply to Him, therefore replies are prepared before Him. and who will answer Him Therefore, what His soul desires, He does.

'But He is at one with Himself' - some say that the letter bet [in 'at one'] is extra; but the truth is that it is not extra, and I cannot explain it further, for there is a great secret in it.

'But He is at one with Himself' [be'echad] — meaning: of a single mind. 'What His soul desires' — meaning: His will longs for.

‘But He is at one [with Himself]’ — and even though the uprightness of my ways is revealed before Him, He remains fixed in a single resolve and is unwilling to remove my sufferings from me; and who can turn Him back from His will? Whatever His soul desires, that He does — whether by strict justice or apart from it.

'His soul' — that is, His will, as in, "My soul is not toward this people" (Jeremiah 15). 'Desires' — longs for, as in, "He has desired it for His habitation" (Psalms 132:13).

'But He is at one with Himself' — that is: linking this to what he said above, 'He knows the way that I take' — since He is one, Hashem already knew my way in advance through His foreknowledge. He had already known beforehand that I would serve Him, that my service would be refined like gold without dross, and that my foot would hold only to His track. All of this Hashem knew in advance through His foreknowledge. Accordingly, I had no further choice or freedom to choose a different path, for that would mean a change in Hashem's knowledge — since, were I to choose a different path, His knowledge would have to change so as to know that I had chosen otherwise than what He had known from the start. But that is impossible, for He is one with a true unity, and it is impossible for there to be multiplicity or change in His knowledge, which is His very essence. And since He already knew from the outset that I would walk a blameless path for His sake — then who can turn Him? And what His soul desires, even that He does — who can overturn the decree of Hashem that was decreed through His foreknowledge? And who is it whose soul desires something and carries it out — who still has the choice and freedom to want whatever his soul pleases and choose it, and to act according to his own will? This is impossible, for that would necessarily mean turning back and nullifying the counsel of Hashem which He knew from the outset — and that would contradict the unity of Hashem. From this it is clear that He cannot do anything that contradicts His knowledge, since that would mean a change in His knowledge, which is His essence. And since I was compelled toward my good deeds by Hashem's knowledge and His foreordained decree, I am owed no reward for them.

For He will complete my sentence I know that He will not draw back His hand until He completes the sentence of His decrees, the retribution that He has decreed against me. and there are many such things with Him For He did many such things.

'For He will perform that which is appointed for me' - He will carry out the decree He has decreed upon me.

'That which is appointed for me' [chuki] — meaning: that which is necessary for me, for that which is necessary for a person is called a 'chok,' as in 'feed me with mine allotted bread' (Proverbs 30:8).

‘For He will perform’ — indeed, I know that He will bring to completion upon me all the sufferings, according to the decree He has fixed for me, and He will not remove them from me on account of the rightness of my ways. ‘And many such things’ — just as He does these things to me, so He has with Him many similar things that He does to human beings.

(14–15) 'For He will perform that which is appointed for me' — referring to what he said above, that my service of Hashem was whole, without any external motive: that at the time of my service I did not think I was serving in order to thereby obtain my allotted portion and my needs, for I served only for Hashem's sake alone. He says that even though at times a sudden thought would rise in my mind during my service — that I need Hashem to complete my allotted portion and my needs — and so it says: 'for He will perform that which is appointed for me, and many such things are with Him; therefore I am affrighted at His presence' — even though at times I am affrighted at His presence, afraid to disobey His words, because I need Him to complete my allotted portion and my bodily needs, so that my needs be met in full — 'and many such things,' referring to the many other things I need, such as attaining life, health, favor, wealth, and children, for all these are with Him, and I need Him to grant them to me in full — and therefore I am affrighted at His presence, fearing lest He diminish my allotted portion and my livelihood, or any one of the things mentioned. And for a fleeting moment such a thought would rise in my heart during my service — but this was only a momentary, sudden fright. Yet at the time such a thought arose in my mind in fright, without composure of mind, I would reflect with understanding of heart and intellect, and then I would fear Him differently: the fright over my own needs, which is fear of punishment, and fear for myself lest I suffer harm in body or possessions, would then leave me, and my essential fear was of Him alone — awe of His grandeur, that I should not turn away from His commandments out of fear of His grandeur and awe of Him, not out of fear of punishment or love of reward — so that the essence of my service was without any external motive at all, not from hope of reward or fear of punishment, but only from awe of Hashem's grandeur, with no other thought whatsoever.

Therefore Since He does not requite man according to his ways. I am startled by Him and when I ponder His ways, I am frightened of Him.

‘Therefore’ — seeing that He does not relent from the decree He has fixed, I am terrified before Him; and when I consider His deeds, I am afraid of Him. This doubles the same idea in different words.

‘And God has made faint’ — in addition to the sufferings, God has brought further faintness into my heart, so that I am all the more terrified. ‘And the Almighty has affrighted me’ — this repeats the same thing in different words.

'Faint' — an expression of morekh ('faintness') and fear.

(16–17) 'Indeed, God' — but as for the fact that I did not withstand the test just now, and that through my suffering I turned away from the service of Hashem and from awe of Him — which would indicate that my service had been only out of love of reward (as Eliphaz said: 'for now it has come to you and you are impatient; is not your fear of God your confidence?' [Job 4:5–6]) — this was because God has softened my heart in that I was not cut off before the darkness. For had He put me to death before bringing this darkness upon me, I would have accepted it with love, since I served Hashem with all my might and all my soul, even were He to take my soul, for I had no hope of reward for my service. But in that I was not cut off, and He left me alive amid this darkness — suffering harsher than death — through this my heart was softened, as the Sages said: 'had they lashed Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, they would have worshipped the image' (Ketubot 33b) — for such suffering cannot be endured, and through this my heart was softened, I was overcome with fright, and I did not withstand the test. And [Job] means: had I not been cut off before the darkness — had death covered the gloom from before my eyes — I would not have seen the evil that befell me.

Because I was not cut off from before the darkness Because of this I am startled; because I was not completely cut off and laid permanently in the grave before this darkness that has come upon me, and because He did not cover this thick darkness from before me until my death. and [because He did not] cover the thick darkness from before me This refers back to “because not” at the beginning of the verse.

'Because I was not cut off' - he wished he had been cut off and had died, just as he was in darkness before he came out into the air of the world [i.e., before birth].

'I was ... cut off' [nitzmati] — meaning: I was cut off. 'Before the darkness' — meaning: before the darkness of evil events came. 'Neither did He cover the thick darkness from my face' — meaning: He would cover and hide from my sight the gloom of these troubles, that is, that I would not see them.

‘Because I was not cut off’ — and the reason is this: in the past, whenever there was darkness and destruction in the world, I was never cut off on account of the darkness, for it was never upon me; and whenever there was thick gloom in the world, Hashem would screen the thick gloom from before me, and I never saw it. And because I was never accustomed to suffering and had never seen it in all my days, therefore now, when various troubles come upon me, great faintness and much terror enter my heart.

'Was not cut off' — was severed, as in, "Hashem will cut them off" (Psalms 94). 'The thick darkness' — deep gloom.