Job · Chapter 7

Is not man on earth for a limited time This is what I said to you. ‘Agree and turn to me.’ because how can I be silent from crying our about my misfortune? Do you not know that the time a man has to live is limited? and...like the days of a hireling and I—that time that is allotted to me...

'Is there not a time of service' — a fixed period.

'A time of service' — meaning: a fixed end and appointed time.

"Is there not a time of service ..." — now he begins to speak, saying: is there not an end and a set time appointed for man on earth? Meaning: are not his days limited and fixed, like the days of a hireling?

A time of service (tzava) — An end and a season; so too, 'changes and a term of service (tzava) are with me' (below, 10:17).

‘Is there not a time of service to man upon earth?’ — Job now begins to refute Eliphaz's view in general, namely, that Hashem brings suffering upon the righteous in order to purge some minor sin they have committed, so that they may thereby be spared a greater and more constant punishment that their iniquities would otherwise deserve. Job responds that this view is incorrect. For man was created to attain a certain perfection, and this perfection is the very purpose of his creation. Now, this perfection depends on one of two things: either on the length of his allotted lifetime — since he was created to serve Hashem all the days of his life without interruption, so that the fixed term allotted him to live on earth is what bounds his perfection; and in this respect he resembles a servant who is obligated to serve his master all the days of his life, from the break of dawn until the stars come out, whether or not he completes any given task. It is in this sense that he says, ‘Is there not a time of service to man upon earth?’ — that is, is not his term and season bounded and measured according to what is needed for him to attain his perfection? Or else, this perfection depends on a fixed and bounded task — for example, if a person fulfills the 613 commandments, he has then attained his perfection, whether he fulfilled them over the course of many years or managed to fulfill them in a short time, thereby swiftly completing his task; but if he does not complete them, then even if he lived many years and served Hashem all his days, he has not attained his perfection. In this respect he resembles a hired laborer engaged to complete a specified task, who, once he completes it, receives his wages without regard to how many days his labor took. It is in this sense that he says, ‘And his days are like the days of a hireling.’ Now he goes on to explain his words.

As a slave who longs for the shadow As a slave, who toils all day through and longs and yearns, “When will the shadow of evening come?” And as a hireling, who hopes for his wages at eventide, because the whole day was to him for toil, and he yearns for the sunset.

'As a servant who eagerly longs for the shadow' — once he has finished his work.

'Eagerly longs' — meaning: hopes. 'His wages' — meaning the wage of his labor, as in 'behold, His reward is with Him, and His recompense before Him' (Isaiah 40:10) — that is, the wage for his labor.

"As a servant [who longs for the shadow]" — like a servant who labors at his work all day and longs for the shadows of evening, to rest from his toil; and like a hireling who looks forward to the time his work will be finished.

Eagerly longs (yish'af) — [Means] he desires, as in 'do not long (tish'af) for the night' (below, 36:20).

As a servant who eagerly longs for the shadow — That is, if a person's situation resembles a servant who is not released from his labor by completing some fixed measure of work, but only when evening falls, then he 'longs for the shadow' — he is always yearning for the shadow of night to come, since only then does he find rest from his labor. And if he is like a hireling, who is released from his obligation once he completes the limited task he took upon himself, then he 'looks for his wages' — he hopes to finish his work, his limited labor. Either way — whether his well-being depends on time, as with the servant, or on completing his task, as with the hireling — if he is struck with pain on his sickbed so that his work is thereby brought to a halt, he cannot attain his perfection through it. For if his perfection depends on time, it is clear that the time during which he lies disabled counts for nothing; and all the more so if his well-being depends on completing a task so long that even a full lifetime would not suffice to finish it — how much more so if it is cut off for the duration of his days of suffering. If so, how can you say that it is out of Hashem's love for the righteous man, and His wish that he correct what he has done wrong in not having served Hashem properly — whether as his God or as his Maker (as above, 4) — that He reproves him with suffering, in order to purge his sin? Does he not, on the contrary, thereby bring his service to an even greater halt through the suffering — and not only does he fail to correct the past, but he goes on to further disable the work of the soul, and who will complete it for him? This is the meaning of what he says:

So was I made to possess from Heaven months of futility and torments, that limited time that is given to man upon earth. and they appointed wearisome nights for me from Heaven

'Are appointed to me' — assigned to me, like 'who has appointed your food' (Daniel 1:10).

"So am I made to possess" — so I make myself possess months of vanity. Meaning: I wait for the month to pass, [hoping] that perhaps my illness will ease in the coming month, and I wish to possess the months quickly — but it is in vain, for my illness has not eased. "And wearisome nights" — meaning, so too with the nights: I wait for the nights of hardship allotted to me to pass. On every single night I wait for it to be over — but my hope is in vain.

Are appointed (minu) — [Means] they were assigned, as in 'and Hashem appointed a fish' (Jonah 2:1).

So am I made to possess—months of vanity — That is, just as the servant waits for the night to come, and the hireling waits for the day to come, so as to hasten the end of his labor, so in just this way have I been made to possess months of vanity; these months have been counted out and destined for me as nights of hardship. And he goes on to explain:

If I would lie down at night, I would hope and say, etc. and the evening depart When will it become light and when will the time of arising come, and when will the evening depart? [The word מדד ] is an expression of (Gen. 31:40) “and sleep was banished (ותדד).” The “mem” is a defective radical, as in מאמר, statement; משמר, watch. And I was sated with restlessness I was sated with restlessness on my bed by day until twilight, because, due to the torments I could not sleep until the twilight of day, since my flesh was clothed with worms.

'But the night is long' — [I] measure out the evening, as with 'and he measured them with a line' (2 Samuel 8:2); and my heart fails. 'Tossings' — from 'and my sleep fled from my eyes' (Genesis 31:40).

'But the night is long' — meaning: my heart measured the length of the night, since I was not sleeping at all — for during sleep a person does not have full sensation [of time passing].

"When I lie down" — when I lie down at night, I say, 'When shall I arise?' — wishing the evening would pass and be gone, for perhaps my illness will ease by day. And when it does not ease, I wait every hour of the day for that hour to pass and be gone, for perhaps it will ease in the next one. But I am filled all day with wandering thoughts, until evening, and so it goes, over and over. As if to say: is this not my way, and the way of all who suffer affliction? And are not the days of man fixed? If so, one who thinks this way wishes to hasten the time of death, for it would be better for him than a life of suffering — and with this he contradicts the view of Eliphaz, who said that everything comes through providence, that the wicked perish for their sin and die, while the righteous have their sin purged a little through suffering. For if everything truly comes through providence, this should be considered all the more unjust: since death is better than a life of pain and evil, the reward of the righteous would then turn out to be less than the reward of the wicked.

Tossings to and fro (madad) — A form of the word nedidah ('restlessness'). Dawning (nesheph) — [Explained as] evening, as in 'the twilight (nesheph) I longed for' (Isaiah 21:4).

When I lie down — to sleep at the start of the night — I say, 'when shall I arise?' And by the time the evening has dragged on and passed and morning light comes, I am 'full of tossings to and fro to the dawning of the day' — meaning that in the morning he says, 'if only it were evening,' and in the evening he says, 'if only it were morning.' If so, the time that is itself the very condition for attaining his perfection is as nothing, mere emptiness, and he longs only for it to pass and cease to exist. And so too regarding the labor, as with the hireling —

and clods of earth Clods of earth (?) Now this is the development of rust, because it is the custom of clods of earth to moisten and cause rust. wrinkled Heb. רגע wrinkled, as in (Isa. 51:15), “Who wrinkles (רגע) the sea.” Another explanation: עוֹרִי רָגַע is an expression of resting a wave after a wave, like wrinkles (?).

'Clods' — some say it is from 'we grope like the blind' (Isaiah 59:10). Others say it is a type of creature. But the more likely view is that it is a type of earth, in the sense of 'those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake' (Daniel 12:2). 'Closes up' — Rabbi Moshe said: it means 'splits open.' And similarly, as an illustration: 'of the moments of the earth, one moment of it' — meaning, a portion. And he said that 'breaks out' (vayima'es) is from the root 'melts' (nimas), with the alef standing in place of a samech, like the alef in an obscure comparandum whose text here is uncertain. But the correct view, in my opinion, is that 'closes up' is related to 'stirs' as in 'who stirs up the sea' (Isaiah 51:15), and that 'breaks out' should be understood in its plain sense, because the skin has become disfigured.

'Closes up and breaks out afresh' — it splits open and becomes foul, from the putrid discharge within it.

"[My flesh] is clothed" — behold, from the abundance of my wounds and sores, maggots have arisen on my flesh, so that it is as though clothed in them, and in clods of earth's dust, as stated above, that he sits amid the ashes — and dust and ashes are one and the same. "My skin" — the skin of my flesh has split open and melted away.

And clods of dust (vegush afar) — A clump of earth; and in the words of our sages, 'they decreed concerning its clod' (gushah) (Shabbat 15). Closes up (raga) — [Means] is split, cracked open, as in 'and those who trouble (rig'ei) the land' (Psalms 35:20). Breaks out afresh (vayima'es) — A form of the word hamasah ('melting, dissolving').

My flesh is clothed with worms and clods of dust — That is, the worms and clods of dust that clothe me are not a garment over my skin but over my flesh itself, for my skin has already closed up, split open, and dissolved because of the boils; and it is the worms and the dust that now clothe my flesh in place of the skin that clothed it before. If so, how can I do anything toward my own perfection, seeing that I am already like one dead, whose flesh is half eaten away?

My days are swifter The days of my prosperity hastened to go away. than a weaver’s shuttle Than weaving that is done swiftly. So said Hezekiah (Isa. 38:12), “I severed, like a weaver, my life.” without hope I no longer hope for good.

'Than a weaver's shuttle' — in the sense of 'I have rolled up my life like a weaver' (Isaiah 38:12). 'Without hope' — either when the thread is cut off, or hope in the plain sense.

'A weaver's shuttle' — this is the weaver's implement, holding the weaving thread, which the weaver moves easily from one end to the other.

"My days are swifter" — they hasten to pass more swiftly than the weaver's shuttle, which moves swiftly among the threads of the warp. "And are spent" — they come to an end without hope, for I no longer hope to return to my former state; I have grown so ill that it is impossible for me to regain my former strength.

"The weaver's shuttle" — This is the name for the tool that a weaver throws between the threads of the warp. "Without" — [Meaning] without.

My days — He explains: as regards the perfection that depends on time, 'my days are swifter than a weaver's shuttle' — for the warp and the woof threads are drawn across one another with such speed that each moment one binds itself to the next; so too my days pass in a rush, each new day canceling out the one before it. And as regards the perfection that depends on labor, they 'are spent without hope' — for I have no hope of any happiness through them. If so, how could this possibly be for my good — that in exchange for the distressing negligence by which I fell short in serving Hashem, negligence and cessation from the labor that secures my well-being should now be brought upon me for many days?

my eye will not return after death. Here Job denies the dogma of the Resurrection of the Dead.

'My eye shall no more see good' — after my death. 'Remember' — he is speaking to the Omnipresent, that is, to God. And likewise, 'that You set a watch over me' (Job 7:12) — its meaning is a guard against the sea, in the sense of 'that they turn not again to cover the earth' (Psalms 104:9).

"O remember" — he turns his face upward and says: Hashem, if the matter is as Eliphaz said, that suffering comes to purge sin so as to improve one's end — until when shall I be afflicted? Turn Your attention to remember that the days of my life fly by swiftly, like the wind; and if You wait still longer, my eye will never again see good, for I shall die before the good arrives.

O remember — He raises yet another argument. Against the claim that Hashem punishes the righteous man with a temporary punishment in its time, so as not to have to punish him later with an eternal punishment (which, in Job's view — since he denied resurrection — is death), Job argues: is it not so that at the time he is being afflicted he is as good as dead at that very time, since he can accomplish nothing then toward his own perfection, which is the whole purpose of his life? If so, what does he gain by having his days cut short now, so that his days not be cut short at the end of his life? Would it not be better for him to die during this present period, before his actual time of death at the end of his days, than to die during this period in the middle of his life — for the cessation of his work is accounted the same as death. This is the meaning of 'O remember that my life is a breath' — that is, my life is nothing but a breath, the breath of my nostrils, and once that breath goes out it does not return; so too, every moment that passes does not return. If so, I ask: since my eye will not see good again, at the time when—

shall see me no more The eye that wishes to see me shall see me no more after I die. set Your eyes upon me and I will be here no longer He is addressing the Holy One, blessed be He: “Why did You have to finish me off and crush me with pains? With one look that you set Your eyes on me, I am no longer in the world.”

"Shall behold me no more" — the eye that sees me now will not see me again, for I shall die and be buried; and by the time You set Your eyes upon me to do me good, I will no longer be in the world.

"Shall behold me" — [Meaning] shall see me, as in "I behold him, but not near" (Numbers 24:17).

The eye of the one who sees me shall behold me no more — that is, this is after the loss of the body in death, when it vanishes from every eye and no eye will ever see it again, since from then on it is impossible for it to return to see the light of life. But now, through his sufferings — by which he is already accounted as if dead — his situation is in fact worse. For 'now Your eyes are upon me, and I am gone' — that is, now, even though people can see that I still exist, I am nevertheless as though I did not exist, for the entire span of this suffering is as though I were not in the world at all. If so, it would have been far better had his days been cut short at the time when 'the eye of man shall behold him no more' — that is, at the end of his days — and had He put him to death before his time, rather than cutting his days short in the middle of his life, when people can still see him and he is still alive, and yet he is as one already dead.

"As the cloud is consumed" — meaning, I have no hope that You will bring me back to life to see good; for just as a cloud is consumed and passes away, and that very cloud never returns, so one who goes down to the grave never comes up from it again. And from this our Rabbis, of blessed memory, derived that [Job] denied the resurrection of the dead.

As the cloud is consumed — That is, and if you should say that after death he will live again, and then complete what is due to him, [Job answers:] just as the cloud and the vapor rising from the dissolution of compound things is consumed and disperses, never again to reunite with the body from which it separated, so too, of one who goes down to the grave, the elements of which he was composed will disperse, and he will not rise again. And even were we to imagine that he did rise—

"His place" — the people of his place will no longer recognize him, for he will not return to them; the matter is repeated in other words.

He shall return no more to his house — and even were we to imagine that he returned to his house, 'his place would know him no more.' That is, even though the dissolved parts of the body are not lost from existence — for, as is known, they combine with other bodies and other compounds — they never return to their former condition. Therefore—

Neither will I restrain my mouth Since You do not desist from me, neither will I restrain my speech from complaining about Your ways.

"Therefore I ..." — as if to say: since the sufferings do not cease from me, and I no longer hope to see good, I too will not restrain my mouth; I will speak because of the distress of my spirit — and since I am lost, I am lost. "I will complain ..." — the matter is repeated in other words.

"I will refrain" — [Meaning] I will hold back and desist. "I will speak" — An expression of speech and talk.

Therefore I will not refrain my mouth — since I lose nothing by speaking and gain nothing by keeping silent, it is better that I 'speak in the anguish of my spirit.'

Am I a sea that You placed sand over me as a guard? or a sea monster A huge fish that You imprisoned in the depths of the sea, that You place this Adversary as a guard over me, to watch me lest my soul depart?

"Am I a sea" — am I comparable to the sea, or to the sea-monster, that You have set a watch over me, to be confined by suffering without ever being released, just as You set the sand as a bound for the sea so that it should never cross it, and just as You bound the sea-monster in the depths of the sea so that it should never come out, lest it destroy the world?

"A sea-monster" — This is the Leviathan, as rendered by the Targum.

Am I a sea — why do You muzzle my mouth from speaking? Am I the sea, upon whose mouth nature has placed a muzzle, setting a shore around it, so that it not burst forth and destroy the world? Or am I a sea-monster, upon whose mouth a person places a bridle so that it not cause harm with its bite? Would I likewise cause harm if I opened my mouth, that You should therefore set a watch over me, to guard the door of my lips lest I speak a word?

that my couch shall bear my speech The couch upon which I sleep at night will bear my trouble somewhat, and I will be able to restrain my speech.

'My complaint' — meaning my sorrow; likewise, 'I am distraught in my complaint' (Psalms 55:3).

"When I say" — if I say, 'My bed will comfort me' — it is because sleep makes one forget sorrow. "My couch shall ease my complaint" — the bed of night will burn and blaze upon my complaint, consuming it away; the matter is repeated in other words.

"My bed" — My bed, as in "his bedstead was a bedstead of iron" (Deuteronomy 3:11). [Source Hebrew reads "barul"; corrected to "barzel" (iron), evidently a scan slip, per the verified verse text.] "Shall ease" — [Meaning] it shall burn and blaze, as in "the earth was set ablaze before Him" (Nahum 1:5) — read here in the sense of burning, not its more common sense of "upheaved." "My complaint" — Refers to the recounting of one's troubles, as in "out of my great anguish and distress" (1 Samuel 1).

When I say – Until now I was silent, for I said, either that ‘my bed shall comfort me’ — meaning that by resting on my bed the suffering would ease somewhat — or that ‘my couch shall ease my complaint,’ that is: my couch would carry on my behalf the complaint and the talk, and would speak in my place. He is hinting that he thought that those who came to visit him, seeing him lying sick in his bed, would themselves speak and carry the complaint on his behalf, so that he would not need to speak. But even on my bed, at night, I have no rest, for —

"Then You scare me" — but even this comfort did not succeed for me, for in the time of sleep You broke me with bad dreams and terrified me with harsh visions; for in my dreams I see all the events of the day, because I dwell on them constantly — for that is the way [of dreams], to reflect the ponderings of the day.

"You scare me" — An expression of being broken [by dread], as in "you see a terror" (Job 6:21). "Through visions" — An expression of seeing, as in "and you shall seek out" (Exodus 18:21); meaning, the imaginings one sees in a dream. The matter is stated twice, in different words. "You terrify me" — An expression of sudden terror and dread.

Then You scare me with dreams – through the dreams he sees of what is destined to happen to him in the future, his body is broken from fear; and terrify me through visions – in that he sees frightening and terrible visions, until —

death rather than these my bones I choose death rather than these limbs in my body.

'Death rather than these my bones' — my soul chooses death rather than to dwell within my bones; for the body is to the soul like a house, and the essence of the body is the bones, like the foundation and the pillars of a house.

'Rather than these my bones' — meaning: than my limbs.

"So that my soul chooses [strangling]" — my soul chooses to die by strangulation, and it chooses death rather than remaining with these bones of mine.

"Than my bones" — The limbs are called "bones," because they are what holds the body up.

So that my soul chooses – my soul chooses strangling, that is, death by strangulation, for he longs to be strangled and die; my soul chooses death rather than remaining within these bones of mine, for death is better for it than life.

I despised my life, because ultimately I will not live forever. desist from me From harming me, because my days are futile and few.

"I loathe [it]" — I loathe my life, for I shall not live long; and what good could I possibly receive in so short a time? Therefore take life away from me — for are not my days mere vapor, without substance, since they are so few?

I loathe it – The construction of the verse, continuing from ‘my soul chooses’ [v. 15], is: ‘I loathe — I shall not live forever.’ The very thing I always loathed, and that seemed evil to me — namely, why should I not live forever? — is now the very thing my soul chooses; it now seeks death, and it is better for it that I was created in such a way that I will not live forever. And so I ask: let me alone, since in any case my days are mere vanity.

that You should give him importance to pay attention to him, to visit his deeds every morning and test him every moment?

"What is man" — until now he spoke according to Eliphaz's view, that everything comes through providence; but now he comes to voice his own opinion. As if to say: how can I believe that everything comes through providence? For what is man, that You should regard him as great and honored enough to watch over him, and set Your heart upon him? Is he not small and utterly lowly?

"You should set" — [Meaning] You should place.

What is man, that You should magnify him, and that You should set Your heart upon him – Now he begins to argue against Eliphaz's view concerning Providence, saying: what is man, that he should be considered significant enough for You to focus Your providence exclusively upon him? Or what is he considered, that You should even so much as set Your heart upon him incidentally, in passing? All the more so, how could this even be conceived? For —

'Every morning' — every single morning, and its sense is continually. Likewise: 'new every morning' (Lamentations 3:23).

"And that You should remember him every morning, and try him every moment" — that You should watch over him every morning, and scrutinize his deeds every moment — is this Your glory?

"And that You should remember him" — [Meaning] You should attend to him, as in "and you shall visit your fold" (Job 5:24). "Every morning" — [Meaning] every morning; similarly, "new every morning" (Lamentations 3).

And that You should remember him every morning – every single morning; and more than that: and try him every moment – that You test him every single moment, to this very degree.

How long For what length of time will You not desist from me, like (Exod. 5:9), “and let them not turn (ישעו) to false words.” Similarly (below 14:6), “Turn away (שעה) from him and desist.” until I swallow my spit long enough to swallow my spit.

'Look away from me' — that is, let go, desist; and likewise 'look away from me' (Isaiah 22:4).

'Will You not look away from me' — meaning: relent and turn away from the pain.

"How long" — as if to say: even granting that You do watch over me, and that these sufferings came upon me as a punishment — why does Your hand weigh so heavily upon me for so long, without ceasing to strike me, without granting me relief even for the brief moment it takes to swallow saliva?

"Will You look away" — [Meaning] will You cease, as in "look away from me, that I may recover" (Psalms 39).

How long will You not look away from me – According to Eliphaz's view, that Job's afflictions are providential, and that Hashem numbers their quantity and quality, watching over him at every moment so that he not die from the sheer greatness of his pain — how could it be conceived that the One exalted above the exalted would extend such providence to this man, who counts as nothing before His greatness? And the construction of the verse is: how, at every moment, to this degree — that You will not look away from me — do You test me? For behold, You do not give me rest even long enough to swallow my spittle, so that You must be examining my affairs every single moment. And how is it even possible that Your providence should persist to this degree? Now, such extraordinary vigilance cannot be conceived except in one of two ways: either it comes from great vengeance — just as a king who wishes to take great revenge on someone commands that he be tortured every day with harsh and strange afflictions, and appoints eminent physicians over him to heal him continually and see to it that he remains alive a long time, so that the king may go on taking revenge on him for a long time — or it comes from extraordinary beneficence, that He keeps him alive in order to do him good in the end. And against this Job argues that this vigilance cannot be for the sake of vengeance, for such vengeance can only be conceived between one person and another, if one has done evil to the other and wishes to repay him in kind — but not with Hashem, for it cannot be conceived that man could do evil to Him. And so he says —

as a mark for You As an object that a man strikes when he is angry and vents upon it the entire act of his hatred (other editions: his sin). so that I have become a burden to myself [Etz Chayim ms: Like “and I have become a burden to You.”] This is one of the words in which Scripture euphemized, and they are known as the emendation of the scribes.

'As a mark' — that Your hand and Your blow strike against me. 'So that I am a burden to myself' — this is one of the tikkun soferim [scribal emendations], although its meaning is sound even without the emendation.

"If I have sinned" — and furthermore, even if I have sinned, what am I, that I could do You any harm? And furthermore, are You not the watcher of men — why then did You create me, only to be made ready for You to strike me with the blow of Your hand? As if to say: surely at the very outset of my creation You knew that this is how I would turn out, and it is as though You created me in order to take vengeance on me, to be like a target for an arrow. "So that I am a burden to myself" — this is one of the scribal emendations (tikkun soferim); the text as it should properly stand is "and I have become a burden to You," and it refers back to "why have You set me" — as if to say: why did You create me, only to take vengeance on me and to become a burden to You, diminishing something of Your holiness? Surely my never having existed would have been better. And without the emendation, it means that Job is saying: I loathe my life, I cannot bear myself, and I am a burden to myself — and this is a figure of speech.

"As a mark" — An expression of striking a fatal blow, as in "come here, strike him down" (2 Samuel 1).

If I have sinned – even if I have sinned, what do I to You, and what harm has reached You through my sin, that on account of it You should be so agitated with all this agitation, to take such extraordinary vengeance upon me? And likewise it cannot be that this vigilance is for the sake of beneficence — the safeguarding by which He watches over the work of His hands — for on this point I ask, O watcher of men: if this vigilance comes because You are the One who forms man and watches over him, not wishing to destroy the work of Your own hands, then why have You set me as a mark for Yourself? Indeed, I ask: why did You create me at all, since there is no benefit whatsoever in my creation and existence — not for Your sake, since I am only a source of harm to You, like a thing whose trouble far outweighs its benefit; nor for my own sake and benefit, since through my very existence I become a burden to myself, a heavy burden bearing sorrow and toil, and non-existence would have been better for me than existence. All the more so, if the purpose of the sufferings is that through them You should bear away my iniquity, as Eliphaz said — behold, I ask —

Now why do You not forgive my transgression What is this matter that You do not forgive my transgression? and You shall seek me You shall seek me and not find me.

'And You will seek me' — meaning: You will seek me out. This concludes the explanation of the individual words of the response. [What follows is] the explanation of the content of the response: Job answered, arguing against Eliphaz's words. He responds to Eliphaz's assumption that rebuke and discipline come upon the upright and the blameless for the little sin they have, while death and utter destruction come upon the wicked because of the greatness of their sin, and he justifies his preference for death over the sufferings with which he was being disciplined, saying: If only my vexation, and the complaint I raise over my suffering, could be weighed together with my calamity on a scale, the one side would not outweigh the other; but since my calamity is heavier than the sand of the seas, my words come out broken, and my vexation matches the magnitude of what has broken me. For mighty arrows are lodged within me, whose venom my spirit drinks in, and terrors — mighty, wondrous terrors — array themselves against me continually. Do you imagine that I complain for no reason? Does the wild ass bray when grass lies before him to eat, or does the ox low when fodder lies before him to eat? In truth, I complain only about what is fitting to complain of. Can something tasteless be eaten without salt to give it flavor? Is there any flavor in the spittle of a healthy person? So too, because of my great sickness, I find no flavor in my food. The things my soul refuses to touch, out of squeamishness and disgust, are like the sickness in my own flesh — and how could I possibly keep away from it? Out of the greatness of my pain and sickness I long with a wondrous longing: would that Hashem might be willing to crush me further, beyond my sickness, in a way that would put an end to me altogether — for death is preferable to this life. And in truth, even though I am scorched by sickness and severe pain, I take comfort in this: that I have not denied the words of the Holy One, and I have no cause to reproach myself, telling myself that had I guarded against sinning against Hashem, this would not have befallen me. What is my strength, that I should hope Hashem will heal me and grant me a good end, as He promised me? I have no strength left to bear this sickness. And what is the limit of my life, that I should go on living until my seed and my offspring multiply, as He promised me? Little enough remains of my allotted days even without such troubles as these, let alone with them. Is my strength as great as the strength of stone? Is my flesh as strong as bronze, that I could endure this sickness? Do I not have within my own soul the fitting conduct that ought to serve me as help and benefit — namely, comporting myself in the fear of Hashem and walking in praiseworthy ways? Has proper human conduct been driven from me — meaning, have I failed to behave as a whole-hearted man ought to behave — that you should say my iniquities have brought this upon me? Is it conceivable that a broken man should receive reproach from his own friend, who says of him that he had abandoned the fear of the Almighty, and that this is why this trouble has come upon him? Is this the compassion and pity that his friends owe him? My friends have betrayed me — they are like a wadi, like the channels of streams that run dark, swollen with the great depth of the ice and snow melting into them; yet at the very moment they are running, they are cut off and cease, because their abundance does not arise from anything inherent to them, but from outside causes. As the water flowing into them is used up, and as the season's heat arrives, so that the rainwater fails and the melting snow is exhausted, they are uprooted from their place, or the streams disappear and are lost — either because their course shifts, diverting their waters from their sources to other places, or because they rise into nothingness and vanish, meaning that the very existence of the water departs from its source and is used up entirely. This last occurs when the vapor that forms in that place stops generating water there and rises instead into the air, or when the very formation of that vapor ceases. Both of these causes for the failure of rivers are noted in the Book of Meteorology. Merchants passing through in the rainy season have observed these streams running and hoped that when the heat of the season came and they needed water, they would find plenty there; but on reaching these streams in the heat, they found nothing, and were ashamed and confounded in their hope. So now you, my friends, have become like this stream to me: I trusted that you would help me in my time of need, and that your comfort would relieve my sickness — but the opposite happened. When you saw the terror that had come upon me, you were afraid to come near me, and you turned into strangers. Why have you become estranged from me? Did I ever ask you to give me something of your wealth, or to offer a bribe on my behalf from your own labor, to save me from an enemy or redeem me from the hand of the ruthless? Had that been so, I would have kept silent, understanding that they acted as they did to protect their own wealth. But I ask nothing of you — so why do you treat me as a stranger, claiming that I have erred in my words, and arguing with me on that account? Teach me where I have erred, and I will fall silent; come to me with true arguments, not with these false claims that I have sinned, when you yourselves know my righteousness and the integrity of my heart. How forceful and weighty are honest words! But what good do the rebukes you offer actually accomplish? Is it right that, in arguing with me, you should treat my words as mere wind, without bringing any real argument against them? Is this the way of a proper disputant? In truth, I judge that you would cast lots even against an orphan contending with someone else, on account of his weakness — for you dig deep to speak slander against your own friend once you see that his hand has failed, and this is proof that your intent is to prey upon the weak. Now, be good enough to look and see whether I am lying; turn back and answer my words without injustice. If you return to argue with me on these terms, my righteousness will become evident in the very disputation. Is there injustice in my claim that Hashem does not attend to the individuals of mankind? Can my own palate not judge the calamities that have broken me, and discern whether death is preferable to them or not? In truth, I will show them that, in a certain sense, death is indeed preferable to a life such as this. For man has a fixed end and an appointed term on earth, and just as the days of a hired laborer are limited, so too are his days limited. Just as a laboring servant always hopes for night to come, to find rest for his soul, and just as a hired laborer hopes for the time to come when his wages are due, so that he may be paid for his labor, so I have been allotted months of futility and nights of misery. For when I am in one month, I hope to reach the next, telling myself that perhaps the burden will not weigh on me as heavily in that month as it does in this one; and on the nights when I think to lie down and sleep, to find some rest from my illness, even then my heart does not settle. If I lie down, I am up again through the whole night, asking myself when I will rise; my heart measures out the length of the night, because sleep is denied me, and I am sated with tossing on my bed because of my illness, without any rest at all until dawn. This being so, it is clear that I always choose death over the life I am living, since my time is fixed, and I am always choosing to draw nearer to death — for in the morning I long for the evening to come, and in the evening I long for the morning. It is clear that this same longing is found in anyone chastened with such sufferings, and from this it is clear that death is, in some sense, preferable to them. Out of the abundance of my afflictions, worms have covered my flesh, and clods of dust, and my skin has cracked open and become utterly repulsive from the discharge within it. My days are swifter than the weaver's shuttle, which the weaver moves easily from one end to the other; so too my days are few, and they run out without any good hope, for I do not expect to live to see good after this ruin and sickness. Alas, Hashem! If it is true, as Eliphaz said, that You are chastising me and will grant me good in the end, how long will You wait before removing this evil I am in? Remember that my life is but a breath, and it is impossible that my eyes should see good again. The eye that beholds me will see me no more; I shall perish when my end comes; and when Your eyes turn toward me to do me good, You will not find me, and I have no hope that You will restore me to life to see Your goodness. For just as a cloud fades and passes away entirely, and that same cloud never returns, so too one who goes down to Sheol does not rise up again; he does not return to his house. I too will not hold my tongue on account of your words, refraining from complaint against Hashem, if what you say is true, that He attends to the individuals of mankind. I will speak out of the distress of my spirit; I will complain in the bitterness of my soul. Alas, Hashem! If it is true that this chastisement comes from You, why do You go to such lengths to do me such harm? Am I the sea, or a sea monster, that You should set a watch and a prison over me, so that I can never break free of it — just as the sea never at any time oversteps its bounds, nor does the sea monster ever escape its confinement, out of fear of men? For I said, I will find comfort from my trouble when I am on my bed; my couch will ease my complaint — thinking I would find rest when I slept. But even in sleep I find no rest, for then You terrify me with bad dreams and frighten me with harsh visions, until my soul chooses strangling, and death, rather than remaining with these bones and limbs of mine. I have loathed my life, for I will not live long enough to wait for a time when I might see good. Alas, Hashem, let me alone, for my days are but a breath, and they run out amid this evil. Now, after Job had refuted, in statements such as these, Eliphaz's claim that the pains that had befallen him were meant as chastisement — and had shown, from what he himself felt in them, that death is more to be preferred than such a life — he proceeds to a forceful argument meant to refute Eliphaz's view that Hashem attends to the individuals of mankind and understands their deeds. He argues that it is impossible for Hashem to attend to man, given man's deficiency and Hashem's perfection — all the more so that He should visit him continually, morning after morning, and examine him moment by moment to see whether he has sinned or not, until he receives what is fitting to him according to his deeds at each moment, with ever-new knowledge continually arising in Him without end, as Eliphaz maintained. Job says: Alas, Hashem! If what Eliphaz said is true, how long before You cease paining me — will You not let me alone even for the brief moment it takes to swallow my own spittle? Even granting that I am blameless and upright, and even granting that I have sinned, as Eliphaz claims — what could I possibly do to You, O Guardian of man, his Keeper, as Eliphaz calls You? Why have You set me up as Your target, as though You had nothing else to do but harm me, as though I had become a burden to You? Is this the way of a maker and guardian to behave toward what he makes and guards — that he should hate the very thing he watches over? Now, according to the scribal correction (tikkun sofrim), which emended the text to read 'and I have become a burden to myself,' the sense would be: You have gone so far in harming me that I have become a burden to myself, and I have grown weary of my life. And why do You not forgive my transgression and take away my iniquity, along with the pain You have inflicted on me, and remove this trouble from me? For now I shall lie down in the dust from the sheer intensity of the pain; and when You seek me out, to reward me with good for my righteousness and the uprightness of my heart, You will not find me — and injustice will be attributed to You, in that You will have withheld my reward for the righteousness and uprightness I have shown. Since this is so, on Eliphaz's own view there is no escaping the conclusion that injustice must be attributed to Hashem for this pain He has inflicted on me — even if I admit that I have already sinned, and all the more so if I maintain, as is in fact the truth, that I have not sinned at all. The general conclusion that emerges from all this is that the evils that befall individual human beings cannot be attributed to punishment from Hashem in the way Eliphaz maintained — namely, that the punishment of the wicked is that they perish and are destroyed, while the punishment of the good who have sinned only a little is mere pain and suffering — for if that were so, the punishment of the good would be harsher than the punishment of the wicked, and this would be an injustice on Hashem's part. This is borne out by the fact that Job has already told us that the intensity of his pains reached such a point that he would choose death over that kind of life. Job states this quite explicitly elsewhere as well, in a different response, when he says: 'If the scourge slay suddenly, He will mock at the calamity of the innocent' (Job 9:23) — meaning: if the scourge slays the wicked suddenly, Job will mock and laugh at the calamity of the innocent, since the trial of such sufferings is harder to bear than sudden death — all the more so given that Job maintains he has not sinned, for he knew of himself that he had not sinned. Job brought further proof that death was, in his view, preferable, from the fact that his days were numbered and fixed: while in one month, he would already be hoping for the next month to come; in the evening he would say, 'Would that it were morning.' It follows that he was choosing to draw nearer to death, and this is strong proof that death was, in some sense, preferable to him over this life — for were it not so, he would not have longed for the passing of the time he was in, since that longing is nothing other than a longing to draw nearer to death. And since this happens to everyone afflicted with such pains — that he longs for the passing of the time he is in — it is clear that every sufferer of such pains chooses death over that kind of life, incidentally, even if he does not consciously recognize this about himself. For this reason, Job chose to attribute to Hashem an absence of providence over the individuals of mankind, so as to keep injustice far from Him — the injustice inherent in the disordered way that good and evil befall individual people, an injustice that is unavoidable on the position Eliphaz maintained, as we have explained in this response. Now, Job's friends did not condemn him for denying the resurrection of the dead, since they were not among the people of our Torah, and, I believe, this promise had not yet been transmitted at that time by any prophet. Job further set out two reasons why Hashem cannot attend to the individuals of mankind: first, that man is contemptible in Hashem's eyes on account of his deficiency in relation to Hashem's perfection; and second, that such knowledge would forever be coming into being anew, and it is impossible that Hashem should have knowledge that comes into being anew — all the more so, knowledge that comes into being anew without end. Now, Job did not trouble to refute the particular arguments by which Eliphaz upheld his view of providence; rather, he refuted Eliphaz's view as a whole, bringing against it an argument drawn from experience and sound reasoning. He did not refute Eliphaz's arguments on their own terms — either because it was not yet clear to him how causation in these matters could be fully accounted for without positing that Hashem attends to the particulars of mankind, or because those arguments do not, in any case, necessarily prove that Hashem attends to the individuals of mankind, since one could say that this providence operates through some agency other than Hashem Himself. Were we to explain this matter fully, we would need a lengthy discourse, so we will be brief and content ourselves with what suffices for this place. We may say that, regarding all of Eliphaz's arguments, one could maintain that they do not prove what Eliphaz took them to prove. For instance, the knowledge conveyed through a dream might well be attributed to the order and the emanation that flows from the heavenly bodies and the Active Intellect, as has been explained elsewhere. Likewise, the matter of the rains, and the frustrating of the schemes of the wicked in order to protect the good, could also be attributed to an order and a providence exercised through the heavenly bodies, insofar as Hashem has appointed them to this task. But as for Eliphaz's claim that whatever counts as a deficiency in man cannot possibly be attributed to Hashem — this argument is not correct in every respect, as Aristotle himself shows. For what is a deficiency in man does not necessarily entail that the same thing is a deficiency in Hashem. Whoever possesses a capacity for some action regards that action as a perfection for himself, inasmuch as he has the potential for it; and when that potential is not brought into actual practice, this is a deficiency for the one who possesses that capacity. But it is not a deficiency for one who has no such capacity to begin with — whether a human being or some other living creature — if that action simply does not proceed from him. For example, the rooster's crowing is a perfection for the rooster, since it has the capacity for it; and if this action were withheld from it, that would be a deficiency in it. But it is no deficiency in man, or in other living creatures, that this same action is withheld from them. Since this is so, it is no deficiency in Hashem if He does not attend to every deed of man, even though He rules over the whole of existence. In general, it would indeed be a deficiency in Hashem if we said that He knows nothing at all. But if we say that He knows the eternal, honorable things, and does not know the perishable, lowly things insofar as they are perishable, on account of their lowliness — while knowing them insofar as they are eternal — this is no deficiency in Hashem, just as it is no deficiency in the human intellect that it cannot apprehend particular things, which are instead apprehended by the senses. This, then, is what might be said to show that Eliphaz's arguments do not necessarily prove what he took them to prove. As for the actual truth of this matter, we have already established it in the Wars of the Lord and in our commentary on the book of Sense and the Sensible, where we explained that Hashem knows all things perfectly, along with the manner in which He knows them. The truth concerning most of these arguments will become clear from what follows later in this book.

"And why" — and furthermore, have I not already received my full measure of retribution? From now on, then, why do You not pardon my transgression, and bring upon me the good that is the reward of righteousness? "For now" — meaning: surely now, in a short time, I shall lie down in the dust like those long dead; and if You delay in repaying me the reward of righteousness, I shall no longer be in the world, and so my reward would be forfeited. (The upshot of this response is to refute the view of Eliphaz, who said that everything comes through providence and that recompense will be paid; for Job replies with these words that, if so, this would be yet a further injustice — for the recompense of suffering paid to the righteous for a slight sin is a worse evil than the recompense of destruction paid to the wicked. And he brings proof from sufferers, who watch day after day as time passes, since the days of man are numbered, and so they long for the time of death to draw near. He adds further that it is no honor to God to concern Himself with the lowly, and he presses the argument, saying: even if He does concern Himself, and even if a person sins and incurs guilt, what effect does that have on Him, and why did He create him at all? And he complains further, saying: is it not enough for him, the punishment he has already received until now — and when will he receive the reward of righteousness? Will his reward be withheld?)

"And why" — [Meaning] and for what reason; similarly, "of what shall a living man complain" (Lamentations 3). "You will seek me" — [Meaning] You will search for me, as in "one who earnestly seeks good" (Proverbs 11).

And why – and why do You not pardon my transgression, and take away my iniquity? How long will You delay in removing it? For soon I shall lie down in the dust, since my life is short, and it would have been fitting for You to hasten to atone for my sin and remove the rod of Your anger while I am still alive, for in just a little while You will seek me, and I shall not be in the world.