Job 35:16 | KD | STEP | Although thou sayest, thou seest Him not: The cause lieth before Him, and thou mayest wait for Him. 15 Now, then, if His wrath hath not yet punished, Should He not be well acquainted with sullenness? 16 While Job openeth his mouth without reason, Without knowledge multiplieth words. The address is not direct to Job exclusively, for it here treats first of the acts of injustice which prevail among men and remain apparently unpunished; but to Job, however, also, so far as he has, , comp. ; , thus complained concerning his prayer being unanswered. אף כּי signifies elsewhere quanto minus, , or also quanto magis, , but nowhere quanto minus si (Hirz., Hlgst.) or quanto magis si (Hahn), also not , where it signifies etiamne quum. As it can, however, naturally signify etiam quum, it can also signify etiamsi, etsi , as here and Neh 9:18. This quamvis dicas ( opineris ) is followed by the oratio obliqua, as Job 35:3. The relation of the matter - says the conclusion, - is other than thou thinkest: the matter to be decided lies before Him, is therefore well known to Him, and thou mightest only wait for Him (חולל instead of יחל or הוחיל only here, comp. , והתחולל לו); the decision, though it pass by, will not fail. In , is taken by most modern commentators as antecedent to , in which case, apart from the distortions introduced, two interpretations are possible: (1) However now, because His (God’s) wrath does not visit ... Job opens his mouth; (2) However now, because He (God) does not visit his (Job’s) wrath (comp. on this reference of the אפּו to Job, ; , )...Job opens, etc. That a clause with a confirmatory כי is made to precede its principal clause is not without example, , ; but in connection with this arrangement the verb is accustomed always, in the principal clause or in the conclusion, to stand prominent (so that consequently we should expect ויפצה איוב), although in Arabic this position of the words, ואיוב יפצה, and in fact Arab. fâyûb instead of wâyûb (in connection with a difference of the subj. in the antecedent and in the conclusion, vid., De Sacy, Gramm. Arabe, §1201, 2), is regular. Therefore for a long time I thought that was to be taken interrogatively: And now (ועתּה as logical inference and conclusion, which is here its most probable function, Ew. §353, b ) should His wrath not punish (פּקד as absolute as ), and should He not take notice, etc., כּי interrogative as ; ; 1Ki 11:22, as הכי (is it so that, or: should it be so that), , and freq., in connection with which, what is said on concerning the modal use of the praet . might be compared on the two praett . But by this rendering the connection of with what precedes is awkward. Ewald has given the correct rendering (apart from the misunderstanding of פּשׁ): Therefore, because His wrath has not yet punished, He does not know much about foolishness! requires to be taken as the conclusion to , yet not as an exclamation, but as an interrogative. The interrogative use of ולא is not unusual, ; , , ; ; and just as here, this interrogative ולא is found after a hypothetical antecedent clause, ; Exo 8:22. In connection with this interrogative rendering of , it still remains questionable whether it refers to Job’s sin, or sin which prevails among men. The theme of this third speech of Elihu requires the latter reference, although perhaps not without a side-glance at Job’s won arrogant behaviour. The translation shows how suitably is connected with what precedes: is a circumstantial clause, or, if one is not willing to take it as a subordinate clause, but prefers to take it as standing on a level with , an adversative clause attached with Waw , as is frequently the case: but (nevertheless) Job ... ; פּצה פּה of opening the mouth in derision, as ; ; הבל is the acc . of closer definition to it (= בּהבל), and the הכבּיר, which occurs only here and , signifies without distinction magnificare and multiplicare: Job multiplies high emotional words. As this יכבּיר is, so to speak, Hebraeo-Arabic (Arab. akbara ), so is full of Arabisims: (1) The combination אין פּקד, which has not its like in the Hebrew language (whether it be originally intended as relative or not: non est quod visitaverit, Ew. §321, b ), corresponds to the popular Arabic use of lys for lâ , Ges. Thes . i. 82, b ; probably אין has the value of an intensive negation (Carey: not at all). (2) The combination ידע בּ, to know about anything, to take knowledge of anything (differently , but comp. on the idea), is like the Arab. construction of the verb ( alima with bi (concerning) or bianna (because that) of the obj.; מאד (on this vid., on ) belongs not to בפשׁ (which is indeed possible), but, according to , to ידע. (3) פּשׁ is especially to be explained from the Arabic. The signification a multitude (Jewish expositors, after פּוּשׁ, Niph. se diffundere, ) is not suitable; the signification evil (lxx, Jer., and others: פשׁ = פשׁע) presents a forcibly mutilated word, and moreover one devoid of significance in this connection; whereas the Arab. fšš (but not in its derivatives, fashsh , empty-headed; fâshûsh , empty-headedness, imbecility, with its metaphorical sense) indicates a development of signification which leads to the desired end, especially in the Syro-Arabic usage most natural here. The Arab. verb fšš (פשׁשׁ, cogn. Arab. fšr , frš , to extend, expandere ) is used originally of water ( fashsh el - mâ ): to overflow its dam, to overflow its banks, whence a valley by the lake of el-Hîgâne , into which the waters of the lake flow after the winter rains, is called el - mefeshsh ; then of a leathern bottle: to run out ( tarf mefshûsh , an emptied bottle), of a tumour ( waram ): to disperse, disappear, and tropically of anger ( el - chulq ): to break forth, vent itself on anything, hence the phrase: dost thou make me a mefeshshe (an object for the venting) of thine anger? From this Arab. fšš (distinct from Arab. faš med. Waw , to swim on the surface, trop. to be above, not to allow one’s self to be kept down, and med. Je, comp. פושׁ, , , Mal 4:2, signifies to be proud) is פּשׁ, formed after the forms בּד, מד, מס, a synon. of זדון, or even of עברה in the signification of excessive haughtiness, pride that bursts forth violently. Thus, even at the close of this third speech of Elihu, the Arabic, and in fact Syro-Arabic colouring, common to this section with the rest of the book, is confirmed; while, on the other hand, we miss the bold, original figures which up to followed like waves one upon another, and we perceive a deficiency of skill, as now and then between Koheleth and Solomon. The chief thought of the speech we have also heard already from the three friends and Job himself. That the piety of the pious profits himself without involving God in any obligation to him, Eliphaz has already said, Job 22:2.; and that prayer that is heard in time of need and the unanswered cry of the godly and the ungodly are distinct, Job said, Job 27:9. Elihu, however, deprives these thoughts of their hitherto erroneous application. If piety gives nothing to God which He ought to reward, Job dare not regard his affliction, mysterious as it is to him, as unjust; and if the godly do not directly experience the avenging wrath of God on the haughtiness of their oppressors, the question, whether then their prayer for help is of the right kind, is more natural than the complain of a want of justice in God’s government of the world. Job is silent also after this speech. It does not contain the right consolation; it contains, however, censure which he ought humbly to receive. It touches his heart. But whether it touches the heart of the idea of the book, is another question.

‏ Job 35:16

Job 35:14-16 14 Although thou sayest, thou seest Him not:

The cause lieth before Him, and thou mayest wait for Him. 15 Now, then, if His wrath hath not yet punished,

Should He not be well acquainted with sullenness? 16 While Job openeth his mouth without reason,

Without knowledge multiplieth words.

The address is not direct to Job exclusively, for it here treats first of the acts of injustice which prevail among men and remain apparently unpunished; but to Job, however, also, so far as he has, Job 23:8-10, comp. Job 19:7; Job 30:20, thus complained concerning his prayer being unanswered. אף כּי signifies elsewhere quanto minus, Job 4:19, or also quanto magis, Pro 15:11, but nowhere quanto minus si (Hirz., Hlgst.) or quanto magis si (Hahn), also not Eze 15:5, where it signifies etiamne quum. As it can, however, naturally signify etiam quum, it can also signify etiamsi, etsi, as here and Neh 9:18. This quamvis dicas (opineris) is followed by the oratio obliqua, as Job 35:3. The relation of the matter - says the conclusion, Job 35:14 - is other than thou thinkest: the matter to be decided lies before Him, is therefore well known to Him, and thou mightest only wait for Him (חולל instead of יחל or הוחיל only here, comp. Psa 37:7, והתחולל לו); the decision, though it pass by, will not fail. In Job 35:15, Job 35:15 is taken by most modern commentators as antecedent to Job 35:16, in which case, apart from the distortions introduced, two interpretations are possible: (1) However now, because His (God’s) wrath does not visit ... Job opens his mouth; (2) However now, because He (God) does not visit his (Job’s) wrath (comp. on this reference of the אפּו to Job, Job 18:4; Job 36:13, Job 36:18)...Job opens, etc. That a clause with a confirmatory כי is made to precede its principal clause is not without example, Gen 3:14, Gen 3:17; but in connection with this arrangement the verb is accustomed always, in the principal clause or in the conclusion, to stand prominent (so that consequently we should expect ויפצה איוב), although in Arabic this position of the words, ואיוב יפצה, and in fact Arab. fâyûb instead of wâyûb (in connection with a difference of the subj. in the antecedent and in the conclusion, vid., De Sacy, Gramm. Arabe, §1201, 2), is regular. Therefore for a long time I thought that Job 35:15 was to be taken interrogatively: And now (ועתּה as logical inference and conclusion, which is here its most probable function, Ew. §353, b) should His wrath not punish (פּקד as absolute as Job 31:14), and should He not take notice, etc., כּי interrogative as 1Sa 24:20; 1Sa 28:1; 1Ki 11:22, as הכי (is it so that, or: should it be so that), Job 6:22, and freq., in connection with which, what is said on Gen 21:7 concerning the modal use of the praet. might be compared on the two praett. But by this rendering the connection of Job 35:16 with what precedes is awkward. Ewald has given the correct rendering (apart from the misunderstanding of פּשׁ): Therefore, because His wrath has not yet punished, He does not know much about foolishness! Job 35:15 requires to be taken as the conclusion to Job 35:15, yet not as an exclamation, but as an interrogative. The interrogative use of ולא is not unusual, 2Sa 20:1; Eze 16:43, Eze 16:47, Eze 16:56; Eze 32:27; and just as here, this interrogative ולא is found after a hypothetical antecedent clause, 1Sa 20:9; Exo 8:22.

In connection with this interrogative rendering of Job 35:15, it still remains questionable whether it refers to Job’s sin, or sin which prevails among men. The theme of this third speech of Elihu requires the latter reference, although perhaps not without a side-glance at Job’s won arrogant behaviour. The translation shows how suitably Job 35:16 is connected with what precedes: Job 35:16 is a circumstantial clause, or, if one is not willing to take it as a subordinate clause, but prefers to take it as standing on a level with Job 35:15, an adversative clause attached with Waw, as is frequently the case: but (nevertheless) Job ... ; פּצה פּה of opening the mouth in derision, as Lam 2:16; Lam 3:46; הבל is the acc. of closer definition to it (= בּהבל), and the הכבּיר, which occurs only here and Job 36:31, signifies without distinction magnificare and multiplicare: Job multiplies high emotional words. As this יכבּיר is, so to speak, Hebraeo-Arabic (Arab. akbara), so is Job 35:15 full of Arabisims: (1) The combination אין פּקד, which has not its like in the Hebrew language (whether it be originally intended as relative or not: non est quod visitaverit, Ew. §321, b), corresponds to the popular Arabic use of lys for lâ, Ges. Thes. i. 82, b; probably אין has the value of an intensive negation (Carey: not at all). (2) The combination ידע בּ, to know about anything, to take knowledge of anything (differently Job 12:9, but comp. Job 24:12 on the idea), is like the Arab. construction of the verb ( alima with bi (concerning) or bianna (because that) of the obj.; מאד (on this vid., on Psa 31:12) belongs not to בפשׁ (which is indeed possible), but, according to Psa 139:14, to ידע. (3) פּשׁ is especially to be explained from the Arabic. The signification a multitude (Jewish expositors, after פּוּשׁ, Niph. se diffundere, Nah 3:18) is not suitable; the signification evil (lxx, Jer., and others: פשׁ = פשׁע) presents a forcibly mutilated word, and moreover one devoid of significance in this connection; whereas the Arab. fšš (but not in its derivatives, fashsh, empty-headed; fâshûsh, empty-headedness, imbecility, with its metaphorical sense) indicates a development of signification which leads to the desired end, especially in the Syro-Arabic usage most natural here. The Arab. verb fšš (פשׁשׁ, cogn. Arab. fšr, frš, to extend, expandere) is used originally of water (fashsh el - mâ): to overflow its dam, to overflow its banks, whence a valley by the lake of el-Hîgâne, into which the waters of the lake flow after the winter rains, is called el - mefeshsh ; then of a leathern bottle: to run out (tarf mefshûsh, an emptied bottle), of a tumour (waram): to disperse, disappear, and tropically of anger (el - chulq): to break forth, vent itself on anything, hence the phrase: dost thou make me a mefeshshe (an object for the venting) of thine anger? From this Arab. fšš (distinct from Arab. faš med. Waw, to swim on the surface, trop. to be above, not to allow one’s self to be kept down, and med. Je, comp. פושׁ, Hab 1:8, Jer 50:11, Mal 4:2, signifies to be proud) is פּשׁ, formed after the forms בּד, מד, מס, a synon. of זדון, or even of עברה in the signification of excessive haughtiness, pride that bursts forth violently. ^{▼▼The signification expandere also underlies the noun fishshe, the lungs (in Egypt.); the signification discutere (especially carminare, to card wool), which the Talmud. פשׁפשׁ also has, is only a shade of the same signification; the origin of the trop. signification fatuum esse is clear from 'gaus fashûsh , empty nuts. The rice from the Palestine valley of Hûle, it is somewhere said, is worse than the Egyptian, because (what is a fault in the East) in cooking tufeshfish, i.e., it bursts, breaks in pieces (comp. on the other hand: if the seed for sowing sinks to the bottom when put into water, it is good; if it swims on the surface, jefûsh, it is bad). The Piel of this fashsha signifies to cause the water to overflow, trop. fashshasha qalbahu, he gave air to his heart, i.e., he revealed a secret which burdened him. A proverb says: the market (with its life and changing scenes) is a feshshâsh of cares, i.e., consoles a trouble heart. In the Hiph. one says in like manner proverbially, el - bukâ jufishsh, weeping removes the anguish of the soul. - Wetzst.}

Thus, even at the close of this third speech of Elihu, the Arabic, and in fact Syro-Arabic colouring, common to this section with the rest of the book, is confirmed; while, on the other hand, we miss the bold, original figures which up to Job 31:1 followed like waves one upon another, and we perceive a deficiency of skill, as now and then between Koheleth and Solomon. The chief thought of the speech we have also heard already from the three friends and Job himself. That the piety of the pious profits himself without involving God in any obligation to him, Eliphaz has already said, Job 22:2.; and that prayer that is heard in time of need and the unanswered cry of the godly and the ungodly are distinct, Job said, Job 27:9. Elihu, however, deprives these thoughts of their hitherto erroneous application. If piety gives nothing to God which He ought to reward, Job dare not regard his affliction, mysterious as it is to him, as unjust; and if the godly do not directly experience the avenging wrath of God on the haughtiness of their oppressors, the question, whether then their prayer for help is of the right kind, is more natural than the complain of a want of justice in God’s government of the world. Job is silent also after this speech. It does not contain the right consolation; it contains, however, censure which he ought humbly to receive. It touches his heart. But whether it touches the heart of the idea of the book, is another question.