Читать книгу The Book of Job - Leonard S. Kravitz - Страница 8

2:1 It was on another day that the angels of God came to present themselves before Adonai. Satan also came along to present himself to Adonai.

A scene similar to the one about which we read in 1:6 opens chapter 2. The author writes the verse to suggest that the scene is rather routine. The angels regularly present themselves before God and Satan is apparently included among them. B’nai elohim figure as the progenitors of giborim (mighty men) in Genesis 6:4. That those at Sinai (Exodus 20:2) were warned against elohim achareyim (others gods) suggests that monotheism proceeded first out of monolatry. B’nai elohim as a kind of congress of deities does not seem to faze the writer of the book of Job.

For Gersonides, the mention of Satan in this verse indicates a connection between the last and worst of the evils that befell Job. For Gersonides, evil doesn’t exist independently. Gersonides notes that unlike the previous verse (1:6) which also described the “children of God” who presented themselves before God with Satan in their midst, this verse tells us that Satan presented himself alone. For Gersonides, this is an allusion to that portion of the human soul to which advice may be directed, that is, for the service of the human intellect so that it may achieve perfection. So for Gersonides, the book of Job is a parable about imagination’s role in moving us toward what is impermanent and away from what is permanent.

2:2 Adonai said to Satan, “Where are you coming from?” Satan answered Adonai, “From wandering around the earth and walking back and forth through it.”

As in 1:7, the Targum adds that Satan’s movements were to mivdsak b’ovdai bnai nesha, to “examine the deeds of humans.”

2:3 Adonai said to Satan, “Have you paid attention to my servant Job? Nobody on earth is like him. Upright and honest, revering God and turning away from evil, he remains without blame, even though you have incited me against him to batter him for no reason.”

God shows Satan that Job didn’t react as Satan had expected. Rather than react with anger to what befell him, Job continued to lead a life of blessing.

2:4 Satan answered, “Skin for skin. For one’s own life, a person will give up everything he [or she] owns.”

Many families have their own insights that reflect the folk wisdom of this verse. The phrase “skin for skin” appears to be a proverb of some kind. To help understand it, the Targum translates the proverb as “limb for limb.”

Rashi thus understands the phrase: Were one to see a sword about to strike one’s head, one would raise one’s arm to protect oneself. How much the more, he adds, would one use one’s entire fortune to protect oneself.

2:5 Just stretch out your hand and touch his bone and flesh and he will surely curse you right to your face.

Satan remains dissatisfied and wants to continue his abuse of Job. What had taken place to this point was apparently insufficient. Satan assumes that eventually Job will reach his breaking point and curse God as a result. So now he argues that if Satan causes him physical pain, rather than the psychic pain of his losing his family, then Job would strike out against God.

Gersonides offers us philosophical insight on this verse. Satan thought that Job might curse God as a result of Job’s apparent misunderstanding of divine providence. Job thought that God did not afford that providence to lower beings. Had he conceptualized the matter correctly, he would never have been moved. Job’s confusion was due to the lack of proper philosophical investigation in the matter of perfection, so says Gersonides, which protects a person from what will turn out to be imaginary evils.

For Gersonides, what we read of the terrible things that happened to Job is only a parable: with God’s permission, Satan had attempted to harm Job’s body in every possible way. However, Satan was forbidden to harm Job’s soul. That soul could have ruled over Satan had it wished to do so. It was given over to Satan at one point because of Job’s imperfect reverence for God and Job’s loss of faith on being tested. This is the meaning of the statement “And touch his bone . . . [atzmo, which Gersonides takes to mean his essence, that is, his soul].”

2:6 Adonai then said, “Alright, he is in your hands. But spare his life.”

In this verse, God is again portrayed badly. God does not try to protect or defend Job. Instead, God allows Satan to continue to play with Job—asking only that his life not be taken. God seems to be wagering on Job’s virtue. As a result, God is willing to allow Job to suffer. And in this case, even if it is not apparent at other times, God seems to be able to intervene in order to prevent Job’s suffering from taking place. Job has become a pawn in a game of chess between Satan and God with no value at all.

Rashi surmises that God’s demand presents a problem for Satan. How can Satan afflict Job badly but not kill him? Rashi reminds us of the midrash (Yalkut Shimoni II: 893:2) in which the rabbis make the comparison of Satan to a person being told to smash a wine barrel filled with wine and still preserve the wine for drinking.

2:7 No sooner had Satan left God’s presence that he afflicted Job with painful blisters from the soles of his feet to the top of his head.

Satan couldn’t wait to do his dirty work on Job, especially now that Satan had God’s permission once again to do so. The author uses the same word—shecheen (blisters)—that the Torah uses to refer to one of the plagues afflicting the Egyptians. This is really to emphasize the severity of the affliction. However, the specific description of the ailment is not clear. They are some kind of boils or sores. Since it seems that the intent was to cause Job excruciating pain, we have translated ra (evil) to mean “painful.”

2:8 Job took a potsherd with which to scrape himself and sat in the ashes.

Job’s discomfort is palpable. So Job grabs whatever he can in order to try to relieve himself of his pain. Perhaps the choice of a “potsherd,” something broken and discarded, is symbolic of Job’s condition. Sitting in ashes or dust is symbolic of his mourning.

2:9 His wife said to him, “Still without blame? Curse God and die!”

While the comments of Job’s wife are certainly not sympathetic, they are understandable. She is looking for something that might explain her predicament, as well. She has also grown impatient with Job for his refusal to confront or curse God. In Job 2:3, we translated machazeek b’tumato as “remains without blame,” instead of other possible translations. We chose this particular translation of odecha machazeek b’tumatatcha, “still without blame,” because the English words suggest something which, although not as explicit in the Hebrew, seems to stand behind Job’s wife’s bitter statement: “You don’t blame God? You should! Curse God for what God has done to you, even if it means that you will die!”

Since Job’s wife is not identified by name, the Targum attempts to identify her. It suggests that she is Dina, Leah’s daughter, who brazenly fell in love with Shechem, the son of Hamor (Genesis 34:1–3). Perhaps the implication is that it is not Job who is to blame. It is Job’s wife—and her actions—that are to blame. That would change the dynamic of the story considerably. As Gersonides notes, Job still holds on to his virtue even in response to his wife’s words.

2:10 Job answered her, “You are talking like one of the foolish women! Should we be willing to [only] receive the good from God and not accept the bad?” In all of this, Job did not sin with his lips.

As in all attempts to translate idiomatically, there are challenges implicit in our translation of the verse. The plural noun ha-n’valot (foolish women) has a moral dimension to it. Looking at the context, “foolish” could be an epithet that a spouse, even one as sorely tried as Job, might direct at his wife.

Our rendition of Job’s question to his wife seeks to take it from the abstract and make it real. Hence, we have added “willing” to our translation of nekabel “we shall receive, get,” and “things” to the translation of tov (good) and rah (bad).

2:11 When the three friends of Job—Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuchite, and Zophar the Naamatite—heard about the calamity that had befallen him, each one left where he was, met together, and agreed to visit Job to console and comfort him.

The author presents these three friends of Job coming from a distance and after a period of time “to console and comfort him.” It is not clear how far away they are or how much time has elapsed. It is possible that the author intends to imply that both a physical and a metaphysical distance separate Job from his friends.

As a response to the implicit question as to what impelled Job’s friends to visit, especially at this particular time, the Targum tells us that they saw the trees in their orchards wither, the bread served at their meals became raw meat, and the wine served turned into blood. Because of their act of kindness, they were delivered from the place in Gehinnom that had been reserved for them.

Gersonides tells us that while Job’s three friends saw how upset he was, none of them were able to offer any words of consolation (as indicated in 2:13). Gersonides contends that had they been accomplished thinkers, they together with Job would have been able to conduct a philosophical investigation that might have led to a religious solution and would have avoided the contention that follows.

2:12 When they saw him from afar, they almost did not recognize him. Sobbing loudly, each one ripped his coat and threw dust upon his head.

While this verse is made up of familiar words, it is still difficult to render into idiomatic English. The verse begins with the familiar biblical idiom “and they lifted their eyes from a distance,” that is, when they first saw him. Because of his suffering, Job had changed so much that they didn’t recognize him—lo heekeeruhu. But the Hebrew that follows implies that Job’s friends did recognize him. That is why we have rendered the phrase as “they almost did not recognize him.”

The verse continues vayisoo et kolam vayvkooi, “and they lifted up their voices and wept,” which we translated as “sobbing loudly.” The last Hebrew clause (va’yizrkoo afar al rosheyhem ha-shammamah—they threw dust heavenward upon their heads) suggests some kind of mourning ritual in which dust is thrown in the air in order to fall on the heads of mourners. It may simply mean that they sprinkled themselves with ashes.

2:13 The three sat with him on the ground for seven days and seven nights. Seeing how great was his pain, no one said anything to him.

Job’s friends sat with him on the ground to share his pain. As noted in 2:11, Gersonides sees their act as a shortcoming rather than an expression of empathy. Nevertheless, it is the Jewish custom not to speak to mourners when visiting them during their period of mourning until they have spoken to you. The text does not report any initial exchange between Job and his friends, even when they first approached him. So it is really not known if the author’s intent is to imply that no words were spoken at all or, to use an English idiom, that “they had nothing to say to him.” In other words, Job’s condition was so bad that they didn’t possess any words that could provide any measure of solace and, as a result, remained silent.

2:14 Then Job opened his mouth and cursed the day of his birth.

In some editions this verse is 3:1. By placing it in 2:14 it serves to bridge the gap between chapter 2 and chapters 3 through 41. We have followed the critical manuscripts and included it here. Regardless of where it is placed, in this verse, Job finally expresses the pain that has been bubbling under the surface of this text since the beginning of his misfortunes. How could he not express himself in such a way given what he has experienced? One would expect no less. It is the reason why a mourner is exempt from certain religious obligations during the initial days of mourning. The Rabbis understood the position of someone who has suffered a loss of such magnitude. Perhaps the silence of his friends provoked Job to speak out at that moment. It might have been a reaction to the bitter words of Job’s wife—following his reflection on them. While the author uses the word yomo (literally, his day) at the end of the verse, we translated it as “the day of his birth,” following the suggestion of Ibn Ezra (and as implied in 3:2).

Gehinnom

The Jewish version of hell, Gehinnom, also called Sheol, literally refers to a valley south of Jerusalem on one of the borders between the territories of Judah and Benjamin. (Compare Joshua 15:8; 18:16.) During the time of the monarchy it was a site associated with a cult that burned children. Jeremiah condemned the practice. In the rabbinic period, the name is used to refer to the place of torment after death reserved for the wicked. It stands in contradistinction to Gan Eden, the “Garden of Eden,” which, in rabbinic literature, became known as the place of reward for the righteous. In the Bible, these two names never connote the abode of souls after death. Yet, in rabbinic literature, such references abound: in Pesachim 54a, Gehinnom and Gan Eden existed even before the world was created; Gehinnom is at the left hand of God and Gan Eden at God’s right in the midrash to Psalms 50:12.1

Providence

Sometimes referred to as “divine providence,” it is the notion that God can enter into people’s lives and history and exercise control. To better understand the notion, it might be called divine supervision of the individual. It includes the opportunity for God to intervene in nature “miraculously” as needed.

1. Kravitz and Olitzky, Pirke Avot, 91.