Second Discourse of Jehovah (together with Job’s answer):
To doubt God’s justice, which is most closely allied to His wonderful omnipotence, is a grievous wrong, which must be atoned for by sincere penitence:
Job_40:6 to Job_42:6
1. Sharp rebuke of Job’s presumption, which has been carried to the point of doubting God’s justice:
Job_40:6-14
Job_40:6. Then answered the Lord unto Job out of the whirlwind, and said:
7 Gird up thy loins now like a man:
I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me.
8 Wilt thou also disannul my judgment?
wilt thou condemn me that thou mayest be righteous?
9 Hast thou an arm like God?
or canst thou thunder with a voice like Him?
10 Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency,
and array thyself with glory and beauty.
11 Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath;
and behold every one that is proud, and abase him.
12 Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low;
and tread down the wicked in their place.
13 Hide them in the dust together:
and bind their faces in secret.
14 Then will I also confess unto thee
that thine own right hand can save thee.
2. Humiliating exhibition of the weakness of Job in contrast with certain creatures of earth, not to say with God; shown
a. by a description of the behemoth (hippopotamus):
Job_40:15-24
15 Behold now behemoth,
which I made with thee;
he eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins,
and his force is in the navel of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar:
the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass;
his bones are like bars of iron.
19 He is the chief of the ways of God:
He that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.
20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food,
where all the beasts of the field play.
21 He lieth under the shady trees,
in the covert of the reed, and fens.
22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow;
the willows of the brook compass him about.
23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not:
he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan in his mouth.
24 He taketh it with his eyes:
his nose pierceth through snares.
b. by a description of the leviathan (crocodile): Job 40:25–41:26 [E. V. Job_41:1-34]
E.V. [Heb.]
41. [40.]
1 [25] Canst thou draw out leviathan with a hook?
or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down?
2 [26] Canst thou put a hook into his nose?
or bore his jaw through with a thorn?
3 [27] Will he make many supplications unto thee?
will he speak soft words unto thee?
4 [28] Will he make a covenant with thee?
wilt thou take him for a servant for ever?
5 [29] Wilt thou play with him as with a bird?
or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens?
6 [30] Shall the companions make a banquet of him?
shall they part him among the merchants?
7 [31] Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons?
or his head with fish spears?
8 [32] Lay thine hand upon him,
remember the battle, do no more.
[41]
9 [1] Behold the hope of him is in vain:
shall not one be cast down even at the sight of him?
10 [2] None is so fierce that dare stir him up;
who then is able to stand before Me?
11 [3] Who hath prevented me that I should repay him?
whatsoever is under the whole heaven is mine.
12 [4] I will not conceal his parts,
nor his power, nor his comely proportion.
13 [5] Who can discover the face of his garment?
or who can come to him with his double bridle?
14 [6] Who can open the doors of his face?
his teeth are terrible round about.
15 [7] His scales are his pride,
shut up together as with a close seal.
16 [8] One is so near to another,
that no air can come between them.
17 [9] They are joined one to another,
they stick together that they cannot be sundered.
18 [10] By his neesings a light doth shine,
and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.
19 [11] Out of his mouth go burning lamps,
and sparks of fire leap out.
20 [12] Out of his nostrils goeth smoke,
as out of a seething pot, or cauldron.
21 [13] His breath kindleth coals,
and a flame goeth out of his mouth.
22 [14] In his neck remaineth strength,
and sorrow is turned into joy before him.
23 [15] The flakes of his flesh are joined together:
they are firm in themselves; they cannot be moved.
24 [16] His heart is as firm as a stone;
yea, as hard as a piece of the nether millstone.
25 [17] When he raiseth up himself the mighty are afraid:
by reason of breakings they purify themselves.
26 [18] The sword of him that layeth at him cannot hold:
the spear, the dart, nor the habergeon.
27 [19] He esteemeth iron as straw,
and brass as rotten wood.
28 [20] The arrow cannot make him flee;
slingstones are turned with him into stubble.
29 [21] Darts are counted as stubble;
he laugheth at the shaking of a spear.
30 [22] Sharp stones are under him:
he spreadeth sharp-pointed things upon the mire.
31 [23] He maketh the deep to boil like a pot;
he maketh the sea like a pot of ointment.
32 [24] He maketh a path to shine after him;
one would think the deep to be hoary.
33 [25] Upon earth there is not his like,
who is made without fear.
34 [26 He beholdeth all high things:
he is a king over all the children of pride.
3. Job’s answer: Humble confession of the infinitude of the divine power, and penitent acknowledgment of his guilt and folly:
Job_42:1-6
1 Then Job answered the Lord and said:
2 I know that Thou canst do everything,
and that no thought can be withholden from Thee.
3 “Who is he that hideth counsel without knowledge?”
therefore have I uttered that I understood not;
things too wonderful for me which I knew not;
4 Hear, I beseech Thee, and I will speak:
I will demand of Thee, and declare Thou unto me.
5 I have heard of Thee by the hearing of the ear;
but now mine eye seeth Thee:
6 Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent
in dust and ashes.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1. That the omnipotent and infinitely wise activity of the Creator in nature is at the same time just, was in the first discourse of God affirmed for the most part only indirectly, or implicite. Only once, in Job_38:13-15, was this aspect of His character expressly presented, and then only incidentally. The second discourse of Jehovah is intended to supply what is still lacking as to this point, to constrain Job fully to recognize the justice of God in all that He does, and in this way to vanquish the last remainder of pride and presumption in his heart. It accomplishes this end by a twofold method of treatment. First by the direct method of severely censuring the doubt which Job had uttered as to the divine justice, and by vindicating God’s sole and exclusive claim to the power requisite for exercising sovereignty over the universe (first, and shorter part: Job_40:6-14). Next by the indirect method of attacking his pride through a lengthened description of two proud monster-beasts, mighty creations of God’s hand, which after all the amazing wonder which their gigantic power calls forth, are nevertheless only instruments in the hand of the Almighty, and must submit, if not to the will of man, at least to the will of God, who crushes all tyrannous pride (second, and longer part: Job_40:15 to Job_41:26 [ Job_41:34]). This second part, which is again divided into two unequal halves-the shorter describing the behemoth- Job_40:15-24, the longer the leviathan, Job 40:25-41:26. [E. V., Job_41:1-34], falls back on the descriptive and interrogative tone of the first discourse of God; in contrast with which however it is characterized by an allegorizing tendency. It directly prepares the way for Job’s second and last answer, in which he renews the humble submission which he had previously made, and strengthens it by a penitent confession of his own sinfulness.-The strophic arrangement of this second discourse of Jehovah is comprehensively simple and grand, corresponding to the contents, which are thoroughly descriptive, with a massive execution. It embraces in all five Long Strophes, of 8–12 verses each, not less than three of which are devoted to the description of the leviathan in Job 40:25–41:26, [E. V., Job 41.] These five Long Strophes include indeed shorter subordinate divisions, but not, strictly speaking, regularly constructed strophes.-Against the modern objections to the authenticity of the episode referring to the behemoth and leviathan, see above in the Introd. § 9, II. (also the notice taken of the peculiar theory of Merx in the Preface).
2. First Division (Long Strophe): Severe censure of Job’s presumptuous doubt respecting the justice of the divine course of action: Job_40:6-14.
Job_40:6. Then answered Jehovah Job out of the storm, etc.-This intentional repetition of Job_38:1 is to show that God continues to present Himself to Job as one who, if not exactly burning with wrath towards him, would have him feel His mighty superiority. That here also, instead of
îð ñòåä
, the original text was
îִðְäַñְּòָåָä
, is evident from the Masorah itself. The absence of the art.
ä
, if it originally belonged here, is by no means to be explained, with Ramban, as designed to indicate that the storm was no longer as violent as before.
Job_40:7 precisely as in Job_38:3.
Job_40:8. Wilt thou altogether annul my right?-
äֲàַó
stands in a climactic relation to Job’s “contending” (
øֹá
) reproved in Job_40:2. “To break” (
äôø
) God’s right would be the same as “to abolish, annul” the same (comp. Job_15:4). Job was on the point of becoming guilty of this wickedness, in that he sought to substitute what he assumed to be right, his idea of righteousness, for that of God, so that he might be accounted righteous, and God unjust, (see the second member).
Job_40:9. Or hast thou an arm like God?-
åְàִí
interrogative, as in Job_8:3; Job_21:4; Job_34:17. The “arm” of God as a symbol of His power, comp. Job_22:8; so also the “thunder-voice” spoken of in the second member; comp. Job_37:2 seq.-
úַּøְòֵí
, lit., “wilt, canst thou thunder? dost thou pledge thyself to thunder?”
Job_40:10. Then put on majesty and grandeur, as an ornament; clothe, deck thyself with these attributes of divine greatness and sovereignty (comp. Psa_104:1 seq.; Job_21:6 [5]. The challenge is intended ironically, since it demands of Job that which is in itself impossible; in like manner all that follows down to Job_40:13 (comp. Job_38:21).
Job_40:11. Let the outbreakings of thy wrath pour themselves forth.-
äֵôִֹõ
, effundere, to pour forth, to cause to gush forth, as in Job_37:11; Pro_5:16.
òַáְøåֹú
, lit., “over-steppings,” are here the overflowings, or outbreakings of wrath; comp. Job_21:30; and for the thought, particularly in the second member, comp. Isa_2:12 seq. The fact that Jehovah ironically summons Job to display such manifestations of holy wrath and of stern retributive justice against sinners, conveys an indirect, but sufficiently clear and emphatic assurance of the truth that He Himself, Jehovah, governs the world thus rigidly and justly; comp. above, Job_38:13 seq.
Job_40:12. Look on all that is proud, and bring it low.-This almost verbal repetition of Job_40:11 b is intended to emphasize the fact that at the moment when God casts His angry glance upon the wicked, the latter is cast down; comp. Psa_34:17 [16].-And overturn the wicked in their place,
äָãַêְ
,
ἅð
.
ëåã
., “to throw down,” or perhaps “to tread down” (related to
ãּåּêְ
). In the latter case the passage might be compared with Rom_16:20.-On
úַּçְúָּí
“in their place” [= “on the spot”], comp. Job_36:20.
Job_40:13. Hide them in the dust altogether;i.e., in the dust of the grave (hardly in holes of the earth, or of rooks, as though Isa_2:10 were a parallel passage).-Shut up fast (lit., “bind, fetter”) their faces in secret, i.e., in the interior of the earth, in the darkness of the realm of the dead;
èָîåּï
here substantially =
ùְׂàֹì
Comp. the passage out of the Book of Enoch Job_10:5, cited by Dillmann:
êáὶ ôὴí ὄøéí áὐôïῦ ðþìáóïí
,
êáὶ öῶò ìὴ èåùñåßôù
.
Job_40:14. Then will I too praise thee, not only wilt thou praise thyself (comp. Job_40:8)-That thy right hand brings thee succor;i.e., that thou dost actually possess the power (the “arm,” Job_40:9) to put thy ideas of justice into execution with vigor; comp. the similar expressions in Psa_44:4 [3]; Isa_59:18; Isa_63:5. This conclusion of the rebuke which Jehovah administers directly to Job’s insolent presumption, as though he only knew what is just, prepares at once the transition to the description which follows of the colossal animals which are introduced as eloquent examples of God’s infinite creative power, which for the very reason of its being such is of necessity united to the highest justice.
3. Second Division: The descriptions of animals, given for the purpose of humiliating Job by showing his weakness, and the absolute groundlessness of his presumptuous pride.
a. The description of the behemoth: Verses 15–24.
Job_40:15. Behold now the behemoth.-Even Dillm., one of the most zealous opponents of the genuineness of the whole section, is obliged to admit that the connection with what precedes by means of
äִðֵּäּ
is an “easy” one. Moreover it is by no means one that is “purely external,” for the behemoth is brought to Job’s attention for the very purpose of illustrating the proposition that no creature of God’s, however mighty, can succeed against Him, can “with his right hand obtain for himself help against Him” (see Job_40:14 b). This is clearly enough indicated by the second member: which I have made with thee;i.e. as well as thee (
òִí
as though it were comparative, as in Job_9:26; comp. Job_37:18). Job is bid to contemplate his fellow-creature, the behemoth, far huger and stronger than himself, that he may learn how insignificant and weak are all created beings in contrast with God, and in particular how little presumptuous and proud confidence in external things can avail against Him (comp. the passage of Horace; Vis consilî expert mole ruit sua, etc.). The name
áְּäֵîåֹú
(which the ancient versions either misinterpreted as a plural [so the LXX.:
èçñßá
], or left untranslated, as a proper name [Vulg., etc.]), in itself denotes, in accordance with the analogy of other plural formations with an intensive signification: “the great beast, the colossus of cattle, the monster animal.” The word is, however, a Hebraized form of the Egyptian p-ehe-mau, “the water-ox” (p=the, ehe=ox, mau or mou=water), and like this Egypt, word (besides which indeed the hieroglyphic apet is more frequently to be met with), and the Ital. bomarino, it signifies the Nile-horse, or hippopotamus. For it is to this animal that the whole description which follows refers, as is most distinctly and unmistakably shown by the association with another monster of the Nile, the crocodile: not to the elephant, of which it is understood by Thom. Aquinas, Oecolampadius, the Zürich Bib., Drusius, Pfeifer, Le Clerc, Cocceius, Schultens, J. D. Michaelis [Scott, Henry. Good refers the description to some extinct pachyderm of the mammoth or mastodon species. Lee, following the LXX., understands it of the cattle, first collectively, and then distributively]. The correct view was taken by Bochart (Hieroz. iii. 705 seq.), and after him has been adopted by the great majority of moderns. With the following vivid description of this animal’s way of living and form, beginning with the mention of his “eating grass” (supporting himself on tender plants, the reeds of the Nile, roots, etc.), may be compared Herod, ii. 69–71; Pliny viii. 25; Aben Batuta, ed. Defrem 4., p. 426; among the moderns, Rüppell: Reisen in Nubien, 1829, p. 52 seq.; and in particular Sir Sam. Baker in his travels, as in The Nile and its Tributaries, The Albert Nyanza, etc. (See extracts from these works, with striking illustrations of the hippopotamus in the Globus, Vol. XVII., 1870, Nos. 22–24) [Livingstone, Travels and Researches, p. 536].
Job_40:16. Lo now, his strength is in his loins, etc.-
àåֹï
as in Job_18:7; Job_18:12.
ùְׁøִéøִéí
in b, a word found only here (derived from the root
ùׁø
, “to wind, to twist,” which is contained also in
ùֹׁø
, “navel,” as also in
ùֹׁøֶùׁ
“root”), cannot signify, the “bones,” of which mention is first made in Job_40:18 (against Wetzstein in Delitzsch), but the cords, the sinews and muscles, which in the case of the hippopotamus (not, however, of the elephant) are particularly firm and strong just in the region of the belly.
Job_40:17. He bends his tail like a cedar;i.e. like a cedar-bough; the tert. comp. lies in the straightness, firmness and elasticity of the tail of the hippopotamus (which is furthermore short, hairless, very thick at the root, of only a finger’s thickness, however, at the end, looking therefore somewhat like the tail of the hog, but not at all like that of the elephant).
éַçְôֹּõ
, instead of being translated “he bends” (Targ.), may possibly be explained to mean “he stiffens, stretches out” (LXX., Vulg., Pesh.).-The sinews of his thighs are firmly knit together; or also “the veins of his legs” (by no means nervi testiculorum ejus, as the Vulg. and Targ. [also E. V.] render it). With
éְùׂøָâåּ
, “they are wrapped together, they present a thick, twig-like texture,” comp.
ùָׂøִâִéí
, “vine-tendrils” [the interweaving of the vine-branches being before the poet’s eye in his choice of the word. Del.].
Job_40:18. His bones are pipes of brass.-
àֲôִé÷ִéí
here “pipes, tubes, channels,” as in Job_41:7; comp.
ðַçַì
, Job_28:4.
ðְçåּùָׁä
, a word peculiar to our book, instead of the form which obtains elsewhere,
ðְçùֶׁú
(comp. further Job_20:24; Job_28:2; Job_41:19). Concerning
îְèִéì
, “staff, pole, bar,” probably the Semitic etymological basis of
ìÝôáëëïí
, comp. Delitzsch on the passage. In respect to the similes in both members of the verse, comp. Son_5:15 a.
Job_40:19. He is a firstling of God’s ways;i.e. a master-piece of His creative power (comp. Gen_49:3).
øֵàùִׁéú
can all the more easily dispense with the article here, seeing that it denotes only priority of rank (as in Amo_6:1; Amo_6:6; comp. also
áְּëåֹø
in Job_18:13, and often), not of time (as e.g. in Pro_8:22; Num_24:20). In respect to “God’s ways” in the sense of the displays of His creative activity in creating and governing the universe, comp. Job_26:14. The whole clause refers to the immense size and strength of the hippopotamus, which, at least in length and thickness, if not in height, surpasses even the elephant, and overturns with ease the ships of the Nile, vessel, crew and cargo. In reality therefore there is no exaggeration in the statement; and only an exegetical misapprehension of it, and an idle attempt at allegorizing it (stimulated in the present instance by the resemblance to Pro_8:22) could have influenced the Jewish Commentators, and those of the ancient Church, to find in this designation of the behemoth as a “firstling of God’s ways” a symbolic representation of Satan (comp. Book of Enoch, 60, 6 seq.; many Rabbis of the Middle Ages; the Pseudo-Melitonian Clavis Scripturœ Sacræ [in Pitra, Spicileg. Salesm. Vol. II.], Eucherius of Lyons in his Formulæ maj. et minores [Idem, Vol. III., p. 400 seq.], Gregory the Great, and most of the Church Fathers on the passage; Luther also in his marginal gloss on the passage, Brentius [see below, Doctrinal and Ethical Remarks.-The same view is taken moreover by Wordsworth, who explains: “It seems probable that Behemoth represents the Evil One acting in the animal and carnal elements of man’s own constitution, and that Leviathan symbolizes the Evil One energizing as his external enemy. Behemoth is the enemy within us; Leviathan is the enemy without us”].-It only remains to say, that there is nothing surprising in the fact that here, in a discourse by God, He should speak of Himself in the third person; comp. above Job_39:17; Job_38:41.-He who made him furnished to him his sword, viz. his teeth, his two immense incisors (which according to Rüppell in l. c. grow to be twenty-six French inches long), with which as with a sickle (a
ἅñðç
, Nicander, Theriac. 566; Nonnus, Dionysiac. 26) he mows down the grass and green corn-blades.
äָòùֹׁåֹ
stands for
äָòùֵֹׁäåּ
, “He who hath made him, his Creator” (the article being used as demonstrative; comp. Gesenius § 109 [§ 108, 2, a]), and
éַâֵùׁ
elliptically for
éַâֵùׁ ìåֹ
, “brought near to him, furnished to him.” The emendation suggested by Böttcher and Dillmann-
çֵòָùׁåּ
instead of
äָòùֹׁåֹ
: “which was created [lit. plur. ‘which were created’] so as to attach thereon a sword” (
éַâֵùׁ
as Jussive)-is unnecessary, as is also Ewald’s rendering of
äִâִּéùׁ
in the sense of “to blunt, to make harmless.”
Job_40:20 gives a reason for Job_40:19 b:For the mountains bring him forth food.-
éְáåּì=áּåּì
, produce, fruit, vegetation. The clause is not intended to describe the hippopotamus as an animal that commonly or frequently grazes on the mountains (in point of fact it is only in exceptional instances that he ascends the mountains or high “grounds, when the river-banks and the grounds immediately around them have been eaten up). It only intends to say that entire mountains, vast upland tracts, where large herds of other animals abide, must provide for him his food (see b).
Job_40:21 states where the hippopotamus is in the habit of staying: He lies down under the lotus-trees, in the covert of reeds and fens (comp. Job_8:11)-
öֶàֱìִéí
, plur. of
öִàְì
, or of
öֶàֱìָä
(a word which occurs also in the Arabic), are not the lotus-flowers, i.e., the water-lilies (Nymphæa Lotus) [so Conant], but the lotus-bushes, or trees (Lotus silvestris s. Cyrenaica), a vegetable growth frequently found in the hot and moist lowlands of Egypt, Cyrenaica, and Syria, with thorny branches, and a fruit like the plum. On b comp. the description of the hippopotamus given by Ammianus Marcellinus (XXII. 15): Inter arundines celsas et squalentes nimia densitate hæc bellua cubilia ponit.
Job_40:22. Lotus-trees cover him as a shade.-
öִìְìåֹ
(resolved from
öִìּåֹ
, like
âֶּìְìåֹ
, Job_20:7, from
âִּìּåֹ
) is in apposition to the subject, with which it forms at the same time a paronomasia. Another paronomasia occurs between
éְñֻëֻּäåּ
and
éְñֻáֻּäåּ
in b.
Job_40:23. Behold, the river shows violence; he trembles not; lit., “he does not spring up, is not startled.
äֵï
at the beginning of this clause has, as in Job_12:11; Job_23:8, substantially the force of a conditional particle.
òָùַׁ÷
here without an object: “to exercise violence, to act violently,” (differing from Job_10:3) a word which strikingly describes a river wildly swelling and raging [sweeping its borders with tyrannous devastation. E. V., following the Vulg. absorbebit fluvium (Targ. “he doth violence to the river”) gives to
òù÷
a meaning not warranted]. He remains unconcerned (lit. “he is confident”) when a Jordan rushes (lit. “bursts through, pours itself forth,”
âִּéçַ
as in Job_38:8) into his mouth. The Jordan, (
éַøְãֵּï
without the Art.) is used here in an appellative sense of a river remarkable for its swiftly rushing course, not as a proper name, for hippopotami scarcely lived in the Jordan. There is nothing strange in this mention of the Jordan in order vividly to illustrate the description, the same being a river well known to Job, and also to his friends. It certainly cannot be urged as an argument for the hypothesis that the author of this section is not the same with the author of the remainder of the book (against Ewald and Dillmann). [“The reason why the Jordan is the river particularly here used as an illustration is, I suppose, because not unlikely, rising as it does at the foot of the snow-clad Lebanon, it was liable to more sudden and violent swellings than either the Euphrates or the Nile. It is, in fact, more of a mountain torrent than either, and probably in its irruptions it drove away in consternation the lions and other wild beasts, located in the thickets on its banks.” Carey. Comp. Jer_12:5 and Jer 41:19].
Job_40:24. Before his eyes do they take him, pierce through his nose with snares.-The position and tone of the words forbid one taking this verse as an ironical challenge: “Let one just take him!” or as a question: “Shall, or does any one take him,” etc.? Instead of
áְּòֵֹðָéå
(i.e., “while he himself is looking on, under his very eyes;” comp. Pro_1:17), we must at least have read
äַáְּòֵéðָéå
. Moreover instead of the 3d Pers. we should rather have looked for the 2d, if either of the above constructions had been the true one (comp. the questions in Job 40:25 seq.) [Job_41:1 seq.]. The clause accordingly is to be taken, with the ancient versions, and with Stickel, Umbreit, Ewald, Dillmann [Conant] as descriptive of something which actually takes place, and hence as referring to the capture of the river-horse. By the ancients in like manner as by the Nubians of to-day this was accomplished by means of harpoons fastened to a long rope. It is either to this harpoon-rope, or to a switch drawn through the nose after the capture has been effected that the word
îåֹ÷ֵùׁ
in b refers. It can hardly mean a common trap (Delitzsch [“let one lay a snare which, when it goes into it, shall spring together and pierce it in the nose”]).-Why does God close the description of the hippopotamus with a reference to its capture? Evidently because He wishes thereby to emphasize the thought that this animal is wholly and completely in His power, that all its size and strength are of no avail to it, and that when God determines to deliver it into the hands of men, its pride is humbled without fail. Whereas on the other hand the description of the leviathan which follows contains no such reference to its capture, but sets forth throughout only the difficulty, or indeed the impossibility of becoming its master by the use of ordinary strength and cunning; this indicates an advance over what goes before.
4. Continuation, b. First part of the description of the leviathan:Job_41:1-11 [Heb. Job 40:25-41:3]: the untamableness and invincibility of the leviathan.-Dost thou draw out the leviathan with a net? [or as E. V., Gesen., Fürst, etc., “with a hook”]. The name
ìִåְéָúָï
denotes here neither the mythical dragon of heaven, as in Job_3:8 (see on the passage), nor the whale, as in Psa_104:26, but the crocodile, whose structure and mode of life are in the following description depicted with fidelity to the minutest particular (comp. the evidence in detail in Bochart, Hieroz. III., 737 seq.). In and of itself
ìåéúï
is the generic name of any monster capable of wreathing itself in folds, in like manner as
úַּðִּéï
(comp.
ôåßíù
) may denote any monster that is long stretched out. But as the latter name is become the prevalent designation of the whale, (see on Job_7:12), so the name leviathan seems to have attached itself from an early period to the crocodile, that particularly huge and terrible amphibious monster of Bible lands, for which animal there was no special name appropriated in the primitive Hebrew, as it was not indigenous to Palestine, or at all events was but rarely found in its waters (traces indeed are not absolutely wanting of its having existed in them at one time: see the remarks of Robinson in respect to the “coast-river Nahr ez Zerka, or Maat-Temsâh [“crocodile-waters”], and also in respect to the city Crocodilon, not far from Cesarea, in his “Physical Geography,” etc., p. 191). The name leviathan does not involve the Hebraizing of an Egyptian name of the crocodile, (analogous to that of pe-ehe-mou in behemoth). By so much the more probable is it that in the interrogative
úִּîְùֹׁêְ
“drawest thou” (without
äֲ
, see Ew., § 324, a), the poet intends an allusion to the well-known Egyptian name of the animal, which in Copt, is temsah, in modern Arab, timsah (Ew., Del., Dillm., etc).-Dost thou with a cord press down his tongue? i.e., when, liks a fish, be has bitten the fishing-hook, dost thou, in pulling the line, cause it to press down the tongue? The question is not (with Schult., Hirzel, Delitzsch, etc.) to be rendered: “Canst thou sink a line into his tongue [or “his tongue into a line”]? a rendering which is indeed verbally admissible, but which yields an idea that is not very intelligible. This member expresses, only with a little more art, the same thought as the first. It is not at all necessary to assume (with Ewald, Dillmann and other opponents of the genuineness of the present section), that the poet represents the capture of the crocodile as absolutely impossible, thus contradicting the fact attested by Herodotus, II., 7, that the ancient Egyptians caught this animal with fishing-hooks. That which the ironical question of God denies is simply the possibility of overcoming this animal, like a harmless fish, with ordinary craft or artifice, not the possibility of ever capturing it.-There is nothing to forbid the assumption that instead of the Egyptian crocodile (or at least along with it) the author had in view a Palestinian species or variety of the same animal, which is no longer extant, and that this Palestinian crocodile, just because it was rarer than the saurian of the Nile, was in fact held to be impossible of capture, (comp. Delitzsch II, p. 366, n. 2). It is, generally speaking, a very precarious position to question the accuracy of our poet’s statements even in a single point: compare e.g., the perfectly correct mention in this passage of the tongue of the crocodile, with the ridiculous assertion of Herodot. (II. 68), Aristotle, and other ancients, that the crocodile has no tongue.
Job_41:2 [Job 40:26]. Canst thou put a rush-ring into his nose, and bore through his jaw (or, “his cheek”) with a hook?-i.e.. canst thou deal with him as fishermen deal with the fish captured by them, piercing their mouths with iron hooks in order afterwards to thrust through them rush-cords (
ó÷ïßíïõò
), or iron rings (the fishermen of the Nile use the latter to this day, see Bruce, Travels, etc.), and to lay the fish thus tied together in the water?
Job_41:3 [Job 40:27.] Will he make many supplications to thee, etc., i. e., will he speak thee fair, in order to retain his freedom? The question which follows in Job_41:28 enlarges upon this thought, with a somewhat different application. “For a servant for ever” is here equivalent to “for a tamed domestic animal” (comp. Job_39:9).
Job_41:5 [Job 40:29]. Wilt thou play with him as with a bird?-
ùִׂçַ÷ áְּ
differently from Psa_104:26, where it signifies to play in something. By the “bird” here spoken of is meant neither the “golden beetle” (which in the language of the Talmud is called “bird of the vineyard”), nor the grasshopper (comp. Lewysohn, Zool. des Talmud. § 364). We are rather to compare with it the sparrow of Catullus: Passer, deliciæ meæ puellæ, and, as in that poem, we are to understand by the
ðòøåú
“female slaves;” scarcely the “little daughters” of the one who is addressed (as Dillmann thinks, who takes pains to exhibit here a new reason for suspecting the genuineness of this section).
Job_41:6 [Job 40:30]. Do fishermen-partners trade in him? [do they divide him among the Canaanites?]
çַáָּøִéí
(different from
çֲáֵøִéí
Isa_44:11) are fishermen as members of a guild, or as partners in a company associated together for the capture of fish; comp. Luk_5:7; Luk_5:10,
éִëְøåּ
with
òַì
as in Job_6:27, “to make bargains for anything, to traffic with it;” not “to feast upon anything, to make a banquet,” as the phrase is rendered by the LXX. (
ἐíóéôïῦíôáé
), Targum [E. V.], Schult., Rosenmüller, etc.; for
ëָּøָä
“to banquet” (2Ki_6:23) agrees neither with the construction with
òַì
, nor the mention of the “Canaanites,” i.e., the Phenician merchants (Isa_23:8; Zec_14:21; Pro_31:24) in the second member. [Gesenius, Conant, etc., less simply take
ëָּøָä
in its more usual sense, “to dig,” i.e., dig pits, lay snares for. Merx. reads
éִëְּøåּ
from
ëøø
, and translates: The animal, against which hunters go in troops].
Job_41:7 [Job 40:31]. Not only is the crocodile unsuited to be an article of commerce, but. coated as he is with scales, he is equally unsuited to be the object of an exciting harpoon-hunt. With
ùֻׂëּåֹú
, “pointed darts,” comp. the Arab, sauke, which signifies both “thorn” and “spear.”
Job_41:8 [Job 40:32]. Remember the battle, thou wilt not do it again-i. e., shouldst thou presume to fight with him (
æְëֹø
, not Infinit. dependent on
úּåֹñַó
, but Imperat. consecut., comp. Ew., § 347, b), thou wilt not repeat the experiment (
úּåֹñַó
pausal form for
úּåֹñֶó
, see Ew., § 224, b). Needless violence is done to this verse also, if (as by Dillmann) the attempt be made to deduce from it the idea of the absolute impossibility of capturing and conquering the crocodile. Let it be borne in mind that the words are addressed to a single individual.
Job_41:9 [Job_41:1], Behold, every hope is disappointed; lit. “behold, his hope is disappointed,” that viz. of the man who should enter into a contest with the monster (the use of the suffix accordingly being similar to that of Job_37:12). Even at the sight of him one is cast down; lit. as a question: “is one cast down?” etc.; i.e., is it. not the fact that the mere sight of him is enough to cast one down with terror? On
îַøְàָéå
, which is not plur.. but sing, comp. Gesenius, § 93 [§ 91], 9, Rem.
Job_41:10 [Job_41:2], None so fool-hardy that he would stir him up.-
øֹà
is not, without further qualification,
àֵéï
(Hirz.), but the lacking subj. is to be supplied out of the next member, and the whole clause is exclamatory: “not fierce (fool-hardy, rash) enough, that he should rouse him up!” Respecting
àַëְæָø
, (comp. Job_30:21. And who will take his stand before Me?-i.e., appear against Me as Mine adversary;
äúéöá
here in another sense than in Job_1:6; Job_2:1. According to some MSS. and the Targ. the text should be
ìְôָðָéå
, referring to the crocodile: and who will stand before him?” But this would destroy the characteristic fundamental thought of the verse, which consists in a conclusio a min. ad majus: “If no one ventures to stir up that creature which I have made, how much less will any one dare to contend with Me, the Almighty Creator?”
Job_41:11 [3]. Who gave to me first of all that I must requite it?-i. e., who would dare to appear against me as my accuser or my enemy, on the ground that he has perchance given me something, and is thus become my creditor? (Rom_11:35). As to the second half of the verse which gives the reason for the question, in which God claims all created beings as His property, comp. Psa_50:10 seq.; on
úַּçַú ëָּìÎäַùָּׁîַéִí
see Job_28:24; on the neuter
äåּà
see Job_13:16; Job_15:9.-The general thoughts advanced in Job_41:2 b, and Job_41:3 are a suitable close to what is said of the invincibility of the crocodile, as a mighty illustration of God’s creative power, so that we are required neither to transpose the passage (as e.g., by placing it after Job_40:14), nor to deem it out of place here, between the description of the leviathan’s untamableness, and that of his bodily structure (against Dillmann).
5. Conclusion: c. Second part of the description of the leviathan: The bodily structure and mode of life characteristic of the leviathan, the king of all proud beasts: Job_41:12-34 [4–20].
Job_41:12 [4]. I will not keep silent as to his members (
áַּãִּéí
, see Job_18:13). So according to the K’thibh
ìֹà àַçֲøִéùׁ
; the K’ri
ìåֹ àç×
would give the idea in the form of a question: “as to him should I pass his limbs in silence?” which as being a little more difficult is to be preferred. In no case does the clause deserve to be called “a prosaic and precise announcement of the subject to be treated of,” such as would seem to be “not very suitable” in a discourse delivered by God (Dillmann): the idea of the ancients touching what might be suitable and in taste, and what might not be so, were quite different from our modern notions. Nor as to the fame of his powers (so Vaihinger strikingly); lit. “nor of the word of his powers” i.e., of their kind and arrangement (Ewald), how the case stands with respect to them; comp.
ãָּáָø
in Deu_15:2; Deu_19:4. In the final clause
åְçִéï òֶøְëּåֹ
the word
òֶøֶêְ
is in any case equivalent to “disposition, structure” (Aq.:
ôÜîéò
), and
äִéï
seems to be a secondary form of
çֵï
= come-liness, gracefulness, with which the tenor of this description which follows well agrees, setting forth as it does not only that which is fearful, but also that which is beautiful and elegant in the structure of the leviathan. For this reason it is unnecessary either with Ewald to identify the word with
äִéï
, “measure” (dry measure), or with Dillmann to amend the text (to
òֵéï
? or
çֹñֶï
?)
Job_41:13-17 [5–9]: The upper and foreside [face] of the crocodile.-Who has uncovered the face of his garment?i.e., no one can uncover, lift up the upper side (
ôָּðִéí
as in Isa_25:7) of his scaly coat of mail; this lies on his back with such tenacity that it cannot be removed, nor broken. [Others, Ewald, Schlott., etc., explain
ôָּðִéí
of the anterior part of his garment, or armor, that which pertains to the head or face; but this would be less natural, and would involve tautology-the. “opening of the jaws” being referred to again in the next ver.].-Into his doable jaws who enters in?-Lit., “into the double of his jaws;”
øֶñֶï
here accordingly in a different sense from Job_30:11 [where it means “bridle,” the meaning which E. V. gives to it here]. The fact mentioned by Herod. II., 68, and confirmed by modern observations, to wit, that a little bird, the plover, (Charadrius Ægyptius, in Herod,
ôñï÷ßëïò
) enters the open jaw of the crocodile, in order to look for insects there, need not be deemed unknown to our author; only we are not to insist on his having such an incident in mind in the passage before us.
Job_41:14 [6]. The doors of his face-who has opened them?i.e., his jaws, his mouth, the aperture of which reaches back of the eyes and ears (comp. the well-known picture, taken from the Description de l’Egypte, and introduced into several pictorial works on zoology, e.g., into Klotz and Glaser’s Leben und Eigenthümlichkeiten der mittleren und niederen Thierwelt, Leipzig, 1869, p. 15, representing the mouth of a crocodile wide open, with a Charadrius in it).-Round about his teeth is terror; comp. Job_39:20. The crocodile has thirty-six long, pointed teeth in the upper jaw, and thirty in the lower, the appearance of which is all the more terrible that they are not covered by the lips.
Job_41:15 [7]. A pride are the furrows of the shields (comp. Job_40:18), referring to the arched bony shields, of which the animal has seventeen rows, all equally large and square in form. [According to this interpretation
àֲôִé÷ֵé
means first channels, and then the shields bounded by those channels. Others (Gesenius, Conant, etc.) take it as an adj. = robusta (robora) scutorum].-Fastened together like a closely, fitting seal; or, construing
çåúí öø
not as appositional, but as instrumental accusative (according to Ewald, § 297, b): “fastened together as with a closely-fitting seal” [so E. V.]. How this is to be understood is shown by the two verses which follow; in which comp., as to the phrase,
àéùׁ áàçéäå
, Gesen., § 124, [§ 122], Rem. 4; as to the verbs
ãá÷ִ
and
éúìëã
Job_38:30; Job_38:38.
Job_41:18-21 [10–13]. The sneezing and breathing of the crocodile.-His sneezing flashes forth light (
úָּäֶì
, abbreviated from
úָּäֵì
, Hiph. of
äìì
, comp. Job_31:26); i.e., when the crocodile turned toward the sun with open jaws is excited to sneezing (which in such a posture happens very easily, see Bochart III., 753 seq.), the water and slime gushing from his mouth glisten brilliantly in the sunbeams. As Delitz. says truly: “This delicate observation of nature is here compressed into three words; in this concentration of whole, grand thoughts and pictures, we recognize the older poet.”-And his eyes are as eyelids of the dawn (Job_3:9); i.e., when with their red glow they glimmer in the water, before the animal’s head becomes visible above the surface of the water. This cat-like sparkle of the crocodile’s eyes was observed from an early period, and is the reason why in the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics two crocodiles’ eyes became the hieroglyph for the dawn, according to the express statement of Horus, Hierogl. I., Job 68:
ἐðåéäὴ ðñὸ ðáíôὸò óþìáôïò æþïõ ïἱ ὀöèáëìïὶ ἐê ôïῦ âý
̓
èïõ ἀíáöáßíïíôáé
.
Job_41:19 [11]. Out of his mouth proceed torches;i.e., not literal torches, but streams of water shining like torches, when the animal emerging out of the water breathes violently.-Out of his nostrils goes forth smoke, like a seething pot with reeds [lit., “like a kettle blown and reeds”]; i.e., like a heated kettle standing over a crackling and strongly smoking fire of reeds (Ewald, Böttcher, Delitzsch, Dillm.) [Conant]. The common rendering is: “as a seething pot and caldron;” but
àַâְîåֹï
is scarcely to be taken to signify something else here than above in Job 40:26 [Job_41:2]; “caldron” would be
àַâָּï
, Arab, iggane. With the description before us, as well as with the still more strongly hyperbolical description in the verse which follows, comp. the description of Bochart, l. c.: Turn spiritus diu pressus sic effervescit et erumpit tam violenter, ut flammas ore et naribus videatur evomere. Also what the traveler Bartram (in Rosenmüller’s Alterth., p. 250) relates of an alligator in Carolina, that a thick smoke streamed out of its distended nostrils, with a noise which made the earth shake. [Schlottmann calls attention to the close parallelism between Job_41:18-19 and Job_41:20-21].
Job_41:22 [14]. On his neck dwells (lit., “passes the night, lodges,”
éָìִéï
as in Job_17:2) strength, and despair danceth hence before him.
úָּãåּõ
, leaps, springs up suddenly. Both members of the verse refer to the crocodile suddenly emerging out of the water, and terrifying men or beasts, and particularly to the violent movements of its neck or head, which are sufficient to overturn ships, etc. [“The trepidation, the confused running to and fro of one who is in extreme anguish (comp.
éúçèàå
Job_41:17) is compared to the dancing of one who is crazed, and this is attributed to the
ãàáä
as the personification of the anguish.” Schlott.-E. V., less suitably: “and sorrow is turned into joy before him”].
Job_41:23 [15] seq., describe the lower and hinder parts of the animal.-The flanks [
îôìé
, the flabby pendulous parts of the body, especially the belly] of his flesh are closely joined together, are fixed fast upon him, are not moved; i.e., they do not shake with the motions of the body, being thickly lined with strong scales, smaller however than those on the back.
éָöּåּ÷
, pass. partic. of
éö÷
, differing accordingly from Job_28:2; Job_29:6.
Job_41:24 [16]. His heart is firmly cast as a stone, firmly cast as a nether millstone, [not as E. V., “as a piece of the nether millstone,” for
ôìç
, as that which is split off, or produced by cleavage, refers to the whole stone; hence elsewhere (Jdg_9:53; 2Sa_24:6),
ôֶìַç øֶֹëֶá
for the upper millstone]. It was necessary that the nether millstone should be particularly hard, because it has to bear the weight and friction of the upper stone; comp. the Biblical Archæologies and Dictionaries, under the word “Mill.” Besides the physical hardness of the crocodile’s heart (in respect to which comp. Arist. De partib. animal. 3, 4), the poet here has in view the firmness of his heart in the tropical or ethical sense, i.e., the courage and fierceness of the beast, as the following verses show clearly enough.
