Introduction: The Third Speech in the Book
We begin Chapter 6, which is Iyov's response to Eliphaz - the third speech from the beginning of the book. As is our practice, we will first outline the main thrust of Iyov's arguments in this chapter, and only then delve into the pesukim themselves.
וַיַּעַן אִיּוֹב וַיֹּאמַר׃ - And Iyov answered and said:
Iyov's Fundamental Stance
Let us recall his position: Iyov argues that the earth has been handed over to the celestial systems and the constellations. There is no accounting for human actions, whether good or evil, for man is compelled in his actions - he has no free will, and cannot change what has been decreed for him by the celestial mechanisms. Consequently, there is no difference between a righteous person and a wicked one. The proof is he himself: I am completely righteous, I have never done wrong or evil, yet look at how many troubles have poured down upon me. From here lies the proof, in his view, that there is no purpose in fulfilling the mitzvos, there is no free will, and there is no reward and punishment - which is why such injustice can happen to an upright and righteous man like me.
Eliphaz's Argument: Temporary, Cleansing Afflictions
Eliphaz came to refute this: You claim that evils befall a person even though he is righteous - know that these evils are temporary. You say, "Behold, the righteous man perishes" - the righteous man does not perish. Rather, a righteous person may suffer temporarily, and these afflictions come because of a minor sin he committed, in order to cleanse him of that sin and save him for eternity. Thus, he receives a mild and temporary punishment so that he may attain eternal salvation. If he were to perish forever, you would be right; but that is not the case.
Iyov's Response: One Does Not Recover from Such an Illness
To this, Iyov responds in our chapter: From the afflictions that have come upon me, you yourself can see that the righteous man indeed perishes! My illness is so severe that it is completely impossible for me to heal from it. If so, how can you claim that the afflictions came to cleanse minor sins so that I might escape eternal misfortune? After all, in my state, my entire desire is that the end come faster, that my death be near. Do you really believe this is temporary and that things will yet get better for me? One does not recover from such an illness, and therefore nothing remains for me but evil.
"Tell Me What My Sin Is" - And: A Disproportionate Punishment
And if you say that I committed grave sins, such that a death sentence was decreed upon me and so inscribed against me - Iyov says to you: Tell me what my sin and my transgression are. You believe I have iniquities? Tell me how I sinned, what I did that was improper.
And as for the proof you brought - that when the Holy One, blessed be He, began to afflict you just a little, you immediately opened your mouth, and behold, there is your sin, for you spoke against Hashem and did not accept suffering with love - to this Iyov responds: Know that what I spoke is minuscule compared to the suffering I am enduring. It is inconceivable that a person should utter an improper word and because of that someone should pull out a gun and shoot him. Punishment must be proportional to the sin. Whatever you falsely attribute to me, even if this is the fault you found in me - that I did not accept the afflictions with love, but said, "Master of the Universe, I do not deserve this, You are not dealing justly with me" - such a sin does not warrant such suffering, and it cannot be that Hashem would afflict me so severely for it.
Every Creature Was Created for a Purpose
Beyond this, Iyov debates with Eliphaz over the very claim that the righteous suffer in order to purge their sins and save them from death. The premise is this: we know that every living creature was created in this world for some purpose.
This is like the famous story of King David, who asked: Master of the Universe, why do You need madmen? They have no purpose in the world; for what need was such a person created? Ultimately, when he fled from Shaul and arrived before Achish, king of Gath, and they told Achish that David had come to spy on him, posing a mortal danger - how was he saved? He feigned madness. Achish said: Do I lack madmen? He already had a mad wife and a mad daughter, and now they brought him another mad king - so he sent him away and drove him out. At that point, David said: Master of the Universe, it is good that You created madmen.
He likewise asked: Why is a spider needed? And when he fled from Shaul and hid in a cave, and Shaul wanted to enter and search for him, Hashem sent a spider that spun a web over the cave's entrance. Shaul said: It is impossible that anyone entered here, for there is a spiderweb here - so he left the place and went on. David then understood that Hashem created the spider for a purpose as well.
In truth, there is no creature in the world without a purpose, but we simply do not know everything. If one were to ask what the purpose of the common house cockroach is, other than scaring women - we do not know. Regarding most things in the world, our minds are too limited to grasp their purpose. We have not even fully understood our own bodies: until recently, surgeons would remove the appendix, believing it to be superfluous, and only lately has it become clear that the appendix acts as a kind of city of refuge - when there is an onslaught of bacteria or viruses attacking the immune system, the beneficial bacteria take refuge in the appendix, and later, once the body regains the strength to overcome, they emerge and fight the pathogens. Thus we see that we do not fully understand even the human body, and science continually discovers the purpose for which another element was created.
Similarly, regarding things once considered superfluous: trees - it turned out that they provide an immense benefit through photosynthesis, generating oxygen and absorbing carbon dioxide, and that clearing entire forests causes immense damage to the ozone layer and the like. Everything in creation has a purpose and an objective, and the very existence of that creature throughout all the days of its life fulfills its goal and purpose.
What Is Man's Purpose? - Two Views
Man, too, undoubtedly has an objective and a purpose. The question, however, is what it is: what perfection must he attain, and by what path? The Malbim explains that opinions differ on this matter. Some say that man requires a specific quota of deeds, a certain sum of mitzvos, and once he has completed it, he has already achieved his perfection. Others say there is no fixed quota at all.
The view of the Arizal is that if a person fulfills all 613 mitzvos, he has achieved his perfection and rectified all parts of his soul. However, this is not simple at all, and requires several gilgulim (reincarnations) to achieve, as a person must be born at times as a kohen, at times as a levi, and at times as a yisrael, and there are many mitzvos that do not apply to every individual.
The second view holds that there is no quota for how many mitzvos a person must fulfill; rather, the fulfillment of his role and destiny is that he must labor all his days. It does not depend on a numerical total, but on the fact that until the end of your days, there is never a time when you are free from Torah and mitzvos. Even if he did not manage to finish everything, he has done what was incumbent upon him: from the moment he was created until the end of his days, to do the will of his Creator.
A Source for the Two Views in the Words of Chazal
The Malbim notes that we find a source for this in the words of Chazal. On the verse, "and opened its mouth without measure [livli chok]" (Yeshayahu 5:14), Reish Lakish says: whoever leaves out even a single statute (chok) descends to Gehinnom - which aligns with the view of the Arizal, that one must fulfill all 613 mitzvos. Rabbi Yochanan, however, says: even if he observed only one statute. That is, even if you performed only one mitzvah - provided it was throughout all the days of your life, such that there was never a time when a person was idle and could say, "I have already performed mitzvos and from now on I am exempt." You may not have completed the full quota, but in terms of effort, you labored without pause, and that is sufficient.
This is also the Rambam's position: if a person performs even a single mitzvah with full devotion, purely for the sake of Heaven, he has already earned life in the World to Come through it. This does not exempt him from the other mitzvos at all - one must fulfill all of them - but this is the minimum threshold: even if one performed just one mitzvah perfectly for the sake of Heaven, he has fulfilled this requirement.
Based on this, we can explain the teaching of Rabbi Chananya: "The Holy One, blessed be He, wished to confer merit upon Israel; therefore He gave them an abundance of Torah and mitzvos." The obvious question arises: how is an abundance of mitzvos a merit? When there are many mitzvos, there are also far more opportunities to stumble into sin, whereas if there were fewer mitzvos, there would be less chance of stumbling. The answer, according to the Rambam, is that because there are so many mitzvos, it is virtually impossible that a person will not perform at least one of them purely for the sake of Heaven. Had there been only one or two mitzvos, performing them purely for the sake of Heaven would not be simple; but when there are so many, you are bound to perform at least one of them purely for Hashem's sake - and therefore, it is a merit.
Iyov's Challenge: The Punishment Is Worse Than the Sin
The Malbim explains: suppose the view of some commentators is that a person must constantly occupy himself with Torah and mitzvos all the days of his life, whether he lives long or short, whether he is able to fulfill all of them or only some of them - wholeness does not depend on quantity, but on time. In any case, according to both approaches, Elifaz's words remain incomprehensible.
Elifaz argues that for a minor sin, in which the righteous person did not complete his service, Hashem brings afflictions upon him to purge his iniquities. Iyov asks: What purpose do these afflictions serve? The suffering is actually worse - now I cannot complete my divine service at all, as I am prevented from doing so.
To what can this be compared? To a king's servant who was negligent in his work and did not do what the king commanded him. What did the king do? He cast him into prison to atone for his offense. Yet if the servant was supposed to work twelve hours a day and was negligent, working only ten - by putting him in prison, you have now stripped away even the ten hours he would have worked! It turns out that the punishment is far worse than the offense: he neglected two hours, and because of the punishment, he now loses all twelve.
This is Iyov's argument: Hashem says, "You did not complete your allotted portion, you did not complete your service" - whether according to the first opinion that there is a set quota of mitzvos one must fulfill, or according to the second opinion that one must fill his time with performing mitzvos, as much as he can manage, whether much or little - the suffering causes the cessation of service and the neglect of mitzvah observance. According to the first view: because of what I failed to do, You cause me to do even less; I could have fulfilled more mitzvos, but in this agony I cannot perform them. And according to the second view: I could have had more time to perform mitzvos, yet because I did not fill all my time, You now cut me off completely from the mitzvos? It makes no sense that something meant to purge a minor sin should cause an incomparably greater loss.
Ten Years of Suffering in the Middle of Life vs. an Early Death
Elifaz further argues: the afflictions that the Holy One, blessed be He, brings upon you prevent Him from taking you before your time. Put simply - it is worth it for you, for the alternative is that Hashem would put you to death because of your iniquity; therefore rejoice, for you received only suffering instead of death, and afterward Hashem will grant you long life.
Iyov replies: That is not true. For what is Hashem doing to me now by afflicting me? In essence, He is killing me - killing me temporarily. Why? Because He is paralyzing me from serving Hashem, making me like a dead man. Furthermore, I actually long for and prefer death.
Imagine a person who lives for seventy years, and Hashem decided to afflict him for ten of those years so that He would not have to take him before his time. Iyov asks: What is better for that person - to live seventy years and endure suffering, say from age forty to fifty, or to live sixty years and simply not be in this world during those ten years of agony? Surely the latter is preferable! For ten years of agonizing suffering are like death: right in the prime of life he was put on "pause", dead for ten years. And not merely dead, but in a state worse than death, for he yearns to die. If so, what good are these afflictions to me, by which Hashem purportedly averted my death? On the contrary, let me live sixty full years and let Him take me ten years early - it is far better that He put me to death at the end, cutting my days slightly short, than to kill me in the middle of life with something harsher than death itself.
And What About Eternity?
However, Elifaz argues: this entire calculation fails to take into account that an eternal world exists. The suffering you endure here comes in place of being lost forever, and that changes the calculation entirely - it is not merely shifting ten years from here to there; rather, through these afflictions you have gained eternity, as he says, "unnoticed, they perish forever."
Yet as recalled, Iyov denied the immortality of the soul. Iyov did not believe in Divine providence or free will, nor did he believe in reward and punishment - recompense for doing His will and retribution for transgressing it. This is why Chazal said: Iyov denied the resurrection of the dead. Therefore, Iyov says, the claim that "it is worth enduring a little suffering so that it will be good for you for eternity" does not convince me - I do not believe in eternity; in his view, once a person dies, everything is over.
Why Was the Prophecy Given to You and Not to Me
Iyov further argues against him: You said that you received the answer through prophecy and a night vision, and you said this was not a message of your own making - you might be mistaken, but what comes through prophecy is from Hashem. And Iyov says to him: If your words are true that this matter was transmitted to you from Hashem in a prophecy, it would have been far more logical for the prophecy to be given to me, so that I would receive the message and the answers. You are no more worthy of the word of Hashem than I am; it would be one thing had I been an unworthy person, had I been wicked - but Iyov was completely righteous, as he states repeatedly without end. If so, if Hashem has an answer, why did the prophecy not come to me, and how did the spirit of Hashem pass from me to you? On the contrary, it would be fitting for Hashem to speak with me, for I am the one suffering and afflicted.
The Challenge to Providence Itself - and the Parable of the Ant
Another matter: Iyov challenges the very concept of Divine providence. How is it possible that the Holy One, Blessed is He, exalted above all, devotes individual providence (hashgachah pratit) to the lowliest human being, watching over what happens to him, what afflictions he should receive, in what measure, when they will arrive, and when they will depart - all from Hashem? And how could it be that when a person sins, the Holy One, Blessed is He, afflicts him and takes care to keep him alive so that he receives the precise measure of suffering due him without dying prematurely?
Iyov says: I find all of this difficult to accept. Does the Holy One, Blessed is He, have any need for human life? Does it matter to Him whether a person lives or dies? Let us draw a coarse comparison: consider an ant, one of those tiny ones wandering around so much lately - do we care what happens to it, whether its leg hurts, how long it will live, what it will experience, or when it will die? And yet we are far closer to the ant, sharing many common points of existence, than the Holy One, Blessed is He, is to us in proportion. If I have no interest in what happens to the ant and in all its minute details, how can you tell me, Elifaz, that everything occurs through providence, that Hashem cares what happens to man, and that He ensures afflictions are of this precise degree and not another, and dictates when they will come? Why should the exalted God care what happens to lowly man, when the distance between us and Him, blessed be He, is higher than the heavens and entirely beyond comparison?
Who Truly Belittles the Creator of the World
Iyov's perspective is indeed the classic philosophical view: that the Holy One, Blessed is He, does not concern Himself with the lowly, for He is exalted and elevated. According to their argument, the Jewish perspective supposedly diminishes the Creator of the world, since it turns Him into one who is concerned with what takes place down here with the lowly, whereas they, the philosophers, exalt Him - He is high and lofty, and could not care less whether your finger hurts.
We have already discussed in the past that this notion is flawed. On the contrary: it is the philosophers who belittle the Creator of the world, while the Jewish perspective is what magnifies Him. For according to the philosophers, what does interest the Creator of the world? World wars, the grand events; but small matters, like a bounced mortgage payment, are not truly His concern. In saying that, you have diminished the Creator of the world.
The explanation is this: From here to infinity - what is the distance? Infinity. And if I step forward one meter, what is the distance from here to infinity? Still infinity. To say "infinity minus a meter" is absurd; infinity is infinity. It is like the person who visited a museum, pointed out an archaeological artifact to his friends, and said: "This artifact is five thousand and two years old." They asked him: "How can you possibly know that so precisely?" He replied: "Because exactly two years ago I was here with my parents, and the guide said it was five thousand years old, and two years have passed since then."
So it is here: from here to infinity is infinity, and from there to infinity is infinity. To say that the Holy One, Blessed is He, is interested in grand things and not in small things is the exact same fallacy. What you call "large" is nothing next to the Infinite, and so is the "small." Any scale you can conceive of is nothing next to infinity. Therefore, by making these divisions - that Hashem is concerned with great matters and not small ones - you yourself have conceived of something limited, for big and small only matter to someone who is finite. To One who is infinite, the great and the small are completely equal, for from zero to infinity, from one hundred to infinity, and from one million to infinity - it is all infinity.
A Complaint Against the Friends
Beyond all this, toward the end of the chapter, Iyov complains against his friends: why have companions, loved ones, and friends turned into enemies, and why have those who were supposed to come, find merits in his favor, and encourage his spirit instead become people who search for flaws and shortcomings in him and attempt to justify the severe suffering he has received?
In summary: In chapter 6, Iyov responds to Eliphaz on several levels: his illness is too severe to be a "temporary cleansing"; the punishment is disproportionate to any sin they might find in him, and therefore he demands that they tell him how he sinned; and on a fundamental level - just as every creature was created for a purpose, so too man's purpose is the service of his Maker, whether through a quantity of mitzvos (in accordance with the Ari z"l and Reish Lakish) or by filling all his days with divine service (as held by Rabbi Yochanan and the Rambam's view that a single mitzvah performed completely for the sake of Heaven is sufficient) - and according to both opinions, the suffering itself disrupts him from his divine service, like the parable of the servant who was thrown into prison for two hours of negligence, which caused him to lose the entire day of work. And regarding the claim that suffering spares a person from death, he replied that ten years of suffering in the middle of life are worse than premature death; and he did not engage with the argument of eternity, since he denied the resurrection of the dead. Furthermore, he wondered why prophecy had not come to him, and he denied individual Divine Providence through the parable of the ant - although in truth, it is the philosophical perspective that diminishes the Creator of the world, for with the Infinite there is no difference between great and small. Finally, he laments his friends, who turned from comforters into accusers.