by one’s circumstances. Before Job can eat, he must sigh and reflect on his suffering. As he thinks about his situation, a scream erupts from the depths of his soul. But there is no one to hear his cries or to help. As Gersonides notes, Job’s suffering—like water that continues to flow downward—was continuous.
3:24 What I feared has happened to me, what I was afraid of, came upon me.
Job’s suffering was intensified by the anticipation and then the realization of his worst fears. Rashi tells us that Job was afraid that something terrible would happen to him, a fear that consumed him throughout his entire life. He feared that something had already been decreed. Perhaps Rashi used his insights as a father when he said that Job was afraid that somehow his children had offended the Deity.
3:25 I wasn’t at ease. I wasn’t quiet. I wasn’t at rest. Yet trouble came.
Readers can feel Job’s anxiety in this verse—even if he has the right to be anxious because of what he suffered. It is as if Job knew the statement of Rabbi Aha (Genesis Rabbah 84:1) who quotes the verse that when the righteous wish to be at ease in this world, Satan accuses and “trouble” comes. Although Job was not at ease, still “trouble came” upon him. Rashi thinks that the author is trying to tell the reader that Job could simply not stop worrying about everything.
Leviathan
The Leviathan is a sea monster of sorts, as also noted in Psalm 74:13–14 and Isaiah 47:1. According to Rashi (in his commentary on Genesis 1:21), God created the Leviathan. As a result, this monster is subject to God’s direction and control. Some suggest that it was created on the fifth day of creation. This monster, interpreted in various ways, appears in a variety of contexts in rabbinic literature.
Saadya Gaon
Saadya ben Joseph (882–942), from Fayyum in Egypt, is considered by most to be the father of medieval Jewish philosophy. He was the first to develop the notions of Islamic theology and philosophy in a Judaic manner. Similarly, he was the first to develop a philosophic justification for Judaism. He received his training in Egypt, where he lived the first thirty years of his life. He subsequently lived in the land of Israel, Syria, and Babylonia. In 928, he became the gaon (head) of the well-known rabbinical academy in Sura, Babylonia.
Saadya was also a pioneer in Hebrew philology. He translated the Bible into Arabic, and his commentaries on it laid the foundation for a scientific interpretation of the Bible. Much of his extensive literary output focused on polemics against Karaism. (The Karaites were a Jewish sect that accepted the biblical text, kara in Aramaic, alone, and rejected all rabbinic interpretation of oral law.) Saadya’s entire system of philosophy can be found in his book Beliefs and Opinions. His doctrine concerning the relationship between reason and revelation—which was accepted by most subsequent Jewish philosophers—provided the methodological foundation for his religious philosophy. For him, religious truth, a distinct form of truth, is found in revelation. Reason provides the common foundation for all religions.2
2. Kravitz and Olitzky, Mishlei, 243.
Chapter 4
4:1 Then Eliphaz the Temanite replied,
As readers of the book of Job have already learned (2:11), Eliphaz was one of Job’s friends. There was no real question asked, but Eliphaz is responding to Job’s predicament and anguished cries. In contemporary usage, the Hebrew place Tayman is identified with Yemen. The Targum translates the Hebrew v’yaanan . . . va-yomer (literally, he answered . . . and said), the Aramaic formula of response put into the mouth of Laban (Genesis 31:43) which we have translated as “replied” by rendering the first verb as v’aytiv (he replied) and the second verb as v’amar (and he said).
Amos Hacham, an Israeli Bible expert primarily of the twentieth century, claimed that the bulk of the book of Job consists of “ma’anot,” a Hebrew term which is taken from this language of reply that is used in the introduction to each new section.
Rashi wants to clarify Eliphaz’s bona fides. So he comments that Eliphaz was the son of Esau but he had grown up under the influence of Jacob. As a result, he was worthy of the Divine Presence resting upon him (and therefore being able to explain to Job what had taken place).
4:2 If someone tries to say something to you, will you be too weary [to hear]? But who can refrain from speaking?
As a friend, Eliphaz feels bound to speak. He simply wonders whether Job has the inner strength to listen to him after all that Job has experienced.
Rashi understands Job’s experience as a test. Thus, he reads the verse as “Has one test by your Creator so wearied you? Henceforth, control your speech, for who can respond to you?” This is not Ibn Ezra’s understanding at all. For Ibn Ezra the phrase means “How shall we bear a word to you?” In other words, “How can we convince you?”
4:3 Look, you have instructed many and strengthened weak hands.
Our translation as “you have instructed” assumes what is taught is moral instruction. Rashi understands it as “with many words you have reproved and chastised.” Thus, the hands that have been strengthened are those belonging to those who fear retribution. Job had told such persons that God would judge them with the application of God’s attribute of justice.
4:4 Your words have supported the one [who is] about to fall. You have strengthened buckling knees.
This verse continues Eliphaz’s words of support to Job, explaining to him—and for the benefit of others—all the good that Job has done in his life, especially in supporting others when they are in dire straits. The Targum tells us that a person might fall because of sin. Similarly, one’s knees might buckle because of transgression.
4:5 Now trouble has come to you and you are exhausted. It has touched you and you are astounded.
Eliphaz makes the point that American slang would make clear: Job has talked the talk but can he now walk the walk?
4:6 Are you not confident in your piety? Should you not depend on the perfection of your ways?
It seems that Eliphaz is putting questions to Job. On the one hand, “Shouldn’t you believe that somehow you will be delivered from your suffering because of what you believe and what you practice?” On the other hand, “Perhaps you really don’t believe that what you thought you believed and what you practiced will indeed bring you deliverance from your tragedy?”
As Rashi explains the verse, Job’s faith at this point suggests something about his initial belief. His piety was not well-based at all. It was folly.
Gersonides presents his understanding of the verse as “‘Perhaps,’ Job is being asked, ‘your reverence for God was so that your possessions would be protected. Now that you have seen your possessions destroyed, that reverence has departed.’”
4:7 Note well: who being innocent was ever punished? Who being upright was ever destroyed?
Because of the statements that precede this verse, it seems to reflect more of the speaker’s sense of unyielding faith rather than intentional irony that might be inferred should the verse have stood alone. We have all witnessed the perishing of the innocent and the destruction of the upright as we struggle to retain a belief in justice. Perhaps it is a statement of hope or prophetic vision for the future.
4:8 What I have seen is
