Lectionary Calendar
Saturday, July 19th, 2025
the Week of Proper 10 / Ordinary 15
the Week of Proper 10 / Ordinary 15
video advertismenet
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement
Attention!
Take your personal ministry to the Next Level by helping StudyLight build churches and supporting pastors in Uganda.
Click here to join the effort!
Click here to join the effort!
Bible Commentaries
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Critical, Doctrinal and Homiletical Lange's Commentary
Copyright Statement
These files are a derivative of an electronic edition available at BibleSupport.com. Public Domain.
These files are a derivative of an electronic edition available at BibleSupport.com. Public Domain.
Bibliographical Information
Lange, Johann Peter. "Commentary on Ecclesiastes 8". "Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical". https://studylight.org/commentaries/eng/lcc/ecclesiastes-8.html. 1857-84.
Lange, Johann Peter. "Commentary on Ecclesiastes 8". "Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical". https://studylight.org/
Whole Bible (44)Old Testament (1)Individual Books (5)
Verses 1-15
2. Against the temptations to disloyalty and rebellion in national and civil relations
(Ecclesiastes 8:1-8)
1Who is as the wise man? and who knoweth the interpretation of a thing ? a manâs wisdom maketh his face to shine, and the boldness of his face shall be 2changed. I counsel thee to keep the kingâs commandment, and that in regard of the oath of God. 3Be not hasty to go out of his sight: stand not in an evil thing; for he doeth whatsoever pleaseth him. 4Where the word of a king is there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou? 5Whoso keepeth the commandment shall feel no evil thing: and a wise manâs heart discerneth both time and judgment. 6Because to every purpose there is time and judgment, therefore the misery of man is great upon him. 7For he knoweth not that which shall 8be: for who can tell him when it shall be ? There is no man that hath power over the spirit to retain the spirit: neither hath he power in the day of death : and there is no discharge in that war; neither shall wickedness deliver those that are given to it.
3. Against the oppressions of tyrants and other injustices
(Ecclesiastes 8:9-15.)
9All this have I seen, and applied my heart unto every work that is done under the sun: there is a time wherein one man ruleth over another to his own hurt. 10And so I saw the wicked buried, who had come and gone from the place of the holy, and they were forgotten in the city where they had so done: this is also vanity. 11Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil. 12Though a sinner do evil an hundred times, and his days be prolonged, yet surely I know that it shall be well with them that fear God, which fear before him: 13But it shall not be well with the wicked, neither shall he prolong his days, which are as a shadow; because he feareth not before God. 14There is a vanity which is done upon the earth; that there be just men, unto whom it happeneth according to the work of the wicked: again, there be wicked men, to whom it happeneth according to the work of the righteous: I said that this also is vanity. 15Then I commended mirth, because a man hath no better thing under the sun, than to eat, and to drink, and to be merry: for that shall abide with him of his labour the days of his life, which God giveth him under the sun.
[Ecclesiastes 7:29. ×Ö°×ַר is not rightly rendered onlyââthis only have I found.â More correctly, this by itself, or besides, as something beyond what is said before of both sexes.âT. L.]
[Ecclesiastes 8:1. ×ְש×Ö»× Ö¼Ö¶×; there is no need of saying of this that it is more Chaldæo; some such interchange of × for × is quite common in Hebrewâsee the extensive list of cases given by the Jewish grammarian, Jona Ben Gannach. The 70 read ש×Ö¸× Öµ× to hate. So did the Syriac. ×¢Ö¹× ×¤Ö¸× Ö¸×× denotes the sternness, or austerity, of the countenance. Wisdom clears it up, changes it to a bright and joyful aspect. See M. V.âT. L.]
[Ecclesiastes 8:2 ×Ö²× Ö´× ×¤Ö¼×Ö¾×Ö¶×Ö¶×Ö°, Zöckler would supply ×Ö¸×Ö·×¨Ö°×ªÖ¼Ö´× here. There is hardly need of thatâI a kingsâs mouth; supply simply the substantive verb, âI am a kingâs mouthâthat heed.â It is an assertion by the writer of his royal right to give such advice. See M. V.âT. L.]
[Ecclesiastes 8:10. ×Ö¼×Ö°×Öµ×. See Exeget.âT. L.]
[Ecclesiastes 8:11. פִתְ×Ö¸×. See remarks on the appendix to Introduction, p.33.âT. L.]
[Ecclesiastes 8:15. ×ְש×ִפַ×ְתִּ×; the conjunction × here, has more than the mere copulative force. It denotes time, as it frequently does, and also a reason. Its mere conjunctive force is seldom alone when it connects sentences: ââTwas then I praised joyââthat is, when I took this view of things. ×ְַש×ֶר=not simply to á½ Ïι, but to á½¡Ï á½ Ïι, how that there is, etc.; and that this ×Ö´×Ö°×Ö¶×Ö¼×Ö¼ will remain, adhere to him.âT. L.]
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
The subdivision of this section into three equal divisions or strophes, is indicated by the introductory remarks on the general contents, which are found in Ecclesiastes 7:23-29; Ecclesiastes 8:1; and Ecclesiastes 8:9. The divisions beginning with these passages are clearly different from each other in contents; Ecclesiastes 7:25-29 warns us against voluptuousness; Ecclesiastes 8:2-8 against rebellion towards civil authority; Ecclesiastes 8:9-15 against injustice. Since this latter theme does not close until the 14th and 15th verses, it seems quite improper to extend the third section simply to Ecclesiastes 8:10, as do Hengstenberg, Hitzig, et al., [the general introduction of the first part of Ecclesiastes 8:14 is, in comparison with Ecclesiastes 8:1; Ecclesiastes 8:9, and Ecclesiastes 7:23-25 too insignificant to be able to serve as the opening of a new division], just as we must declare the separation of Ecclesiastes 8:15 from the preceding, as the beginning of an entirely new section, (Hahn) decidedly inexpedient and destructive of the sense.
2. First Strophe. Introduction. Ecclesiastes 7:23-25. Concerning the difficulty of finding true wisdom, and Kohelethâs zealous search after it.âAll this have I proved with wisdomâThis, therefore, formed the means and the goal of his searching. For the expression × Ö´×Ö¼Ö¸× ×Ö¼Ö·×Ö¸×Ö°×Ö¸× compare on the one hand תּ×ּר ×Ö¼Ö·×Ö¸×Ö°×Ö¸× Ecclesiastes 1:13, and, on the other, × Ö´×¡Ö¼Ö¸× ×ְּש×Ö´×Ö°×Ö¸×, Ecclesiastes 2:1. âAll thisâ certainly does not refer to all the preceding from the beginning of the book, as Hengstenberg asserts, but mainly to the rules of life and practical counsels contained in Ecclesiastes 7:1-22.âBut it was far from meââIt,â i.e., wisdom in the absolute sense, perfected wisdom. A partial possession of wisdom is by no means excluded by this humble confession of not having found any; see Ecclesiastes 8:5; Ecclesiastes 7:11-16; Ecclesiastes 7:19, etc. Ecclesiastes 7:24. That which is far offâi.e., the real innermost essence of wisdom lies far from human comprehension; comp. Job 28:12 ff.; Sirach 24:38 ff.; Bar 3:14 ff. Rosenmueller, Herzfeld, Hahn, Elster [and, at an earlier period, also Ewald] correctly consider ×Ö¸× ×©×Ö¼Ö¶×Ö¸×Ö¸× as the subject of the clause; but ×Ö¸×Ö¸× cannot then be taken in the preterit sense, as is done by the three first named commentators [Herzfeld : âthat remains far off which was far off;â Rosenmueller: procul abest, quod ante aderat; Hahn: âthat is far off which has beenâ]. Knobel, Hitzig, Vaihinger, and, lately, Ewald, affirm that there is an emphatic prefixing of the-predicate âfarâ before the relative pronoun ×Ö¸× : âThat which is far off, and exceeding deep, who can find it out.â But the examples quoted from Ecclesiastes 1:9; Job 23:9 scarcely justify so harsh a construction. The interpretation of Hengstenberg: âthat is far off. which, has been,â i.e., the comprehension of what has been or is (Ïῶν á½Î½ÏÏν γνῶÏιÏ, Wisd. of Sol. 7:17) is opposed by the circumstance that, practical wisdom alone is here considered, and not theoretical,[1] for which reason also there can scarcely be a reference to the objective cognition of wisdom, or the knowledge of its objects. The interpretations of most of the ancients are decidedly ungrammatical, as of the Septuagint (μακÏὰν á½Ïá½²Ï á½ á¼§Î½), Vulgate (multo magis quam erat), Luther (âIt is far off, what will it be?â); thus also is that of Köster (âIt is far off, what is thatâ), and so many others.âAnd exceeding deep.âLit., âdeep, deep.â The repetition of ×¢Ö¸×Ö¹×§ expresses the superlative idea (Ewald, Lehrbuch, § 303 c). Deep signifies difficult to be fathomed, comp. Proverbs 20:5, and especially Job 11:8, where the Divine doing and the Divine government are declared to be the absolute limit of all wisdom, or as âdeeper than hell;â see also Psalms 139:8; Romans 11:33.Ecclesiastes 7:25. I applied mine heart.âLit., âI turned, I and my heart,ââa figure similar to that in Acts 15:28 : á¼Î´Î¿Î¾ÎµÎ½ Ïá¿· ÏνεÏμαÏι á¼Î³Î¯Ï καὶ ἡμá¿Î½; comp. also the Song of Solomon 5:2. That the heart also participated in the turning, shows it to be no thoughtless action, but one resting on deep reflection. The simple סַ×Ö¼×Ö¹×ªÖ´× does not express a return from a path formerly followed, but now perceived to be an erroneous one (Hitizigâs view). It is different with ×ְסַ×Ö¼×ֹתִ×, âthen I turned,â Ecclesiastes 2:20, which clearly marks the entrance into a path entirely new, whilst in this passage nothing is affirmed but the transition from a superficial to a deeper and more solicitous searching after wisdom. Comp. Hengstenberg and Vaihinger on this passage, which latter correctly gives the connection thus: âAlthough wisdom in its fullness is unsearchable and unattainable, I did not refrain from searching after an insight into the relations of things, in order to learn the causes of the want of moral perfection; I wished, however, in learning wisdom, to learn also its counterpart, and thus to see that iniquity is every where folly.ââTo know, and to search, and to seek out wisdom, etc.âThe two accusatives, wisdom and reason, belong only to the last of the three infinitives (×ַּקֵש×); before which × is left out, in order to separate it externally from the two preceding ones. ×ֶש×Ö°×Ö¼×Ö¹× is here, as in Ecclesiastes 7:27, âreason, calculation,â a result of the activity of the judgment, in examining and judging of the relations of practical life, therefore equivalent to insight, practical sagacity and knowledge of life. Vaihingerâs interpretation of ×Ö¸×Ö°×Ö¸×Ö¼ ×Ö°×ֶש×Ö°×Ö¼×Ö¹× in the sense of âwisdom as calculation,â is unnecessary, and indeed in direct contradiction to the construction in the following clause. The copula also in Ecclesiastes 8:2 does not express the explanatory sense of the expression, âand indeed.ââAnd to know the wickedness of folly, and even of foolishness and madness.â(Zöckler: âwickedness as folly, foolishness as madnessâ). That this is to be thus translated is proved by the absence of the article[2] before the second accusative. Comp. for this construction Ewald, § 284 b, and for the sentence, Ecclesiastes 1:17; Ecclesiastes 2:12 f.; Ecclesiastes 10:13.
3. First Strophe. Continuation and Conclusion. Ecclesiastes 7:26-29. A warning concerning an unchaste woman and her seductive arts. Hengstenberg, following older writers [and thus Seb. Schmid, Michael., Lampe, J. Lange, Starke, etc.) maintains that this harlot is an ideal personage, the false wisdom of the heathen; but that she is a representative of the female sex in general in its worst aspect, appears to be incontrovertible from Ecclesiastes 7:28-29, where women in general are represented as the more corrupt portion of humanity, corresponding with Sir 25:24; 1 Timothy 2:12-15. And as parallels to this passage we find above all those warnings of the Proverbs of Solomon against the âharlotâ or âstrange woman,â i.e., against unchaste intercourse with, women in general; comp. Proverbs 2:16 ff; Proverbs 5:2 ff; Proverbs 7:5 ff; Proverbs 22:14; Proverbs 23:27. And quite as arbitrary as the idealizing of this lascivious woman into the abstract idea of âfalse wisdom,â is the view of Hitzig, namely, that therein allusion is made to a definite historical person, Agathoclea, mistress of Ptolemy Philopater.âAnd I find more bitter than death.âFor this figure comp. 1 Samuel 15:32; Sir 28:25; Sir 41:1; also Proverbs 5:4, etc.âThe woman whose heart is snares and nets.â×ֲש×ֶר is to be connected with the suffix in ×Ö´×Ö¼Ö¸×Ö¼ and ×Ö´×× is to be regarded as copula between subject and predicate, which here emphatically precedes. In the comparison of the heart of the harlot to âsnares and nets,â and her hands to âbands,â we naturally think, in the first instance, of her words and looks (as expressions of the thoughts of her heart), and, in the second, of voluptuous embraces.âWhoso pleaseth God shall escape from her.âLit. âHe who is good in the sight of God.â Comp. Ecclesiastes 2:26. The meaning is here as there, the God-fearing and just man, the contrary of ××Ö¹×Öµ× or sinner, who by her (×Ö¼Ö¸×Ö¼) i.e., by the nets and snares of her heart, and by her loose seductive arts, is caught. Ecclesiastes 7:27. Behold, this have I found, saith the Preacher.âNotwithstanding Ecclesiastes 1:1; Ecclesiastes 2:12; Ecclesiastes 12:9, where ×§×Ö¹Ö¶×ֶת is without the article, we must still read here ×Ö¸×ַר ×Ö·×§Ö¼×Ö¹Ö¶×ֶת (comp. Ecclesiastes 12:8) and not ×Ö¸×Ö°×¨Ö¸× ×§×Ö¶Ö¹×ֶת; for the word ×§×Ö¶Ö¹×ֶת is every where else used as masculine, and the author cannot wish to express a significant contrast between the preaching wisdom and the amorous woman, since the expression, âsaith the Preacher,â is here, as in those other passages, a mere introductory formula (though Hengstenberg thinks otherwise).âCounting one by oneânamely, considering, reflecting. Lit., âone to the other,â i.e., adding, arranging. The words are adverbially used, as in the phrase ×Ö¼Ö¸× Ö´×× ×Ö¶× ×Ö¼Ö¸× Ö´×× Genesis 32:31.âTo find out the account.â[×ֶש×Ö°×Ö¼×Ö¹× as in Ecclesiastes 7:25], giving the result of this action of arranging one after the other. This did not consist in comparison between woman and death, but in a summing up of those unfavorable observations concerning her which necessitates the final judgment, namely, that she is âmore bitter than death.â The whole verse clearly refers to the foregoing, and does not, therefore, serve as an introduction to the contents of Ecclesiastes 7:28-29, as Hahn and several older authors contend, who begin a new section with this verse. There is rather a certain break immediately before Ecclesiastes 7:28, as the words ×ֲש×ֶר ×¢×× ×ִּקְש×Ö¸× ×Ö°×× at the beginning of this verse show. Ecclesiastes 7:28. Which yet my soul seeketh.âThe soul is represented as seeking, to indicate how much this seeking was a matter of the heart to the preacher; comp. the address: âthou whom my soul loveth,â Song of Solomon 1:17; Song of Solomon 3:1 ff. The âfinding notâ is then again attributed to the first person : âand that which I found not.ââOne man among a thousand have I foundâi.e., among a thousand of the human race, I found, indeed, one righteous one, one worthy of the name of man, and corresponding to the idea of humanity. ×Ö¸×Ö¸× here stands for ×Ö´××©× as, in the Greek, á¼Î½Î¸ÏÏÏÎ¿Ï for á¼Î½Î®Ï. For the expression âone among a thousandâ [lit., out of a thousand] comp. Job 9:3; Job 33:23; but for the sentence, Ecclesiastes 7:20 above, and Job 14:5; Micah 7:2, etc. The hereditary corruption of the entire human race is here as much presupposed as in the parallel passages; for Koheleth will hardly recognize the one righteous man that he found among a thousand as absolutely righteous, and therefore as ×Ö¸×Ö¸× in the primeval, pure and ideal sense of the first man before the fall.âBut a woman among all these have I not found. That is, one worthy of the name ×ִש×Ö¼Ö¸×, in the primeval ideal sense of Genesis 2:22-25, I did not find among all that thousand, which presented me at least one proper man. That he never found such a one, consequently that he considered the whole female sex as vicious and highly corrupt, cannot possibly be his opinion, as appears from Ecclesiastes 7:29, as also in Ecclesiastes 9:9. (See the praise of noble women in other documents of the Chokmah literature, as Proverbs 5:19; Proverbs 18:22; Proverbs 31:10 f.; Psalms 128. ff.). But that moral excellence among women, taken as a whole, is much more rarely found than among men, that sin reigns more uncontrolled among the former than the latter, and in the form of moral weakness and proneness to temptation, as well as in the inclination to seduce, to deceive and ensnareâsuch is clearly the sense of this passage, a sense that harmonizes with Genesis 3:16; Sir 25:24; 2Co 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:12 ff., as also with numerous other extra-biblical passages. Comp. also these sentences from the Talmud: âIt is better to follow a lion than a woman;âââWho follows the counsel of his wife arrives at hell;âââThe mind of women is frivolous;â also the Greek maxims: θάλαÏÏα καὶ Ïá¿¦Ï ÎºÎ±á½¶ Î³Ï Î½á½´ κακὰ ÏÏία;âá½ ÏÎ¿Ï Î³Ï Î½Î±á¿ÎºÎµÏ εἰÏι ÏάνÏÌ á¼ÎºÎµá¿ κακά. Compare also the following Proverb from the Arabic of Meidani; âWomen are the snares of Satan,â etc. (Comp. Wohlfarth, Knobel and Vaihinger on this passage).
Ecclesiastes 7:29. Lo, this only have I found. ×Ö°×Ö·×, âalone, onlyâ (an adverb as in Isaiah 26:13), here serving to introduce a remark intended as a restriction of what precedes.[3] The fact of the universal sinful corruption of man, expressed indirectly in Ecclesiastes 7:28, is here to be so far restricted that this corruption is not to be considered as innate in humanity through a divine agency, but as brought into the world by manâs own guilt.âThat God hath made man upright. ×ָש×ָר, upright, good, integer; comp. Genesis 1:26 f.; Genesis 5:1; Genesis 9:6; Wis 2:23.âBut they have sought out many inventions. ×ִש×Ö¼Ö°×× Ö¹×ֹת are not âuseless subtleties,â (Ewald), but, as the contrast to the idea of ×ָש×ָר teaches us: malæ artes, tricks, evil artifices, conceits.
4. Second strophe, Introduction, Ecclesiastes 8:1.âOf the rarity and preciousness of wisdom.âWho is as the wise man? This is no triumphant question, induced, or occasioned by that lucky finding in the last verse of the preceding chapter (Hitzig), but simply an introduction to what follows, by which true wisdom is to be declared a rare treasure of difficult attainment, just as in Ecclesiastes 7:23; Ecclesiastes 8:16 f.âIn ×Ö¼Ö°×Ö¶×Ö¸×Ö¸×, the usually contracted form ×Ö¼Ö¶×Ö¸×Ö¸× is again expanded, in accordance with a custom often occurring in later authors;[4] comp. Ezekiel 40:25; Ezekiel 47:22; 2Ch 10:7; 2 Chronicles 25:10, etc.âAnd who knoweth the interpretation of a thing; Zöckler, âof the word,â (×Ö¼Ö¸×ָר)[5] namely, of the following assertion, which emphasizes the great work of wisdom according to its influence on the physical well-being and morally just demeanor of men. פֵש×ֶר, a Chaldaic word[6] (comp. Daniel 2:4 ff., Daniel 2:24 ff.; Daniel 4:6; Daniel 4:15), holding the same relation to the synonymous פִֹתְר×Ö¹× as ×ֶתֶר to ×ִתְר×Ö¹×.âA manâs wisdom maketh his face to shine. That is, it imparts to him a cheerful soul and this on account of the fortunate and satisfactory relations into which it places him. The same figure is found in Numbers 6:25; Psalms 4:7; Job 29:24.âAnd the boldness of his face shall be changed. ×¢×Ö¹ ×¤Ö¹Ö¸× Ö¸×× is to be explained without doubt according to expressions ×Öµ×¢Öµ× ×¤Ö¸× Ö´××, Proverbs 7:13; 21:39; or ×¢Ö·×Ö¾×¤Ö¸× Ö´×× Deuteronomy 28:50; Daniel 8:23, and signifies, therefore, that repulsive harshness and stiffness of the features which are a necessary result of a coarse, unamiable, and selfish heart (not exactly âboldness,â as Döderlein, Dewette, and Gesenius translate, or âdispleasure,â as Knobel, Grimm, and Vaihinger). It is therefore the civilizing, softening and morally refining influence of true wisdom on the soul of man, that the author has in view, and which, according to the question in the beginning of the verse, he describes as something mysterious and in need of explanation, and which he explains, partly at least, by the subsequent precepts regarding wise conduct in a civil sphere. Ewaldâs comprehension of the passage is in sense not materially different from ours: âAnd the brightness of his countenance is doubledââbut this is in opposition to the usual signification of ×¢×Ö¹ as well as that of ש×Ö¸× Ö¸×, which can hardly be rendered âto double.â The explanations of the septuagint, resting on a different punctuation, ×ִש×Ö¼Ö¸× Öµ× instead of ×ְש×Ö»× Ö¼Ö¶× give a widely different sense á¼Î½Î±Î¹Î´á½´Ï ÏÏοÏÏÏῳ αá½Ïοῦ μιÏήθηÏεÏαι, which gave rise to that of Luther: âBut he who is bold, is malignant;â and Hitzig, in conjunction with Zirkel (and the Vulgate) reads ×ְש×Ö·× Ö¼Ö¶× and thus obtains the sense, âand boldness disfigureth the countenance.â But the word ×¢×Ö¹ alone hardly means âboldness,â and the change adopted in the punctuation appears the more unnecessary since the sense resulting from it brings the assertion in the last clause into contrast with the one before it, which is in decided opposition to the connection.
5. Second strophe. Continuation. Ecclesiastes 8:2-4. A proper demeanor towards kings the first means of realizing true wisdom.âI counsel thee to keep the kingâs commandment. To ×Ö²× Ö´× supply ×Ö¸×Ö·×¨Ö°×ªÖ¼Ö´× or ××ֵֹר, a somewhat harsh ellipse,[7] for which however we may quote parallels in Isaiah 5:9; Jeremiah 20:10, and elsewhere. Therefore it is unnecessary, with Hitzig, to punctuate ש×Ö¹×ֵר âI keep the kingâs commandmentâ (thus the Vulgate). That ש××Ö¹×ֵר stands in Ecclesiastes 8:5 below in scriptio plena would form no valid objection against the allowableness of this change of the imperative into the participle; for ש×Ö¹×ֵר is also found in Ecclesiastes 11:4. But, as Elster correctly observes: âit would be surprising if Koheleth did not appear here in his usual manner as a teacher who admonishes others, but only as announcing what he has laid down as a principle to himself.â âTo regard the mouth of the kingâ means of course, to render obedience to his commands; comp. Genesis 45:21; Exodus 17:1; Job 39:27, etc.âAnd that in regard of the oath of God, which thou hast vowed to him, the King. The duty of obedience to worldly authority is here insisted on with reference to loyalty towards God, the heavenly witness to the vow made to the king; comp. Matthew 22:21; Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-17. These New Testament parallels should have prevented Hengstenberg from endeavoring to cause the âkingâ to mean the heavenly King Jehovah, because nominally, âthe obedience to the heathen lords of the O. T. in general was not enjoined as a religious duty,ââa remark that is in direct contradiction with passages like Proverbs 16:10-15; Isaiah 45:1 ff.; Jeremiah 27:12-13; Jeremiah 29:5-7; Ezekiel 17:12 ff. The conjunction ×Ö° in ×Ö°×¢Ö·× is not âand indeed,â but âalso,â adding the remembrance of the assumed oath as an additional motive to the one already contained in the precept. The âoath of Godâ is an oath made with an appeal to God as witness (Exodus 22:10; 2 Samuel 21:7; 1 Kings 2:43), and here especially such an oath of fidelity to the sovereign, sworn in the presence of God (comp. 2 Kings 11:17; Ezekiel 17:12 ff.).
Ecclesiastes 8:3. Be not hasty to go out of his sight. The first verb only serves to express an adverbial qualification of the second. The hasty going out from the king is not to indicate an apostacy from him, or a share in rebellious movements (Knobel, Vaihinger), but simply the timid or unsatisfactory withdrawal from his presence, in case he is unfavorably inclined; it is directly the opposite of the âstandingâ forbidden in the subsequent clause. Hitzigâs opinion, that the king is considered as an unclean heathen, and that the aim of the entire admonition is to counsel against the too strict observance of the Levitical laws of cleanliness in presence of heathen princes, has too little connection with the context, and is in every respect too artificial.âStand not in an evil thing, (Ger., âevil wordâ); i.e., when the king speaks an angry word (×Ö¼Ö¸×ָר רַע) do not excite his anger still more by foolishly standing still, as if thou couldst by obstinately remaining in thy place compel his favor. Ewald and Elster correctly give the general sense of the admonition as follows: In presence of a king, it is proper to appear modest and yet firm, to show ourselves neither over timid nor obstinate towards him. The Vulgate, Luther, Starke, etc., are less consistent: âStand not in an evil thing,â i.e., remain not in evil designs against the king, if you have become involved in such;âHengstenberg gives the same. Vaihinger: âDo not appear in an evil thing.â And thus finally Hitzig: âStand not at an evil commandâ [i.e., even though the king should command an evil thing, thou must do it, as Doeg, 1 Samuel 22:18], a translation which rests on the erroneous supposition that the author presents as speaking, in Ecclesiastes 8:2-4, an opponent of his teachings, a defender of a base worldly expediency and a false servility.âFor he doeth whatever pleaseth him. This formula serves in other places to show the uncontrolled power of God as ruler of the world (Jonah 1:14; Job 23:13) but must here be necessarily accepted in a relative sense, as an emphatic warning against the fearful wrath of a monarch who is all-powerful, at least in his own realm; comp. Proverbs 16:14; Proverbs 19:12; Proverbs 20:2.
Ecclesiastes 8:4 completes the last clause of Ecclesiastes 8:3.âWhere the word of a king is there is power. ש×Ö´×Ö°××Ö¹× here, and in Ecclesiastes 8:8, need not be considered as an adjective; it can quite as easily express the substantive sense of âruler, commander,â as in Daniel 3:2-3 (Chaldaic).âAnd who may say to him, What doest thou ? That is, who can utter an objection to his ordinances and commands ? An expression like that at the close of the preceding verse, which is elsewhere only used in glorification of divine power (Job 9:12; Isaiah 45:9; Daniel 4:32; Wis 12:12), but which therefore justifies neither Hengstenbergâs nor Hahnâs reference of the passage to God as the heavenly King, according to Hitzigâs assertion: âWe have here the servility of an opponent of the king, introduced by the author as speaking in a style which usually indicates the omnipotence of God.â
6. Second Strophe. Conclusion. Ecclesiastes 8:5-8. Admonition to submit to the existing arrangements of this life, all of which have God as their final author.âWhoso keepeth the commandment shall feel no evil thing.â×ִצְ×Ö¸× âthe commandment,â is undoubtedly the same as ×Ö¼Ö°×ַר־×Ö¶×Ö¶×, Ecclesiastes 8:4, therefore not the Divine law (Vaihinger, Hahn, Hengstenberg, etc.), but the law of earthly authority as the Divine representative. The feeling no evil thing (×× ×××¢ ××ר רע) most probably signifies the remaining distant from evil counsels, taking no part in rebellious enterprises (Knobel, Vaihinger, etc.), so that, therefore, ××ר רע here expresses a sense different from that in verse 3 above. Yet another explanation of the language, and one consistent with the context, is as follows: âHe experiences no misfortune, remains protected from the punishment of transgressing the lawsâ (Elster, Hengstenberg). But Heiligstedt, on the contrary, is wrong (comp. Ewald): âhe pays no attention to the evil that is done to him, and does not grieve about the injustice that he suffers, but bears it with equanimity;â and also Hitzig: âthe keeper of the commandment (the servile slave of tyrants) does not first consider an evil command of his superior, in so far as it is morally evil, but executes it blindly, and thus commits a sin at the bidding of a higher power; the wise man, on the contrary, etc.ââa declaration which stands and falls with the previously quoted artificial understanding of Ecclesiastes 8:2-4 as antagonistic in speech.[8]âAnd a wise manâs heart discerneth both time and judgment.âThat is, the wise man knows that for every cvil attempt there comes a time of judgment; see Ecclesiastes 8:6. This explanation alone, which is that of the Septuagint [καὶ καιÏὸν κÏιÏÎÏÏ Î³Î¹Î½ÏÏκει καÏδία ÏοÏοῦ] is in accordance with the text; one needs think as little of the judgment which awaits all men, especially wicked princes and tyrants, as of the appointed time of existence of all civil ordinances [Elster], or of the proper time and authority to do any thing, or not (Hahn). Ecclesiastes 8:6. For the first clause compare Ecclesiastes 3:17.âTherefore the misery of man is great upon him.âThat is, on him who unwisely disregards the important truth that there is a time and judgment for every purpose, and therefore takes part in rebellious undertakings against the king; a heavy misfortune visits him as a well-deserved punishment, and he falls a victim of his foolish effort to struggle against the Divinely sanctioned ordinances of this world.[9] Ecclesiastes 8:7. For he knoweth not that which shall be.â He knows not the issue of the undertakings in which he has thoughtlessly allowed himself to be involved; and because the future is veiled to us men, he cannot see what consequences they may have, and how weighty may be the destinies that it entails upon him.âFor who can tell him when it shall be ?â(Ger., âhow it shall beâ).âTherefore he is not only ignorant of future destinies in themselves, but does not even know their âhow,â the manner of their entrance. Herzfeld and Hitzig say: âWhen it shen it shall bem,â etc. But ×Ö¼Ö·×ְַש×ֶר no where else in this book signifies âwhen,â not even in Ecc 4:17; Ecclesiastes 5:4, where it is to be taken as conditional; and the idea of time is by no means in harmony with the passage. Ecclesiastes 8:8. There is no man that hath power over the spirit to retain the spirit.âר×Ö¼×Ö· here is different from that in Ecclesiastes 11:4-5,[10] where it clearly signifies âwindâ (comp. Proverbs 30:4); it must here be taken in a sense very usual in the O. T., that of âbreath of life,â âspirit;â comp. Ecclesiastes 3:19-21. [11] The meaning of the following clause is most nearly allied to this, and that we find ×ָּר×Ö¼×Ö· and not in ×ְּר×Ö¼Ö¹××Ö¹ proves nothing in favor of the contrary acceptation of Hitzig, Hahn, etc.; for the author denies the ability of men to control the breath of life, and purposely in the most general way, in order to show, in the strongest manner, his unconditional dependence on God [just as in the following clause he has the very general ×Ö¼Ö°××Ö¹× ×Ö·×Ö¼Ö¸×ֶת and not ×Ö¼Ö°××Ö¹× ××ֹת×Ö¹â-And there is no discharge in that war.âThat is, as little as the law of war, with its inexorable severity, grants a furlough to the soldier before the battle, just so little can a man escape the law of death which weighs on all, and just so unconditionally must he follow when God calls him hence by death.âNeither shall wickedness deliver those that are given to it.âLit., âits possessors;â comp. Ecclesiastes 7:12; and for the sentence, Proverbs 10:2; Proverbs 11:4, etc. This clause clearly contains the principal thought of the verse, as prepared by the three preceding clauses, and which here makes an impressive conclusion of the whole admonition begun in verse 2 concerning disobedience and disloyalty towards authority.
Ecclesiastes 8:7. Third Strophe. First half. Ecclesiastes 8:9-13. The many iniquities, oppressions and injustices that occur among men, often remain a long time unpunished, but find, at last, their proper reward, as a proof that God rules and judges justly.âAll this have I seen.âA transition formula, serving as an introduction to what follows, as in Ecclesiastes 7:23. âTo see â is here equivalent to observing through experience, and âall thisâ refers, in the first place, to Ecclesiastes 8:5-8, and then to every thing from Ecclesiastes 7:23 onward.âAnd applied my heart unto every work.âFor × Ö¸×ªÖ·× ×ֶת־×Öµ× comp. Ecclesiastes 1:13.âThe infinitive absolute with copula prefixed indicates an action contemporaneous with the main verb. For what follows comp. Ecclesiastes 1:14; Ecclesiastes 2:17; Ecclesiastes 4:3, etc.âThere is a time when one man rules over another to his own hurt.âThese words clearly form an explanation to what precedes: âevery work that is done under the sun;â and they therefore more closely designate the object of the authorâs observation to be a whole epoch or series of oppressions of men by tyrants.âThe words are usually regarded as an independent sentence: âThere is a time wherein,â etc.; or, âsometimes,â or, âat times,â âa man rules,â etc. (Vulgate, Luther, Vaihinger, Hengstenberg, etc.). But the word עֵת alone is not equivalent to âthere is a time,â or âsometimes;â and to refer the pronoun in ××Ö¹ to the first ×Ö¸×Ö¸× (to his own hurt,â i.e., to the hurt of the tyrant) is not in harmony with what follows. Also Knobelâs explanation: âtruly I have also seen tyrants who practiced evil unpunished through whole eras,â seems quite unfitting, because it anticipates Ecclesiastes 8:10, and introduces into the text the word âtrulyâ that is in no wise indicated.
Ecclesiastes 8:10. And so I saw the wicked buried, who had come and gone (to rest).â×Ö¼×Ö°×Öµ× lit.: and under such circumstances,[12] comp. Esther 4:16. The wicked, of whom it is here affirmed that they were buried and went to rest, i.e., they received a distinguished and honorable burial [comp. Isa. 4:19; Jeremiah 22:19; and also Eccles. Ecclesiastes 6:3] are the same as those named in Ecclesiastes 8:9, who rule over others to their hurt, and are therefore tyrannical oppressors and violent rulers. ×Ö¼Ö¸××Ö¼ lit.: âthey entered in,â namely, to rest, an abbreviation of the full form which is found in Isaiah 57:2.âGone from the place of the holy.â[Zöcklek : But went far from the place of the holy.]âThe wicked are clearly here no longer the subject, but as in the following clause, âthose who did righteously,â whose undeservedly sad fate the author well depicts in contrast with that of the former. Therefore the âplace of the holyâ from which they wandered afar [×Ö´×, as in Isaiah 26:14; Zephaniah 3:18; Job 28:4] is the grave, the honorable burial place which these just ones must fail to obtain; to refer this expression to Jerusalem (Hitzig), or to the sacred courts of the leaders of the people (Knobel), or to the community of the saints (Hengstenberg), is all arbitrary, and opposed to the context. ×Ö°×Ö·×Ö¼Ö°××Ö¼, âthey wandered, they went,â does not, of course, mean a wandering of the souls of the unburied after death, but simply [in contrast to that word ×Ö¼Ö¸××Ö¼] the wandering or being carried to another resting place than that holy place,â the burial in a grave neither sacred nor honorable. Hitzigâs emendation,×Ö·×Ö²×Ö¹××Ö¼ âthey pass away,â is as unnecessary as the view of Ewald, Elster, Vaihinger, etc., that the Piel ×Ö´×Ö¼Öµ×Ö° is here synonymous with the Hiphil ××Ö¹×Ö´××Ö° as though the sense were âI saw them driven away, castout from the holy place.â[13]âAnd they were forgotten in the city where they had so done (Zöckler: âwho there justly acted).âFor עָש×Ö¸× ×Ö¼Öµ× âto do right,â to act uprightly, comp. 2 Kings 7:9 : for âbeing forgotten in the city,â i.e., in their own place of residence [not in Jerusalem, as Hitzig declares], Comp. Ecclesiastes 6:4; Proverbs 10:7; Psalms 73:19-20. Instead of ×Ö·×ִש×ְתָּ×Ö¼Ö°××Ö¼ the Septuagint, Vulgate, and twenty-three manuscripts had ×Ö·×ְש×Ö»×Ö¼Ö°××Ö¼ âand they were praised;â but this reading appears clearly to be an emendation, and would render necessary this grammatically inadmissible translation: âand they were Praised in the city, as if they had acted justly.ââThis is also vanity.âThat is, also this unequal distribution of destiny in human life, is an example of the vanity pervading man controlling all earthly relations; comp. Ecclesiastes 2:26; Ecclesiastes 4:14; Ecclesiastes 4:16; Ecclesiastes 7:6, etc.
Ecclesiastes 8:11. Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily.âBecause speedy justice is not executedâa very common reason for the increase crime and wickedness. פִתְ×Ö¸× [14] originally a Persian word [ancient Persian, patigama, modern Per. paigam, Armenian patkam]; lit., âsomething that has happened or taken place,â and, therefore, command, edict, sentence; comp. Esther 1:20. Since in this passage, as in the Chaldaic sections of Ezra and Daniel (e.g., Ezekiel 4:17; Daniel 3:16; Daniel 4:14), the word is always treated a masculine, we should have expected × Ö·×¢Ö²×©×Ö¸× instead of × Ö·×¢Ö²×©×Ö¶× But comp. the examples of the masculine quoted by Ewald, § 74, gr., which, in later authors, are used as feminine.âTherefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in him to do evil.âTherefore they venture on evil without any hesitation; comp. Ecclesiastes 9:3; Esther 7:5; Matthew 15:19.
Ecclesiastes 8:12-13. In spite of the universal and ever-increasing prevalence of evil over justice and righteousness, hitherto depicted, the wicked at last find their deserved reward, and oppressed innocence does not perish.âThough a sinner do evil a hundred times.â×ֲש×ֶר does not here signify âbecauseâ (Hitzig), but âalthough,â âconsidering that,â as ×Ö¼Ö´× does sometimes (Lat. quod si). Comp. Leviticus 4:22; Deuteronomy 11:27; Deuteronomy 18:22; Ewald, § 362, b. Before ×Ö°×ַת supply פְּעָ×Ö´××âAnd his days be prolongedânamely, in sinning. ××Ö¹ with ×Ö·×ֲרִ××Ö° shows that this verb is not to be supplemented by ×Ö¸×Ö´××, as in the following verse.âYet surely I know that it shall be well with them that fear God.â×Ö¼Ö´× ××, âyet,â makes here a strong contrast. Koheleth represents the idea of just retribution as something certain and lasting, although experience seems so strongly to teach the contrary, and consequently as a conviction that does not rest on empirical observation, but on direct religious faith. âThere is not expressed in this verse, as some commentators suppose, the thought of a retribution in after life, but it must be confessed that the standpoint of observation on which Koheleth here places himself could easily lead to this conclusion, although it is not here drawn (Elster).âWhich fear before him.âNot, âbecause they fear before him;â ×ֲש×ֶר is here really a relative pronoun, pointing out the conformity of the conduct of the God-fearing to their designation as such. Comp. 1 Timothy 5:3 : ÏήÏÎ±Ï Ïίμα Ïá½°Ï á½Î½ÏÏÏ ÏήÏÏÏ.âBut it shall not be well with the wicked, neither shall he prolong his days.âThis denial of long life to the wicked does not contradict what is said in Ecclesiastes 8:12; for there the question was not of long life, but of prolonged sinning.âWhich are as a shadow; because he feareth not before God.â[Zöckler: He is as a shadow who feareth not before God.] We have had the same figure in Ecclesiastes 6:12. The Vulgate, as well as most modern commentators, are correct in not joining ×ַּצֵּ×, with the Masoretic accentuation, to what precedes [thus also Luther, Vaihinger, Hengstenberg; âand as a shadow will not live longâ], but to what follows [Vulg. âtranseuntâ].
8. Third Strophe. Conclusion. Ecclesiastes 8:14-15. Since the unequal distribution of human destiny points to the futile character of all earthly occurrences and conditions, we must so much the more enjoy present happiness, and profit by it with a contented mind.âThere is a vanity which is done upon the earth.âSee Ecclesiastes 8:10 and Ecclesiastes 3:16. That the lots of the just and the wicked are frequently commingled and interchanged in this world, seems to the Preacher as vanity, i.e., as belonging to the evil consequences of the human fall; but it does not, therefore, make on him an especially âbitter and gloomyâ impression, as Elster supposes. Comp. Hengstenberg: âIf there were righteous men such as there should be, wholly righteous, then the experience here given would certainly be in a high degree alarming. But since sin is also indwelling in the just, since they deserve punishment and need watchful care, since they can so easily slide into by-paths and fall into a mercenary worldliness, the shock must disappear for those who really dwell in righteousness. These latter are often severely disturbed by the fact here presented to view, but it is for them only a disturbance. The definitive complaint regarding this comes only from those who without claim or right count themselves among the just. And it is clear that the equality of result for the evil and just is only an external and partial one. To those whom God loves, every thing must be for the best, and the final issue separates the evil from the good.â
Ecclesiastes 8:15. Then I commended mirth, etc.[15]âComp. the exegetical remarks on Ecclesiastes 2:24; Ecclesiastes 3:22; Ecclesiastes 5:19.âFor that shall abide with him of his labour the days of his life.âLit., âThat clings to him,â etc., i.e., that and that only becomes truly his; comp. in Ecclesiastes 3:22; Ecclesiastes 5:19, which is synonymous in sense. The optative meaning of ×Ö´×Ö°×Ö¶× Ö¼×Ö¼ (Hitzig: âthat may cling to him;â Herzfeld: âthat may accompany him,â etc.), is unnecessary and runs counter to the analogy of those earlier parallels.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
(With Homiletical Hints)
The warnings against seduction through the snares and amorous arts of women, concerning rebellion against authority, and wicked oppression and violence, are quite dissimilar in their nature, and hang but loosely together. For in the first of these warnings the attention of the author is principally directed to the depraved nature of woman as the originator and principal representative of the ruin of man through sin; in the second, it is less the Divine necessity that is made especially emphatic, than the human utility and profitableness in the obedience to be rendered to kings; and in the third, the principal object of attention is not the wicked conduct of sinners in itself, but the fixed, certain, and just retribution of God for this conduct, together with the useful lesson which the good man is to draw therefrom. The questions concerning the origin, goal, and remedy of human depravity, [the most important problems in anthropology], are in this way touched, but by no means exhaustively treated; and the indicated solutions reveal a certain one-sidedness on account of the brevity of the illustration. It appears, at least, in Ecclesiastes 7:28, as if the female sex were thoroughly and without exception evil, and the first woman was represented as the sole originator of the sin of humanity; and just so it seems as if the remedy against sin and its bad effects were mainly (Ecclesiastes 8:2 ff.) unconditional obedience to earthly authority; and then, again, it would appear (Ecclesiastes 8:15) that a frivolous and thoughtless joyousness were recommended. But that this is mere appearance, is proved by the connection of each of the respective passages. As in Ecclesiastes 7:29, not women alone, but sinning humanity as a whole, are presented as the destroyers of the originally upright, pure, and God-like nature [corresponding to the words of Paul, á¼ÏÌ á¿³ÏάνÏÎµÏ á¼¥Î¼Î±ÏÏον Romans 5:12]; not less in Ecclesiastes 8:2 ff. is the duty of obedience to authority to be, from the beginning, Divinely influenced, and therefore subordinated to the higher duty of obedience towards God [corresponding with Acts 4:19]. And finally, the joy recommended in Ecclesiastes 8:15 appears clearly as the joy of one fearing God [comp. Ecclesiastes 8:12-13], and consequently it no more forms an exclusive contrast to the rejoicing with trembling of Psalms 2:11 than it contradicts the Apostolic admonition: âRejoice in the Lord alwaysâ (Philippians 4:4). In short, it is every where the conduct of the truly wise man, who, as such, is also the God-fearing man, to which the Preacher directs us, and in which he gets a view of the true ideal in the sphere of ethical anthropology (comp. Ecclesiastes 7:23-25; Ecclesiastes 8:1; Ecclesiastes 8:5). Thence is drawn for a collective homiletical treatment of this section the following theme : the truly wise man fears God, and guards himself as well against unchastity as against the disloyalty and injustice of this world. Or, the truly wise man in conflict with the enticements of this world, as he meets them first in the cunning of women, secondly, in the desire of rebellion, and thirdly, in the wickedness and arrogant violence of tyrants.
homiletical hints on separate passages
Ecclesiastes 7:23-25. Geier:âOur knowledge is fragmentary: the more we learn, the more we perceive how far we are removed from true wisdom, Sir 51:21 f.; 1 Corinthians 13:9.âHansen:âNo one on earth has the ability and skill to acquire a perfect knowledge of the works of God. They remain unfathomably deep and hidden from our eyes.âWe must exert all the powers of our soul to discover the difference between wisdom and folly.âStarke:âDepend not on your own strength in Christianity. You imagine that you make progress, but in reality you retrograde, and lose, in your spiritual arrogance, that which you had already acquired (2 John 1:8).âThe best teachers are those who teach to others what they themselves have learned by experience.
Tübingen Bible:âMan was created in innocence, justice and holiness, and this is the image of God, that he lost after the fall, but after which he should again strive with all earnestness.âHengstenberg:âAfter the fall, man forgot to remain in a receptive relation, which, in respect to the á¼Î½Ïθεν ÏοÏία is the only proper position; he chases after schemes of his presumptuous thoughts. The only means of becoming free from so dire a disease, and of being delivered from the bonds of his own thoughts and phantoms, is again to return to Divine subjection, and renouncing all his own knowledge, to permit himself to be taught of God.
Ecclesiastes 8:1. Zeyss :âImpenetrable as is the human heart in itself, it is nevertheless often betrayed by the countenance.âStarke:âThe innocent man looks happy and secure. He who cherishes injustice in the heart looks at no one cheerfully nor rightly.âHengstenberg:âWhen, by the transforming power of wisdom, the heart of flesh has taken the place of the heart of stone, and inward flexibility and obedience that of terror in presence of God and His commandments, it becomes also evident in the countenance.
Ecclesiastes 8:2; Ecclesiastes 8:6. Luther:âIt is enough for you to do so in the state, that you should obey the kingâs commands, and listen to him who is ordained of God. Here you see how civil obedience is comprehended in obedience to God. So Paul would have servants obey their masters, not as submitting to men, but as to God.âMelanchthon:âThus is obedience ordained. Obey the Divine voice first; then the king commanding things not repugnant to the Divine law.âThis will be in conformity with the rule given Acts 4:19.âStarke (Ecclesiastes 8:3):âThe powerful ones of this world have among men no higher one over them, to whom they must give an account, but in heaven there is One higher than the highest. Wisdom of Solomon Ecclesiastes 6:2-4.â(Ecclesiastes 8:5): He who keeps the commandments of God will, for the sake of God and his conscience, also obey the salutary commands of authority, Colossians 3:23.âHengstenberg (Ecclesiastes 8:5):âThe wise heart knows well that as certainly as God will judge justly in His own time, so certainly also can he not be really and lastingly unhappy who keeps the commandments, and therefore has God on his side.â(Ecclesiastes 8:6): With all his power, man is nevertheless not independent, but is subjected to the heavy blows of human destiny. Thus all men will be unable to place any impediment to the execution of the justice of God for the good of His children.
Ecclesiastes 8:7-8. Hieronymus (Ecclesiastes 8:8): We are not to mourn, though often oppressed by the unjust and powerful; since all these things come to an end in death, and the proud potentate himself, after all his tyrannical cruelties, cannot retain the soul when taken away by death.âCramer (Ecclesiastes 8:7):âIt is vain that we anxiously trouble ourselves about the progress and issue of things to come; therefore we should abandon our prying desire. Psalms 37:5.âGeier:âThe last conflict and struggle is the hardest and most dangerous; but a pious Christian should not be terrified at it; for the conquest of Jesus over death will become his own through faith; temporal death is for him only a dissolution, a passing away in peace.
Melanchthon:âThis question tortures all minds; so that many who see the prosperity of the wicked, and the misfortunes of the just, begin to think there is no Providence. It is the excelling strength of faith, that it is not broken by such spectacles, but retains the true cognition of God, and waits patiently for the judgment.âOsiander:âIt does not become us to dictate to God how He shall rule the world. Let it satisfy us that God rules, and will finally bring to light the justice of His judgment.âBecause God delays a while in the punishment of sin, men falsely convince themselves that their wickedness will go wholly unpunished, Sir 5:4-5.âJ. Lange:âThe children of God consider the patience of the Lord their salvation [2 Peter 3:15]; whilst the wicked consider this patience as a privilege to sin the more boldly (Romans 6:1). But however happy they may esteem themselves, they nevertheless die unblessed, and their happiness is changed into eternal shame.
Ecclesiastes 8:14]. and 15. Berleb. Bible: Joy is a godly cheerfulness and serenity of soul; since the just man, though he may suffer from the vanities of this world, which are common to all, keeps his soul free from vain cares, calm through faith in God, and hence cheerful and ready in the performance of its duties; so that he eats, drinks and rejoices, i.e., enjoys what God gives him, in a calm, cheerful, and fitting manner.âHengstenberg:â[See previous exegetical illustrations to Ecclesiastes 8:14.]
Footnotes:
[1] [The confusion arises here from disregarding the meditative, soliloquizing, exclamatory style of this book,âin a word, its poetical character. These divisions into the practical and theoretical regard it too much as an abstract ethical or didactic treatise, with its logical and rhetorical arrangement. This is at war with its subjective, emotional aspect, and hence much forced and false interpretations. See the remarks p. 172 in the Introduction to the rhythmical version. The most literal rendering is the best, since it preserves this broken, interjectional, ejaculatory style, in which the writer is giving vent to his emotions at the thought of the great past, and how small human knowledge is in respect to it. He expresses it as he feels it, in fragmentary sighs, and repetitions, or as one who says it over and over to himself without thinking of others, or of any didactic use, and yet in this very way, making the most vivid and practical impression.
O that I might be wise, I said; but it was far from me; Far off! The past, what is it? Deepâa deepâO who can find?
There is strong emotion in the paragogic or optative form of ×Ö¶×Ö°×Ö¸×Ö¸×. It expresses the most intense and longing desire, but with little hope of knowing the great secret of the long past, much less of the far stretching future. The interjections used in rendering really inhere in the style. What should we think of an attempt to lay off Youngâs Night Thoughts in âstrophes of the practical and the theoretical?â And yet it is fully as capable of such divisions as this most emotional poem of Koheleth. In the Hebrew, רָ××Ö¹×§ is accentually joined with ×Ö·× ×©×Ö¼Ö¶×Ö¸×Ö¸×, but it is rhythmical rather than logical, and would not prevent ×Ö·× from being an interrogative pronoun: ×Ö·× ×שר ×××, âwhatâthat which was?â or, âthat which was, what is it?â As though he had been going to say merely, âfar off the past,â but the emotion throws it into the more broken or exclamatory utterance, and then he adds: âand deepâdeepâwho can find it?â The ×Ö´× as personal interrogative, corresponds to the general interrogative ××.
In the expression, âO let me be wise,â we have at once suggested to us the passage 1 Kings 3:5-12, Solomonâs dream at Gibeon, the Lordâs appearing unto him, and his earnest prayer for a ×Öµ× ×Ö¸×Ö¸× âa wise and understanding heart.â With all his errors the love of wisdom (ÏιλοÏοÏία and θεοÏοÏία) had been a passion from his earliest youth,âwisdom speculative as well as practical,âwisdom not only âto govern so great a people,â and to âdiscern,â ethically, âbetween good and evil,â but to understand, if it were possible, the ways of God, and the great problem of humanity. Rightly considered, this strong desire, thus expressed, is a special mark of the Solomonic authorship. âO let me be wise, I said.â He said it in his dream at Gibeon.
âDeepâdeepâO who shall find it!â Like other passages of Scripture, this is capable of an ever expanding sense. We may think of the earthly past, so much of it historically unknown; but the style of thought in Koheleth carries the mind still farther back to the great past âbefore the earth wasâ (Proverbs 8:23),âto the ×¢×××× ×¢×××× ÏÏὸ Ïῶν αἰÏνÏν, 1 Corinthians 2:7, âbefore the ages of ages,â or worlds of worlds. There are two views here that may be pronounced exceeding narrow. The one is that of the Scriptural interpreter who recognizes no higher chronology to the whole universe than a few thousand of our sun-measured years. To this he adds six solar days, and then slides off into a blank antepast eternity, a chronological nothingness, we may say, where Deity dwelt, had ever dwelt, á¼ÏÏονοÏ, without time, without creative manifestationâall worlds, whether of space or time, and all ranks of existence below the Divine, having had their origination in this single week (as measured by earthly revolutions) that he assigns to them. The other view, still more narrowâfor if is an infinite narrownessâis the one held by some modern thinkers of high repute. It is that of an eternal physical development, or evolution, carried on through an infinite past of duration, ever evolving progressively, and yet with nothing more or higher evolved, ever evolved, than the very finite and imperfect state of things we now behold,âman the highest product of this eternal evolution that has ever been reached in any part of the universe,âman as yet the âetre supremeââman, too, lately evolved, or within a few thousand years, from some of the animal classes just below him. All before is a descending inclined plane, with an uninterrupted evenness, and an infinitesimal angle, falling away lower and still lower forever-more, in the infinite retrocession from the present advanced state of things!!
In contradistinction to the meagre poverty of both these views stands the Scriptural malkuth kol olamim (Psalms 145:13) βαÏιλεία Ïῶν αἰÏνÏν (1 Timothy 1:17)âa kingdom of all eternities, with its ages of ages, its worlds of worlds, its ascending orders of being, its mighty dispensations embracing all grades of evolution in the physical, and an unimaginable variety in the holy administrations of Him who styles Himself Jehovah tsebaoth, the Lord of hosts. This alone leaves the mind free in its speculative roamings, allowing it to compete with any philosophy in this respect, whilst binding it ever to an adoring recognition of the one absolute and infinite personality, âaccording to whose will all things are, and were, created.â
The Targum explains ×× ×©××× here of the great unknown past, regarding it as equally mysterious with the secrets of the unknown future: âIt is too far off for the sons of men to know that which was from the days of eternity.â Rashi and Aben Ezra give substantially the same interpretation, with a like reference to the creation and the creative times: âWhat is above, what is below, what is before, what is after,âit is deep, deep, too deep for our power to think.â The impassioned impressiveness of Kohelethâs language amply justifies such a style of interpretation.âT. L.]
[2] [Zöcklerâs rendering, âwickedness as folly, foolishness as madness,â weakens the sense. It is more impassioned without the conjunctions, or any other particles to break its earnest and hurried style: âwickedness, presumption [stubbornness, as ×Ö¼Ö¶×¡Ö¶× may mean], yea, stupidity, madness,â all given in a running list:
To seek out wisdom, reason,âsin to knowâ
Presumption, folly, vain impiety.âT. L.]
[3][See text note on ×Ö°×Ö·×.âT. L.]
[4][This is undoubtedly meant as proof of the late authorship of Koheleth, but it amounts to no more than this, namely, that the old manuscript of Ecclesiastes, whose copies have come down to us, was made by a scribe writing from the ear as another read aloud, in consequence of which he has sometimes given in full a letter known to exist etymologically, though lost in sound, as in this case; whilst, on the other hand, and more frequently, he has given it as abbreviated is sound, like ש×Ö¼Ö¶ for ×ֲש×ֻר, or ×Ö´×Ö¼×Ö¼ for ×Ö´× ××Ö¼, though generally written in the full old etymological form; and again, in other cases, he has written a like sounding letter in place of the true one, as ש××××ת for ס×××ת, and other similar cases. The same remark is applicable to Ezekiel, and the very instances that Zöcklerquotes. They are evidences of late chirography in manuscripts, but are little to be relied on as proofs, or disproofs, of original authorship.âT. L.]
[5][This would require the article, or the demonstrative pronoun, or both: ×××ר ×××.âT. L.]
[6][No more Chaldaic than it is Hebrew. It is merely a variation of orthography for the like sounding word פתר, Genesis 40:8. Who knows how early the change to the sibilant took place? as there are no other examples of either form between Moses and Solomon, or between Solomon and Daniel?âT. L.]
[7][See text note.âT. L.]
[8][Among all these conflicting interpretations, it may be suggested that the best way is to take Ecclesiastes 8:5 as a qualification of the positiveness and strictness of the previous precepts: the ordinary man who simply yields literal and passive obedience, will be safe in so doing; but the wise man will use his wisdom in judging as to the manner of doing the command, or of modifying, avoiding, or, it may be, of resisting, as Daniel did. This mode of qualifying, or partially retracting, a precept that seems general and exclusive, is not uncommon with Koheleth. Comp. Ecclesiastes 9:11 and al. Such is in general the idea of Stuart, especially as to the last clause, though he interprets ×× ×××¢ in the first, as meaning, âhe (who obeys) will have no concern about the evil command;â that is, will not trouble himself about its rectitude.âT. L.]
[9][We cannot help regarding this as a forcing the text into the support of the extreme monarchical doctrine of passive obedience, notwithstanding the qualification adverted to in the previous note. There is, too, an omission, unusual for Zöckler, of all comment on the first part of Ecclesiastes 8:6, which contains not only the connection with what precedes, but furnishes the key to what follows. âThe heart of the wise man will acknowledge time and reasonâ (Ecclesiastes 8:5): âfor there is time and reason to every thing, although the misery of man (the oppression, the evil rule, under which he suffers) be so great upon himâ [×¢Ö¸×Ö¸×× implying something laid upon him like a heavy burden). It is all made clear by rendering the second ×Ö¼× although, as adversative to the firstâa frequent sense of the particle in this book, as is generally shown by the context. It is a strong and passionate assertion: The world is not all confusion; there is time and reason; they will appear at last, though misery so abounds; therefore be patient; watch and wait. Obedience is indeed inculcated to lawful (not merely monarchical) authority, but it is also intimated that it is not to be wholly passive, unreasoning, and blind.âT. L.]
[10][There is precisely the same argument for rendering it spirit in chap.Ecclesiastes 11:5 (the way of the spirit), as exists for it here. See excursus on that passage, p. 147.âT. L.]
[11][Perhaps there is nothing, that shows the unspirituality of some commentators more than their obstinate determination to render ר×× wind, and often in utter defiance of the context, as in Genesis 1:2, and in such places as these.âT. L.]
[12] [×Ö¼×Ö°×Öµ× is the particle of illustration: âand in such a case,â or, taken in the connection: âand so it was.â See the Metrical Versionâ
âTwas when I saw the wicked dead interred.âT. L.]
[13][Zöcklerâs version here, which is substantially that of Hitzig, and even of Geier, seems very forced. How is he to get the sense of âwandering far,â or of âbeing driven away,â from ×Ö°×Ö·×Ö¼Öµ××Ö¼? Then, again, the rendering ×ֲש×ֶר ×Ö¼Öµ× ×¢Ö¸×©××Ö¼ âthey who had done rightly,â and making it the subject of ×Ö°×Ö·×Ö¼Öµ××Ö¼, are both unwarranted. Stuart well says that the makkeph in ×Ö¼Öµ×־עָש××Ö¼ shows that the Masorites regarded ×Ö¼Öµ× as the usual adverb so, and therefore joined it closely to the verb as simply qualifying. The references of Zöckler and Hitzig do not bear them out, and there cannot be found a clear case in the Bible where ×Ö¼Öµ× is used absolutely for justice. There are two objections to the finding in this phrase the subject of ×Ö°×Ö·×Ö¼Öµ××Ö¼; one is the separation it makes between it and ×Ö¸×Ö¸××Ö¼; the second is its coming so late after its verb, making a very unusual Hebrew construction in keeping the sense so long suspended. It seems quite clear that ×Ö°×Ö·×Ö¼Öµ××Ö¼ and ×Ö¸×Ö¸××Ö¼ have the same subjectânot that a sudden change is unexampled in Hebrew, but because these two verbs so uniformly go together in similar expressions; as in Ecclesiastes 1:4 ×Ö¼×ֹר ×Ö¹×Öµ×Ö° ,×Ö¼×ֹר ×Ö¼Ö¸× âgeneration goes, and generation comes;â also Ecclesiastes 6:4, ×Ö¼Ö·×ש×Ö¶×Ö° ×Öµ×Öµ×Ö° ,×Ö¼Ö·×Ö¶×Ö¶× ×Ö¼Ö¸× âcomes in vanity, goes away in darkness.â So here there must be for both the same subject; but is it the wicked, mentioned above, or men generally, not personally or pronominally expressed, because it so readily suggests itself from the mention of burial,âthey, the mourners, real or pretended,âthey who form the procession (×Ö°×Ö·×Ö¼Öµ××Ö¼; see remarks on this word in piel, p. 85), who go about the streets, Ecclesiastes 12:5, where סָ×Ö°××Ö¼ includes both going to and coming from. According to this, there is, indeed, a change of subject from that of the previous clause, but this is far from being unexampled in Hebrew, even without notice; as in Psalms 49:19 : âFor he blesses himself in life, and they will praise [×Ö°××Ö¹×Ö»×Ö¸] thee,ââ that is, men will praise thee, when thou doest well to thyself. Here, however, the personal subject is so familiar that it is easily understood, and its omission is on that very account all the more impressive: I saw the wicked buried, and from (or to and from) the holy place [the place of burial],âthey came and went [men came and went]; then straight were they forgotten, that is, the wicked rulers were forgotten. The coming back to these as the old subject, after the mention of the funeral procession, seems very natural. The crowd disperses, the hired mourners âgo about the streets;â it is all over; and soon are they âforgotten in the city where they thus had done,ââwhere they had ruled to their own dishonor, only to be hated, and at last, after an empty funeral pomp, to be consigned to oblivion. In the description of a scene so well understood, the formal insertion of the logical subject would have made it much less graphic. See Metrical Version.âT. L.]
[14][On this word see remarks in the note appended to Zöcklerâs Introduction, p. 33.âT. L.]
[15] [âIt was then I commended mirth,â etc.; that is, under such a view of mankind and their destiny. See the text note. The conjunction × in ×ְש×Ö´×Ö¼Ö·×Ö°×ªÖ¼Ö´× connects by showing the time and reason. It is very important as showing that the Epicurean aspect Koheleth sometimes exhibits was in connection with, and conditioned upon, such discouraging and gloomy views of human destiny as those just mentioned. And this explains the ×ֲש×ֶר, in what follows, as the matter or language of the false commendation (quod, á½ Ïι), âthat there was no other good to man,ââor then âI praised mirth,â etc. (saying), âthat there was no good to man,â etc.; and so of what follows: âand that this only remains to him,â etc. It is all dependent on ש×Ö´×Ö¼Ö·×ְתִּ×, as the subject matter of the Epicurean commendation. Zöckler omits all remarks on ×ֲש×ֶר here, and the connection of ×ְשִ×Ö¼Ö·×ְתִּ×, although it is so important.
âTwas then that pleasure I extolled:
How that there was no good to man beneath the sun,
Except to eat and drink, and [here] his joy to find,
And this alone attends him in his toil,
During all the days, etc.
Compare the Arabic اÙÙØ¨ÙÙÙÙÙØ© res residua, as used in the Koran to denote the portion either of the pious in the life to comes, or of the wicked pleasure-seekers in this world.âT. L.]
Verses 16-17
FOURTH DISCOURSE
Of the relation of true wisdom in the internal and external life of man
(Ecclesiastes 8:16 to Ecclesiastes 12:7)
A. The unfathomable character of the universal rule of God should not frighten the wise man from an active part in life, but should cheer and encourage him thereto
(Ecclesiastes 8:16 to Ecclesiastes 9:16)
1. It cannot be denied that the providence of God in the distribution of human destiny is unfathomable and incomprehensible
(Ecclesiastes 8:16 to Ecclesiastes 9:6)
16When I applied mine heart to know wisdom, and to see the business that is done upon the earth: (for also there is that neither day nor night seeth sleep with his eyes:) 17Then I beheld all the work of God, that a man cannot find out the work that is done under the sun: because though a man labour to seek it out, yet he shall not find it; yea, further; though a wise man think to know it, yet shall he not be able to find it.
Ecclesiastes 9:1 For all this I considered in my heart even to declare all this, that the righteous and the wise, and their works, are in the hand of God: no man knoweth either love 2or hatred by all that is before them. All things come alike to all: there is one event to the righteous and to the wicked; to the good, and to the clean, and to the unclean; to him that sacrificeth, and to him that sacrificeth not; as is the good, Song of Song of Solomon 3:0 is the siuner; and he that sweareth, as he that feareth an oath. This is an evil among all things that are done under the sun, that there is one event unto all: yea, also the heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart while they live, and after that they go to the dead. 4For to him that is joined to all the living there is hope: for a living dog is better than a dead lion. 5For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. 6Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun.
2. Therefore it behooves us to enjoy this life cheerfully, and to use it in profitable avocations
(Ecclesiastes 9:7-10)
7Go thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart; for God now accepteth thy works. 8Let thy garments be always white; and let thy head lack no ointment. 9Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest all the days of the life of thy vanity, which he hath given thee under the sun, all the days of thy vanity: for that is thy portion in this life, and in thy labour which thou takest under the sun. 10Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might, for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.
3. The uncertain result of human effort in this world should not deter us from zealously striving after wisdom
Ecclesiastes 9:11-16
11I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all. 12For man also knoweth not his time: as the fishes that are taken in an evil net, and as the birds that are caught in the snare; so are the sons of men snared in an evil time, when it falleth suddenly upon them. 13This wisdom have I seen also under the 14sun, and it seemed great unto me: There was a little city, and few men within it; and there came a great king against it, and besieged it, and built great bulwarks against it: 15Now there was found in it a poor wise man, and he by his wisdom delivered the city; yet no man remembered that same poor man; 16Then said I, Wisdom is better than strength: nevertheless the poor manâs wisdom is despised, and his words are not heard.
[Ecclesiastes 8:17.â×ְּש×Ö¶× equivalent to ××שר ×, âin that which toâââin proportion to;â Vulgate well renders it quanto plus. LXX. á½ Ïα á¼á½°Î½; âin proportion to that which one shall laborââor âthe more he labors.â It is found elsewhere only in Jonah 1:7, or, in composition, ×ְּש×Ö¶×Ö°×Ö´× and ×ִּש×Ö¶×Ö¼×. It is certainly not a Chaldaism, but it is said âto belong to the later Hebrew,â and the argument runs in this way: Koheleth must belong to the later Hebrew, because this word is elsewhere found only in Jonah; and Jonah must belong to the later Hebrew, because this word is elsewhere found only in Koheleth. It is also called a Rabbinism in Koheleth; but it is rather a Kohelethism much employed, with other Kohelethisms, by the earliest Rabbins, because that book was a great favorite with them, and regarded by them as a specimen of the more elegant and courtly, as well as the more philosophical Hebrew.âEcclesiastes 9:1, ×Ö°×Ö¸××ּר; it has the same meaning here with ×רר, Ecclesiastes 3:18, to exploreâprove, by exploringâprimary sense, separate, purify. It is an example of the affinity, or of the interchange of meanings, in verbs ain wau and double ain.âT. L.]
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1.Vaihinger deviates from the above analysis of this section into three divisions, but only so far as to extend the first division simply to Ecclesiastes 9:3, which does not well coincide with the contents of Ecclesiastes 8:4-6, that clearly refer to what immediately precedes. Several commentators begin a new section with Ecclesiastes 9:11 [Hahn,indeed a new discourse], and deny in this way that the principal theme of the whole pieceâthe contrast between the inscrutability of human destinies, and the wisdom which still retains its worth, and is to be sought after as the highest goodâis also treated in this last division, and that it is more closely allied with the fore going than with that which follows Ecclesiastes 8:17.âHengstenberg also very improperly separates Ecclesiastes 8:11-12 from the four subsequent ones, with which they are most closely connected; see below at Ecclesiastes 8:13.
First Strophe, first division. Ecclesiastes 8:16-17.The universal rule of God is unfathomable.âWhen I applied mine heart.âLit., âgave;â comp. Ecclesiastes 8:9, ×Ö¼Ö·×ֲש×ֶר introduces the longer primary clause, to which then, in Ecclesiastes 8:17, a still longer secondary clause corresponds, introduced by ×Ö° or ×ְרָ×××ªÖ´× There is no closer connection with the preceding, such as is affirmed by Rosenmueller, Hitzig, hengstenberg and hahn, according to the example of most old authors. The commendation of pleasure in Ecclesiastes 8:15, like the earlier praise of cheerfulness [Ecclesiastes 2:24; Ecclesiastes 3:22; Ecclesiastes 5:18; Ecclesiastes 5:20], fittingly closes the preceding, whilst this clause, as is shown by ×Ö¼Ö´× Ecclesiastes 9:1, serves as a basis and preparation for the subsequent reflections. To know wisdom, and see the businessâComp. Ecclesiastes 1:13; Ecclesiastes 1:17. The word ×¢Ö´× Ö°×Ö¸× is here as there the travail caused by a zealous searching after the grounds and aims of human action, fate, and life. For also there is that neither day nor night. ×Ö¼Ö´× here gives the nature and operation of the travail; or is inferential, âso that,â as Genesis 40:15; Exodus 3:11, etc. [comp. Vaihinger]. The parenthetical interpretation of this third clause [Ewald, Elster, hahn,etc., is also unnecessary.] comp. Genesis 31:40; Proverbs 6:4; Psalms 132:4 (Lat. somnum videre).
Ecclesiastes 8:17. Then I beheld all the work of god. ×ֶת־×Ö¼Ö¸×Ö¾×ַעֲש×Öµ× ×Ö±×Ö¹×Ö´×× is the accusative of relation: âI saw in relation to all the work of godâ. The work that is done under the sun, that we find in the subsequent clause, is the same as the âwork of god,â the universal rule of the most High; and the inability to find this work, its incomprehensibility and inscrutability [comp. Psalms 147:5; Romans 11:33] form from the beginning the principal theme of the assertion. To âfindâ is used in the sense of âto comprehend, to fathom;â comp. Ecclesiastes 3:11; Ecclesiastes 7:24âBecause though a man labour to seek it out.âThat is, however much he may try, in spite of all his toil, etc. ×ְּש×Ö¶× ×ֲש×ֶר[1] is equivalent toâ×Ö¼Ö·×ֲש×ֶרâ×Ö·×ֲש×ֶר [comp. the similar crowding of relations in Jonah 1:7-8; Jonah 1:12, and also the Aramaic ×Ö°×Ö´×× ×Ö´], and signifies, when taken together with the following verb ×Ö·×¢Ö²×Ö¹× âwith that which is in it,â etc.; that is, âwith that which there is in his labor,â or âwith that zeal and talent perceptible in it.â Compare Hitzig on this passage, who correctly rejects as unnecessary Ewaldâs emendation ×Ö¼Ö°×Ö¸× ×ֲש×ֶר in place of ×ְּש×Ö¶× ×ֲש×ֶר, although the 70., Vulgate, and Syriac seem to have so read it.âYea further, though a wise man think to know it.â×Ö´× ×Ö¹××ַר âshould he presume,â âshould he attempt;â comp. Exodus 2:14; 2 Samuel 21:16.
3. First strophe, second division. Ecclesiastes 9:1-3. All men, the just, as well as the unjust, are subject to the same fate, especially to the law of mortality.âFor all this I considered in my heart. Namely, when I applied my heart to know wisdom, Ecclesiastes 8:16. âAll thisâ refers to what immediately follows.âEven to declare all this. The infinitive construct with ×Ö¸××ּר ××Ö° continues the finite verb, as elsewhere the infinitive absolute; comp. Isaiah 38:20; Isaiah 10:32, ×Ö¼×ּר equivalent to ×רר (Ecclesiastes 3:18) is found only in this passage in the O. T.âThat the righteous and the wise, and their works, are in the hand of God. That is, wholly dependent, on Him, not capable, in any manner, independently to shape their life; so that their best actions may be followed by the saddest fate. Comp. Hengstenberg on this passage, who correctly shows that there is affirmed an unconditional dependence, not of human action in itself, but of its results on God.âNo man knoweth either love or hatred. That is, no man knoweth in advance whether God will grant him love or hatred (i.e., happiness or unhappiness); (Michaelis, Knobel, Vaihinger, and Hengstenberg are correct). Others read: âNo man knoweth whether he will love or hate;â [Hitzig, Elster]. But this interpretation is not in harmony with the text, and would give a sense which is foreign alike to the passage and the book, and for which Ecclesiastes 2:5 cannot be quoted as proof, as is done by Hitzig.âBy all that is before them. That is, not as affirmed by Hieronymus, Geier, and Rosenmueller,âall their destinies are clear, and as it were visible before their eyes, but the reverse: all their destinies lie in the dark uncertain future before them; they have yet everything to experience, happiness as well as unhappiness, good as well as evil. Comp. Ecclesiastes 7:14, where ×Ö·×ֲרָ×× âbehind himâ signifies just the same as here ×Ö´×¤Ö°× Öµ××Ö¶× âbefore them.â Knobel unnecessarily insists that ×Ö¼× here means: Everything is before them, everything can occur to themâeven great misfortuneâa sense that would need to be more clearly indicated by the context than is here the case.
Ecclesiastes 9:2.âAll things come alike to all. That is, every thing happens to the wise and just as to all others; the just have no special fortune, they share the common fate of all (in this world of course). Knobel, Ewald, Heiligstedt, Umbreit, and Hengstenberg correctly take this position, whilst Hitzig and Elster include the following words ×Ö´×§Ö°×¨Ö¶× ×Ö¶×Ö¸×, and so bring out this somewhat obscure and distorted thought: âAll are as all, they meet one fate;â but Vaihinger takes ×Ö·×Ö¼Ö¹× at the beginning of the verse as an elliptical repetition from Ecclesiastes 9:1 : âYes all! Just as all have the same destiny,â etc.âThere is one event to the righteous and to the wicked. Not that they are the offspring and the victims of one and the same blind power of chance [Hitzig], but they are subjected to one and the same divine providence as regards the issue of their life. Hengstenberg justly says: âChance (×ִקְרֶ×) just as in Ecclesiastes 3:19 (comp. Ecclesiastes 2:14-15), does not form the counterpart to divine providence, but to the spontaneous activity on the part of the just.ââTo the good and to the clean and to the unclean. In order that one may not take clean and unclean in the levitical or externally legal sense, but in the moral sense, the kindred thought of ××Ö¹× (good) precedes that of ×Ö¸××ֹר (pure) as explanatory.âHe that sweareth as he that feareth an oath. That is, the frivolous swearer, and he that considers an oath sacred. That this is the sense is plainly seen in Ecclesiastes 8:2, from which passage it appears that, it does not enter the authorâs mind to condemn the oath in general as something immoral. Vaihinger is of opinion that by him that feareth an oath, as by him that does not sacrifice, is meant an Essene, or at least a representative of growing Essenianism. But the designation is by no means clear enough for this; and the one not sacrificing seems clearly to be a wicked contemner of the levitical laws concerning the temple and sacrifices, and not an unreasonably conscientious ascetic in the sense of Essenianism.
Ecclesiastes 9:3.âThis is an evil among all things that are done under the sun. רַע ×Ö¼Ö°×Ö¹× ×Ö°×× cannot mean the worst of all, etc. (Rosenmueller, Vaihinger) but in the absence of the article before רַע (comp. the Song of Solomon 1:8; Joshua 14:15, etc.), simply bad, evil among all things, or in all things; therefore an evil accompanying and dwelling in every earthly occurrence.âThat there is one event unto all. Namely, that befalls all. ×Ö´×§Ö°×¨Ö¶× must be taken as in verse 2, and points out, therefore, not what one meets with in life, but its issue, its end. The equal liability of all to death, even the good and the just, is designated by Koheleth as that evil, that evil thing that is mixed with every earthly occurrence; (comp. Romans 5:14; Romans 5:21; 1 Corinthians 15:55 f.; Hebrews 2:15). Yea, also the heart of the sons of men is full of evil; namely, in consequence of this their liability to the power of death, which, therefore, also in addition exerts a demoralizing effect on them; comp. Ecclesiastes 8:11.âAnd after that they go to the dead. The suffix to ×Ö·×ֲרָ×× is to be considered as neuter, (âand after this condition,â comp. Jeremiah 51:46), not masculine as if the sense were âand after itâ (i.e., after this life) as in Ecclesiastes 6:12; Ecclesiastes 10:14. The preposition of motion (×Ö¶× in ×Ö¶× ×Ö·×ֵּתִ××) âindicates that the sense of âit goes,â is to complete the sentence,â Hitzig.
4. First strophe, conclusion. Ecclesiastes 9:4-6. In spite of the presentation just given, the condition of the living is ever to be preferred to that of the deadâFor to him that is joined (Zöckler, taking the reading ×Ö°×Ö»×ַר translates it, âwho is it that is preferred?ââT.L.). Thus according to the reading ×Ö°×Ö»×ַר, pual of ××ר âto choose, prefer,â does Vaihinger more correctly give the sense: âThere is no one who would be here preferred and accepted, or who would have a choice, who would be exempted from death; since dying is a common fate; each one must go to the dead; but in death there is nothing more to hope.â In the same way, substantially, does Elster translate, except that he punctuates ×Ö´×Ö°×ַר, and therefore gives it actively; âFor who has any choice ?â Many later commentators adhere to the kâri ×Ö°×Ö»×ַּר, which the 70. read (ÏÎ¯Ï á½ Ï ÎºÎ¿Î¹Î½ÏνεῠÏÏá½¸Ï ÏάνÏÎ±Ï ÏÎ¿á½ºÏ Î¶á¿¶Î½ÏαÏ) together with Symmachus and the Targum. They translate, therefore, with Ewald, âwho is joined to the living has hope,â or, with Hitzig, interrogatively, âwho is it who would be joined to all the living?â But the sense thus arising makes a very forced [2] connection; and the translation of Hahn, who takes the word ××ר in the sense of âcharming,â is open to very weighty linguistic objections.âTo all the living there is hope. Literally, âfor all living,â for all as long as they live. The grammatical expression does not accord with Hengstenbergâs interpretation: âOne may trust to all living;â for ×Ö¶× is used with the verb ××× (Psalms 4:6; Psalms 31:7), but not with the substantive ×Ö¼Ö´×Ö¼Ö¸××Ö¹× for the introduction of the one in whom the confidence is placed. Comp. Job 11:18.âFor a living dog is better than a dead lion. For the most contemptible and hateful thing that lives (comp. for the proverbial use of the dog in this relation, 1 Samuel 17:43; 2 Samuel 9:8; Isaiah 66:3; Matthew 15:26; Revelation 22:15, etc.) is more valuable than the most majestic of all beasts if it is dead; (for the majesty and glory of the lion as the king of beasts, consult Isaiah 38:13; Hosea 13:7; Lamentations 3:10; Job 10:16). This proverb is also known to the Arabs. See Golius, Adag. Cent. 2, n. 3.
Ecclesiastes 9:5.âFor the living know that they shall die. The consciousness of the necessity of death, is here presented not as the only, but yet as the characteristic superiority of the living over the dead, just as if only the necessity of death were the object of human knowledgeâan individualizing statement of an ironical and yet most serious nature.âNeither have they any more reward. Not that they have had their share (Hitzig) but that God no longer exercises retributive justice towards them, because they are wanting in conscious, personal life. The fact of a retribution in a world beyond, is only apparently denied here, for the author now sees only the conditions of this world; on the subsequent fate of a spirit returned to God he is for the present entirely silent (Ecclesiastes 12:7; comp. Ecclesiastes 11:9).âFor the memory of them is forgotten. So entirely do the dead remain without reward; not even the smallest thing that could profit them here below, not even the preservation of their memory with their posterity, is granted to them. Comp. Psalms 31:12; Job 14:21. It is doubtful whether ×Ö¶×ֶר âmemoryâ is intended to rhyme with the preceding ש×Ö¸×ָר ârewardâ (as Hitzig supposes). It is more probable that such a rhyming is made in the following verse between ש×Ö´× Ö°×Ö¸×ªÖ¸× and ×§Ö´× Ö°×ָתָ×.
Ecclesiastes 9:6. A continued description of the sad fate of the dead; âfrom the very beginning with touching depth of tone, a strain of lamentation overpowering the authorâ (Hitzig). Also their love and their hatred and their envy is now perished. That is, not that they are deprived of the objects of their love, hatred, or envy (Knobel), but these sentiments and activities themselves have ceased for them; as רפ××× they are destitute of all affections, interests, and exertions, and lead rather a merely seeming life. (Rosenmueller, Hitzig). The sad existence of departed souls in Scheol, as described in Job 14:11 ff., seems here to hover before the author, just as in ver 10 below, he expressly speaks of it. It is significant that he denies them love as well as hatred, and would seem thereby to mark their condition as one extremely low.
5. Second strophe, Ecclesiastes 9:7-10. On account of this superiority of life, compared with the condition of the dead, and the uncertainty of human fate in general, it behooves us to enjoy life cheerfully (Ecclesiastes 9:7-9), and to use it zealously in the activity of our vocations (Ecclesiastes 9:10).âGo thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart. (Comp. Ecclesiastes 2:24; Ecclesiastes 5:19). This collective triad, âeat, drink, and be merry,â is here, as it were, increased to a quartette; joy being doubly designated, first as it finds its expression in cheerful adornments of the body and appropriate ornament, and then in loving unison with a wife.âWine[3] is used as a symbol and producer of joy, and also in Ecclesiastes 10:19; Genesis 27:25; Psalms 104:15, etc. For ×Ö¼Ö°×Ö¶×Ö¾××Ö¹× âof joyful heart, gay,â comp. 1 Samuel 25:38; also Ecclesiastes 7:3 of the foregoing.âFor God now accepteth thy works. That is, not that God finds pleasure in just this eating, drinking, etc. (Hitzig), but, thy moral conduct and efforts have long pleased Him,[4] wherefore thou mayst hope in the future surely to receive thy reward from Him. (Hengstenberg correctly takes this position).
Ecclesiastes 9:8. Let thy garments be always white. White garments are the expression of festive joy and pure, calm feelings in the soul, comp. Revelation 3:4 f.; Ecclesiastes 7:9 ff. Koheleth could hardly have meant a literal observance of this precept, so that the conduct of Sisinnius, Novatian bishop of Constantinople, who, with reference to this passage, always went in white garments, was very properly censured by Chrysostom as Pharisaical and proud. Hengstenbergâs view is arbitrary, and in other respects scarcely corresponds to the sense of the author: âWhite garments are here to be put on as an expression of the confident hope of the future glory of the people of God, as Spener had himself buried in a white coffin as a sign of his hope in a better future of the Church.ââAnd let thy head lack no ointment. As in 2 Samuel 12:20; 2 Samuel 14:2; Isaiah 61:3; Amos 6:6; Proverbs 27:9; Psalms 45:8, so here appears the anointing oil, which keeps the hair smooth and makes the face to shine, as a symbol of festive joy, and a contrast to a sorrowing disposition. There is no reason here for supposing fragrant spikenard (Mark 14:2), because the question is mainly about producing a good appearance by means of the ointment, comp. Psalms 133:2.
Ecclesiastes 9:9.âLive joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest. That is, enjoy life with her, comp. Ecclesiastes 3:1; Psalms 34:12; and also Ecclesiastes 7:28, above, to which expression, apparently directed against all intercourse with women, the present one serves as a corrective.âAll the days of the life of thy vanity. This short repetition of the preceding (âall the days of thy vain life, which he has given thee under the sunâ) is left out of the Septuagint and Chaldaic, but is produced in the Vulgate, and should be by no means wanting, because it points with emphasis[5] to the vanity of life as a principal motive to joy.âFor that is thy portion in this life and in thy labor, etc. That is, for this cheerful and moderate enjoyment of life shall, according to the will of God, compensate thee for the toil and labor which this life brings with it; comp. Ecclesiastes 2:10; Ecclesiastes 3:22; Ecclesiastes 5:18.
Ecclesiastes 9:10.âWhatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might, The word ×Ö¼Ö°××Ö¹Ö²×Ö¸ is by the Vulgate and most modern authors joined to עֲש×Öµ×, whilst according to the accents and the collocation, it belongs to what precedes. But it is a vigorous doing, nevertheless, that is here recommended; for the sense is clear: whatsoever presents itself, is to be performed with thy strength, whatsoever offers itself to thee as an object for thy exertion, that do ! For the expression, âwhatsoever thy hand findeth to do,â comp. 1 Samuel 10:7; 1 Samuel 23:8;. Judges 9:33; also Isaiah 10:13-14.âFor there is no work nor device, etc., in the grave whither thou goest. comp. Ecclesiastes 9:6. As Koheleth gives a motive here in his admonition to an active life, by pointing to the lifeless and inactive condition of departed souls in the realm of death, so speaks Christ in John 9:4 : á¼Î¼á½² δεῠá¼ÏγαζεÏθαι á¼ÏÏ á¼¡Î¼ÎÏα á¼ÏÏίÏ. á¼ÏÏεÏαι νÏξ á½ Ïε οá½Î´Îµá½¶Ï δÏναÏαι á¼ÏαγάζεÏθαι. Since the νÏξ (night) mentioned in John 9:4 and elsewhere, is clearly something else than the ש×Ö°××Ö¹× of this passage, there is no definite reference to the latter, as Hengstenberg affirms, but between the two assertions there is a certain analogy.
6. Third strophe, Introduction. Ecclesiastes 9:11-12. Human actions in this world depend entirely on divine fate, and their success, therefore, is too often in no comparison with the real ability and strength of the actor.âI returned.âComp. Ecclesiastes 4:1. For the infinitive absolute ×ְרָ××Ö¹ comp. Ecclesiastes 8:9.âThat the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong. These remarks serve only to illustrate what follows: âNeither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favor to men of skill.â ×Öµ× favor, as in Exodus 3:22; Exodus 11:3; Exodus 12:36, etc.âBut time and chance happeneth to them all.âThat is, the success of human actions depends wholly on that higher power which controls the change of seasons, and permits men to be met sometimes by this, sometimes by that (פֶּ×Ö·×¢) which âhappens, meets;â (comp. 1 Kings 5:18). A New Testament parallel is found in Romans 9:16, where, instead of time and chance, divine mercy is called the highest power in all human affairs.
Ecclesiastes 9:12. For man also knoweth not his time. A conclusion, a majori ad minus. âEven over his time itself, over his person and his life, to say nothing of his actions (Ecclesiastes 9:11), there is a controlling power outside of himâ (Hitzig). The âtimeâ of a man is here clearly equivalent to the time of his destruction; as elsewhere the âday,â of Job 18:20; or the âhour,â Job 12:27; Mark 14:41. Comp. also Ecclesiastes 7:17 preceding.âAs the fishes that are taken. For net, and noose, and trap, as symbols of the judgments overtaking men, comp. Hosea 7:12; Ezekiel 12:13; Ezekiel 32:3; Proverbs 7:23; Luke 21:35.âSo are the sons of men snared. ××ּקָש×Ö´×× Part. Pual see Ew. § 169. d. The word strikingly represents the helpless condition of men in the presence of divine destiny, that can put an end to their life at any moment, as the fowler who suddenly robsâ of its life the bird caught in the snare. An allusion to the catastrophe threatened to the Persian kingdom by a new universal monarchy, the Macedonian, is not found in the passage, as Hengstenberg supposes.
7. Third strophe. Conclusion. Ecclesiastes 9:13-16. In spite of that dependence of human destiny and success on a higher power, which often violently interferes with them, wisdom remains, nevertheless, a valuable possession, still able to effect great results with inconsiderable means of an external character, as is seen in the example of a poor and despised man, who, by his wisdom, became the deliverer of his native city from threatening danger of destruction. Whether this example is a purely feigned didactic story (thus think Hengstenberg, Luther, Mercerus, Starke, et at.), or whether it refers to an historical fact within the" experience of the author, must remain uncertain, on account of the general character of the description; and this so much the more so, because the only passage that could seem to refer to a definite fact from Persian history (Ecclesiastes 9:15) is of doubtful exposition.âThis wisdom have I seen also under the sun. (Zöckler, this have I seen as wisdom). The words ×Ö¼Ö·× ××Ö¹ רָ×Ö´××ªÖ´× ×Ö¸×Ö°×Ö¸× must clearly be thus translated (comp. the similar construction in Ecclesiastes 7:25), not, âthus also saw I wisdom,â etc. (thus usually), or, âthis also have I seen: wisdom,â[6] etc. (as Hitzig renders it,) changing ××Ö¹ into ××.âAnd it seemed great unto me, i.e., it appeared large, comp. Jonah 3:3.
Ecclesiastes 9:14.âThere was a little city, and few men within it. That is, not few inhabitants in general, but few fighting men available for defenceâa circumstance which shows the danger of the city to be so much greater, and the merits of its deliverer to be so much more brilliant.âAnd there came a great king against it. We cannot deduce from the expression that the great king was the Persian; because the predicate ×Ö¸××Ö¹× attributed to the hostile king serves mainly to show the contrast to the smallness of the city, and the great size of the army led against it.âAnd built great bulwarks against it. ×ְצ×Ö¹×Ö´×× (from ×צ×× âan instrument for seizure,â hence sometimes a ânet;â e.g. Ecclesiastes 7:26) is here used only in the signification of bulwarks, and must therefore not here be confounded with the more customary ×ְצ×ֹרִ×× Deuteronomy 20:20; Micah 4:14), as two manuscripts here read.
Ecclesiastes 9:15. Now there was found in it a poor wise man. Literal, âone found in it,â impersonalânot, âhe, the king found.ââyet no man remembered that same poor man. [Zöckler renders in the pluperfect âhad remembered,â etc., and then makes it the ground of the remarks that follow.âT. L.] We can neither urge against this pluperfect rendering of ×Ö°×Ö¸×Ö¸× ×Ö¹× ×Ö¸×ָר the circumstance that the one in question is here designated as ×Ö´××©× ×ִסְ×Ö¼Öµ× and not as ×Ö¸×Ö¸× (for the predicate poor is clearly to point out why they did not remember himâ), nor also the contents of the following verse. For in it the emphasis lies upon the commendation of wisdom contained in the first clause, not on the subsequent restrictive remark concerning the contempt and disregard that it often meets with. Vaihinger is correct in his deviation from Hitzig, Ewald, Elster, and most modern authors, who, like the Vulgate and Luther, translate: âno man remembered.â As certain as this sense, according to which the discussion would be concerning a deliverer of his country, rewarded with the ingratitude of his fellow-citizens, is approached neither through language nor connection, just so certainly may we not (with Ewald and some ancient authors) here find an allusion to Themistocles as deliverer of Athens from the hand of Xerxes; and this latter so much the less because Athens could scarcely have been designated by the author as ×¢Ö´×רֹ ×§Ö°×Ö·× Ö¼Ö¸×. Hitzig is of opinion that the besieged city is the little sea-port Dora, vainly besieged by Antiochus the Great in the year 218 (Polyb. v. 66); but nothing is known of the deliverance of this city by a âpoor wise man,â and for many reasons the epoch of this book cannot be brought down to so late an era as that of Antiochus Magnus. Comp. the Introduction, § 4, Obs. 3.
Ecclesiastes 9:16. The moral of the story, is given in the words of Koheleth uttered immediately after he had heard it.âThen said I, wisdom is better than strength. Comp. similar sentences in Ecclesiastes 7:19; Proverbs 14:29; Proverbs 16:32; Proverbs 21:22; Proverbs 24:5.âNevertheless the poor manâs wisdom is despised. These words, which again limit the praise of wisdom expressed above, depend also on the expression, âThen said I.â They refer, according to Ecclesiastes 9:15, to the fact that in the beginning no one had thought of the wisdom of that deliverer of the cityâand not even of the ingratitude afterwards shown to him, or of not having followed his wise counsels (which latter view however would be in antagonism with Ecclesiastes 9:15, according to which the sorely pressed city was really delivered).
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
(With Homiletical Hints)
As the previous section contained a series of ethical precepts with an anthropological foundation (similar to the one preceding it) so is this one a combination of theological and ethical truths, which the author lays to the heart of his readers. And it is especially the doctrine of the incomprehensibility of the decrees and judgments of God, and of the hidden character of His universal rule that the author treats, and from which he derives the duties of a cheerful enjoyment and use of the blessings of life (Ecclesiastes 9:7-9) of an untiring activity (Ecclesiastes 9:10) and of continued striving after practical wisdom as a possession that is valuable under all circumstances. The contents arc therefore similar to those of chap. 3, only that there the principal thought is of the conditioning and restrictive character of the divine counsels and acts of universal rule; here, on the contrary, the prominent idea is their hidden and unsearchable nature (Romans 9:33; 1 Corinthians 13:12). This section is also in close relation with chap, 6, especially in regard to its ethical and practical precepts (comp. Ecclesiastes 9:9, with Ecclesiastes 6:12; Ecclesiastes 9:14, with Ecclesiastes 6:8; Ecclesiastes 9:1-6, with Ecclesiastes 6:2-6, etc.), only that from the former, the conclusions drawn are mainly serious and gloomy, while from the latter they are predominantly cheerful.
Homily on the whole section. The thought of the brevity of human life, and the obscurity of that which awaits us in it, should not discourage but impel us to a ready and cheerful use of the blessings granted us hero below, as well as of the powers for a truly wise exertion; or more briefly: Of the blessing and value of reflections concerning death, as an impulse to the zealous fulfilment of the avocations of life.
homiletical hints to separate passages
Ecclesiastes 8:16-17. Hieronymus:âHe shows that there are causes for all things, why each thing should thus be, and that there is righteousness in all, though they may be latent and beyond the comprehension.âZeyss: a Christian should neither show himself negligent in investigating the works of God, nor too curious.âHansen: Godâs works that He performs among the children of men have eternity in view, and nothing short of eternity will open up to us their inner perfection, Revelation 15:3.âBerlenb. Bible :âO ye poor blind men, who think to fathom by your wisdom the cause of divine providences; ye are indeed greatly deceived! You condemn everything that surpasses our understanding, when you should rather confess that these things are so much the more divine, the more they surpass your comprehension. The more trouble you take to fathom the secrets of wisdom by your own study, so much the less do you attain your goal. The true test that a man possesses genuine wisdom, is when he is assured that he cannot comprehend the mysteries of God as He deals with souls.âHengstenberg:âBlessed is the man who accepts without examination all that God sends him, in the firm trust that it is right, however wrong it may appear, and that to those who love God all things must be for the best.
Ecclesiastes 9:1-3. Brenz (Ecclesiastes 9:1):âThere are those whom God loves and whom He hates. For He does not cast off the whole human race, though He might justly do so; neither does He embrace all men in His favor; but to some He deigns to grant His mercy, whilst others He leaves to their own destruction. There is, however, no one who can know by any external sign, whom God receives or rejects.â(Ecclesiastes 9:2-3). Whoeverin faith looks into the word of God may easily know that, though the wicked may now seem to have the same fortune with the pious, there shall come, at last, a clear discrimination between the good and the bad, adjudging the one class to eternal punishment, the others to the happiness of everlasting life.âGeier (Ecclesiastes 9:2-3). We cannot judge of the condition of the dead after this life, by our reason, but only by its accordance with the revealed word of God.âHansen:âWo are to ascribe it to the peculiarities of this present life, if the just suffer with the wicked; Sir 40:1 ff.
Zeyss:âA child of God should love this life not on account of temporal prosperity, but for the honor of God, and the welfare of his neighbor. Cramer:âSo long as the wicked lives, it is better for him than if he is dead, since he has yet time to repent. But when he is dead then all hope for him is lost. Starke:âAtheists live in the foolish delusion that after death all is over and that the soul ceases with the death of the body; but they will receive the most emphatic contradiction on the great day of judgment.
Ecclesiastes 9:7-10. Luther (Ecclesiastes 9:7):âYou live in a world where there is nothing but sorrow, misery, grief, and death, with much vanity: therefore use life with love, and do not make your own life sour and heavy with vain and anxious cares.âSolomon does not say this to the secure and wicked children of the world, but to those truly fearing and believing God. These latter he consoles, and desires that they may cheerfully take comfort in God. To the former He says rejoice, but does not bid those to drink wine, eat, etc., who are but too much inclined to do so, and pass their lives in idleness and voluptuousness as wicked and depraved men.
Zeyss (Ecclesiastes 9:7):âThe believers have more claim to the gifts of God than the unbelievers (1 Corinthians 3:21-22), although they may enjoy them the least.â(Ecclesiastes 9:9). Marriage is a sacred and wise ordinance of God; therefore the Christian may use it with a good conscience; but it must be enjoyed in the fear of God, Ephesians 5:31. Starke (Ecclesiastes 9:8):âArrogance, pride, and display in dress are very common vices in these latter times: the children of God find it very difficult to suppress these in themselves.â(Ecclesiastes 9:10). The obligations that you owe to the body, you owe doubly to the soul. O man neglect not the labor due to thy soul; the night of death is coming when no one can work.âCramer (Ecclesiastes 9:10):âWe should perform the work of our calling with a resolute and confident spirit, and never hesitate in our charge.âHengstenberg (Ecclesiastes 9:10):âThat we should do all that lies in our power is required by the facts that what we leave undone here below is never done, that the tasks placed upon us by God for this life, and which here remain unperformed, never find their performance, and that the gifts and powers conferred on us for this life must be used in this life.
Ecclesiastes 9:11-12. Tübingen Bible:âEven in temporal things it does not depend upon any oneâs will or movements, but only on Godâs mercy. Everything is derived from Godâs blessing.âStarke (Ecclesiastes 9:12) :âBy his skill man can calculate the rising and setting of the sun; but human wisdom does not extend so far that one can tell when the sun of his life will rise or set.âHengstenberg:âIf it seems sad with the people of God when the world triumphs, let us reflect that such result does not depend on the might, or the weakness of men; and that a sudden catastrophe may overwhelm the highest, and cast him to the ground. Have we God for our friend? it all comes to that as the only thing that can decide.
Ecclesiastes 9:13-16. Melanchthon:âSuch a poor man, in a city, was Jeremiah, as he himself writes, a man who saved the church in the midst of disorder and confusion. At the same time the precept admonishes us that good counsels are listened to by the few, whilst the worst please the many. And thus he says; The poor manâs wisdom is despised.âCartwright:âWisdom, however splendid, if in lowly state, is so obscured by the cloud of poverty that in a brief time it has all eyes averted, and utterly falls from the memory.
Cramer:âThou shouldst laud no one on account of his high estate, and despise no one on account of his low estate. For the bee is a very little creature, and yet gives the sweetest fruit.âStarke:âThe heart of mail is by nature so corrupt that to its own injury it is inclined to run after folly, and be disobedient to wisdom.âBut true wisdom always finds those who know and love her. Though a wise man may for a time dwell in obscurity, he will nevertheless be drawn forth from it before he is aware. Wisdom of Solomon Ecclesiastes 10:13-14.
APPENDIX
[I. Kohelethâs Idea of the Dead.âEcclesiastes 9:5 :â
The living know that they must die, the dead they nothing know;
For them there is no more rewardâforgotten is their name;
Their love, their hate, their zeal, all perished now;
Whilst the world lasts, no portion more have they
In all the works performed beneath the sun.
Stuart thinks that the Preacher âclaims small merit for the living, merely the knowledge that they must die.â âIs this,â he asks, âbetter than not knowing any thing?â He argues, besides, that there is an inconsistency in such a view, made greater by the fact that this praise of life one of the cheering passages, whereas such declarations as Ecclesiastes 7:1; Ecclesiastes 4:2-3 are from the desponding mood. Is not this, however, a mistake ? The language here is gloomy, if not wholly desponding. Koheleth is perplexed and bewildered as he contemplates the apparent state of the dead, especially as it presents itself to the sense, inactive, motionless, silent, unheeding. He turns to the living, and surveys their condition, so full of vanity, with only the superiority of a little knowledge, one important element of which, is a knowledge that this vanity must come to an end. It is just the survey that would give rise to that touching irony already spoken of, that mournful smile at human folly, in which a just contempt is blended with deepest sympathy,âan irony, not sneering, but tenderly compassionate, such as we find in some other Scriptures. As, for example, in Genesis 3:22, where God is represented as ironically repeating the wolds of Satan, but in a spirit how different from that of the fiend! Ah, poor wretch! he knows it now, the difference between good and evil! See Gen., p. 210. So here, as though he had said, âAlas, their boasted knowledge! They know that they must die,âthis is the substance of it, the remotest bound to which their science reaches.â There is something of the same feeling in what is here affirmed of the state of the dead. It gloomily contemplates only the physical aspect, or the physical side of death, such as presents itself, sometimes, to the Christian, without any feeling of inconsistency, and without impairing that hope of future life which he possesses in a higher degree than Koheleth. We may even say that it is good for us, occasionally, to fix our minds on this mere physical aspect of our frail humanity.
O when shall spring visit the mouldering urn?
O when shall day dawn on the night of the grave?
It was not an infidel, but a devout believer, that wrote this. And so, too, there may be, at times, a sort of melancholy pleasure in thinking of death mainly in its aspect of repose from the toils and anxieties of the present stormy life; as in that mournful dirge so often sung at funeralsâ
Unveil thy bosom, faithful tomb;
Take this new treasure to thy trust;
And give these sacred relics room
To slumber in the silent dust.
Nor pain, nor grief, nor anxious fear,
Invade thy bounds; no mortal woes
Can reach the peaceful sleeper, here.
We feel no inconsistency between such strains, even when they assume a more sombre aspect, and that brighter view which the Christian takes in contemplating the spiritual side of our strange human destiny, or even as it sometimes presented itself to the Old Testament believer (Psalms 16:11; Psalms 17:15; Psalms 78:24). They no more jar upon our speculative theology than the language of our Saviour, John 9:4 : âThe night cometh, when no man can workâ [comp. Ecclesiastes 9:10; Ecclesiastes 11:8], or that touching language of the New Testament which represents death under the soothing conception of a sleepâκοίμηÏιÏâa lying down to rest. This term is not confined to the body, as the best exegesis would show, but would seem to denote also a most blessed state of quiescence for the spirit,âa state rudimental, imperfect, unfinished, anomalous, preparatory, yet most secure,âtranquil yet not torpidâinactive, yet not inertâa holy conscious rest, a lying âunder the shadow of the Almighty,ââseparate from the present world, away from all its busy doings, if not from all its memories, and thus cradled again, nursed and educated, we may say, for that higher finished life, when death shall be fully conquered. He is the last and greatest enemy [1 Corinthians 15:26] who, until that time, retains some dominion over all humanity,âeven over those âwho sleep in Jesus,â or âthrough Jesus,â as it should be rendered,âthe saved, or rather, the being saved [present participle, οἱ ÏÏζÏμενοι] the being healed, or made alive, as the Syriac has it, those in whom the redemptive life of Christ is overcoming death, and growing to the matured and perfect life of eternity. For it is clear, even from the New Testament, that this âstate of death,â or reign of death, still continues, in a certain sense, and in a certain degree, until the resurrection. Its power is over all men, and over the whole man, soul and body, although for the Christian, whose âlife is hid with Christ in Godâ [Colossians 3:3], its sting is taken quite away. There is no mistaking the language, 1 Corinthians 15:54 : á½ Ïαν δὲ Ïὸ ÏθαÏÏὸν ÏοῦÏο á¼Î½Î´ÏÏηÏαι�. Ï. λ. It is only when this corruption puts on incorruption, and this mortal puts on immortality, that there is brought to pass the saying, âDeath is swallowed up in victory.â Till then, Death and Hades go together. One is but the continuation of the other. Being in Hades is being in the kingdom of the dead. Till then, the Old Testament idea still holds of death, not as extinction, non-existence, or not being [see Genesis, Notes, pp. 273, 586], but as a state, a state of positive being, though strange and inexplicable,âa state of continued personality, real though undefined, utterly unknown as to its condition, or only conceived of negatively as something that differs, in almost every respect, from the present active, planning, toiling, pleasure-grasping, knowledge-seeking life âbeneath the sun.â That there is something strange about it, something difficult to be thought, is intimated in our Saviourâs language respecting the Old Testament saints, Luke 20:38, ÏάνÏÎµÏ Î³á½°Ï Î±á½Ïá¿· ζῶÏιν, âfor they all live unto Himâ [unto God],âas though what was called their life was something out of them, and could only be made dimly conceivable to us by this remarkable language. Compare the Jewish expression as we find it, 1 Samuel 25:29, and as it is interpreted and often quoted by Rabbinical writers, צְר×Ö¼×¨Ö¸× ×ִּצְר×ֹר ×Ö·×Ö·×Ö¼Ö´×× âbound up in the bundle of life with Jehovah thy God,â or as the Vulgate renders itâanima custodita quasi in fasciculo viventium apud Dominum Deum tuum.
There is yet a reserve to the doctrine of the immediate after life, still a veil cast over it, we may reverently say, even in the New Testament. The most modern notions of a sudden transition to the highest Heavens, and to the perfect life, are, perhaps, as far to the one extreme, as the descriptions of mortality which Koheleth gives us, in his gloomy mood, may be in the other. This idea of the dead passing straightway into a busy active state of existence, in these respects resembling the present life, with its proud talk of progress, was unknown to the early Church, as its liturgies and funeral hymns most evidently show. See especially the earliest Syriac hymns, much of whose language the modern notions would render almost unintelligible. Christ has indeed âbrought immortality to light,â but it is chiefly by the doctrine of the resurrection, that great article so clear in the New Testament, though having its shadow in the Old. But there is another doctrine there, however little it is studied. We are taught that there was a work of Christ in Hades. He descended into Hades; he makes proclamation [á¼ÎºÎ®ÏÏ Î¾ÎµÎ½] in Hades (1 Peter 3:19) to those who are there âin ward.â He is our Christian Hermes, belonging to both worlds. He is the ÏÏ ÏαγÏγὸÏ, the conductor and guide of redeemed spirits in Hades, the âShepherd and Bishop of soulsâ (1 Peter 2:15), the âGood Shepherdâ (Psalms 23:0), who leads his spiritual flock beside the still waters, in the Cetzalmaveth, the âvalley of the death shade,â or terra umbrarum, and, at the same time, the great High Priest above, to whom is âgiven all power in Heaven and in earth.â He is the ×××× ××××× the Redeeming Angel of the Old Testament, to whom the righteous committed their spirits [Psalms 31:6] and the Mediator more clearly revealed in the New.
The doctrine of the immediate after life, as we have said, has still a shadow cast upon it. We should not, therefore, wonder to find Koheleth still more under the veil. His very language implies continuance of being, in some way, although presenting a state of inactivity, and, in a word, a want of all participation in the doings and even memories of the present âlife beneath the sun.â It did not fall in the way of his musing to speak of differences, in this state, between the ârighteous and the wicked;â but, in other passages of the Old Testament, it appears more clear, though still barely hinted, as in Proverbs 14:32; Psalms 73:20; Psalms 49:15. It is a state in which the one is âdriven away,â whilst the other âhas hope.â Elsewhere, however [Ecclesiastes 3:17; Ecclesiastes 12:13-14], Koheleth affirms his strong belief that at some time, and in some way, the two classes will be judged, and the difference between them most clearly manifested.
In the rhvthmical version of Ecclesiastes 9:10, ×Ö¸×Ö°×Ö¸× is rendered philosophy, because the writer seems, in this place, to take it in its more pretentious sense, or for human wisdom in distinction from the Divine,âspeculative inquiry,
Very much as Paul uses ÏοÏία, sometimes, in the New Testament. And so, perhaps, we would come nearer to the intended force of the other word ×ַּעַת by rendering science, although not exactly corresponding to it in the most modern acceptation of the term. It is Paulâs γνῶÏιÏ, âcurious knowledge,âânot mere knowing, as consciousness, whether Koheleth held to any such consciousness or not. Comp. it with ×ֶש×Ö°×Ö¼×Ö¹× (plan, reckoning) in immediate connection. So, too, even when speaking of the perfect psychological state (1 Corinthians 13:8) Paul says of knowledge (γνῶÏιÏ), καÏαÏγηθήÏεÏαιânot, âit shall cease,â as rendered, but âit shall be deposedââput one sideâno longer made the highest thing, as in this fallen life, where the intellectual is placed above the moral nature. In the blessed and perfect life to come, moral or spiritual contemplation, pervaded by á¼Î³Î¬Ïη, shall be the highest exercise of the soul. Even the intermediate state is to be regarded as superior to the present existence in ontological rank, and the terms embryotic or rudimental, if applied to it, must be taken simply as denoting a formative state of repose, preparatory to the more glorious life that follows.âT. L.]
[II. The Alleged Epicureanism of Koheleth. Note on Ecclesiastes 9:7-10, in connection with Ecclesiastes 11:9-10. These passages have given rise to much comment. Stuart, with many others, regards the first of them as expressing the real advice which Koheleth would give in regard to the conduct of life, and then says: âIn all this there is nothing Epicurean.â What then is Epicureanism ? Or how shall we distinguish? It would seem to be almost too sober a word. The language here used may almost be characterized as Anacreontic: âEat with joy thy bread, and drink with mirth thy wine,âthy garments always white, and oil neâer lacking to thy head:â
ΠίνÏμεν, ὦ ÏίνÏμενâ
Τὸ á¿¥Ïδον Ïὸ καλλίÏÏ Î»Î»Î¿Î½
ÎÏοÏάÏοιÏιν á¼ÏμÏÏανÏεÏ.
How, then, shall we avoid what seems to be on the very face of the passage ? It will not do to resort to any special interpretation on account of a mere exigentia loci; although it might, with perfect truth, be said, that such Anacreontic advice is not only contrary to all the more serious portions of the Scriptures, Old and New, but also to the deeply solemn views in regard to human vanities, and the great awaiting judgment, that Koheleth himself has, in other places, so clearly expressed. All this outward argument, however, would not justify us in calling it irony, unless there were some internal evidence, something in the very style of the passage which called for such a conclusion. A careful examination, made in the spirit of the whole book, shows that there are such internal grounds of criticism. It was a feeling of this that led Jerome, the most judicious of the Patristic commentators, to call it a ÏÏοÏÏÏοÏοιίÌα, a personification, or dramatizing, more rhetorum et poetarum, or what the Jewish critics (see p. 71) called âthe case speaking,â the language of human life and human actions, in view of the pure earthliness of its condition. It is the language of the author so far as he puts himself forth as the representative of such a despairing state: quasi dixerit, O homo quia ergo, post mortem nihil es, dum vivis in hac brevi vita fruere voluptate, etc.: âO man since, after death, thou art nothing, then, whilst thou livest thy short life, enjoy pleasure, indulge in feasts, drown thy cares in wine, go forth adorned in raiment ever white (a sign of perpetual joy), let fragrant odors be ever breathing from thy head; take thy joy in female loveliness (quæcunque tibi placerent feminarum, ejus gaude complexu, et vanam hanc et brevem vitam vana et brevi voluptate percurre) and in brief pleasure pass this thy brief life of vanity,â etc. He then represents Koheleth as retracting all this in the passage immediately following, where he says, âI turned again, and saw that the race was not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor wealth to the prudent, etc.,â in other words, that thus to live in joy was not in manâs power, but that all things happened as they were disposed by God: Hæc, aliquis inquit, loquatur Epicurus et Aristippus, et ceteri pecudes philosophorum, ego autem (inquit Koheleth) mecum diligenter retractans, invenio non est velocium cursus, necfortium prælium, etc, etc.
There are two things in the passage itself that lead the serious reader to such a feeling, and such a view of its ironical, or, rather, its dramatic character. The first is the exuberance of the language, its extravagance, its Bacchanalian style, we might almost call it, inconsistent with, or certainly not demanded by, such a moderate, rational, sober view, or such a sober advice to live a contented life, as Stuart contends for, or, in other words, a judicious, virtuous Epicureanism. The joy so oft repeated, the mirth, the wine, the white raiment, the aromatic oilsâwhat has such superlativeness of style to do with such a moderate, sober purpose ? It was no more needed than the language which Euripides (Alcestis 800) puts into the mouth of Hercules when playing the Bacchanalian, and which this Solomonic irony so closely resembles:â
Îá½ÏÏÎ±Î¹Ï Îµ ÏÎ±Ï Ïὸν, Ïá¿Î½Îµ. Ïὸν ÎºÎ±Î¸Ì á¼¡Î¼ÎÏαÏ
Îίον λÏÎ³Î¯Î¶Î¿Ï ÏÏν. Ïá½° Î´Ì á¼Î»Î»Î± Ïá¿Ï ÏÏÏηÏ.
Τίμα δὲ καὶ Ïὴν Ïλεá¿ÏÏον ἡδίÏÏην θεÏν.
Îá½ÎºÎ¿Ï ν, Î¼ÎµÎ¸Ì á¼¡Î¼á¿¶Î½, Ïὴν λÏÏην á¼ÏεὶÏ, Ïίη,
ΣÏεÏÎ¬Î½Î¿Î¹Ï ÏÏ ÎºÎ±ÏÎ¸ÎµÎ¯Ï Îº. Ï. λ.
Make glad thy heart, drink wine, the life to-day
Regard thine own; all else belongs to chance.
In high esteem hold Loveâs delightful power.
In social joy indulgeâwith chaplets crowned;
And drive dull care away.
Hear Koheleth:
Go then and eat with joy thy bread, and drink with mirth thy wine,
In every season be thy garments white,
And fragrant oil be never lacking to thy head;
Live joyful with the wife whom thou hast loved.
The one kind of language seems but the echo of the other. If we disregard the spirit and the design of Koheleth, there is an Epicurean zest in his description, not surpassed, to say the least, by that of Euripides. We may say, too, on the other hand, that it is not easy to distinguish his language, and the spirit of it, from that of Paul in his quotation, 1 Corinthians 15:32 : âLet us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die.â If it be said that the context there makes it impossible for us to mistake the Apostleâs ironical meaning, the same may be said in respect to the writer who tells us, only a short distance back,
Better to visit sorrowâs house, than seek the banquet hall;
Better is grief than mirth;
For in the sadness of the face the heart becometh fair.
It is the very nature of rhetorical irony, especially if it be the irony of sorrowful warning, to paint the thing in higher colors, we may say, than would suit its description in a more direct and didactic admonition. Had it been a piece of Isocratean moralizing in commendation of a moderate, contented, frugal, and thankful enjoyment of life, it would naturally have been in a lower and calmer strain. The wine, the odors, the splendid raiment, would have been all wanting. They are just the points in the picture, however, to make an impression on the serious mind when it is felt to be a description of the vanity of life. We may even say that they are just the things that lead to such a feeling.
The second internal evidence showing the true character of this passage, is the feeling of sorrow, which, amidst all its apparent joyousness, the writer cannot suppress. We have called it irony, but the irony of the Bible is not only serious, but sometimes most tender. Whilst, then, the language here criticised is not the mere worldly advice that Stuart and others would represent, neither is it, on the other hand, the hard irony of sarcasm, or of unpitying satire. Kohelethâs thoughts of death, and its awful unknown, have depressed his faith, and there seems to have come over him a feeling akin to despair. His idea of Godâs justice, and of some great destiny, or world, over and encompassing the present, is not lostâfor it reappears strongly afterwardsâbut, for the moment, the thought of man, as he is seen in the earthly state, becomes predominant, and he breaks out in this strain, in which pity is a very manifest element. âGo then and enjoy thy poor life.â There is strong feeling in it, a most tender compassion, and this shows itself in that touching mention of the transient human state, and, especially, in the pathetic repetition of the words
The days of thy vain life,âthat life
Which God hath given to thee beneath the sun;
Yea, all thy days of vanity.
This plaintive tone is utterly inconsistent with the Epicurean interpretation, however moral and decent we may strive to make it.
Again, there are two arguments against such a view that may be said to be outside of the passage itself, though one of them is derived from another place in the book. Firstâin Ecclesiastes 11:9-10, we have a strain so precisely similar, in style and diction, that we cannot help regarding it as possessing the same rhetorical character. It may be thus given metrically, yet most literally, and with the full force of every Hebrew word:
Rejoice O youth in childhood; let thy heart
Still cheer thee in the day when thou art strong;
Go on in every way thy will shall choose,
And alter every form thine eyes behold.
It is not easy to mistake the character of this, even if it were not followed by that most impressive warning:
But know that for all this, thy God will thee to judgment bring:
O then turn sorrow from thy soul, keep evil from thy flesh;
For childhood and the morn of life, they, too, are vanity.
Here the caution is clearly expressed, although we feel that such expression is just what the previous words, rightly comprehended in their spirit, would have led us to expect. Rhetorically regarded, such an addition would have been exactly adapted to this place (Ecclesiastes 9:7-10). It would have been in harmony with the tone of what had gone before. It is, however, so suggested by the whole spirit of the passage, and especially by that irrepressible tone of commiseration that appears in the words before cited (the pathetic allusion to our poor vain life), that it may well be a question whether any such distinct warning, or any mere moralizing utterance. could have had more power than the âexpressive silenceâ which leaves it wholly to the feeling and conscience of the reader.
The passage Ecclesiastes 11:9-10, is so important in itself, and has such a bearing on the one before us, as to justify its fuller interpretation in this place. Many modern commentators regard these verses also as a serious advice to the young man, if the term serious could, with any propriety, be applied to such an admonition. The older commentators, however, are mostly the other way. They regarded the passage as indeed most serious, but as having this character from its sharp pet mournful irony. So Geier says : âmagnam interpretum partem hæc verba imperative, ironice accipere.â Among these were Kimchi, Munsterus, Mercerus, Drusius, Junius, Piscator, Cartwright, Cajetan, Vatablus, Ar. Montanus, Osorius, Mariana, Menoch, Pineda, Jac. Mathiæ, and others, among whom may be reckoned Tremellius, if we may judge from the tone and style of his Latin translation. Luther was the other way, and it may be said that he has given the tone to many that have come after him, evangelical as well as rationalist. âThis is said seriously by Solomon,â he tells us, âde licita juventutis hilaritate, concerning the permitted joy fulness of youth, which ought not to be unbridled, or lascivious, but restrained within certain limits.â But what right has he to say this ? What limits are assigned ? The language seems wholly without limitations, or reserve : âWalk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes,â terms which every where else in the Hebrew Scriptures are used, in malam partem, to denote sensual and ungodly conduct; as in Numbers 15:39 : âYe shall not go (roam) ×Ö·×Ö²×¨Öµ× ×Ö°×Ö·×Ö°×Ö¶× ×Ö°×Ö·×Ö²×¨Öµ× ×¢Öµ×× Öµ××Ö¶× after your own heart, and after your eyes.â Compare also the frequent phrase ש×ְרִ×ר×ּת ×Öµ×, commonly rendered âthe imagination of the heart,â but really meaning the turnings (choices) of the heart,âdoing as one pleases. See Deuteronomy 29:18; Psalms 71:13 where it is synonymous with ×Öµ×Ö°×Ö¼ ×Ö¼Ö°××ֹעֲצ×ֹתֵ××Ö¶× âwalking in their own counsels,â also Jeremiah 9:13, and other places. Compare especially Job 31:7, where, for âthe heart to follow the eyeâ is placed among the grievous sins, being regarded, in fact, as the very fountain-head of sin: ×Ö´× ×Ö·×ַר ×¢Öµ×× Ö·× ×Ö¸×Ö·×Ö° ×Ö´×Ö¼Ö´×, âif my heart hath gone after mine eyes,â the will (the conscience) after the choice, the velle after the optare, the voluntas after the voluptas. âWalk in the way of thine heart;â what an admonition this to a young man, even if such a one ever needed an exhortation to hilarity, or to the following of his own pleasure! How strange, too, as coming from one who, in other parts of this book, talks so differently : âBetter the house of mourning than the house of feasting;â âI said of laughter it is mad, of mirth, 0 what availeth it!â Compare it with the repeated charge of Solomon, in the Proverbs, to restrain the young manânot to let him go after the imaginations of his heart, to put a bridle on him (×× × Proverbs 22:6), and âbow down his neck in his youth.â The language here is peculiar, and each word must be sharply looked to: âGo on â (it is ×Ö·×Ö¼Öµ×Ö°, the piel intensive) âkeep going, in the ways (all the ways, in the plural, every way) of thine heart,â ×Ö¼×Ö°×ַרְ×Öµ× ×¢Öµ×× Ö¶××Ö¸ (the kâtib is undoubtedly right) and in (or after) the forms of thine eyes.â The word ×ַרְ×Ö¶× is so frequently used of female beauty (see the phrase ×ְפַת ×ַרְ×Ö¶× Genesis 12:11, and other places) that the idea is at once suggested here; and what a contrast then to our Saviourâs teaching, that even to look is sin. What a contrast, we may say, is the whole of it thus considered, to what Christ says about the broad way, and to St. Johnâs most emphatic language (1 Epist. Ecclesiastes 2:16) respecting âthe lust of the eye,â the desire of the eye, Ïὴν á¼ÏÎ¹Î¸Ï Î¼á½¶Î±Î½ Ïῶν á½Ïθαλμῶν! If we give the phrase the more general rendering, âthe sight of the eyes (sight objectively) it would come to the same thing. It would be a license to follow every form of beauty. There might be urged, too, the contrast between it (thus regarded as serious advice even in the most decent sense that could be given to it) and Paulâs counsel for young men, Titus 2:6, ÏÎ¿á½ºÏ Î½ÎµÏÏÎÏÎ¿Ï Ï ÏαÏακάλει ÏÏÏÏονεá¿Î½, âexhort them to be sober,â temperate, sound-minded, having reason and conscience ruling over appetite and desire. How unlike, too, the Psalmistâs direction Psalms 119:9, âWherewith shall a young man cleanse his way,âby taking heed thereto (×ִש×Ö°×ֹר), by watching it, according to Thy word.â How utterly opposed to this is the unlimited advice to the young man âto walk in the way of his heart,â that is, to do as he pleases. Luther feels the force of this contrast, for he says in the same comment, when he comes to speak of the words ×ת×× ××ר×× ××× âwalk in the ways of thine heart,â fecit hic locus ut totum hunc textum ironiam esse putarem, quia ferme in malum partem sonat, siquis incedat in via cordis sui: âThis place would make me think that the whole text was irony, because the phrase âto walk in the way of oneâs heart,â is so generally taken in a bad sense.â But, after all, he goes on to say that we must abide by the general idea of the passage (as he had taken it) and suppose the necessary limitations. Very few commentators have had a clearer perception than Luther of the general sense of the Scripture, but in regard to such passages as these he is not to be implicitly trusted.
He was of a very jovial disposition; but what chiefly led him to such interpretations, here and elsewhere in this book, was his aversion to some of the more austere dogmas, as well as practices or Romanism, and especially his dislikeof asceticism, as exhibited by the Monks. Hence he allowed himself too much to be driven towards the opposite extreme. Thus in his commenting on the words ××ר×× ×¢×× ××, âin the sight of thine eyes,â he boldly says, quod offertur oculis tuis hoc fruere, ne fias similis Monachorum, etc.: âwhatever is offered to your eyes, that freely enjoy, lest you become like the monks who would not have one even look at the sun.â And so in the beginning of the passage, Ecclesiastes 9:9 : non prohibet jucunditates sive voluptates, quemadmodum stulti monachi fecerunt, etc.: âIt does not prohibit delights nor pleasures, as the foolish monks have done, which is nothing else than making stocks of young men (even as Anselm says, ille monachissimus monachus, that most monkish monk), or than attempting to plant a tree in a narrow pot.â Others of the Reformers and early Protestant commentators were influenced in the same way in following Luther, and there can be no doubt that this has much affected their interpretations of Koheleth, making him talk like an Epicurean, and then denying that it was Epicureanism, or trying to throw over it a decent ethical mantle by their unwarranted hypotheses and limitations. After they have done their best, however, in this way, they make this writer of Holy Scripture to be a moralist inferior to Socrates and Seneca, who certainly never thought that a young man needed any such advice as that. The pious Geier seems to be aware of the suggestions that might arise from other parts of Scripture, and would zealously guard this virtuous Solomonic young man, who needs such a caution against excessive sobriety, from any comparison with the Prodigal Son, Luke 15:0. But what did he do, that filius perditus, that spendthrift, ille heluo, as Geier calls him, except âto walk in the ways of his heart, and in the sight of his eyes?â What is all pleasure-seeking selfishness [ÏÎ¹Î»Î±Ï Ïία, Ïιληδονία, 2 Timothy 3:2-4] but saying âgive unto me my portion of goods that falleth to me,â in this world ?
It might have been thought, however, that the latter part of Ecclesiastes 9:10, following the warning of judgment, would have been treated in a different manner; but the general consistency of which Luther speaks has led some to an Epicurean interpretation even of this. We regret to find our author Zöckler following such a course in his interpretation of the words ×סר ××¢× ×××× âturn away sorrow from thy heart.â âHere,â he says, âthe positive exhortation to hilarity (Frölichsein) is followed by a dissuasion from its opposite,ââthat is, the young man is told to avoid seriousness as painful and troublesome (Kummer, Unmuth,) which he gives as the interpretation of ×Ö·×¢Ö·×]. It is a recommendation of hilarity, of mirth, in opposition to asceticism or undue sobriety, as though the young manâs danger in Solomonâs time, or in the days of Malachi, or at any other period in the human history, had been in that direction of gloom and monkery.
There are few interpreters more honest, or more learned, than Stuart, and yet his comment here is certainly a very strange one. âIn verse 9th,â he tells us, âthe command is to do something positive in the way of enjoyment; here it is to shun evil and suffering. Taking both together, the amount is, enjoy all that a rational man can enjoy in view of retribution, and avoid all the evil and suffering that can be avoided.â Retribution here is a mere make weight. Why retribution for simply acting according to the advice? If pleasure be the good, then, as that acute moralist Socrates says, âhe who gets the most of it is the á¼Î³Î±Î¸á½¸Ï�, the good man, the best man.â âBut why,â asks Stuart, âis this so strongly urged upon the young?â The question is certainly one that is very naturally suggested in view of such an interpretation, but the answer he gives is remarkable: âPlainly because that even they, although in the best estate of man, hold life by a very frail tenure. Therefore, as even youth is so frail and evanescent, make the best of it. It is almost as if he had saidâThen or never.â In other words, a short life and a merry one. Anacreon could not have said it better. No exhortation to obedience to parents, to temperance, to sober-mindedness, in the style of Paul, no advice to âwatch over the heart,â such as Solomon gives in the Proverbs, but a direction âto walk in the sight of the eyes,â and a caution against seriousness as inconsistent with youthful hilarity. Strange advice this under any circumstances; and still more strange from the fact that it is the only place in the book in which young men are addressed,âthe first verse of chap. 12 being but a continuation of the admonition here given. Look at the argument as it thus presents itself: God will bring thee unto judgment, young man; therefore put away all serious concern from thy heart. And why? Because youth is brief and evanescent. How does it compare Scripturally with the other view as presenting the other reasoning : Know that God will bring thee into judgment for âfollowing the ways of thine heart, and walking in the sight of thine eyes;â therefore âturn sorrow from thy heartâ [thy soul], that is the feeling of remorse, the sense of the Divine displeasure, or of thine own self-accusing indignation [×Ö¼Ö·×¢Ö·×] for such an unrestrained living to thyself, and âkeep off [×Ö·×¢Ö²×ֵר, avert] evil from thy fleshââthat is, the bodily ills that must come from a life of sensuality, or followingâ âthe desire of thy heart,â and âthe voluptuous sight of thine eyes.â And why? Because âchildhood and youth [ש×Ö·×ֲר×ּת, literally, the morn of life] are vanity;â that is, all their joys, take them at the highest, are vain and worthless in comparison with the serious evils, whether for this life or another, that such a course of free indulgence may bring upon thee.
The ironical nature of this passage is accepted by that great critic, Glassius, in the Philologia Sacra, p. 1518. It is an âapostrophe,â he says, âa concessio ironia cujus correctio, a consuetudine animi et sensuum prava revocans, statim subjungitur:â Go on,âbut know. He compares it with Isaiah 2:10, âenter into the rock, and hide thyself in the dust,â but know that God will find thee. So Isaiah 8:9, âJoin yourselves together, enter into council, but know that it will be all in vain.â It is equivalent to saying, âthough ye do this,ââthe imperative being really the statement of an hypothesis. Another passage he cites is Isaiah 21:5 : âSpread the table, set the watch, eat, drink,â etc.; though that may be taken in a different way.
A second outside proof of the true character of the language, Ecclesiastes 9:7-10, is derived from a passage in the Apocryphal book entitled Wisdom of Solomon. It is evidently an imitation of these very verses, and, whether written by a Jew or a Christian, is evidence of the earliest mode of interpreting all such modes of speaking in Koheleth. It is the language of the worldly pleasure-seeker, chap. 2 Ecclesiastes 9:6-8 : âCome then, and let us enjoy the good that is before us; let us be filled with costly wine and aromatic odors; let no flower of the spring pass by us; let us crown ourselves with roses before they be withered,â etc. The imitation is evident throughout the passage. It appears not only from the language used, but also from the fact that the writer, both by his general style and by the title he has given to his book, intended it as a more full and florid setting forth of what he deemed the pervading thought and feeling of Koheleth. Now, by placing this same style of language in the mouth of the sensualist, he makes clear that he was of like opinion with Jerome (whose views may have been derived from his Hebrew teacher representing the same view afterwards advanced by Kimchi), that as uttered by Koheleth, it was a ÏÏοÏÏÏοÏοιίÍα, a dramatic representing of what is expressed in human action,âthe sensualistâs own conduct speaking forth the view of life that would be in accordance with the idea that this is all of man, and that there is no such judgment as that on which Koheleth elsewhere so strongly insists. This is rendered still more clear from the sudden change that immediately follows in Ecclesiastes 9:11, and which Jerome justly characterizes as Koheleth retractans. He cannot let the language go without showing how full of vanity it is, viewed only in regard to the present world, and according to the known condition of human life :
I turned again to look beneath the sun.
Not to the swift the race, I saw,
nor victory to the strong, Nor to the wise secure their bread, nor to the prudent wealth.
The very uncertainty of all human efforts renders such advice utterly vain. Why say to men, be happy, eat, drink, and be merry, âlet thy garments be ever white, and let aromatic oils be never lacking to thy head,â when no strength, no wisdom, can give any security for the avoidance of sorrow, much less for the attainment of such Epicurean joys. In such a connection the thought of there being, necessarily for man, a judgment and a destiny, making all such pleasures, even if innocent, mere vanity and worth lessness in the comparison, is more powerfully suggested than it would have been by the most express utterance.
There are some other things of less exegetical importance, but deserving of attention in their bearing on the real character of these important passages. Thus the words ×Ö¼Ö´× ×Ö¼Ö°×ָר ×¨Ö¸×¦Ö¸× ×Ö¸×Ö±××Ö¹Ö´×× ×ֶת־×ַעֲש×Ö¶××Ö¸ [Ecclesiastes 9:7]are rendered in E.V.: âGod now aoeepteth thy works,â indicating that He has, in some way, become gracious. The true rendering is, âGod hath already,â or rather, âlong ago, accepted thy works.â It is a thing of the past, settled as the Divine way in regard to man; He has never been off ended at all. It is the doctrine of Platoâs second class of atheists (as he calls them, though they claim to be theists), who believe in a Divine power, but regard Him as taking no account of men, or rather, as accepting all human works, as He accepts the operations of nature. Or it is a Hebraistic form of the Lucretian doctrine of the Divine nature:
Semota. ab nostris rebus, sejundaque longe.
That this general acceptance by Deity of human works is not the serious language of Koheleth, is evident from his so frequent insisting on judgment, either in this world or in another, as though it were his favorite doctrine, his âone idea,â we might say, in all this discourse. So Wordsworth regards the whole passage as the language of the sensualist (which is the same as Jeromeâs ironical ÏÏοÏÏÏοÏοιÏα or Koheleth speaking in their person), and thus comments on the words in question: âEvil men misconstrue their prosperity into a sign that God accepts their works.â There is, however, too much inferential moralizing in such a statement. In their language, Godâs âaccepting their worksâ is rather another mode of saying that He is utterly indifferent about them, or, as they would represent in their Lucretian hyperpiety, too great, too exalted, to mind the affairs of men.
The 10th verse of Ecclesiastes 10:0 is rendered in E. V.: âWhatever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might.â The Vulgate favors this, but the accents forbid it. They connect ×××× with ×עש×ת, requiring us, if we follow them, to render: âwhatever thy hand findeth to do in thy strength, do it.â This puts a different aspect upon the sentence, and the accents, with their usual nice discrimination, bring it out. The other rendering would indeed suggest a similar meaning, but the accents make it clear. It becomes the maxim, Ïὸ κÏάÏιÏÏον Ïὸ δίκαιον, might makes right, or let might be thy law of right, or as it is rendered in the Metrical Version,â
Do, then, whateâer thy hand shall find in thy own might to do.
Wordsworth takes the same view: âDo all that thy hand findeth to do by thy powerâ [see Hengstenberg, Ewald]; that is, âlet might be right with thee; care nothing for God or man, but use thy strength according to thy will.â Surely this is not the serious language of the serious Koheleth, the earnest teacher of judgment, who speaks so solemnly of âthe fear of God, and who says, only two verses from this : âThen I turned again to look beneath the sun, and saw that the race was not to the swift nor the victory to the strong.â
The language following: âFor there is no knowledge,â etc., even Stuart regards as that of the objector, though replying to the serious advice given above, as though he had said in addition: enjoy thyself, etc., for there is no after state to give thee uneasiness. âBut we have seen,â says Stuart, âthat the settled opinion of Koheleth himself [Ecclesiastes 8:12-13] was something quite different from this.â It is not easy to understand the remark. It would have furnished Stuart a much more consistent ground of reasoning, had he regarded the whole passage as irony or personification. He says, at the close of his comment on the verses: âThe positive passages which show Kohelethâs view of judgment, and of retribution, are too strong to justify us in yielding to suggestions of this natureââthat is, the supposition of his denial of all future accountability. This rule of criticism, had they consistently followed it, would have made Koheleth all clear in many places where the opposite method produces inextricable confusion and contradiction.
Such remarks as Zöckler and Stuart sometimes make in deprecation ofâ Epicureanism [Hitzig, in general, gives himself no concern about it] show the pressure upon evangelical commentators (and even upon all who may in a true sense be styled rational), when they adopt what may be termed the half-way Lutheran mode. The doctrine of Epicurus, even in its most decent form, is so inconsistent with any devout fear of God, and this again is so utterly alien to any philosophic or scientific theism that maintains a Deity indifferent to human conduct, one who cannot be prayed to, á¼Î½ÎµÏ κÏαá¿Î¿Ï, and without any judgment either in this world or another; for in respect to the true nature of Kohelethâs exhortation, either idea presents a conclusive argument. His doctrine must be somehow connected with all that system of truth, with all that âwisdom, of which the fear of the Lord is the beginning.â To a mind deeply meditative. like that of Koheleth, the thought of there being no judgment, no hereafter (should such a belief be ever forced upon it), would not be ground of joy, much less of an exhortation to joy, as addressed to others. He would not, even in that, case, adopt the Epicurean maxim: Let us eat and drink,ârather let us fast, let us mourn, in view of an existence so brief, so full of vanity, so soon to go out in darkness all the more dense, a despair all the more painful, in consequence of the transient light of reason with which we are so strangely and irrationally endowedâe tenebris in tenebrasâlike the bubble on the wave in a stormy night, reflecting for a moment all the starry host above, and then going out forever. There is no religion, no superstition, no creed so awfully serious, as that of human extinction, and of a godless world. Place the two exhortations side by side: Live in the fear of God, for thou must come to judgment: Live joyful, for soon thou wilt be no more; in either alternative, the present value of the present being, considered for its own sake dwindles in a rational estimate. As connected with a greater life to come, though made important ant by such connection, yet how comparatively poor! regarded as the whole of our existence, how absolutely vain! In the first aspect, it is vanitas; in the second, it is vanitas vanitatum, utterly vain, a âvanity of vanities.â The Epicurean idea and the Epicurean call to mirth are as inconsistent. with the one as with the other.âT. L.]
Footnotes:
[1][see the text note on this world, and the simple translation of the Vulgate and LXX., which came from the text as it is.âT.L.]
[2][It may well be said, on the other hand, that the exceedingly forced rendering of Zöckler and Vaihinger show that the common translation âjoined, associated,â and the reading ××Ö°Ö»×ַּר on which it is grounded, are correctâT. L.]
[3][âAnd merrily drink thy wine.â No where do we find more of the Bacchanalian expression, and yet Zöckler would regard it here as the âinnocent and normal use of wine.â (See his comment on Ecclesiastes 10:19): whilst elsewhere, with no difference of language, it denotes, he says, the âcorrupting and licentious use.â The irony of the passage is shown at once by comparing it with Ecclesiastes 7:2 and Ecclesiastes 2:2.âT. L.]
[4][As there is nothing said about moral conduct in the text, or any other conduct except unrestrained eating and drinking, this remark of Zöcklerâs is perfectly gratuitous. If it is to be taken as serious advice of Koheleth, then Hitzigâs view is far more logical: âIt is just this eating, drinking, etc., that God approves beforehand, so that you can indulge, without any scruple to disturb your sensual joy.â How contrary this is to other declarations of Koheleth we have elsewhere shown. How utterly opposed it is to other numerous passages of Scripture need not be pointed out. It is equivalent to saying God will never âbring thee into judgmentâ for it, or that He is utterly indifferent. See the Appendix to this Division, p. 134.âT. L.]
[5] [Ecclesiastes 9:9. âThe days of thy vain life,â or, more literally, âall the days of the life of thy vanity.â The 70 left out this second mention because they regarded it as a mere repetition. Martin Geier would connect it, not with the former, which he says would be odiosa repetitio, but specially with what is said about the wife, as indicating that the conjugal relation continues through life, as also the idea, Luke 26:36, that there is no marriage in the other world. Other commentators have, in like manner, been disturbed by it, but it only shows that no amount of piety, or of learning, will fit a man to be a true interpreter of this book without something of the poetic spirit by which it is pervaded. It is not emphasis merely, much less an enforced motive to joy, that this repetition gives us, as Hitzig and Zöckler maintain, but a most exquisite pathos in view of the transitoriness and poverty of life. The style of diction reveals the style of thought, showing how far it is from the Epicurean sentiment of any kind, whether gross or moderate. It is the language of one musing, soliloquizing, full of some touching thought that causes him to linger over his words, and keep their sad music in his ear. There are examples of it in the Greek poets, especially in Homer, which have led the ancient writers on rhetoric to give it a technical name. Thus Plutarch calls it á¼ÏαναÏοÏά, and so also the later writer Macrobius, Saturnal. Lib. iv. 6, more particularly describes it: Nascitur pathos et de repetitione quam Græci á¼ÏαναÏοÏὰν vocant, cum sententiæ ab iisdem nominibus incipiunt: âPathos also comes from repetition, which the Greeks call epanaphora, when sentences begin from the same words.â It receives some of its best illustrations from passages in the Iliad, such as 20:371, 23:641, and especially 22:126, which, though very different from this, in other respects, has this same kind of pathetic repetition. It is Hector soliloquizing in the time of his awful danger from the near approach of Achillesâ
οὠμÎν ÏÏÏ Î½á¿¦Î½ á¼ÏÏá½¶Î½ï¿½Ì á¼Ïὸ ÏÎÏÏηÏ,
Ïá¿· á½Î±ÏιζÎμεναι, á¼ Ïε ÏαÏθÎÎ½Î¿Ï á¼ ÎÎ¸ÎµÎ¿Ï Ïε,
ÏαÏθÎνοÏâἡÎÎ¸ÎµÎ¿Ï ÏÌ á½Î±ÏίζεÏον�.
No time for such a friendly parley now,
As when from oak and rock, The youth and maid,
the youth and maid, hold parlance sweet together.
Very different is the sentence of Solomon in its subject matter, but like it in pathos, in the peculiar repetitive diction to which it gives rise, and the musing state of soul from which it flows:
Go then, with gladness eat thy bread, and merrily drink thy wine,
Thy garments ever white, thy head with fragrant oil adorned;
Enjoy with her whom thou dost love, the days of thy vain life,â
The days of thy vain life, the all, that God has given to thee Beneath the sun.
It is indeed irony, but not that of scorning sarcasm, nor of heartless satire. It is the irony of Scripture, full of a mournful tenderness, taking this as its most impressive form of serious admonition. Interpreted in its spirit, and even by what is rhetorically revealed upon its face, there is no contradiction between it and Ecclesiastes 7:2-3; Ecclesiastes 2:2; and other passages in this book that represent sobriety, and even sadness, as morally and spiritually better for man than mirth. We have dwelt more fully on these topics, and at the hazard of some repetition, in the extended excursus on the alleged Epicureanism of Koheleth, p.131. It has been done, because no ideas suggested by the book seemed more important in their bearing upon its thorough interpretation,âT. L.]
[6][A much clearer sense, and better adapted to the whole spirit of the passage, is obtained by taking ×Ö¸×Ö°×Ö¸× in the concrete, like the Greek Ïὸ ÏοÏÏν, for a wise thing, a problem, a mystery, something tl at requires wisdom to explain it. Such use of it, though not found elsewhere in the Hebrew, is justified by the perfectly parallel Greek idiom, and by what is demanded to represent the peculiar thinking of this book. The mystery, puzzle, Ïὸ ÏοÏÏν, ÏιλοÏÏÏημα, ζήÏημα, inquiry, is the curious case which he is going to state. The use of ×Ö¸×Ö°×Ö¸×, Ecclesiastes 7:25, is quite dissimilar. This view is confirmed by what follows: âand it seemed great to me.ââT. L.]