Zeraḥiah ben Isaac ben She’alti’el ḥen was born in the early decades of the thirteenth century in Barcelona. He would relocate to Rome where, in the last quarter of the century, he came a highly honoured teacher of Maimonides’ philosophical thought. His Commentary on the Book of Job is the first exposition on the entirety of the book of Job by a Jewish philosopher in the Maimonidean school.
Zeraḥiah understood Job to be
allegorical, not historical. As Robert Eisen notes, Zeraḥiah’s reasons for such
can be divided into the following seven points:
1.
Lack of historical detail. According to Zeraḥiah, the allegorical nature
of the Job story is indicated by the fact that key historical details are
missing. Zeraḥiah points out that we are not told about who Job was or when he
lived, oversights that suggest such a character never existed. Similarly, when
Satan inflicts calamities on Job, we are not told what day or year they
occurred. This indicates that the author meant the story to be representative
of events that occur at all times, in all places, and to all people.
2.
Contrived names of places and persons. Some names and places are contrived
in order to reflect back on one or another aspect of the story, a feature
characteristic of allegories. Zeraḥiah adopts Maimonides’ view that ‘Uẓ, the
place where Job lived, is related to the Hebrew ‘eẓah, “idea” or “insight,”
since the Book of Job is supposed to prod the reader to reflect on the philosophical
lessons underlying the story. Zeraḥiah also adopts the view alluded to in
rabbinic sources that Job’s name, Iyyov, is related to the Hebrew oyev,
or “enemy.” As Zeraḥiah argues, the name is reflective of Job’s situation. He
is despised by God; he is despied by the forces of nature and by human beings
who do him and his loved ones harm; and he is despised by his friends, who
critizie him rather than comfort him.
3.
Unusual descriptions of persons, places, or animals. There are several
examples of this tendency in the Book of Job, which again provide evidence of
its allegorical character. The numbers of Job’s children and flocks of animals
are all presented in pairs adding up to multiples of ten: seven sons and three
daughters, seven thousand sheep and three thousand camels, and five hundred
oxen and five hundred she-asses. Zeraḥiah proposes that these numbers are
contrived so as to be representative of the average numbers of children and
possessions that a wealthy individual would have.
Zeraḥiah
also pays attention to the fact that Job is described by God at the beginning
of the story in superlative terms: “There is no one like him on earth” (Job
1:8). Here, too, Zeraḥiah claims that the description is evidence of the story’s
allegorical character, for it is unlikely that there would be no other person
in the world with Job’s qualities. While Job has virtues, he is not so exceptional
that he should merit such praise. Here Zeraḥiah seems to be making the astute
observation that allegories—as well as related genres such as parables, fables,
and fairy tales—often have characters that are described in unrealistic and
exaggerated terms. Finally, Zeraḥiah makes note of the exotic, fictional beasts
mentioned in God’s speech, such as the Leviathan. These creatures are also
characteristic of allegories. Such animals, Zeraḥiah explains, are designed to
capture the attention of the reader and inspire him to explore the inner
meaning of the story.
4.
Unusual events. In addition to the unlikely descriptions and people in
the Book of Job, strange occurrences also attest to the allegorical quality of
the story. Zeraḥiah specifically cites the destruction of Job’s flock of seven
thousand sheep by fire falling from the sky as an event too incredible to be an
actual historical occurrence. Zeraḥiah adds that the other two disasters that
befall Job are far more believable, and that the author placed the plausible
and unlikely events side by side deliberately. The unusual events will inspire
the philosophically sophisticated reader not to read the story as historical
truth and to search for its esoteric message. The plausible events will convince
the unsophisticated reader to accept the story at face value. Zeraḥiah also points
to the ending of the story as another unlikely series of events and thus
further evidence of the book being an allegory. That Job should have his wealth
restored to him and begin a new family stretches the credulity of the reader.
5.
Literary structure. Zeraḥiah cites on argument regarding the structure
of the dialogue as evidence that the story is allegorical. The number of
speeches in the Book of Job is precisely twenty-six, which corresponds to the
number of premises required to prove God’s existence, according to Maimonides.
It is also the numerical equivalent of the Tetragrammaton. These
correspondences, Zeraḥiah believes, could not be mere coincidence and again
attests to the allegorical nature of the story.
6.
The uniform style of the dialogue. Zeraḥiah argues that the literary
style of all the speakers in Job is the same. It is therefore unlikely that
they were historical individuals, since one would expect their speaking styles
to differ from one another. Zeraḥiah cites as proof of his point that each of
the biblical books of the prophets is written in the distinctive style of its author.
IT is thus clear to Zeraḥiah that one author composed the speeches in the Boo
of Job, and that they are not the product of actual historical individuals.
7.
Philosophical difficulties regarding God. Finally, as evidence for the
allegorical quality of the Job story, Zeraḥiah points out a number of philosophical
difficulties, most of which resolve around the classic problem of
anthropomorphic representations of God and His activity. Pretty much all of
these difficulties are connected to the conversation between God and Satan. Zeraḥiah
cites the implausibility of a number of features in the interaction between the
two, in particular the notion that God asks Satan where he has been, as if He
were ignorant of his whereabouts and that God would allow Himself to be
convinced by Satan to cause an innocent man to suffer. Such events are patently
absurd from a philosophical standpoint and again indicate that the Job story is
fiction and must contain a deeper meaning. (Robert
Eisen, The Book of Job in Medieval Jewish Philosophy [Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2004], 114-16)
