איוב פרק א

The baraita further states that Moses wrote his own book, the portion of Balaam, and the book of Job. This supports Rabbi Levi bar Laḥma, as Rabbi Levi bar Laḥma says: Job lived in the time of Moses. It is written here with regard to Job: “Oh, that my words were written now [eifo]” (Job 19:23), and it is written there in Moses’ words to God: “For in what shall it be known here [eifo]” (Exodus 33:16).

Rava says: Job lived at the time of the spies whom Moses sent to scout the land of Canaan. This is proven by the fact that it is written here: “There was a man in the land of Utz, whose name was Job” (Job 1:1), and it is written there in the account of the spies: “Whether there are trees [eitz] in it” (Numbers 13:20). The Gemara asks: Is it comparable? Here the word that is used is Utz, whereas there the word is eitz. The Gemara answers: This is what Moses said to Israel, i.e., to the spies: Is that man named Job still alive, he whose years are as long as the years of a tree and who protects his generation like a tree?

The Gemara relates that one of the Sages sat before Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani and he sat and said: Job never existed and was never created. Rather, his story was a parable. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said to him: In rebuttal to you, the verse states: “There was a man in the Land of Utz whose name was Job” (Job 1:1)

The Gemara asks: But if that is so, what shall we say about the parable that Natan the prophet presented to David: “There were two men in one city; the one rich and the other poor. The rich man had very many flocks and herds, but the poor man had nothing except one little lamb, which he had bought and reared” (II Samuel 12:3)? Was there really such a person? Rather, it was merely a parable; here too it is merely a parable. The Gemara answers: If so, why state his name and the name of his city?

Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Elazar both say: Job was among those who ascended from the exile to Eretz Yisrael at the start of the Second Temple period, and his house of study was in Tiberias. The Gemara raises an objection from what is taught in a baraita: The days of Job’s life extended from when Israel entered Egypt until they left.

The Gemara answers: Say that the baraita means that the duration of Job’s life lasted as long as from when Israel entered Egypt until when they left, but not that he lived during that specific time frame.

The Gemara raises an objection from another baraita against the notion that Job was a Jew: Seven prophets prophesied to the nations of the world, and they are: Balaam and his father Beor, and Job, Eliphaz the Temanite, and Bildad the Shuhite, and Zophar the Naamathite, and Elihu ben Barachel the Buzite. He said to him: And according to your reasoning that Job could not have been Jewish because he prophesied to the nations of the world, was Elihu ben Barachel not a Jew? Is it not written: “Of the family of Ram” (Job 32:2), meaning Abraham?

Rather, one must explain that Elihu is included in this list because he prophesied to the nations of the world; and so too it may be maintained that Job is included in this list, even though he is Jewish, because he prophesied to the nations of the world. The Gemara asks: But did not all the other prophets also prophesy to the nations of the world? The Gemara answers: There, their main prophecies were directed to Israel, whereas here, their main prophecies were directed to the nations of the world.

First, consider the words: "There was a man in the land Uz." The term Uz has different meanings; it is used as a proper noun. "Uz, his first-born" (Gen. 22:21); it is also imperative of the verb Uẓ, "to take advice." Uẓu, "take counsel" (Isa. 8:10). The name Uz therefore expresses the exhortation to consider well this lesson, study it, grasp its ideas, and comprehend them, in order to see which is the right view. "The sons of God then came to present themselves before the Lord, and the adversary came also among them and in their number" (chap. 1:6, 2:1). It is not said: "And the sons of God and the adversary came to present themselves before the Lord"; this sentence would have implied that the existence of all that came was of the same kind and rank... Such a phrase is only used in reference to one that comes without being expected or invited; he only comes among others whose coming has been sought. The adversary is then described as going to and fro on the earth, and walking up and down thereon. He is in no relation to the beings above, and has no place among them. For this reason it is said, "from going to and fro on the earth, and walking up and down on it," for his "going" and "walking" can only take place on the earth. [Job], the simple and righteous man, is given and handed over to the adversary; whatever evils and misfortunes befell Job as regards his property, children, and health, were all caused by this adversary. When this idea is sufficiently indicated, the author begins to reflect on it: one opinion Job is represented to hold, whilst other opinions are defended by his friends. I will further on expound these opinions which formed the substance of the discussion on the misfortunes of Job, caused by the adversary alone. Job, as well as his friends, were of opinion that God Himself was the direct agent of what happened, and that the adversary was not the intermediate cause. It is remarkable in this account that wisdom is not ascribed to Job. The text does not say he was an intelligent, wise, or clever man; but virtues and uprightness, especially in actions, are ascribed to him. If he were wise he would not have any doubt about the cause of his suffering, as will be shown later on...