Job 11:5–9

Footnotes

1. 11 The wish formula מִי־יִתֵּן (mi yitten, “who will give”; see §151.b) is followed here by an infinitive (Exod 16:3; 2 Sam 19:1).
2. 12 Job had expressed his eagerness to challenge God; Zophar here wishes that God would take up that challenge.
3. 13 The text seems to be saying “that it [wisdom] is double in understanding.” The point is that it is different than Job conceived it—it far exceeded all perception. But some commentators have thought this still too difficult, and so have replaced the word כִפְלַיִם (khiflayim, “two sides”) with כִפְלָאִים (khifla’im, “like wonders,” or, more simply, “wonders” without the preposition). But it is still a little strange to talk about God’s wisdom being like wonders. Others have had more radical changes in the text; J. J. Slotki has “for sound wisdom is his. And know that double [punishment] shall God exact of you” (“Job 11:6,” 35 [1985]: 229–30).
4. 14 The verb is the imperative with a ו (vav). Following the jussive, this clause would be subordinated to the preceding (see §110.i).
5. 15 Heb “God causes to be forgotten for you part of your iniquity.” The meaning is that God was exacting less punishment from Job than Job deserved, for Job could not remember all his sins. This statement is fitting for Zophar, who is the cruelest of Job’s friends (see H. H. Rowley, Job [], 88). Others in an attempt to improve the text make too many unwarranted changes. Some would read יִשְׁאָלְךָ (yish’alkha, “he asks of you”) instead of יַשֶּׂה לְךָ (yasseh léka, “he causes to be forgotten for you”). This would mean that God demands an account of Job’s sin. But, as D. J. A. Clines says, this change is weak and needless (Job [], ).
6. 16 The verb is מָצָא (matsa’, “to find; to discover”). Here it should be given the nuance of potential imperfect. And, in the rhetorical question it is affirming that Job cannot find out the essence of God.
7. 17 The word means “search; investigation”; but it here means what is discovered in the search (so a metonymy of cause for the effect).
8. 18 The same verb is now found in the second half of the verse, with a slightly different sense—“attain, reach.” A. R. Ceresko notes this as an example of antanaclasis (repetition of a word with a lightly different sense—“find/attain”). See “The Function of Antanaclasis in Hebrew Poetry,” 44 (1982): 560–61.
9. 19 The abstract תַּכְלִית (takhlit) from כָּלָה (kalah, “to be complete; to be perfect”) may mean the end or limit of something, perhaps to perfection. So the has “can you probe the limits of the Almighty?” The has: “have you come to the end of that which the Almighty has made?”
10. 20 The Hebrew says “heights of heaven, what can you do?” A. B. Davidson suggested this was an exclamation and should be left that way. But most commentators will repoint גָּבְהֵי שָׁמַיִם (govhe shamayim, “heights of heaven”) to גְּבֹהָה מִשָּׁמַיִם (gévohah mishamayim, “higher than the heavens”) to match the parallel expression. The may have rearranged the text: “heaven is high.”
11. 21 Or “deeper than hell.” The word “Sheol” always poses problems for translation. Here because it is the opposite of heaven in this merism, “hell” would be a legitimate translation. It refers to the realm of the dead—the grave and beyond. The language is excessive; but the point is that God’s wisdom is immeasurable—and Job is powerless before it.