Job · Chapter 40

Explanation of the words of the response. Hashem answered Job out of the darkness and the whirlwind, and said — now, this vision is attributed to the whirlwind because when prophecy comes to the prophets, there is, between them and the prophetic overflow, a kind of screen, stemming from matter's inability to receive the divine emanation in its fullness; and this is why you find prophecy attributed to a thick cloud, or to darkness and a whirlwind, which is the dense, dark vapor. 'Who is this' whose counsel and arguments are dark and obscure, devoid of knowledge, who has desired to contend with Me? 'Now gird up your loins like a man' — like a man engaged in dispute — 'I will demand of you, and declare you to Me' — since you are one who judges My deeds, see how you could possibly judge My deeds when you neither know them nor grasp them. And it is clear that a judge ought to have knowledge of the matter he is judging. 'Where were you' — that you should know the way wisdom operates in the foundations of the earth? 'Declare, if you have understanding, who determined its measure' — at this precise proportion — so that you might grasp the wisdom involved. The reason is that the measure was fixed at this proportion out of wisdom, so that had it been any larger or any smaller, the world would have been ruined; for the world is preserved through the balance among the elements, in both quantity and quality, as has been explained in the natural sciences. 'Or who stretched the line upon it' — in the manner of builders when they begin to build; the intent is: from what did the beginning of its coming-into-being proceed? He puts it this way because the coming-into-being of the earth is an obscure matter, since the earth is attributed to privation — that is, to the recipient's lack of capacity to receive the action of the agent — and this is why what is farthest from the celestial bodies is earth. It is a wonder that Hashem completes this lower existence through these two causes: the cause attributed, in a certain sense, to privation — such as the earth — and the cause opposite to it; so that the world is sustained through the coexistence of opposites. This shows, as it were, that even what is attributed to necessity and privation is put to use by Hashem for a purpose, so far as possible, so that through it He completes this lower existence. Or the verse may mean: 'or who stretched a line upon it,' to take its measure at the time of its coming-into-being, the way builders do — in which case the phrase simply doubles the same thought. 'Upon what were its foundations fastened, or who laid its corner-stone' on which it rests? For there is in this a piece of wisdom that ought not to be overlooked: the earth rests upon its center, which is nothing but a point — and it is not by virtue of being a point as such that it does so, since all points are alike to one another; rather, the true cause lies in what brought this about: the luminous stars that forever sing and rejoice before Me — meaning, the spheres in which the stars are set. For when these stars came into being, singing and praising before Me together with all the angels — and this took place at the time the celestial bodies came into being — it was then that this property of centering was fixed for that point, by virtue of its being the middle. 'And who shut up the sea with doors' when it burst forth from the womb, so that there would be an exposed portion of land where these creatures that live on the earth could dwell, and the sea would not pass over it and cover it? This was a very great wonder, one for which no natural cause can be given, as we explained in the Wars of Hashem. 'And I made the cloud its garment, and thick darkness a swaddling-band for it' — I have continually maintained this arrangement afterward as well, meaning: the sun continually draws up vapors from the sea, diminishing it, so that it never passes beyond its boundary, on account of the waters that flow into it from the rivers — for it loses, through these vapors, an amount equal to what the rivers add to it. In this way, 'I prescribed My decree for it, and set bars and doors' before the sea, so that it should not pass its boundary; 'and I said: Thus far shall you come, but no further' — and at this height, 'your proud waves' will be stayed, since the height of the sea never increases at all, for the reason just given. 'Have you commanded the morning since your days began, and caused the dayspring to know its place' from which it rises? Now, he says this because the sun does not rise from the same point every day; rather, the point of its rising shifts, owing to its motion along its inclined sphere, which completes its circuit at a uniform rate — and through this the seasons of the year are renewed, seasons that leave a powerful imprint on the existence of these generated, corruptible things, and on their being sustained for a time. For through the causes bound up with these seasons, one member of a pair of opposites gains the upper hand, and then the other, time after time, until through this the order and rightness proper to these existing things is achieved; and by this one and the same agent, many different effects are produced, owing to the different relations it bears to the various places on earth where it acts. Likewise, coming-to-be and passing-away are renewed by this same single agent, for its nearness to a place is a cause of coming-to-be there, and its distance a cause of passing-away — and this is itself a matter of wonder and marvelous wisdom. For this reason he says that the sun's places of rising vary, 'that it might take hold of the wings of the earth' — meaning, at one time it reaches the extreme point of northward inclination, when it stands at the head of Cancer, and at another time the extreme point of southward inclination, when it stands at the head of Capricorn. Now these variations, even though they have a great role in the coming-to-be of things and the preservation of what exists, also produce, incidentally, harm from their intensification at certain seasons — and even in this, though it comes about of necessity, there is a benefit: to shake the wicked out of the earth. For from this same shift, different effects of the stars keep being renewed upon matter, the way matter takes on seals and forms by turns, so that these forms stand like a garment a man puts on at one time and takes off at another, never remaining on him for long. And through this alternation that comes upon existing things — owing to the changing positions of the stars relative to the earth, and the changing positions of some stars relative to others — light and prosperity are withheld from the wicked, and 'the high arm' that belongs to them 'is broken.' For even if a wicked man was born at a time when, by astral judgment, he was destined to prosper, his fortune will still keep changing, turning from one condition to another, owing to the shifting significations and judgments the stars render concerning him — until his arm and his strength are broken, until he comes to nothing. 'Have you entered into the springs of the sea, or have you walked in the recesses of the deep' — so as to know their wondrous depths, and to know that even there the action of the celestial bodies reaches, bringing into being the things that exist there? 'Have the gates of death been revealed to you, or have you seen the gates of the shadow of death' — meaning, do you know which place is the center of the earth, which is death and the shadow of death and Sheol, since it is so constricted that scarcely anything can come to be there — the earth being at the furthest extreme of privation, such that among perceptible existing things there is nothing that matches it in deficiency and privation. This is why the masters of the philosophical systems posited the earth as though it were prime matter, as Aristotle states in Book Two of the Metaphysics; and Scripture likewise says, 'For dust you are, and to dust you shall return' (Genesis 3:19). 'Have you surveyed the paths of the sun' — so as to know what occurs in regions of far greater latitude than your own? 'Declare, if you know it all' — at what place on earth does light dwell for a long stretch of time, and where is the region of darkness while the light is there? For it has been demonstrated by clear proofs that from a latitude of sixty-six degrees and twenty-five minutes up to ninety degrees, there are places where day continues without night for a month, or even months — until, at the very extreme, one reaches a place with six months of day and six months of night. Do you know this matter concerning the sun — how it operates — 'that you should lead it to its bound,' and understand the paths of its house, so as to know what necessarily follows from its motions at every place on earth? Or do you know this simply from the length of your days, this having been confirmed for you by direct experience? (This is the sense of 'You know it, for you were then born, and the number of your days is great' — spoken in irony.) Now, he includes this matter along with his account of the other hidden things because it was something hidden from Job — for in prophecy, matters of this sort come according to the capacity of the recipient, as is said of Abraham with regard to the counting of the stars (Genesis 15:5): this was something hidden from Abraham, even though those who came after him already knew it, to the point that they have counted the number of all the visible stars and given them names. And stranger still: a false notion can reach a prophet at the moment of prophecy, in a matter that does not pertain to him as a prophet but stems from opinions he holds on the subject — as happened with Ezekiel, to whom it came in prophecy as though the spheres produce wondrous sounds through their motion, because he believed that the spheres do produce sounds through their motions, as Maimonides states in the Guide for the Perplexed. 'Have you entered the treasuries of the snow' — so as to know from what place snow issues, and by what cause it comes to be? 'Or have you seen' the place from which hail issues, 'which I have reserved' to be ready for the time I wish to bring evil upon the world, 'for the day of battle and war'? And he speaks of these two together, since both snow and hail are a freezing of water — one occurring together with cold, the other together with heat — and he says that hail was indeed brought into being for this purpose, though this is not its primary intent but only a secondary one, arising of necessity, so that benefit might be drawn from it by producing the harms with which the wicked are harmed. Declare, now, by what way the fiery vapor divides, from which flames arise, so that at one time it produces a shooting star, at another a comet, and other such kinds that come to be from the flames generated within it; and at another time it produces wind, and 'scatters the east wind upon the earth.' Or the intent may be: by what way does this one, single fiery vapor divide, so that part of it turns out hot and part cold, in a manner that generates wind from it — for wind comes to be from it in just this way, as has been explained in the Book of Meteorology (Sefer HaOtot). 'Who has cleft a channel' for the flood that pours down from the rains, providing a bounded conduit to receive it — meaning, that rain falls in one place and not in another, according to what has been decreed, so that the plants might thereby be brought to completion? And 'who has set' a practice and a law 'for the lightning of the thunder,' so that the matter proceeds in a straight, orderly course — meaning, that at one time fire and wind prevail, and at another their opposites prevail? Who is it that arranged for the rain to fall, at one time, on the wildernesses, where it brings no benefit to people, and at another time on cultivated, sown ground, causing tender grass to sprout — so that through this the arrival of harm to the wicked might also be achieved? 'Has the rain a father' who begot it and brought it into being, so that it should have a fixed law to recur year after year in the rainy season? 'Or who has begotten the drops of dew,' that it should have a fixed law to recur day after day at the close of night — the close of night, within the cycle of a single day, being analogous to the rainy season within the cycle of the year? Declare, now, what is the cause that produces them, for there is depth in this; and declare also from what cause ice comes to be, and the hoar-frost of heaven. For what cause do the waters hide away and congeal like stone, until the freezing grows so intense that even the face of the deep, for all its depth, freezes over? Declare, now, the cause of this. Can you hold back what the Pleiades bring forth in the trees and the growing fruits? For when the sun is in conjunction with the Pleiades, which lies in the sign of Aries, then the trees and plants yield their strength. Or can you release and undo what Orion — one of the southern constellations — restrains and draws tight? For when the sun is in the sign where Orion stands, then it is cold, and the trees and plants are held back and withhold the giving of their strength, on account of the great cold. Can you bring forth Mazzaroth at its proper time of appearing — a comprehensive constellation among the southern constellations, visible in the land where Job lived only for a short time? Or can you guide the Bear together with her young — one of the northern constellations? 'Do you know the ordinances of the heavens' — meaning, what necessarily follows from the stars, given their position at each point in the sphere, and from their aspects, conjunctions, and other such relations? 'Can you establish' the dominion of the heavens 'in the earth,' so that this lower existence is thereby brought to completion, and the order of these matters — which one might suppose to be mere chance, such as rain and lightning and whatever follows their pattern — is maintained? 'Can you lift up your voice to the clouds,' so that abundant rain would come down? 'Will the lightnings obey you,' to be sent forth whenever you wish, so that through them whatever existing things require would be supplied? Now, he says this because Hashem has established, in this regard, an order and a fixed measure that proceeds in a regular cycle, governed by the motion of the celestial bodies, their stars, their positions, and their aspects. 'Who has put wisdom' in the sealed recesses of the heart, 'or who has given' to man's intellect 'understanding,' to grasp the matters that pertain to the heavens? Now, he says this because man is created devoid of all wisdom, and so it is a wonder how it could be possible for him to acquire wisdom at all — since every act of learning and study requires a person to already possess some prior knowledge, as has been explained in Book One of the Posterior Analytics (Sefer HaMofet); and since he has no prior knowledge, it is a wonder how he can come to have any knowledge whatsoever. Yet Hashem placed within him faculties by which wisdom can reach him: sense-perception, imagination, the faculty of thought, and memory, as has been explained in the book On the Soul. Now the very fact that knowledge can be acquired by means of these faculties is itself a great wonder; and it is likewise a wonder how man comes to understand matters for which sense-perception provides him no starting point at all, except through remote premises — as in what he comes to know, through inquiry, about the spheres and their forms, meaning, the separate intellects. Now, one might say that Scripture calls 'wisdom' the first premises, and 'understanding' the conclusions that necessarily follow from them; but the first explanation is more correct, for 'wisdom' is attributed to what becomes clear to us through premises that are essential and proper to the matter itself, while 'understanding' is attributed to what becomes clear to us through remote premises. This is the meaning of the verse, 'Hashem, by wisdom, founded the earth; by understanding, He established the heavens' (Proverbs 3:19). For what belongs to the earth exists there for its own sake, and what follows from the forces within it follows as a manifest, direct consequence — as, for instance, heat directly producing warmth and porousness, and other such qualities that follow directly, one from another. But as for the heavens, what is found in them — the placement of the center, the stars, the measures of their motions and inclinations, and whatever else proceeds in this fashion — does not follow directly from their own essential nature in this way, as we explained in the Wars of Hashem; nor does what follows from the forces within them follow as a manifest, direct consequence, the way one might say heat and cold and the other qualities follow from earthly forces — for there is nothing in the heavens that corresponds to those qualities, as has been explained in the natural sciences. This is why this order found in the heavens is attributed, as it were, to 'understanding' rather than 'wisdom': for understanding is the derivation of one thing from something else distinct from it, whereas wisdom is the derivation of a thing from that very thing itself, in some fashion — since the knowledge that comes from a true demonstration is knowledge derived from the thing itself, as has been explained in the art of logic. 'Who can number the clouds by wisdom' — to fix their number in this manner, which is of the utmost perfection, so as to bring this lower existence to completion — such that if even one of the motions belonging to any single star were lacking, this lower existence could not be brought to completion? 'And who lays' and settles at the middle of the world the bodies that fall from the sky — meaning, the earthy portions — so that the particles of dust are joined together with such force, owing to their great heaviness and their tendency toward the center, and the portions of earth cohere in a firm bond? Now, he says this because the spheres have differing centers, as we explained beyond doubt in the Wars of Hashem; and this is why it is a wonder that the portions of the earth come to rest at the center of one particular sphere among these, rather than at any of the other centers. 'Will you hunt prey for the lioness, and satisfy the appetite of the young lions,' when they crouch in their dens and sit in the covert, lying in wait to seize whatever comes their way? Declare, now, how their food reaches them in this manner — a manner one might attribute to mere chance — if not from the goodness of the wisdom and providence by which I have ordered existence so that their food is supplied to them. 'Who provides for the raven his prey,' so that its species is preserved and does not perish of hunger? For the young ravens wander about for lack of food and cry out to God — speaking figuratively — to give them their food, since they have no one else to supply it; for the raven does not prepare food for its young — rather, it hates them when they first hatch, whether because that is simply its nature, meaning it lacks the instinctive love for its young that other creatures have, or because their feathers are white at first, so that it supposes, on that account, that they are not its own, as some of the ancients have said. It is thus clear that the supplying of their food comes from the abundance of providence and wisdom. 'Do you know the time when the wild goats of the rock bring forth,' and do you keep watch for the time the pangs and travail come upon the hinds, that they may give birth? The intent, as I understand it, is that owing to the severity of their labor, the offspring would be in the utmost danger — and yet the young survive, through the abundance of My providence over existing things, and My capacity to do whatever is needed. This is why it says: 'Can you number the months that they fulfill,' during which their pregnancy is completed, 'and do you know the time when they bring forth,' so that you might save them then? For it is because, from the great pain of labor and the constriction of their womb, they simply crouch down when their pangs come upon them — meaning, they make no effort to help themselves give birth — that they are, so to speak, broken, and their young shattered along with them; for they merely release their pangs and their throes and exert no effort of their own, when the time comes, to assist their own delivery, unlike the practice of other living creatures. And yet, through the abundance of His providence over existing things, their young are born sound, so that they have no need of their mother, and grow up in the open on whatever food they find, without needing their mother to provide it; rather, 'they go forth, and return not' to her. 'Who has sent out the wild ass free,' that he should not be kept as a house-pet but under the dominion of man? 'And who has loosed the bands of the wild ass,' that man should not rule over him? 'Whose house I have made the wilderness, and the salt land his dwelling-place.' Behold, in his strength he 'scorns' and mocks 'the tumult of the city,' and does not fear it, 'and does not hear the shoutings of the driver' — meaning, there is no one to drive him and rule over him, owing to his strength. And it is a wonder that his dwelling was set in the wilderness, since he is not a predator but eats grass and the vegetation of the ground, so that he must search out the mountains where he may graze in the wilderness, seeking out every green thing. It is thus clear that such a creature has its food supplied to it only through the strength of My providence, since it lives in a place that is neither worked nor sown, and no man provides its food; and yet it is supplied food in this way, to this degree of sufficiency. For this same reason, as I understand it, he goes on to mention the strength of the wild ox, and that its dwelling too is in the wilderness, since it likewise is not a predator but eats grass. This is why he then says: 'Will the wild-ox be willing to serve you, and abide by your crib,' so that you might supply his food, as with domesticated animals? 'Can you bind' with ropes 'the wild-ox' so as to tie him 'in the furrow,' that he should plow and harrow the ground? 'Will you trust him, because his strength is great, and leave to him all the labor of the field' — meaning, will you make use of him the way you make use of the ox and the donkey? 'Will you rely on him, that he will bring home your seed, and gather in your threshing-floor to your house,' if you load the produce upon him? Since he eats grass, his dwelling was set in the wilderness, and there I supply his food in a manner suited to the strength he possesses. Behold, the wing of a certain bird called 'renanim' 'beats joyously' — meaning, on account of its own beauty, that bird becomes exultant and joyful when it looks upon itself. I think this bird is the one called 'pa'on' in the vernacular (that is, the peacock), which delights and takes pleasure in the beauty of its wings and plumage. 'But is the pinion and plumage of the stork' — whose feathers are not beautiful — joyous in the same way? He says this in a tone of wonder: what is the reason that this bird, called the stork, has such abundant joy that she gives no thought at all to safeguarding what she is about to bring forth? 'For she leaves her eggs on the earth, and warms them in the dust' to hatch them, giving no thought to placing her eggs somewhere protected, and forgetting, out of her great self-regarding joy, that 'the foot may crush' them, 'or that the wild beast may trample them.' Has Hashem made her forget her young, so that she leaves them in a place where they will be ruined and lost to her — expending her labor for nothing, yet without fear, without any thought that her eggs are liable to be destroyed in just this way? For 'Hashem has deprived her' of the wisdom and resourcefulness that He gave, in this matter, to the other animals, and has not granted her a share of that understanding. 'Now, when the time comes, she raises herself on high to fly, and scorns the horse and its rider' — meaning, she fears nothing at all. And yet, despite all this, her eggs are found preserved, so that through this the survival of that species is safeguarded — by the strength of Hashem's providence in these matters. 'Have you given the horse' his quality of might? 'Have you clothed his neck with' the thunderous force and the neighing that comes from it? Is it you who brings it about that he makes this commotion — the commotion he makes 'like a locust' — and that you make the power of his snorting a terror to those who hear it? 'His feet paw' deep into the valley from his striking the ground, in the way of horses; 'he rejoices' in the strength he has, and 'goes out' to meet the weapons of war without fear; 'he mocks' and scoffs at the things that inspire fear in battle, and 'is not affrighted, neither does he turn back from the sword.' 'On his account the quiver rattles' — with the arrows placed in it — 'and the glittering spear and javelin,' for he is the reason these weapons can carry out their function, since he does not fear the sword. 'With storm and rage he races' at full strength, until it is as though he swallows the ground and devours it; 'and he does not believe' — that is, he does not flinch — 'at the sound of the horn' that the men of war sound. 'At the sound of the horn he says: Aha!' and he smells the battle from afar, out of his eagerness for it; and 'the thunder of the captains, and the shouting' of battle he senses from far off, and races there. Now, he brings up the matter of the horse in order to make clear that Hashem placed this quality in him for man's use in warfare, such that he does not shy away from the sword, even though it is the nature of every living creature to keep away from what can harm it — and all of this stems from the strength of Hashem's providence over this creature. 'Is it by your understanding that the hawk flies' from the northern region in the days of cold, 'and stretches its wings toward' the south, toward the inhabited quarter, to escape the intensity of the cold? Does this bird know about the variation among climates, and that the closer a place lies to the equator, the warmer it is, so that it flies there? Surely all of this stems from the abundance of Hashem's providence, who placed this understanding within them like an instinct, so that they are preserved by it. 'Is it at your command that the eagle mounts up' to fly higher than the other birds, 'and makes her nest on high,' so that she dwells upon the crag of the rock and the stronghold? And indeed this is so, because from there she can spot prey at a distance, and thereby obtain her food; so that her young 'suck up' the blood of the prey brought to them, and wherever slain bodies are found, there she is, taking flesh from the corpses to eat. Does this eagle possess intellect, that she should know that the higher she flies, the more distant things she will be able to see? Surely it is Hashem who, out of the abundance of His wisdom and providence, so constituted her nature that this lofty air suits her, and this benefit accrues to her as a result. The general principle that emerges from these words is that Hashem rebuked Job for having judged, regarding His works, that there is deficiency and shortcoming in them — meaning, in that Job had been complaining: why did Hashem leave human individuals subject to this order deriving from the celestial bodies, from which injustice necessarily follows, so that a wicked man ends up prosperous and a righteous man suffers; and if it was not possible for Hashem to arrange this in a more perfect way, why did He create these unfortunate people at all, since death would be preferable for them? Hashem said to him that it was not fitting for him to render such a judgment, since he does not grasp Hashem's own workings, and one who judges a matter ought to have knowledge of that which he is judging. Furthermore, what Hashem recounted of His works that had been hidden from Job serves to make clear that Hashem possesses the utmost power and wisdom to do all the good that is possible for this lower world, and that He watches over it to the extent that this is possible. Hashem also noted that even what He created, from which some evil results, carries a benefit within it: bringing punishment upon the wicked — this being the sense of His statement, 'and the wicked are shaken out of it' (Job 38:13). This statement indicates that these evils do not reach the righteous — which is why he said 'the wicked,' since it is the wicked alone who are harmed by it, as Elihu explained; and there is, in this, a further benefit for the rest of mankind, that they accept discipline and fear Hashem, thereby attaining the success of the soul. Now, just as nature has placed in plants a force that repels whatever is unsuited to their nature, so that they not be harmed by it, so too Hashem has placed, in some fashion, forces within mankind generally that repel evils, so that people not be harmed by them. This, however, held true only for the evil that follows incidentally from this order deriving from the celestial bodies — an order that is otherwise directed at harming the wicked, as stated above. 'Moreover Hashem answered Job, and said' — when Hashem saw that Job was not answering Him at all, He said: Is it fitting that one being disciplined by the evil that comes upon him should, on that account, contend with Hashem? And is it proper that Hashem should have to answer one who argues with Him about that rebuke and complaint? Even so, I have already gone beyond the strict letter of the law in responding to your words. Or the intent may be: is it fitting that one whom God reproves should answer that rebuke by hurling words against Hashem? Or again, the intent may be that whoever argues with Hashem deserves to be punished for his argument, when he speaks with Him. Therefore it is fitting for you now to answer my words, or else to acknowledge them.

'And Hashem answered' — at first He had paused in His speech, so that Job might respond with something; and since Job stood silent and did not answer, He spoke to him again.

Will one who contends with the Almighty make himself master? May a man make himself master to contend with the Almighty? He who argues with God, let him answer it He who comes to argue, let him answer his words.

'Shall he who reproves contend with the Almighty' — is it proper conduct for a person to strive with the Almighty? 'He who argues with God, let him answer it' — [addressed] to Job: let him show cause to Hashem why he will not answer these matters.

'Shall he who reproves' — the word is written with the interrogative heh, for He asks him: are you the reprover who contends with the Almighty, now that you have received correction from His words? Surely one who argues with God ought to answer His reply — why then are you silent?

'Contend' [הרוב] — from the language of dispute [riv]. 'Argues' [יסור] — from the language of rebuke, chastisement [musar].

‘Shall he who reproves contend with the Almighty? He who argues with God, let him answer it’ — since Job had fallen silent and answered nothing at all, and Hashem knew that there were still words in his heart, He said to him: is it not so that whoever contends with the Almighty must retreat — let him who disputes with God answer Him. For after Hashem first chastised you with afflictions, and even so you stood up against Him to contend with Him, and asked that He debate with you face to face — now, then, that the afflictions have been removed from you, and I am but ‘God who reproves,’ arguing with you through words and proofs by way of debate, all the more should you answer Him. Why, then, have you fallen silent now, and given no reply?

'Then Job answered Hashem, and said.'

'Then Job answered Hashem, and said' — Behold, I am very lowly in relation to You; what can I answer You concerning these words of Yours? Behold, I have put my hand over my mouth. That is: I have spoken with You once, and I will not answer regarding Your words; and a second time I will speak, to see whether there is any reply to make to Your words — and I will add no more. The interpretation of ‘twice [u-shtayim]’ is like ‘a second time,’ comparable to ‘and in the thirteenth year they rebelled’ (Genesis 14:4), where, according to some commentators, the intent is that they had already rebelled in the year following the twelve years in which they served Chedorlaomer. Or the intent here may be — and this is more correct — Behold, I had been arguing that wickedness and injustice appear in the good and evil that befall people from two directions: one, on account of the evil that is found to befall the righteous; and the other, on account of the good that is found to befall the wicked — to the point that they are even delivered from evil when it comes upon their neighbors — as he mentioned when he said, ‘Why do the wicked live’ etc. (Job 21:7), and ‘for the wicked is reserved for the day of calamity’ etc. (Job 21:30). Now, the first of these two arguments — my claim from the evil that is found to befall the righteous — I hereby set aside and abandon, and I will not answer You anything further about it, since the resolution of this difficulty has already become clear to me from what Elihu explained at length; Hashem therefore mentions it only briefly in this response, relying on what Elihu had already explained to Job. But as for the second argument, the difficulty has not yet been resolved explicitly, neither in Elihu's words nor in Hashem's — and I will add no further claim to You besides that one argument: namely, the prosperity that the wicked enjoy for a long time, which is an injustice — whether the good and evil that befall people come directly from Hashem, or whether it would indicate weakness and inadequacy [in the arrangement of providence] if people were left to the order that derives from the heavenly bodies, arranged in this manner, with no power to arrange it more perfectly so that each person would receive according to his deeds and the fruit of his doings.

'Behold, I am of small account' — from the root of 'light,' [meaning, insignificant,] and close to the root of 'disgrace'; the opposite of this is 'heavy,' from the root of 'honor.' 'I lay my hand upon my mouth' [lit. 'to my mouth,' lamo-fi] — the mem and the vav are additional letters in the word 'lamo.'

'Behold, I am of small account' — behold, I have recognized in myself that I am very slight, and I have not learned the wisdom to know that everything comes about through providence. So what is there for me to answer You? For I have no reply in my mouth; therefore I have laid my hand upon my mouth and said nothing more, now that You have paused in Your speech.

'Upon my mouth' [למו פי] — [means] to my mouth; as in 'for my counsel (lemo atzati)' (above, Job 29).

'Behold, I am of small account' — he replies to Him: as for the arguments I have made until now about my sufferings, which came without cause, and the claims I raised against Providence — I see now that I was of small account in this, and I have nothing to answer You. For Hashem's providence has now become clear to me: from my seeing that He answered me and watches over my affairs; from my seeing that I have been healed of my sufferings and that a righteous man does not perish; and from my seeing that there is survival of the soul — for it is known from prophecy that the soul survives and cleaves to God, as I explained in the introduction. And so I know that there is another world in which the righteous are repaid for their sufferings; and therefore, 'I lay my hand upon my mouth.'

I said one [thing i.e., I have spoken little and I will add no more. Others explain: I said one What I said (above 9:22), “[It is all one; therefore I said,] ‘He destroys both the innocent and the wicked,’” I will no longer answer. and two What I said (above 13:20), “Do not do two things to me,” I will not add.

'Once have I spoken, but I will not answer again' — that is, I have spoken a single utterance; and likewise, in construction, 'the rich man answers boldly' (Proverbs 18:23).

'Once have I spoken' — as if to say: the one thing I spoke, at the very outset of my words, was to raise a complaint that You had handed everything over to the workings of the constellations — that is what I spoke then. But now I will not answer again to uphold my words, for now I see that You have not handed things over to the workings of the constellations, but that everything is in Your own hand. 'Indeed, twice' — but as for the two questions I asked — namely, if everything comes about through providence, why then does evil come upon the righteous and good upon the wicked — behold, even though I still do not know the answer to them, nevertheless I will not go on asking further, for I am afraid to murmur against You.

'Once have I spoken' — that is to say: my debate concerned two matters, (1) The righteous man who suffers — and on this I have already received an answer, as above; therefore, as to the 'one' matter I spoke of, the question of the righteous man who suffers, I will not answer again. But 'twice': my debate was indeed about two matters, for I also argued about the wicked man who prospers, and about the fact that there are wicked men who devastate the settled world and destroy many lives — why does Hashem not remove the harm they do? On this too I want an answer; and then I will proceed no further to ask.

'Out of the whirlwind' — like its counterpart (cf. Job 38:1). The sense is that Hashem answered Job about his words in order to rebuke him, and let him know that he does not [even] know the ways of Hashem in their generality — how much less in their particulars. And when Hashem finished rebuking him, Job fell silent. Hashem then answered him and said: 'Why do you not answer?!' And Job replied with an unworthy word, saying: 'I will not answer.' Then Hashem said to him: 'Since you will not admit the truth, and think in your heart that you are wise, I will question you, and you will inform Me: by falling silent, did you mean to nullify the laws of wisdom that I set in the world? Will you condemn Me, so that you may be justified?!'

Explanation of the words of the response: ‘Then Hashem answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said.’

'Then Hashem answered' — therefore Hashem answered him a second time, with an answer concerning the wicked man who prospers.

'Gird up your loins now, etc.' — this is an expression of readiness, for one girded at the waist is prepared for action. 'I will demand of you' — I will ask you, and you must let Me know the answer to them. And the questions are the ones He goes on to ask — "or have you an arm," "can you draw out leviathan," and the like. He is telling him that he will have to answer Him whether he agrees with these things.

'Gird' [אזר] — [means] bind, tie. 'Like a man' [כגבר] — like a mighty man [ish gibor]. 'Your loins' [חלציך] — [means] your waist.

'Gird up your loins now like a man' — the substance of the answer to what he had asked: why does Hashem allow the arrogant and mighty wicked, who cast their terror upon people and destroy them, to remain? For this very question could be asked about all of creation: we see that Hashem created great and fearsome creatures that cast their dread upon all living things, preying on them and destroying them — why does He allow them to remain? He has already explained to him that His providence encompasses all living creatures according to their kinds; so why does He not remove the predators and destroyers? But this is a foolish question, for one who asks it in effect demands that Hashem create only weak, feeble creatures, such that no living creature would have the power to rise up against one weaker than itself. Yet it is not to the Creator's honor to create only worms and ants and snails that dissolve as they crawl; rather, His honor lies in there being mighty, powerful, proud, and lofty creatures, while the Creator is exalted above the lofty and towers over them, subduing them all by His power — and yet He watches over things so that, notwithstanding this, the species survive, having equipped every living thing with the means and traits by which it protects itself from its enemies. So too He created mighty men and giants of great strength; and if these, by their own choice, sometimes use their might arrogantly to harm the poor and the weak, Hashem watches over the matter and has provided mankind with intellect, love of justice, laws, and a social nature, through which people are protected from the arrogance of tyrants; and Hashem, in His providence, encourages the orphan and the widow and thwarts the way of the wicked. On this basis He commanded him to gird his loins to answer His question.

(God’s answer from the tempest) Will you even make void My judgment Will you even prove with your words to make My judgment void and to show that it is perverted?

'Will you even' — He returned to answer him on this point as well, saying to him: will you also annul My judgment? As if to say: is this not harder than the first matter — that you should think My judgment is void, because I do not repay each person according to his deeds? 'Will you condemn Me' — meaning, will you condemn My judgment, because you regard yourself as righteous? For over a wicked man who prospers there is not so much room for wonder, since who knows what is hidden in his fellow — whether he is righteous or wicked. But the main cause of his astonishment was the case of a righteous man to whom evil happens, and he was astonished on his own account, for he considered himself righteous and was greatly afflicted. So God said to him: and is it because of your own opinion of yourself that you would condemn My judgment?

'Make void' [תפר] — from the language of nullifying and annulling.

(vv. 8-9) 'Will you even make void My judgment? Will you condemn Me, that you may be justified?' — I ask you: if it could be imagined that you had an arm and strength like God's, and you could thunder with a voice like His and terrify all the tyrants — would you, even then, void My judgment and My governance, and say that My governance is not right, and condemn Me so that you may be justified? If you had power like Hashem's, would you then govern differently, in order to show that My governance was not right and not just?

'An arm like God' — that is, like [His] name. 'Can you thunder with a voice like Him' — with a voice, just as God thunders with the sound of thunder.

‘And can you thunder with a voice like Him?’ — [meaning,] can you make a sound as powerful and thunderous as His own?

'Or have you an arm' — for behold, man is made in the image of God, and when he is found whole in himself, not turning aside in any way from the way of Hashem, then his power is very great, and he can rule over everything, even over the hosts of heaven — as in the matter of which it is said: "Sun, stand still upon Gibeon," etc., "and the sun stood still," etc., "and there was no day like that," etc., "in that Hashem hearkened to the voice of a man" (Joshua 10). Therefore He said to him: how can you maintain yourself to be righteous, when the question is whether you have the power of arm that God has, to rule over everything, and whether you can thunder with a voice as He does, to decree something over the hosts of heaven, as would befit a righteous man who is truly whole and genuine?

'An arm' [זרוע] — an expression of strength, for strength resides in the arm. 'Can you thunder' [תרעם] — from the language of thunder [ra'am] and noise [ra'ash].

Bedeck yourself Heb. עדה, an expression of an ornament (עדי) and decoration.

'Deck yourself now with majesty and excellency' — from the root of 'take off your ornaments' (Exodus 33:5).

‘Deck yourself now with majesty and excellency’ — clothe and adorn yourself with pride and loftiness, as I do, so as to be, absolutely, the highest.

'Deck yourself now' — as if to say: try now to put the matter to the test — adorn yourself with pride and loftiness, and clothe yourself with splendor and majesty, so as to perform wondrous deeds.

'Deck yourself' [עדה] — from the language of ornament and adornment. 'Majesty' [גאון] — [means] pride, grandeur.

'Deck yourself now with majesty and excellency' — on this basis I say to you: behold, I grant you power and might like God's; lift yourself up now, and put on grandeur and loftiness, and clothe yourself in glory and majesty as God is clothed, so that you have power like His.

'The rage of your wrath' — for anger shows itself in the face ['af'].

‘Cast abroad the rage of your wrath’ — [meaning,] scatter it.

'Cast abroad' — scatter the fury of your wrath and your anger against the wicked of the people, to punish them with the breath of your lips, and look upon every proud one and bring him low. Meaning: fix your eyes on him and humble him, as is fitting and proper for a perfectly righteous man to do.

'Cast abroad' [הפץ] — [means] scatter, as in 'the east wind is scattered (yafetz)' (above, Job 38). 'The rage' [עברות] — from the language of fury [evrah] and wrath.

'Cast abroad the rage of your wrath' — and with the divine power that you now have, scatter your wrath to bring low every proud being you see; every creature and person in the world who is stronger than his fellow and exalts himself over him by his strength — bring them all low, so that they all become weak and feeble.

and crush Heb. והדך, an expression of (Num. 11:8), “or crushed (דכו) it in mortars.”

'Tread down the wicked in their place' — this word has no parallel elsewhere [in Scripture]; it means 'trample.' The sense is: if you have the might, tread down the proud. And he names two examples of the proud: the first is behemoth, which is on dry land; the second is leviathan, which is in the sea.

‘And tread down the wicked in their place’ — break and crush the wicked where they stand.

'Look, etc.' — this repeats the same matter in different words. 'And tread down' — with the utterance of your mouth, tread down the wicked in their place.

'And bring him low' [הכניעהו] — from the language of subjugation. 'And tread down' [והדוך] — an expression of crushing, as in 'You turn man to contrition (dacca)' (Psalms 90:3).

'Look' — and also every proud person who exalts himself in his own mind, subdue him until he is humbled in his heart as well; and through this, 'tread down the wicked in their place' — for once there is found in the world neither strength nor pride, there will no longer be wicked men who destroy their fellows.

'Bind their faces' — like 'nor bound up' (Isaiah 1:6). 'In the hidden place' — like 'in the dust'; the matter is stated twice, in parallel.

‘Bind their faces in the hidden place’ — bind them in confinement and concealment; or the sense may be that He will put them to death and hide them in the dust — the hidden place being the grave.

'Hide them' — hide all of them together in the dust, and bind their faces in a hidden, concealed place. Meaning: decree lowliness, submission, and crushing upon them, and see whether your decree will be fulfilled.

'Hide them' [טמנם] — an expression of concealment in a hidden place, as in 'and behold, they are hidden (temunim) in the earth' (Joshua 7:21). 'Bind' [חבוש] — an expression of seizing and shutting in, as in 'He binds (chavash) the streams from flowing' (above, Job 28).

'Hide them in the dust together' — for they will all cease to exist and return to the dust.

'Then will I also confess to you' — like 'one who confesses and forsakes finds mercy' (Proverbs 28:13).

'Then will I also confess' — when you attain that rank at which the merit of your own right hand saves you, so that you possess this power of arm, then I too will confess concerning you that you are a perfectly righteous man. But since that is not now the case, what does it matter to Me that you alone praise yourself as righteous?

'Then will I also confess to you' — if you are able to conduct such a governance, and nonetheless still be called by the name 'God,' Creator and Fashioner — for that title applies only to one who has created a full world with great creatures corresponding to His great power.

behemoth Prepared for the future.

'Behold now behemoth, which I made with you' — 'behemoth' is the name of a great beast; there is none greater than it in the inhabited world. And the sense of 'with you' is that it dwells on dry land, since afterward he mentions leviathan, which is in the sea. Some say the sense of 'with you' is that behemoth was created on the same day as Adam, the first man — but this is a matter of midrash. 'He eats grass as an ox' — because of this the commentators said that it is the elephant, but this is not conclusive proof. 'Grass' [chatzir] — that is, herbage, as in 'who makes grass grow on the hills' (Psalms 147:8).

‘Behold now behemoth, which I made with you’ — it is an animal so called [by that name].

'Behold now behemoth' — as if to say: for if you were truly a perfectly righteous man, My hand would not be too short to pay you your due reward, seeing that I have made such wondrous creatures as these, which nothing can stand against — so who then could stand against Me to hold back My hand from paying reward? Now, one such creature is the behemoth, which I created during the seven days of creation, and it is still with you today, and has not died. 'Grass' — even though its days are many, torn prey has never entered its mouth, for it eats the grass of the field like an ox.

'Now' [נא] — [means] at this time. 'Behemoth' [בהמות] — this is literally its name, Behemoth; so too it is written, 'the beasts (behemot) upon a thousand hills' (Psalms 50:10); it is the wild ox.

'Behold' — continuing this figure of speech, in which He hands Job divine power to sustain or annul any creature, and wishes to test whether it would please him to annul and abolish every strong, mighty, powerful thing that exists — he would necessarily have to begin the work of destruction with the greatest creatures in the world. On this basis He tells him that there are two of the mightiest creatures in the lower world: one on dry land, which eats grass and consumes all the food of the other creatures and beasts, and one in the sea, which preys on prey; and he must begin with them, to destroy them and remove them from the world. Therefore He says: 'Behold now behemoth, which I made with you' — and it eats grass like an ox.

his strength is in his loins His testicles are squashed and concealed, and have not been completely torn off. in the navel Heb. בשרירי, like (Song 7:3), “Your navel (שררך).”

'His force' — his strength, as in 'my might and the first fruit of my vigor' (Genesis 49:3). 'The stays of his body' [lit. 'the sinews of his belly'] — like 'your navel cord was not cut' (Ezekiel 16:4).

‘And his force is in the stays of his body’ — [meaning,] his strength. ‘The stays of his body’ — that is, the navel.

'Lo now, his strength, etc.' — as if to say: although it has never learned to tear prey, so that its power is not made known in actual practice, nevertheless the power is stored away within its loins, and it is inherently a creature of great strength. 'And his force, etc.' — his strength is in the center of his belly; this repeats the same matter in different words.

'And his force' [ואונו] — [means] and his strength, as in 'I have found me wealth (on)' (Hosea 12:9). 'In the stays of' [בשרירי] — [means] in the region of his navel, as in 'your navel (shorreikh) is like a round bowl' (Song of Songs 7).

'Lo now, his strength is in his loins' — for the beasts of prey that eat flesh have their strength in their weapons: their claws, their teeth, their roar, and their venom. But this behemoth, whose food is grass, has its strength located mainly in its loins.

hardens Heb. יחפץ like יַחְפּוֹז, hardens. Similarly, in the language of the Sages: דַחַפִּיזָא כִּי אוּפְתָּא (Hullin 47b), hard as wood. his testicles Heb. פַחֲדָיו. are knit together Heb. ישרגו, twisted cords, like (Lam. 1:14), “they are knit together (ישתרגו),” or the webbing (שריגי) of a bed in the language of the Mishnah, (Moed Katan 1:8), and it is an expression of twisted cords.

'He strains his tail like a cedar' — he makes it stand firm; this word has no match or parallel elsewhere in Scripture. The commentators derived it from the root of 'chefetz' [desire], but I have no chefetz [desire] for that view. 'His thighs' [pachadav] — the Targum renders it 'the sinew of the testicle, the thighs' — that is, the testicles. 'Are knit together' — they intertwine, from the root of 'tendrils' [sarigim]; they become entangled.

‘He strains his tail like a cedar’ — he moves his tail with haste and speed; the tzadi [in yachpotz] here stands in place of a zayin [i.e., it relates to chafaz, ‘to hasten’], since the two letters share the same place of articulation. ‘The sinews of his thighs are knit together’ — the sinews of his testicles branch out and are knitted together.

'He strains' — it hurries to swing its tail, which is like a cedar tree in size and thickness. 'The sinews of his thighs' — the sinews of its testicles are as thick as though they were the branches of a tree.

'He strains' [יחפוץ] — [means] 'yachpoz' [he draws in swiftly]; the tzadi stands in place of a zayin, for the letters zayin-samech-shin-resh-tzadi interchange with one another; and it is an expression of haste and swiftness. 'His thighs' [פחדיו] — [literally] his testicles, for concerning 'he that has his stones crushed (mero'ach ashech)' (Leviticus 21:20), Targum Onkelos renders it 'meris pachdin.' 'Are knit together' [ישורגו] — an expression of branches and boughs, as in 'her branches (sarigeha) turn white' (Joel 1).

'He strains' — when the desire and craving come upon him, then his tail becomes like a cedar, and the sinews of his testicles become like tendrils and like the branches of oak trees.

as a load Heb. כִּמְטִיל, as a burden of iron.

'His bones are as pipes of brass' — strong as copper; and strong currents are also called by this name. 'His gristles are like bars of iron' — this word has no parallel elsewhere; the mem in it belongs to the root, and its meaning, given the context, refers to strength.

‘His bones are as pipes of brass’ — these are strong pieces of copper — that is, the hard metal called ‘acier’ in the vernacular [Old French for steel]. ‘His gristles are like bars of iron’ — his bones are like a piece of iron; the same idea is repeated here in different words [as a restatement of the previous clause].

'As pipes of brass' — they have the strength of brass. 'His gristles' — his bones are like a thick, heavy piece of iron; this repeats the same matter in different words.

'As pipes' [אפיקי] — an expression of strength, as in 'and loosens the belt of the mighty (afikim)' (above, Job 12). 'His gristles' [גרמיו] — [means] his bones, as in 'break the bone (gerem)' (Proverbs 25). 'Like bars' [כמטיל] — an expression of a heavy burden, as in 'and the sand is heavy (netel)' (Proverbs 27).

'His bones are as pipes of brass' — on account of his great strength and might, for his power depends on the build of his body, and on his bones and sinews, which are strong.

He is the first of God’s ways He was created at the beginning to be the chief of all animals. his Maker The Holy One, blessed be He, Himself will slaughter him.

'He is the beginning of the ways of God' — in the creation of the living creatures and all the beasts, for he ranks above them all. 'He only who made him' — the sense is: only the One who made him is able to slay him.

‘He only who made him’ — the One who made him.

'He is the beginning' — meaning, He created it first among the animals. 'He only who made him' — because of its great strength, no one can prevail over it except Hashem, who made it; He Himself brings His sword against it to strike it dead.

'He is the beginning of the ways of God' — since you have resolved that, were you in God's place with power equal to His, you would cut off every mighty and powerful being, the first path God would take to destroy the mighty creatures would be to go to this behemoth and destroy it first — so that only He who made him can make His sword approach him, to destroy him.

For the mountains bear food for him And it is written in the Book of Psalms (50:10): “Behemoth upon a thousand mountains.” A thousand mountains bear food for him. He feeds on all of them every day, [and they are grown again the next day].

'Surely the mountains bring him forth food' — like 'yevulah,' its produce; the sense is that the mountains bear produce for him. 'Play there' — alongside him, since he is not a predator.

‘Surely the mountains bring him forth food’ — [the word ‘bul’ is] like ‘yevul’ (produce). ‘And all the beasts of the field play there’ — meaning, they are not afraid of him, since he does not prey on them.

'Surely the mountains bring him forth food' — for the mountains bear and grow produce for its food, and it is always available to it; that is why it has such great strength, for its food never fails. And despite all its great strength, all the beasts of the field play in its place, and it preys on none of them to drive them away from there.

'Food' [בול] — like 'yevul' [produce], with the first root-letter [the yod] missing; likewise 'kol tuchal' [You can do all things] (below, Job 42) has its first root-letter missing — the true grammatical forms [in each case] being 'yichal' [for tuchal] and 'yevul' [for bul]; its meaning is the growth of the ground, as in 'the produce (yevul) of the land' (Judges 6).

'Surely' — for by this much would be gained: the mountains would then bring forth produce for Him, yielding crops and grain to Hashem; for this beast destroys the produce of the mountains, and were it to be destroyed, the mountains would bring forth produce, and all the beasts of the field would play there — for now every beast flees from there in fear of it.

the shadows the shades of trees.

'The lotus-trees' [tze'elim] — like 'shadows' [tzelalim], with the alef standing in place of the doubled letter, as in 'whose land the rivers divide' (Isaiah 18:2, 7). 'The covert of the reed' — the tall growth of reeds found along rivers. 'Fens' — like 'its swamps and marshes' (Ezekiel 47:11); a place of mud.

‘He lies under the lotus-trees’ — trees, called ‘tze’elim’ because they provide shade [tzel]. ‘In the covert of the reed, and fens’ — [‘fens’ means] mud and marshland.

'He lies under' — as if it said, 'Does he lie under?' with the interrogative heh omitted since the sense is understood; there are many such cases. The meaning is: does he really lie under lotus-trees? Given his immense size, surely there is no lotus-tree in the world large enough to shade him — yet by My providence he endures, with no shade to protect him from the sun's heat. 'In the covert, etc.' — meaning: does he really lie hidden among reed, or hidden among the papyrus-rush that grows in the marsh?

'The lotus-trees' [צאלים] — from the language of shade [tzel]. 'And fens' [ובצה] — its sense is wet mire, as in 'can the papyrus reed grow up without a marsh (bitzah)?' (above, Job 8).

'He lies under the lotus-trees' — and it is fitting that after its death it should lie under the lotus-trees, and lie in the covert of the reed and the fen, for there its carcass would be cast, in a hidden place covered in shadows.

Do the shadows cover him as his shadow [Does] the shadow of the covert of the reeds and the swamp, which is entangled [or surrounded—Berechiah] and hedged around with [many] trees.

'The lotus-trees cover him with their shadow' — so as to be his shade.

‘The lotus-trees cover him with their shadow’ — the trees serve him as a canopy, giving him shade. ‘The willows of the brook compass him about’ — the willows of the brook surround him on every side, to give him shade.

'The lotus-trees cover him' — do the lotus-trees really cover him with shade fitting to his size? Surely there is no shade in the world fit to cover him. 'The willows of the brook compass him about' — do the willows of the brook really surround him, to cast shade over him against the sun's heat? Surely they are as nothing next to him. And the matter is repeated many times in different words, to express how utterly impossible this is.

'Cover him' [יסוכוהו] — from the language of covering, sheltering [sechach]. 'The willows of the brook' [ערבי נחל] — the name of barren trees that grow beside a stream.

'They cover him' — the shade-trees form a canopy over his shadow — that is, over his carcass, the mere shadow that remains of him — and there the willows of the brook surround him, so that no creature can see him.

Behold, he plunders the river, and [he] does not harden The Euphrates, which is a large river whose waters increase, he oppresses and plunders from the creatures by his drinking. and [he] does not harden [His belly does not harden from his drinking, like (verse 17), “His tail hardens.” he trusts that he will draw the Jordan He is confident [of his ability] to draw the whole Jordan into his mouth were he to drink there: like (Ps. 22: 10), “Who drew me (גחי) from the womb.”

'If a river overflow' — he is so great that when he drinks the water of a river, the water is visibly diminished; this is why Scripture uses the word 'ya'ashok' [oppress, exploit]. 'He trembles not' — he does not drink in haste, for he fears neither beast nor man; and so he is confident. 'Though the Jordan rush forth to his mouth' — like 'bursting forth from its place'; the sense is close to 'going out, emerging.' And likewise: 'You are He who drew me forth from the womb' (Psalms 22:10).

‘Behold, if a river overflow’ — [meaning,] its waters surge forth with force, as though seizing everything in their path. ‘He trembles not’ — the river does not rush along turbulently, as it did at first. ‘Though the Jordan rush forth to his mouth’ — he draws out the waters of the Jordan and takes them into his mouth; the word [yagi'ach] is of the same root as ‘when it burst forth [be-gicho] from the womb’ (Job 38:8).

'Behold, if a river overflow' — this is a figurative expression, meaning: behold, he draws the whole river into his mouth, as though he had seized it by force. 'He trembles not' — though he does not hurry to drink in haste — so the water keeps flowing while he drinks — nevertheless he drinks it all, even what flows in during the time he is drinking. 'He is confident' — he is confident in himself that he can draw the whole water of the Jordan into his mouth.

'Overflow' [יעשוק] — from the language of pressing and seizing [used here of a raging flood]. 'A river' [נהר] — meaning, any river that he drinks from. 'He trembles' [יחפוז] — from the language of haste and swiftness [i.e., he does not rush off in fright]. 'Rush forth' [יגיח] — an expression of surging forth, as in 'when it burst forth (begicho), issuing from the womb' (above, Job 38).

'Behold' — now He shows him the second fearsome creature that, in his opinion, deserves to be destroyed: the Leviathan, who is found in the water and there preys on all the water-creatures. 'Behold, if a river overflow' — see, there is a creature that wants to overwhelm an entire river together with the living creatures in it; restrain him, so that he does not rush to overwhelm the river — for he is indeed confident that he will draw the whole Jordan into his mouth and destroy every living thing found in it.

With His eyes He will take him The Omnipresent will take him by looking at him, and he quakes from fear of Him. with snares Fishermen’s tools, with which they catch fish.

'Shall any take him by his eyes' — that is, as if he could take in the Jordan with his own eyes, imagining that he could drink it all; and as if his nose were pierced by snares, when he merely opens his nostrils wide to draw breath.

‘Shall any take him by his eyes, or pierce through his nose with a snare?’ — it seems, in his own estimation, that he could swallow the whole river and drink it, until, in drinking, he lowers his snout and reaches the riverbed, injuring his snout on the snares found there. Or, alternatively, [the verse] returns to speaking of Leviathan, and its sense is: will it seem possible, in man's eyes, that Leviathan could be taken the way other fish are taken, his nose pierced through with snares to trap him with a fishhook — that is, the net with which fishermen fish?

'Shall any take him by his eyes' — he takes the whole Jordan into his mouth before his very eyes, all the way to its springs, the place of its source, which flows out from the cave of Paneas. 'With a snare' — in order to drink it all, he lowers his mouth to the bottom of the Jordan, and his nose is pierced by the obstacles in the Jordan — such as stones and the like — for he strikes against them with his nose. This is a manner of hyperbole and exaggeration, a figure of speech.

'By his eyes' [בעיניו] — the letter bet stands in place of 'ad' [until, at], as in 'Your steadfast love [reaches] unto the heavens (bahashamayim)' (Psalms 36:6), whose true sense is 'ad hashamayim' [unto the heavens]; and 'einav' [his eyes] here is an expression related to a spring of water, as in 'the fountain (ein) of water' (Genesis 15).

'By his eyes' — behold, he wants to take hold of the entire Jordan together with its springs. 'Or pierce through his nose with a snare' — behold, he opens the holes of his nostrils, which are full of snares, by which he traps all the creatures that are in the Jordan.

Can you pull the leviathan etc. When you pull him with a harpoon and insert a fishhook into his nose, will he offer much supplication to you? It means that you are unable to approach him with fishing implements. or press down his tongue Let the rope down (on his tongue) to draw him out of his place.

'Can you draw out leviathan' — the interrogative heh is omitted. 'With a fish-hook' — that is, with a net. 'Press down his tongue' [tashkia] — close to the root of 'and the fire died down' (Numbers 11:2).

‘Or press down his tongue with a cord?’ — can you, with a cord you let down into the sea, draw out Leviathan and catch him, when the barb at the end of the cord catches in his tongue?

'Can you draw out' — as if it said, 'Can you draw out?' with the interrogative heh omitted since the sense is understood. Now he begins to tell of the wondrous power of the Leviathan, saying to him: can you draw the Leviathan out of the water with a fish-hook, the way other fish are drawn out? 'Or press down his tongue with a cord' — the words are transposed, as if it said, 'and a cord you shall sink into his tongue'; compare 'and she put her eyes in paint' (2 Kings 9), whose meaning is 'she put paint on her eyes.' The sense here is: can you sink the cord deep into his tongue, to draw him along after you?

'With a fish-hook' [בחכה] — this is one of the tools of fishing, as in 'and they that cast a hook (chakah) into the Nile' (Isaiah 19:8). 'Press down' [תשקיע] — an expression of putting a thing into the depths, as in 'thus shall Babylon sink (tishka)' (Jeremiah 51:64).

'Can you draw out' — it would therefore be fitting for you to draw out the Leviathan with a fish-hook, the kind used to catch large fish, and press down his tongue with a cord, so that he does not destroy the fish of the sea and the Jordan.

a fishhook Heb. התשים. It is bent, like (Isa. 9:13), “a large arch and a small arch (אגמן), and it is made of iron to catch fish with it. Can you insert Will you insert a fishhook into his nose to take him out of the sea? or...with a barb A fishermen’s implement. or pierce Heb. תִּקּב, like תִּנְקֹב.

'Put a ring into his nose' [agmon] — a familiar word, like 'bulrush' [gome], as is the practice among fishermen.

‘Can you put a ring into his nose?’ — it is the sharp barb used to catch fish. ‘Bore his jaw through’ — [meaning,] pierce it.

'Can you put a ring' — can you put a ring [of rushes] through his nose, or pierce his jaw with a hook, the way it is done to other fish in order to catch them? For given his great strength, no stratagem will help him — not even force joined with might.

'A ring' [אגמון] — [together with] 'a hook' [חוח], these too are tools of fishing; the 'agmon' resembles a bent needle, like the reed (gome) that grows at the water's edge.

'Can you put' — therefore a fish-hook is needed, for you cannot catch him the way small fish are caught, with a reed and a thorn; and likewise it is impossible to deal with him as with good, gentle-natured creatures that fear your rebuke and do no harm — for...

Will he offer much supplication to you Will he offer much supplication to you and beseech you to spare his life? or will he speak This is a repetitious word. soft words Words of supplication.

'Speak soft words' — soft words.

'Will he make many supplications' — will he multiply pleading and soft words to you, so that you might leave him be? As if to say: surely it is impossible to catch him — so how could he plead with you to let him go?

(27-29) 'Will he make many supplications' — and therefore you cannot deal with him as with a creature that a person can subdue under his authority to do his work, like the horse and the mule — for will he make a covenant with you? And likewise you cannot deal with him as with creatures that are caught and put on display for entertainment — for will you play with him like a bird? Therefore there is no remedy for him but the knife; and it is fitting that...

Will he make a covenant with you Will he make a covenant to serve you, that you will take him as a lifelong slave?

'Will he make a covenant' — will he make a covenant with you, that you should take him as a servant forever, and set him free under the terms of that covenant?

Will you play Will you play and stroll with him as though he were a small bird, and will you tie him to the necks of (other editions: for the sake of) your young lads, that they should stroll with him as with small birds that they give children to stroll and to placate him?

'Will you play' — will you toy with him the way one toys with a bird, before which kernels of grain are set at the trap, so that it comes down to eat and is caught there? That is the 'play' one has with a bird — tricking it into coming down into the trap. And he is saying: can you likewise catch the Leviathan with a trick like that? 'Or will you bind him' — will you tie him up so that he cannot escape, and hand him over to your young girls to play with, the way one does with a small bird?

Will charmers dig pits for him Will charmers and sorcerers dig pits to hunt him? To take him out of the sea by means of sorcery [so] that they can divide him and share him among the merchants, as the sea fishermen do? That is, they catch large fish with their cunning, and the merchants come and purchase from them. dig pits Heb. יכרו, an expression of (Jer. 18:22), digging a pit (כורה שוחה). charmers Heb. חַבָרִים, an expression of (Deut. 18:11), “a charmer (וְחבֵר חָבֶר).”

'Will the bands of fishermen make a banquet of him' [yikhru] — will companions band together over him, from the root of 'and he prepared a feast for them' (2 Kings 6:23), in the sense of a banquet. The meaning is: thieves who have joined forces. 'The merchants' [kena'anim] — traders.

‘Will the bands of fishermen make a banquet of him?’ — [‘yikhru’ means] they feast, from the same root as ‘a great feast [kerah gedolah]’ (2 Kings 6:23). ‘The bands of fishermen’ — they are merchants who band together. ‘Will they part him among the merchants?’ — [meaning,] will they take him. ‘The merchants’ — merchants.

'Will the bands of fishermen make a banquet' — will sorcerers catch him by the charms in their hands, and make of him a great feast and a lavish banquet? Or will they divide him into shares among the merchants who would buy him from them?

'Make a banquet' [יכרו] — an expression of a feast, as in 'a great feast (kerah)' (II Kings 6). 'The bands of fishermen' [חברים] — [means] masters of sorcery, as in 'or a charmer (chover chaver)' (Deuteronomy 18). 'Will they part him' [יחצוהו] — an expression of division, as in 'and it shall be divided (vetechatze) toward the four winds' (Daniel 11). 'The merchants' [כנענים] — [means] traders, as in 'her traders (kena'aneha) were the honored of the earth' (Isaiah 23).

'Will the bands make a banquet of him' — bands will join together against him to eat of his flesh, and they will also divide him among the Canaanite traders, the petty merchants, to sell his flesh in commerce.

Will you fulfill Will you fulfill your desire and make tents of his skin? or a shade of fishes of his head Will you make from his head a shade of fish? This is a repetitious expression. a shade Heb. צִלְצַל, a tent of fish. A tent made from his head is called a shade of fish because it is made from him. צִלְצַל is ombre in French. It is an expression of shadow, and that is one of the double words, like: green (ירקרק), red (אדמדם) [both in Lev. 13:49], twisted (פתלתל) [Deut. 32:5], tattoo (קעקע) [Lev. 19:28].

'With barbed irons' — like 'thorns in your eyes' (Numbers 33:55). The sense: could his skin be filled with barbs, until you thereby caught him? 'Or his head with fish-spears' — this word has no parallel elsewhere [in Scripture]. The sense: it is shaped like a thorn-hook that catches among a fish's bones, by which fish are caught, piercing through the head.

‘Can you fill his skin with barbed irons?’ — [meaning,] will it be riddled through [with punctures]? ‘Barbed irons’ — it is the blade with which the skins of large fish are cut. ‘Or his head with fish-spears?’ — it is the blade with which the heads of large fish are cut off.

'Can you fill' — and even if you caught him, could you cut through his skin with knives to strip it off him? Surely his skin is exceedingly tough and cannot be cut with a knife. 'Or his head' — will you sink his head into the instrument made for sinking a fish's head into it, in order to catch him that way?

'Can you fill' [התמלא] — an expression of cutting, severing, as in 'it is cut down (yemolel) and withers' (Psalms 90). 'With barbed irons' [בשכות] — from the language of a knife [sakin], though it is spelled with a shin; so too 'and put a knife (sakin) to your throat' (Proverbs 23:2). 'Or ... fish-spears' [ובצלצל] — this is the name of a tool among the implements of fishing, by which the fish's head is made to sink and settle; and it is from the language of 'they sank (tzalelu) like lead' (Exodus 15:10), meaning they sank into the depths.

'Can you fill' — can you indeed pierce and sever his head with sukkot — meaning the large knives used to cut up fish — or sever his head with a fish-cleaver, a great chopper used to cut off the heads of large fish? That is to say, it is impossible to subdue him with any destructive implement. Nevertheless, I say to you...

Put your hand over him Strengthen yourself to wage battle against him, that you will put your hand over him to strike him. remember the battle, do not stop And do not stop. Remember your might to wage war against him. and do not [rest] תּוֹסַף is derived from יסף, like (Gen.38:26), “and he did not cease (יָסַף) being intimate with her” (regrettera in French), will regret. [In the expression] אַל-תּוֹסַף, the “sammech” is vowelized with a “pattah” because of the pause accent, as in (Gen. 49:4), “You shall not gain superiority (תּוֹתַר) “; (Ruth 2:14), “and she left over (וַתּתַר),” and many like it.

'Lay your hand upon him' — if you are able; but were you to do this, you would never fight him again, for you would not survive. So much for one who imagines he could lay a hand on him.

'Lay your hand upon him' — test it, then: lay your hand upon him to seize him, and know that you will never again think of doing battle against him, for he will roar so terribly at you that you will tremble before him. This is a figure of speech.

'Lay your hand upon him' — after I have given you the power that belongs to God, it is enough that you lay your hand upon him, and by this he will return to nothing. 'Think upon the battle no more' — do not think at all that you will need to fight him in the manner of war (for in that way it is impossible to defeat him), for only through the laying on of hands will he be annulled from existence. And he goes on to explain...