Job · Chapter 4

Eliphaz’s Address Eliphaz He was Esau’s son, and because he was nurtured in Isaac’s bosom, he merited that the Shechinah rest upon him. the Temanite From the land of Tema, Esau’s country. (Not found in some editions.)

'Hansah' [the word opening the next verse] — the nun is used as in the plural, the samech stands in place of a sin, and the heh stands in place of an aleph; compare 'lift up the light of Your countenance upon us, Hashem' (Psalms 4:7).

'Answered' — an expression of response and reply.

Introduction to the Second Response: Eliphaz's Response Eliphaz held the view of the Torah: that man is free in his choices, and that the order of the stars has no power over anything that depends on human choice — for the authority and the ability are in man's own hands, in all his deeds, to do or to refrain, whether for good or for bad, while the stars go their own way in their courses, flying past, without acting upon the world below, as he says, ‘and the sparks fly upward’ (5:7). A person's course in life is not fixed by the celestial order; choice is in his own hands, to harm or benefit himself, according to how he prepares himself by his own will — for we have seen that anger and desire bring death to the fool through his own choice to conduct himself by them (5:2). As he also says, ‘man is born to toil’ — initiative is essential, and effort is both useful and necessary for success (5:7). And when it sometimes appears that a person achieves sudden success without toil or the labor of his hands — as though he had attained his heart's desire without passing through any of the intermediate stages that normally lead to it — that is a false success; it will not endure, either in his own hands or in those of his children. Not so the success of one who enjoys the fruit of his own labor: it is like a garden ‘whose plantings spring up’ (cf. Isaiah 61:11) and bears fruit (5:3–7). Therefore, even the dread that Job constantly felt (as he said: ‘For I feared a fear, and it has come upon me’ [Job 3:25]), which he attributed to some intuition that had entered his soul by decree of the celestial order, was itself a mistake. For his dread came upon him because of his sins, since it is by them that a person rises or falls. As Eliphaz says: ‘Is not your piety your confidence, and the integrity of your ways your hope?’ — which, as will be explained, really means: ‘It is precisely your confidence that should have made you afraid, and it is the integrity of your ways that ought to be your hope’ (4:6). In his words, Eliphaz also sets out one fundamental principle, the same one mentioned in Sefer Ha-Ikkarim (Part 4, Chapter 5): that human actions cannot all be absolutely determined, as the astrologers hold — for if they were, the category of the contingent, whose reality is established by observation, would be nullified, and all the roots of the Torah uprooted. But the opposite view — that all human actions are entirely a matter of free choice, and that effort is effective in every case, which is the opinion of the Philosopher — is likewise shown to be untenable. For we observe, as plain experience, many actions in which a person strives to attain something and makes every possible preparation to reach that goal, yet not only fails to attain it, but the very preparations he made become the cause of the opposite result. So it was with Joseph's brothers: their effort in selling him as a slave, so that he would not rule over them, became the very cause of his rule over them. And likewise, a person often attains some good without any effort at all, as Saul attained the kingship without any effort whatsoever. Human actions, then, are divided as follows: There are actions that are entirely a matter of free choice. These are the ones in which the property of contingency is preserved, the ones affected by diligence and effort, for which a person is praised or blamed, and to which warning, commandment, reward, and punishment apply. Some actions are absolutely determined, such as things decreed by Hashem to happen regardless, like the episode of Joseph and the like. And some are a mixture of determinism and choice, like one who sows and the crop grows, or one who digs and finds a buried treasure — for the crop would not exist without the effort of the sower, nor without the providence that sends rain and wind, the early rain and the late rain, in its season. But even in actions that are determined, or that combine determinism and choice, the determining factor is not the celestial order but the providence and will of Hashem (5:8). He brings proof that providential acts do occur: from the phenomenon of rainfall (5:9–12), and from the fact that the poor are saved from the hand of one stronger than they, even though, by nature, one would expect the powerful to overwhelm the weak and wipe them from the face of the earth (5:12–17). From this he further explains that sometimes providence brings some harm upon a person in order to save him thereby from a still greater harm that was about to come — like someone setting out on a journey whose foot strikes a stone, so that he is kept from taking that road; or someone about to board a ship who suddenly falls ill and does not go, after which bandits fall upon that road, or the ship sinks at sea. Through the lesser harm, then, Hashem protects him from the greater harm that was destined to come (5:17–23). This providence extends over the righteous, over every detail of their actions (5:8), so that it protects them from every kind of misfortune (5:23); and even a person's children, life, and livelihood, in Eliphaz's view, do not depend on the stars at all, but on merit and providence (5:24–27). And the proof of this is: In general matters — from the nature of rainfall, and from the irrigation by rivers in lands where no rain falls, such as the land of Egypt (5:9, 10). In particular matters — from the way providence frustrates the plans of the crafty, or how the very means a person prepares to reach some goal sometimes become, as noted, the cause of the opposite result (5:12, 17). With this Eliphaz answers, by way of reasoned inquiry, Job's complaint — the complaint Job regarded as conclusive proof against the existence of providence, namely, that righteous people are sometimes found to suffer the fate of the wicked. Eliphaz's answer is that this sometimes happens for their own good (5:17, 23). But because Eliphaz himself does not regard this answer as fully sufficient — since he had only worked it out through his own reasoning, as he says, ‘Behold, this we have searched out; so it is’ (5:27) — he does not rely on this answer alone. He sets out his main position on this question of the righteous person who suffers in chapter 4, where he says that he received insight into the matter by way of prophecy, made known to him in visions of the night: that the harm which comes upon a righteous person is on account of some sin he has committed, as our Sages said, ‘There is no suffering without sin’ (Shabbat 55a). And even if, at first glance, no sin can be found in him — no person can boast and say, ‘I have cleansed my heart, I am pure of my sin’ (Proverbs 20:9) — whether one considers the greatness of the Creator and the abundance of His goodness to man, which obligates man to boundless service, or whether one considers the lowliness of man before Him, from either perspective it is impossible that one born of woman could be vindicated before God on high, or claim to have completed his service to God his Maker in absolute perfection. Hashem therefore brings suffering upon him, not for his harm but for his good, to purge his sin and heal the sickness of his soul before his measure becomes full, and before he becomes liable for a punishment far heavier and more lasting — either the loss of his soul's share in eternity, or the loss of his body through an untimely death (4:12, 21). These remedies are mild compared to what would bring a wound that could never be healed. That is, according to Eliphaz's system, it is conceivable for a righteous person to suffer, but it is not conceivable for a righteous person to perish (4:7–11). And from Job's own afflictions, too, no proof can be drawn — even by Eliphaz's own reasoning — beyond the fact that a righteous person may suffer without perishing. If so, the entire foundation on which Job built his claim, that the world has been handed over to the celestial order — his claim being that suffering came upon him though, in his own estimation, he had not sinned — collapses. For this suffering came upon him on account of some sin found in him: that he had not completed his service [of God] to the degree required by service to God, which has no limit or end. And the suffering did not come to destroy him, for ‘he will yet be built up, and established’ (cf. Proverbs 24:3) (4:20, 27). He goes on to prove to Job that his service [of God] was not entirely complete, from the fact that the moment suffering came upon him, he began to complain against Hashem and to deny the very foundations of faith. This is a sign that his fear of Hashem was not genuine, but was only motivated by love of reward and fear of punishment — for one who truly fears Hashem does not falter in his steps when God rebukes him. Not so Job, who ‘opens his mouth in vanity’ (Job 35:16), turning everything upside down (4:2, 7).

Because He tested This is an expression of wonder. Because He tested you with one thing, should you weary? With one rest that the Holy One, blessed be He, tested you, you have become weary. From now on, who will be able to withhold his words from answering you?

'But who can withhold himself from speaking' — some say: 'Hansah' [venture] — [understood as] 'hamenaseh' [one who tests], the sense being 'a word for a word,' [a reply in kind]. But others said that it is the word itself that is 'hamenaseh' [that which puts to the test]. 'Withhold himself from speaking' — we cannot help but answer you.

Explanation of the words of the response (Eliphaz's speech) — "If one venture a word to you, will you be weary?" — This is from the sense of nesi'ah, "bearing" or "lifting," with the shin exchanged for a samekh and the aleph for a heh, as in "lift up upon us the light of Your countenance" (Psalms 4:7); and the meaning would be: if we bear forth a discourse and speak to you, replying to your words, will that be a burden to you? Or it may be from the sense of nisayon, "a trial" or "a test" — and this is the more correct reading — meaning: when Hashem tested you by bringing upon you some of these afflictions, were you wearied? And in line with this he goes on to say, "for now it has come upon you, and you are weary."

'If one venture' — is it right and proper that, when someone tests you with a word about one of these misfortunes, you should at once grow weary and worn out from holding fast to your integrity? And so, who could hold himself back from words, without responding?

'If one venture' [hanisah] — an expression of nisayon (a trial, an attempt); and the initial heh is the interrogative heh, [introducing a question]. 'Will you be weary' — an expression of tiredness and fatigue, as in 'all the hardship' (Exodus 18:8). 'Can withhold himself' — an expression of preventing and holding back, as in 'princes refrained from talking' (Job 29:9). 'From speaking' — an expression of speech.

If one venture – has anything bad, some mishap or misfortune, ever tried before to come upon you, that you should therefore be weary now? That is: have many misfortunes and pains already come upon you before this, until you are now weary of bearing them? Is it not that, until now, nothing has ever tried to draw near you and do you harm, and that this is the first time that something bad has come upon you — so how have you grown weary so quickly, your steps already faltering? And who can hold back his words from arguing against you?

Behold, you have chastised many who multiplied words; you admonished them and chastised them. and...weak hands of those who feared the retribution that came upon them. You used to strengthen [them] and say, “Fear not, for that is the Divine Standard of Justice.”

'Behold, you have instructed' — behold, in the past, did you not instruct many who spoke overmuch against Heaven? 'And the weak hands' — the hands that were weak in faith in Hashem, you would strengthen with words of instruction.

'Weak' — an expression of feebleness.

Behold, you have instructed many – that is: now, precisely because you opened your mouth without restraint to deny Providence and turn aside from faith, by this you have instructed many, for this will serve them as a lesson to learn from; and even one who was faltering in faith will now be upheld by your very words, and will justify the judgment of Heaven, and will recognize that Hashem is righteous in His judgment. For seeing that no sooner did evil come upon you than you grew weary and did not stand the test, everyone will realize that your service was never for the sake of Heaven, but only from love of reward and fear of punishment — that your fear of God came from your own overconfidence and your hope, and was not true fear. From this everyone will recognize that Hashem brought this evil upon you in justice and in righteousness. Whereas had you kept silent and accepted the suffering, everyone would have said that a righteous man like you was made to suffer without justice, and they would have found grounds to deny Providence.

would pick up Your words were wont to pick up the stumbler.

'The one who was falling' — the man who was stumbling, your words would uphold; and knees that were buckling to fall, you would strengthen. That is: whoever was bewildered about God's providence because of the misfortunes that befell him, thinking they came from the arrangement of the constellations and not from providence — him, in the past, you would set firmly upon the truth, telling him that it came through providence, on account of punishment for wrongdoing; and then all of them would turn back and acknowledge your words.

'Falling' — an expression of the loss of strength and exhaustion. 'Feeble' [kor'ot] — this refers to sinking down upon the knees. 'Have strengthened' — you have made strong.

Your words have upheld the one who was falling, and you have strengthened the feeble knees – that is: now, since you have filled your mouth with such reckless, bitter words, you have instructed many, who will take a lesson from you to justify the judgment of Heaven; and even hands that were feeble in faith will now be strengthened, and your words will uphold the one who is faltering in faith, so that he will recognize and know that all His ways are just, and there is no wrong in Him.

'But now' — yet now, when some misfortune comes upon you, you become tired and weary of holding yourself together; and when the misfortune touches you, you become terrified, and without a settled mind you speak mere words of wind.

'You are weary' [vatele] — equivalent to vatil'eh. 'You' [adekha] — to you, as in 'and I will look to you' (Job 32:12).

But now it has come upon you, and you are weary; it touches you, and you are affrighted – that is: since now, for the first time, this thing — this evil — has come upon you; and it has barely come upon you at that, this being its very first arrival, not something that has gone on for many days, but only now beginning to come. And more than that: it only touches you with a mere touch — that is, the rod of God has only begun to touch you a short while ago — and even so you have grown weary and are dismayed, unable to hold out even a little while and withstand the trial. From this everyone will recognize and know, that —

Surely now, your end reveals your beginning, that your fear, that you feared heaven... your foolishness is due to foolishness and not to full understanding, and so are your hope and the sincerity of your ways all foolishness.

'Your confidence' [kislatecha] — something on which you lean, as in 'and they set their confidence in God' (Psalms 78:7).

"Is not your fear of God your confidence" — meaning, your hope. The sense is that your fear of God was only for the sake of your hope that it would safeguard your possessions; and when you saw those possessions lost, the fear of Hashem departed from you. And the vav in "ve-tom derakhekha" ("and the integrity of your ways") functions like the soft feh in Arabic [a consequential "so," not a mere "and"]; so the meaning is: your hope was the cause of the integrity of your ways — that is, your hope that your possessions would be preserved was what produced the integrity of your ways — and so your integrity departed once those possessions came to their end.

'Is not your fear of God' — is it not now evident, in retrospect, that all your fear of God was only so that you could rely on it to attain what you sought through it, and not from a perfect understanding rooted in awe of His greatness? 'Your hope and the integrity of your ways' — your hope went hand in hand with the integrity of your ways. That is, the integrity of your ways was not out of love for it in itself, but the thought of attaining your hope went along with it; for is it not now, with the loss of your hope, that your fear of God has come undone?

'Your confidence' — an expression of trust and hope, as in 'whose confidence shall be cut off' (Job 8:14). 'And the integrity' — the vav here stands in place of 'with'; so too, 'and Joseph was [already] in Egypt' (Exodus 1:5), meaning, along with Joseph, who was [already] in Egypt.

Is not your fear of God your confidence, and your hope the integrity of your ways – is it not that your fear of God, until now, was not true fear at all, but existed only because of your confidence — for you had hoped that, through fearing Hashem, you would be kept safe from all harm and injury; you feared the punishment, not Hashem Himself. So too, your hope was the cause of the integrity of your ways: your walking a blameless path was not for the sake of Hashem, but only for the hope of reward and recompense. That is why, once you saw that Hashem had brought afflictions upon you and had turned His goodness away from you, you began to deny Providence and turn away from faith. It is thus clear that He brought the afflictions upon you justly.

destroyed Heb. נכחדו, disappeared and perished, like (Exod. 9:15), “and you would vanish (ותכחד) from the earth.”

'Cut off' [nichchadu] — means 'were cut off,' as in 'and you would be cut off from the earth' (Exodus 9:15).

'Remember, I pray you' — now he begins to refute Job's words, saying: turn your mind now to remember — who is the innocent man that has ever perished? And where were the upright cut off beyond recovery?

'I pray you' — now. 'Or where' [ve'eifoh] — equivalent to ayeh poh (where here). 'Cut off' — were cut off, as in 'and you would have been cut off from the earth' (Exodus 9:15).

Remember, I pray you, who ever perished, being innocent? Or where were the upright cut off? – you say that the righteous perish without justice, and from this you bring proof to deny Providence. But one who comes to settle such a matter must substantiate his claim by observation and experience — that this indeed happened, that many righteous people perished without sin. I say to you: remember, I pray you, who is the innocent person who perished — can you name a single innocent person, by name, to whom this happened? And if you have forgotten his name, then at least remember where the upright were destroyed — name the place where this event occurred.

As I have seen that those who plow violence and prepare the iniquity in their thoughts, like a plower who prepares [the field] before sowing, afterwards they sow mischief with their deeds. And I saw that they will reap it—i.e., their evil that comes upon them, and I saw that.

"And sow mischief" — the intent is: wrongdoing; and similarly, "under his tongue is mischief and iniquity" (Psalms 10:7). He likens the pursuit of wrongdoing to plowing, sowing, and reaping, to indicate how much effort they invest in it and how many stratagems they employ until they attain it — just as farmers perform many labors to reach the goal they seek.

'According as' — this refers back to the above, 'who is the innocent man that has perished,' etc., to be like what I have seen: that those who plow iniquity and sow mischief reap the fruit of what they sowed. That is: just as one who plows to prepare the field for sowing, and afterward sows, will surely reap the seed he sowed — so too one who plans evil and carries it out receives his recompense in full and perishes forever.

'Mischief' — its meaning is injustice.

According as I have seen, those who plow iniquity, and sow mischief, reap the same – that is: I will recount to you many instances where the wicked were wiped out and perished, and I will name them for you; you, for your part, name even one case of a single innocent person who perished — just as I will recount what I have seen, that those who plow iniquity perish. And the verse should be understood this way: remember, I pray you, who is the innocent person that perished, in the way that I have seen that those who plow iniquity perish by the breath of God — meaning, this often happens, that the righteous is afflicted with temporary suffering, for a time, in order to cleanse him of his sins, but it never happens that he is utterly destroyed. And this is the difference between the righteous and the wicked: when the wicked's measure [of sin] is full, his memory perishes from the earth, while the righteous, though he fall seven times, will rise again. And this is the meaning: remember, I pray you, who is the innocent person that perished in the way that I have seen — that those who plow iniquity and sow mischief, when the time comes for them to reap it, receive their punishment. Then —

From the breath of God they will perish From the blowing of His stormwind and His anger. and from the wind of His nostrils they are always destroyed, and he spoke of the Generation of the Flood.

'By the breath' — by the mere breath of a puff from His mouth they perish. That is, through a slight cause, a trivial thing, by a mere puff of wind. 'And by the blast,' etc. — this repeats the same idea in different words.

'By the breath' — an expression of blowing, as in 'at the blast of the breath of His nostrils' (II Samuel 22:16). 'They perish' — an expression of destruction.

By the breath of God they perish, and by the blast of His anger are they consumed – they perish from the world entirely, and by the blast of His anger they are consumed, with no memory of them remaining; and such utter destruction never happens to the righteous and the innocent.

The roar of an old lion, the voice of a young lion The אריה is the old one, the שַׁחַל the middle one, and the כפיר the cub; all of them were misled, i.e., the kings, the princes and the slaves; all these names are names of the lion.

'The lion roars' — Rabbi Moshe HaKohen, of blessed memory, explained it as meaning 'like the roar of a lion' — the sense being that God would set lions and wild beasts to rule over them. And Rabbi Yonah explained 'nit'u' as 'nilt'u' [seized], from 'malta'ot' [jaw-teeth]. But both explanations are farfetched; the correct explanation is that Scripture likened God's own anger to the roar of a lion over its prey. 'Are broken' [nit'u] — [I explain it] as related to 'they wander' [from the root ta'ah], for lack of food. And the word 'nit'u' refers back to the young lions [kefirim], similar to [the construction in] 'Hark! My beloved! Here he comes' (Song of Songs 2:8).

"The lion... the fierce lion... the young lions..." — and, in the next verse, the old lion and the lioness — these are used as a metaphor for wicked men whose whole aim is to harm others, just as these beasts are eager to prey upon other creatures.

'The lion roars' — although they had the roar of a lion, and the voice of a fierce lion to threaten and terrify people, and the teeth of young lions to devour with a full mouth — in the end they went astray, unable to find rescue from the misfortune that came upon them.

'The fierce lion' [shachal] — and so too kephirim (young lions), layish, and lavi are all names for 'lion,' male and female; except that one of these terms denotes a larger lion than another. 'Are broken' [nit'u] — an expression of to'eh (wandering, straying), meaning: one who does not know what to do.

The lion roars, and the fierce lion howls — yet the teeth of the young lions are broken – the meaning is that then the roar of the lion and the voice of the fierce lion perish and fall silent, and the teeth of the young lions — meaning, their sharp fangs — are then broken out. (He likens the wicked to a mighty predatory lion: it hunts its prey by its roar, which strikes terror, and afterward seizes the prey with its teeth; but when the time of its downfall comes, its instruments of predation are destroyed and its strength is lost.) And then —

A lion perishes without prey The princes perished like a lion who perishes without food; so did their strength to commit violence dissipate. The word אֹבֵד is not an expression of a man who loses something, but [of a man who has] himself become lost, like (Ps. 119.176), “I have gone astray like a lost (אבד) sheep.” and like (ibid. 31:13), “I was like a lost (אבד) vessel.” and the young of the lion will scatter He is speaking of the Generation of the Dispersion, who were scattered from there [Babel] over the face of the entire earth.

'The old lion' — though he was mighty as a lion, in the end he perishes without finding prey and food to sustain himself, and dies of hunger, and his young scatter this way and that in search of food for themselves. This refers back to the above, to say: who is the innocent man that has perished — just as I have seen the wicked perish beyond recovery. And if everything came only from the arrangement of the constellations and not from providence, then the same fate ought to befall the righteous and the wicked alike.

'Are scattered abroad' — they are dispersed.

The old lion perishes for lack of prey, and the whelps of the lioness are scattered abroad – it dies of hunger; and the meaning of the parable is that the tyrannical wicked man, when he grows weak and his strength is spent, dies of hunger, and his children go begging for bread. Not so the righteous: even though he may be afflicted at times, he does not perish, but continues to flourish even in old age, for Hashem does not let the soul of the righteous go hungry.

Now a word was conveyed secretly to me He returns to his rebuke with which he has been chastising him till now: Why are you crying? “Remember now who was innocent that perished...As I have seen, etc.” And concerning you a word of prophecy was secretly conveyed to me, [lit. was stolen to me], from the expression like a stolen thing, because the Holy Spirit does not reveal itself to the prophets of the heathens in public. This is analogous to a king who had a wife and a mistress. When he would go to his wife, he would go in public, but to his mistress, he would go clandestinely and stealthily. So it is with the Holy One, blessed be He. Regarding the prophets of the heathens [Scripture states:] (Gen. 20:3), “And God came to Abimelech in the dream of the night,” and similarly (ibid. 31: 24), “And God came to Laban the Aramean in the dream of the night”; to Balaam (Num. 24:4), “who falls, but his eyes are open” [in Gen. Rabbah 52:5 (Num. 22:20), “And God came to Balaam at night”]; to Eliphaz, “in the visions of the night.” But concerning the prophets of Israel it is written (ibid. 12:8): “With him I speak mouth to mouth manifestly and not with riddles.” In Midrash Tanchuma, I found it emended [See Tanchuma Balak 8, Tanchuma Buber Vayishlach 24.] Now [in] the expression, “And my ear grasped a bit of it,” שֶׁמֶץ, means a bit of the spirit of understanding.

'Was secretly brought' [yegunav] — from the root ganav [to steal], and its sense is 'snatched away.' 'A whisper of it' [shemetz menehu] — all the commentators explained it, according to context, as meaning 'a little.' But what seems correct to me is that it has the sense of 'and how small a whisper is heard of Him' (Job 26:14); its meaning is that my ear could not take in the best, choicest part of it — comparable to the matter of 'front and back' mentioned in the portion of Ki Tisa (Exodus 33).

"Was secretly brought" — meaning, it was concealed and hidden. "A whisper of it" — meaning, a little bit of it; similarly, "and what small whisper of a matter is found of Him" (Job 26:14).

'Now a word was secretly brought to me' — behold, a word of prophecy came to me by way of theft. And because he [Eliphaz] was one of the star-worshippers, prophecy did not come to him directly from the holy place, but by a roundabout path, so that it is regarded as though stolen from holiness. 'And my ear received' — my ear received from the prophecy only some small amount, not all of it, nor even a large part.

'A whisper' — an expression of a small amount, the merest bit; so too, 'and how small a whisper is heard of Him' (Job 26:14).

Now a word was secretly brought to me, and my ear received a whisper of it – this refers to the sufferings that come upon the righteous: Eliphaz here reports one answer that he attained through a prophetic revelation — except that in this he did not have a complete prophecy (for Hashem has not revealed the answer to this question — why the righteous suffer while the wicked prosper — to any prophet or seer; as our Sages said, that it was about this that Moses asked, 'Show me, I pray You, Your ways'). Rather, it was a dim prophecy, like one seeing through a clouded mirror. And Eliphaz supposed that this apprehension of his contained all the deficiencies found in an indistinct prophecy — as Rambam reckons them in the Laws of the Foundations of the Torah, chapter 7, in setting out the differences between the prophecy of the master of the prophets [Moses] and the prophecy of the other prophets: (1) That the prophecy was not directed to him distinctly, but only “secretly brought” to him — like one to whom lightning flashes in a night of darkness and gloom, and then vanishes, leaving him again in the dark (as the Guide states in its introduction); (2) That the prophecy came to him by way of parable and riddle (this too is included in the word “secretly”), and he did not understand all the details of the parable but only a little of it — like a dream, a vision of the night, in which idle matters too are mixed in; and so it says, ‘and my ear received a whisper of it’; (3) That the prophecy did not come to him while awake, but only in a dream, a vision of the night — and the dream did not come to him at the end of the night, when the mind has already settled from the day's preoccupations, but only —

'In thoughts' — that is, thoughts.

'In thoughts' [se'ippim] — means 'thoughts.'

'In thoughts' — a time when his thoughts were full of visions of the night, that is, from seeing the imaginings that appear at night on one's bed. This is the beginning of the night, when the mind is full of the fancies one had been pondering during the day. 'When deep sleep falls' — at the time when deep sleep falls upon men; for at the start of the night a person is weary and worn out from the day's business, and deep sleep falls upon him. Scripture repeats the same thought in these words for the sake of further clarification and for rhetorical flourish.

In thoughts — An expression of thought; so too, 'therefore my thoughts prompt me to answer' (below, 20:2). From the visions — An expression of seeing, as in 'and you shall seek out (techezeh)' (Exodus 18:21). Deep sleep — This is a profound sleep.

In thoughts from the visions of the night – at a time when the thoughts were still full of the visions of the night, this being right at the very onset of sleep, immediately as deep sleep falls upon men; in this respect, the wheat was mixed together with the chaff, and the truth flickered through a veil of mist, (4) That his limbs shook from the greatness of his fear; and so he said —

terror befell me from the spirit that came to me. and the spirit was an angel. as it is stated (Ps. 104:4): “He makes his angels spirits.”

"My bones" — my limbs.

'Fear' — then, at that time, fear and trembling came upon me, and that fear terrified most of my bones, and shuddering and shaking seized them.

Came upon me (kera'ani) — A form of the word mikreh ('chance, happening').

Fear came upon me, and trembling – this fear spread through all his limbs, until it made the multitude of my bones to shake, (5) That in his prophecy he attained some image, which indicates the workings of the imaginative faculty at that time; and he relates that he perceived that image through all his senses — first, through the sense of touch, for —

it made stand on end The spirit made the hair of my flesh (stand on end]. תסמר. That is an expression of a man whose hair stood on end.

'Stand up' [tesamer] — means 'trembled,' as in 'my flesh trembles for fear of You' (Psalms 119:120). But Rabbenu Hai, of blessed memory, explained that it is from 'masmerot' [nails], for the pain is like a nail driven in. 'Passed' [yachalof] — means 'goes, passes,' as in 'gone, he has gone his way' (Song of Songs 2:11).

'Then a spirit, etc.' — the angel who was speaking glided past and passed before me. 'Stand up' — the mass of hair on my flesh stood erect and stiffened like a nail, the way it does to one who is frightened and terrified.

A spirit — That is, the angel. Passed (yachalof) — Means 'it goes by,' as in 'the rain is past, it is gone' (Song of Songs 2:11). Made ... to stand up (tesamer) — A form of the words masmer ('nail') and yated ('peg'); meaning, it stiffened like a nail. So too, 'my flesh bristles from fear of You' (Psalms 119:120).

Then a spirit passed before my face – he perceived a wind blowing across his face, and was so affected by it that the hair of his flesh stood up; and so too he perceived the image through the sense of sight, but with a very dim sight, for —

It was standing It was standing before me, but I did not recognize its appearance. a faint voice I heard the sound of faint words. Another explanation: I heard silence and a voice. I heard the voice of the silence, but the silence I did not hear. “Silence” denotes angels reciting praise silently, as [Jonathan] renders (I Kings 19:12): “a still small voice” as: a voice of those praising quietly. Moses heard the silence [i.e., the voice of the angels praising]—from here we deduce that the early prophets heard [lit. used] the voice, whereas the later ones heard an echo, like a man who hits with a hammer, and the echo resounds far away. From here... far away. Here it is written: silence and a voice, whereas concerning Elijah it is written: a still small voice; because Eliphaz heard only the silencing of the voice, like a person who shouts into a barrel, that the voice of the barrel shouts toward him. That is an echo, not the voice itself, but concerning Elijah if is written: a still, small voice, for he heard the voice itself] And this is what it said.

'It stood still' — this refers to what happens within a dream. 'A still voice' [demamah vekol] — like 'a still small voice' (1 Kings 19:12); and this is the manner of a lesser degree of prophecy.

'It stood still' — although when it passed before me it stood still for a while, nevertheless I could not recognize its appearance, even though the image of its face was right there before my eyes. 'I heard a still voice' — I heard a very faint voice, as though it were made up of both silence and sound together.

But I could not discern — The vav ('and') here carries the sense of 'nevertheless'; so too in 'the ants are a people not strong, yet (vayakhinu) they prepare their food in summer' (Proverbs 30:25). A form — A shape. A still [voice] (demamah) — A form of the words demiyah ('stillness') and shetikah ('silence').

It stood still – it stood before his eyes, yet even so he could not discern its appearance, only ‘a form was before my eyes,’ and he did not know clearly what the form was; and so too he perceived it through the sense of hearing, and this too with a very faint hearing, for ‘I heard a still voice’ — meaning, he heard something intermediate between silence and sound, as though voice and silence were one; and all this depicts the weakness of the apprehension.

Can a mortal be more righteous than God? This is a wonder. or can a man be purer than his Maker? Or can a man be more pure than his Maker?

'Shall mortal man' — and I heard it say, 'Shall mortal man be just before God?' — meaning: is it possible for a human being to be more just in ordering the world's governance than God, or for a man to be purer in his deeds than Hashem who made him? As if to say: even the most perfect human being who administers some system of governance does not order it so that one and the same fate befalls both bad and good alike. How, then, could anyone imagine that God — who handed everything over to the governance of the heavenly system — would let one and the same fate befall the righteous and the wicked, so that mortal man would thereby be more just than God?

Shall mortal man be just before God? – that is, ‘I heard a still voice’: the voice said to me in prophecy, ‘Shall mortal man be just before God?’ It made known to him that it is impossible to find a man wholly righteous in his judgment, since the service and acknowledgment incumbent upon man toward God cannot be discharged in full, for two reasons: (1) In view of the greatness and exaltedness of God — for in proportion to His great greatness, one is obligated to fear and submit before Him to the utmost degree possible, so that a man can never say he has fulfilled this obligation in full. And this is the meaning of ‘Shall mortal man be just before God’ — that is, can he be justified on this score, seeing that He is ‘God, high above the highest’? (2) In view of the abundance of the kindnesses and benefits that man has received from Him — that He is the Maker who made him and fashioned him in utmost beauty, perfection, and order, and on this score man is obligated to serve Him with great service, in proportion to the abundance of His goodness toward him. And this is the meaning of ‘Shall a man be pure before his Maker’ — that is, can he be purified in accordance with the measure of the obligation he owes to serve Him, seeing that He is his Maker and Fashioner, so as to fulfill what he is obligated to serve Him on this score? Second, it is impossible for man to attain perfection in full, because of the lowliness and inferiority of his material substance. And this is the meaning of —

Behold...His servants the righteous. He does not trust that they will not sin against Him, and He takes them out of the world before their time. reproach Heb. תהלה, an expression of folly.

'He puts no trust' — there is no comparable reliability in His servants when set against Him, for He alone is complete, without any deficiency. 'Folly' [tohalah] — like 'I said to the boasters, do not boast' (Psalms 75:5), on account of their deficiency.

"He puts no trust" — this is from the sense of emet, "truth"; the meaning is that they do not attain truth and stable existence from themselves, but rather have a cause for their being true, just as they have a cause for their being existent at all; and this constitutes a deficiency in the standing of these holy beings in relation to Hashem, for Hashem alone has His truth and His existence from Himself. Or the intent may be that Hashem does not trust them to complete, of themselves, what has been readied for them to do by way of action, unless Hashem gives them help in this — and this matter we have already established beyond doubt in Part 3 of the Fifth Treatise of the Wars of Hashem. "And His angels He charges with folly" — the word rendered here as "folly" is tehillah, which in fact means "light" (orah); the roots halah and halal are here two roots with a single sense [both meaning "to shine"]. The intent is: "and He does not set light in His angels" — meaning, they possess no light of their own, that is, no comprehension attained from their own essence, but rather it comes to them from the First Cause, namely Hashem, blessed be He; whereas Hashem, may He be blessed, has no comprehension that comes to Him from another.

'Behold, in His servants' — behold, in His servants the angels — even though they far surpass man in perfection — He still did not grant them independent, self-sustaining existence, so that they are not in constant need of God's influence flowing into them. 'And His angels' — the word 'no' [from the first half of the verse] does double duty, as if Scripture had written, 'and in His angels He places no light' as well — repeating the same idea in different words. That is: He did not place within the angels themselves any light of their own, for everything comes from Him at every moment. This being so, He is far more perfect than the angels on high, and there is no comparing or likening Him to them.

Trust (ya'amin) — Its sense is steadfastness, as in 'a peg fixed in a sure place' (Isaiah 22:23). Folly (toholah) — An expression of light, as in 'when His lamp shone' (below, 29:3).

Behold, He puts no trust in His servants – these are the hosts of the heights, the stars and the celestial spheres: although they serve Him constantly through their eternal motion, nevertheless there is no permanence or constancy in them. And His angels He charges with folly — He does not grant even His angels praise and radiance in full measure, even though the angels are still higher than the spheres, being spiritual, intellectual beings; even they are not pure before God.

Surely Surely. those who dwell in mud houses, whose foundation is in dust, meaning their graves. they crush them before the worms From heaven, their strength is sapped until they are humble and crushed before the worms that eat them in death.

'Those who dwell in houses of clay' — an a fortiori argument: those who dwell in houses of clay. But correct, in my opinion, is that His servants and angels are the beings above, which have no corporeal substance — for the bodies and souls of human beings are hewn out from them — whereas 'those who dwell in houses of clay' are the bodies, whose foundation is in the dust. 'Crushed' [yedakeum] — the sense is that the houses of clay crush their inhabitants, since the body wastes away like a moth. But most of the commentators explained it differently: 'Before the moth' [lifnei ash] — [they explained it as] 'before the sun.' And he said that 'ash' here is like 'and Ash, with her children, you shall guide' (Job 38:32) — the seven stars near the northern pole, comparable to [the interchange of] 'shesh' and 'sish' [both meaning six]. And the sense is: all the days that Ash is visible.

"Moth" — the intent is: decay; it is a noun, and the verb from it is used in "and my bones waste away" (Psalms 31:11) and "my eye wastes away from vexation" (Psalms 6:8). The meaning here is that mishaps — whether from without or from their own poor conduct — already crush such people and destroy them before natural decay ever overtakes them; and this is a true matter, beyond doubt, for most people die before their time on account of some mishap, and it is not found that one in a thousand dies a purely natural death.

'How much more those who dwell' — and how much more, then, is He more perfect than human beings, who dwell in 'houses of clay' — that is, in the lowly world, whose very foundation rests in the dust of the earth, which is the cause of their being crushed before the decay and rot that dominate them — unlike the angels on high, who dwell in the upper world, to whom decay and destruction never happen. As if to say: the dwelling-places of this lowly world and its mishaps are themselves the causes that prevent full attainment and perfection; and for this reason human beings do not even measure up to the angels on high — how much less, then, do they approach the measure of God's own perfection! How, then, could anyone imagine that mortal man could be more just than God?

How much more those who dwell — The word 'ki' is elided, as though it read 'af ki' ('how much more'); this is an expression of kal vachomer (an a fortiori argument), as in 'how much more when fire has consumed it' (Ezekiel 15:5). Clay (chomer) — Mire, mud. The moth (ash) — An expression of wasting away and decay, as in 'my eye wastes away from grief' (Psalms 6:8).

How much more those who dwell in houses of clay – how much more so, then, are human beings, whose material substance is exceedingly base and lowly — whether one considers the span of their existence, or their beginning, or their end. For throughout the whole span of their existence and the days of their life, they are ‘those who dwell in houses of clay’ — their souls dwell in bodies made from the substance of the earth, and this material substance is the house in which man (that is, his soul, which is the essence of man) dwells for as long as he is upon the earth. And the foundation of this house of clay ‘is in the dust’ — its foundation is built of dust, meaning that his origin is from a putrid drop of semen; and the end of this house is that it is ‘crushed before the moth’ — for afterward maggot and worm crush him after his death and cause him to decay. How then is it possible for him to be pure and perfect in his service before God, may He be blessed? And since it is impossible for man to discharge his duty in full — for ‘there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and does not sin’ — measured against the obligation to serve God, this was therefore an act of Hashem's kindness, for —

From morning to evening they are crushed in one day, they are crushed and subdued. without giving [a thought] lit. without putting it upon their heart to return to their Maker. they perish to eternity This too is an elliptical verse.

'Without any regarding it' [mibli m'sim] — means 'understanding,' similarly 'and take note, and understand' (Isaiah 41:20). 'They are shattered' [yukatu] — from [the root] 'katit' [crushed], and the sense is like 'in the morning it flourishes and passes away' (Psalms 90:6).

"Without any regarding it" — lacking a mind; the sense is: without ever setting their mind on bringing their souls to completion. Similarly, [the verb sim carries the sense "to set the heart" even without the word "heart" stated,] as in "that they may take note and consider together" (Isaiah 41:20), where the intent is likewise "that they set their heart."

'Betwixt morning, etc.' — all day long they are crushed and beaten down, and no one takes notice of the crushing; rather, 'a man's own folly perverts his way' (Proverbs 19:3), and he brings the ruin upon himself. 'They perish for ever' — so too, every single day they are crushed and lost. Where, then, is man's perfection, if he lacks even the sense to protect himself?

Betwixt morning and evening they are shattered – that they are struck with sufferings for their sins for a short time, as though from morning until evening, without their being made to perish forever — so that He need not impose upon them a greater punishment, namely, that they perish forever. For by being struck with a temporary punishment, they are thereby exempted from an eternal punishment: through suffering for a short while, they are exempted from death and everlasting perdition. And so —

Their haughtiness, which is absorbed within them does it not leave [them]? Heb. יתרם בם, like (Isa. 15:7), “Because of haughty things (יתרה) they did.” Their haughtiness and their wisdom, which is absorbed into their body—behold it will move away and be uprooted from them, like (ibid. 33: 20), “whose pegs shall never be moved (יסע).”

'Is not their tent-cord plucked up' [hala nissa yitram] — some commentators explain: the surplus of their understanding is plucked up and lost. Others said that it is comparable to 'for my cord is loosed' (Job 30:11) — meaning that a tent's cord is plucked up. But what seems closer to me is that it resembles the word 'yitrah' [surplus], referring to wealth — meaning that their wealth perishes at their death. 'They die, and that without wisdom' — they were shrewd in gathering wealth [but not in true wisdom]. This verse also teaches that man was created for no purpose other than to acquire wisdom.

"Is not their tent-cord plucked up within them?" — [Ralbag reads yitram not as "their tent-cord" but as] "their advantage": meaning that the advantage they had over the other animals — namely, the intellect — has already journeyed away from its place and left them. For the intellect, at the very start of a person's life, is undeveloped, and one who does not bring it to completion has, in the end, no advantage over the other animals at the time of death — as it is said, "man that is in honor abides not, he is like the beasts that perish" (Psalms 49:13).

'Is not their tent-cord plucked up' — has not the extra measure of wisdom granted to them beyond the rest of living creatures departed and left them? For the mishaps that arise, both from outside them and from within themselves, bring about the casting-off of wisdom; and therefore 'they die, and that without wisdom' — meaning their hearts become sealed off from wisdom until the day they die. This being so, where, then, is man's perfection, that one should imagine he could be more just than God?

Their tent-cord (yitram) — An expression of abundance and increase.

Is not their tent-cord plucked up within them? They die, and that without wisdom – that He takes from them their advantage, that is, their wealth and possessions, which are mere superfluities and not essential to them; (without its being decreed that) they die, and that without wisdom, so that He need not impose on them a heavier punishment, namely, the punishment of death. The punishment of poverty is good for them, for through it they are exempted from the punishment of death; and the punishment of temporary suffering is likewise good for them, for through it they are exempted from the punishment of eternal loss. (He also hints in his words that the punishment of this world is good for them, so that they should not be cut off in the World to Come, where their soul would be cut off — which is why he used the phrase ‘they perish forever,’ for the word ‘forever’ denotes the eternal loss of the soul.)