It has occurred to me that, for those not well versed in Hebrew, an English translation of Job 5.2-7 may be helpful in following the posts I have been making. To that end I provide a rough translation here. For the reconstructed Hebrew text from which this translation has been made, go here. The raised numbers refer to footnotes; they are not verse numbers. I apologize, in advance, for the rather lengthy explanatory notes. If nothing else the notes prove that all translation is interpretation. As always, comments are welcome.
Job 5.2-7
Surely1 anger slays the fool2
and envy kills the simple3
As for me,4 I have seen the fool taking root
but suddenly his abode was consumed!
His children5 are far from deliverance
6They are crushed in the gate
There is not a rescuer
What they harvested the hungry will eat
Their wealth the starving will take
The thirsty will pursue7 their possessions
For sorrow8 does not come from the dust
and trouble does not sprout from the ground
Rather,9 humanity10 gives birth to trouble
as the sons of Resheph11 fly high.
- An example of the asseverative כי. See GKC §159ee, GBHS §4.3.4i. ↩
- ל is used here to mark the direct object, a well attested phenomenon. ↩
- The word order of both lines of verse two has been rearranged in order to produce more natural English. ↩
- “As for me” translates the Hebrew אני. This translation was chosen primarily to ensure that the אני was represented in the translation. Secondarily, it serves to heighten the shift of focus which begins in verse three. Verse two is a proverbial saying, whereas verse three begins to relate Eliphaz’ personal experience confirming verse two. ↩
- Translating בניו as “his children.” This seems clearly to be the sense of the passage, as it is unlikely that Eliphaz has only the male heirs of the fool in mind. The entire thrust of the passage is that the fool gets his comeuppance, the fact that his children suffer is part of this. ↩
- The conjunction ו has been omitted. Likewise throughout. ↩
- In this case the parallel yiqtol forms in the first two stitches of verse five make clear that the final verbal form ought to be taken as a weqatal, regardless of the Masoretic accentuation. ↩
- און, in this passage, is in parallel to, and more or less synonymous with, עמל. ↩
- An example of the adversative use of כי. See GKC §163a-b, Williams §447 and JM §172c. ↩
- There are three possible translations for אדם which fit the context to varying degrees. The first is a basic rendering of the word as “a man.” This is certainly possible, and fits the context well. The second possibility is to translate אדם as “mankind” or “humanity.” This is quite similar to the first option, though perhaps somewhat more abstract. The final possibility is to take אדם as a proper name, and therefore to translate it as “Adam.” Of the three, this option fits the context the least, unless one were to take the verb as a preterite of some kind and translate “Rather, Adam gave birth to trouble.” Although this rendering may be possible grammatically, it does not appear to fit the context as well as the other options. Of those two options, the second has been chosen because it communicates best the crux of the proverb–human beings bring about their own trouble, it is not thrust upon them as if it were a plant growing from the ground. ↩
- The meaning of this phrase is difficult to ascertain with confidence. The LXX translator has chosen to translate the phrase as νεοσσοι γυπος (See Dhorme, Job, 61-62 for a discussion of the merits of taking בני רשף as a type of bird, probably an eagle). Modern translations normally see this phrase as some kind of metaphorical way of saying “sparks” (ie, “sons of flame”). However, there was a god named Resheph in the ancient near east, and it may well be that here there is a reference to him. David Clines has the right of it when he says, “since in Joban language the deity Death (Mot) has a ‘firstborn’ (18:13)…who are underworld demons, it is entirely likely that the ‘sons of Resheph’ had the same function,” (Clines, Job, 142). The sons of Resheph then are some kind of flying supernatural beings (demons? cf Targum Job). In order to remain as true to the original Hebrew as possible, while still making clear the reference to the ancient deity, the reading “sons of Resheph” has been preferred. ↩