Ayub 20:12-19
Konteks20:12 “If 1 evil is sweet in his mouth
and he hides it under his tongue, 2
20:13 if he retains it for himself
and does not let it go,
and holds it fast in his mouth, 3
20:14 his food is turned sour 4 in his stomach; 5
it becomes the venom of serpents 6 within him.
20:15 The wealth that he consumed 7 he vomits up,
God will make him throw it out 8 of his stomach.
20:16 He sucks the poison 9 of serpents; 10
the fangs 11 of a viper 12 kill him.
20:17 He will not look on the streams, 13
the rivers, which are the torrents 14
of honey and butter. 15
20:18 He gives back the ill-gotten gain 16
without assimilating it; 17
he will not enjoy the wealth from his commerce. 18
20:19 For he has oppressed the poor and abandoned them; 19
he has seized a house which he did not build. 20
[20:12] 1 tn The conjunction אִם (’im) introduces clauses that are conditional or concessive. With the imperfect verb in the protasis it indicates what is possible in the present or future. See GKC 496 §159.q).
[20:12] 2 sn The wicked person holds on to evil as long as he can, savoring the taste or the pleasure of it.
[20:13] 3 tn Heb “in the middle of his palate.”
[20:14] 4 tn The perfect verb in the apodosis might express the suddenness of the change (see S. R. Driver, Tenses in Hebrew, 204), or it might be a constative perfect looking at the action as a whole without reference to inception, progress, or completion (see IBHS 480-81 §30.1d). The Niphal perfect simply means “is turned” or “turns”; “sour is supplied in the translation to clarify what is meant.
[20:14] 5 tn The word is “in his loins” or “within him.” Some translate more specifically “bowels.”
[20:14] 6 sn Some commentators suggest that the ancients believed that serpents secreted poison in the gall bladder, or that the poison came from the gall bladder of serpents. In any case, there is poison (from the root “bitter”) in the system of the wicked person; it may simply be saying it is that type of poison.
[20:15] 8 tn The choice of words is excellent. The verb יָרַשׁ (yarash) means either “to inherit” or “to disinherit; to dispossess.” The context makes the figure clear that God is administering the emetic to make the wicked throw up the wealth (thus, “God will make him throw it out…”); but since wealth is the subject there is a disinheritance meant here.
[20:16] 9 tn The word is a homonym for the word for “head,” which has led to some confusion in the early versions.
[20:16] 10 sn To take the possessions of another person is hereby compared to sucking poison from a serpent – it will kill eventually.
[20:16] 12 tn Some have thought this verse is a gloss on v. 14 and should be deleted. But the word for “viper” (אֶפְעֶה, ’ef’eh) is a rare word, occurring only here and in Isa 30:6 and 59:5. It is unlikely that a rarer word would be used in a gloss. But the point is similar to v. 14 – the wealth that was greedily sucked in by the wicked proves to be their undoing. Either this is totally irrelevant to Job’s case, a general discussion, or the man is raising questions about how Job got his wealth.
[20:17] 13 tn The word פְּלַגּוֹת (pÿlaggot) simply means “streams” or “channels.” Because the word is used elsewhere for “streams of oil” (cf. 29:6), and that makes a good parallelism here, some supply “oil” (cf. NAB, NLT). But the second colon of the verse is probably in apposition to the first. The verb “see” followed by the preposition bet, “to look on; to look over,” means “to enjoy as a possession,” an activity of the victor.
[20:17] 14 tn The construct nouns here have caused a certain amount of revision. It says “rivers of, torrents of.” The first has been emended by Klostermann to יִצְהָר (yitshar, “oil”) and connected to the first colon. Older editors argued for a נָהָר (nahar) that meant “oil” but that was not convincing. On the other hand, there is support for having more than one construct together serving as apposition (see GKC 422 §130.e). If the word “streams” in the last colon is a construct, that would mean three of them; but that one need not be construct. The reading would be “He will not see the streams, [that is] the rivers [which are] the torrents of honey and butter.” It is unusual, but workable.
[20:17] 15 sn This word is often translated “curds.” It is curdled milk, possibly a type of butter.
[20:18] 16 tn The idea is the fruit of his evil work. The word יָגָע (yaga’) occurs only here; it must mean ill-gotten gains. The verb is in 10:3.
[20:18] 17 tn Heb “and he does not swallow.” In the context this means “consume” for his own pleasure and prosperity. The verbal clause is here taken adverbially.
[20:18] 18 sn The expression is “according to the wealth of his exchange.” This means he cannot enjoy whatever he gained in his business deals. Some
[20:19] 19 tc The verb indicates that after he oppressed the poor he abandoned them to their fate. But there have been several attempts to improve on the text. Several have repointed the text to get a word parallel to “house.” Ehrlich came up with עֹזֵב (’ozev, “mud hut”), Kissane had “hovel” (similar to Neh 3:8). M. Dahood did the same (“The Root ’zb II in Job,” JBL 78 [1959]: 306-7). J. Reider came up with עֶזֶב (’ezev, the “leavings”), what the rich were to leave for the poor (“Contributions to the Scriptural text,” HUCA 24 [1952/53]: 103-6). But an additional root עָזַב (’azav) is questionable. And while the text as it stands is general and not very striking, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. Dhorme reverses the letters to gain בְּעֹז (bÿ’oz, “with force [or violence]”).
[20:19] 20 tn The last clause says, “and he did not build it.” This can be understood in an adverbial sense, supplying the relative pronoun to the translation.
