We see Job's despair in the verses introducing Chapter 10:

"I loathe my very life;
therefore I will give free rein to my complaint
and speak out in the bitterness of my soul.
I will say to God: Do not condemn me,
but tell me what charges you have against me."

   Though we don't know how much of the original Book of Job is missing, we have this consolation.  Enough of the original exists for the literary critic, and indeed, for the grass roots reader, to understand that the book is about Karma, which means action.  Job's body and spirit suffer terribly because Job's acts of sacrificing animals have caused other creatures immense pain and agony.  The Book of Job is an attack on the false traditions of  the Torah. It states that the Torah was fabricated by false scribes.  The Book does its work in an extremely skillful manner, by showing that those who sacrifice animals suffer more than their vegetarian counterparts, represented in the Book of Job by Job's counsellors and by the Sabeans.  In reality, the hospitals of the world, filled with those suffering from cholesterol addiction, are the greatest testimony to the validity of the Book of Job.
 

   Over and over again in the Book of Job, we have Job ask God to enumerate the charges He has against Job. For the rhetorical question underlying the background of the Book is this: who is justified? Those who follow the vegetarian covenant of Genesis, such as Job's counsellors, all of whom are connected with the Sabean tradition, as well as being connected in creed with the Sabeans who destroy Job's family and free his animals?  Or Job (and by inference his family), who sacrifice animals according to the false scriptures written into the Torah?  The underlying question is rhetorical.  As is obvious from other pages in this study, a pure remnant of Judaism never abandoned the original and only true dietary covenant of Gen. 1: 29-30.  The writer of the original Book of Job skillfully created a literary work.  Whether it is a factual biography or not of a particular person, and it could be that, it is none the less definitely an archetypal study of the cattleman and killer of creatures, and how the brutal animal sacrifices contribute to the bad health and despair of those living on flesh, the corpses of slaughtered animals.  Our hospitals are filled with people suffering from cancer, stroke, diabetes, heart disease, and a legion of other diseases caused by eating flesh, and these suffering people are an even greater testament of the validity of the Vegetarian covenant, if we had eyes to see.
 

     Irony is used precisely to show the indifference of Job, the former cattleman, to the feelings and lives of other creatures.  This irony is seen in Job's assertion that God is indifferent to the feelings of Job. This is constantly seen in Job, with plenty of illustrations in Chapter 10.
 

Does it seem good to thee to oppress,
to despise the work of thy hands
and favor the designs of the wicked:
Has thou eyes of flesh?
Do you see as a mortal sees? 10: 1-4.
 

   The answer to Job's question is that God's vision is infinite and that God has no trouble seeing as a mortal sees, for that is but a small facet of the infinitely faceted vision of God.  But the point is that Job is mortal and has eyes of flesh as do the animals he has sacrificed.  And as we can see, Job is not at all repentant here in chapter 10 and neither is he patient or resigned to God's will.

    Those of my readers who already know the morality of the Ethiopic Book of Enoch understand that the morality of the vegetarian covenant of Genesis is perfectly in alignment with it, and that both forbid the killing of other creatures and eating them.
 

   Though the question above is a rhetorical question or non-brainer to vegetarians and to many people who have personally witnessed the diseases spawned by carnivorism, the orthodoxies of Judaism, Christianity and Islam still maintain that they have a right to subdue other creatures and have dominion over them.  The carnivorous orthodoxies of Judaism, Christianity and Islam hold on to the morally corrupt false scriptures of Genesis 1: 26-28 and Genesis 9: 2-3, and ignore all the scriptures contradicting them, like alcoholics holding on to their liquor. And like their fellow and sister addicts, the carnivore holds on to these scriptures to the detriment of all whom they influence.  In other words, the carnivores of the world claiming to be true Jews, Christians, and Muslims are holding on to a corrupt and destructive tradition not only for themselves personally, but for their children and lineage as well.  In short, orthodox Jews through their acceptance of the tradition of animal sacrifices promote bloody atrocities among the other creatures, and disease among themselves.
 

Thy hands fashioned and made me:
and now thou dost turn about and destroy me?
Remember that you molded me like clay.
Will you now turn me to dust again?
Did you not pour me out like milk
And curdle me like cheese,
Clothe me with skin and flesh
and knit me together with bones and sinews? 10: 8-11.

   The answer to Job's question is obvious enough: An all compassionate Creator by definition could not create creatures to suffer.

       Job spends time on explaining that it is not logical for God to go into such detail in order to create a creature of flesh and blood, himself, Job, and then to destroy it.  The irony is more than obvious.  The true God of the Jews did not. Only the false god fabricated by those of the cattleman cult wishing to create a sanction for the evils of the meat industry.

    Only the totally obtuse reader would not understand that the God Job refers to also created the animals Job raises and slays, that cattle are the work of God's hands as well, as the earliest verses of Genesis point out.  Cattle like men have eyes of flesh and Job is right: it makes no sense indeed to create a being in order to slaughter it, since nothing good is gained either by the animal or by the eater of the sacrificed animals' corpse, certainly not optimal health, only the satisfaction of an addiction, which finally, is no different except in the means, to the satisfaction gained by inordinate users of drugs, i.e. drug addicts.

    How do these facts fit in with the Sabean tradition?  Shiva, aka Sheba, Seba or Saba, as He was known to ancient Jews and Ethiopians, was known as Pasupati, that is, Lord of Creatures, and also as Protector of Cattle. Shiva is known for having a bull, Nandi, as a friend.

     As witnessed by our hospital beds full of sufferers of cholesterol related diseases, there are no real winners in the game of carnivorism. The oppressed, enslaved and slaughtered animal loses its dignity and life, the carnivore loses her/his health. Only base appetites are satisfied: the egotistical desire to dominate another creature to the degree of killing it; and the satisfying of the addiction to eat flesh, the corpses of slaughtered animals.  The chapters on the demons Azazel and Mastema in this study discusses the fact that the animal sacrifices in the "Torah have a demonic source, that is, that demons and not God instituted animal sacrifices.

     Once again we may juxtapose the Sabean beliefs of the earliest Jews worshipping El Shadai, who is none other that Sada, or Shiva of the Hindus, Ethiopians and Sabeans in general.  Shiva was known as Pasupati, Lord of the Creatures, as well as Protector of Cattle.  Numerous parts of this study detail the Sabean origins of Judaism, that the Sabaoth, the Lord of Hosts was named after Shiva, as were the feasts Shavu ot and T'ub Shevat.
 

"And if I lift myself up, thou dost hunt me like a lion, and again work wonders against me; thou dost renew thy witnesses against me, and increase thy vexation toward me; thou dost bring fresh hosts against me."  10:16-17

     Those who have carefully read the testaments of the Jewish prophets denouncing the animal sacrifices know that the imagery of the lion is usually a negative one connected with the lion's predatory nature and shedding of blood.

    Job, who touts his own intelligence over and over, who reminds his questioners that they see nothing that Job himself does not see, nevertheless fails over and over again to see the irony and karma of his situation:  As Job treats the animals, the creatures of the Creator, so the Creator treats Job.  Job treats cattle as a predator, so God preys on Job.  If nothing else, longevity statistics from time immemorial in the Rg Vedas to the present from our most advanced medical research labs verify this correlation: like it or not, vegetarians live longer and healthier lives. This is indisputable. When Job asks "Why didst thou bring me forth from thy womb?," he asks the same question any creature could ask. In other words, our suffering is not mysterious; it is caused by the fact that we cause suffering to other creatures.

Why then did you bring me out of the womb?
I wish I had died before any eye saw me.
If only I had never come into being,
or had been carried straight from the womb to the grave!
Are not my few days almost over?
Turn away from me so I can have a moment's joy
before I go to the place of no return,
to the land of gloom and deep shadow,
to the land of deepest night,
of deep shadow and disorder,
where even the light is like darkness. 10: 18-22.

   The narrative, we shall see, moves from an affirmation of Karma to an affirmation of Grace, which is a facet of all the major religions in their scriptures, affirming that though Deity is Just, Deity is also Love, and that Love has its own indefinable transforming power, as Zophar the Na'amathite will remind us in Chapter 11.