A commentary on Ecclesiastes

V. (1.) Keep thy feet (the Masorets have altered this to the singular, but without sufficient reason; yet the LXX. support the Kri) as when (occurs chapter v. 3 (4), viii. 7; ‘as though’ is the meaning here) thou walkest (taking up the word from the last clause above) towards the house of the Deity (the LXX. render, of course correctly as to sense by the double article, τὸν οἶκον τοῦ Θεοῦ——‘Thou art walking to the temple of a Divine Providence’ is the idea), and drawing near to hear (evidently ‘in order to hear’; hence the LXX. render ἐγγὺς τοῦ ἀκούειν; some, however, with the Authorized Version, take this as an imperative, but the sense is better preserved by rendering as the LXX. do), more than giving of the befooled ones (for we must not lose sight of the hiphil form: they are deceived either by themselves or others) a sacrifice. (The curious rendering of the LXX. by no means shows that they did not understand the meaning, or even would have altered the present pointing; ὑπὲρ δόμα τῶν ἀφρόνων θυσία σου fulfils their conditions of rendering, which is, if possible, to preserve both the sense and the order, ‘above the gift of fools is thy sacrifice’). For they are not those instructed to the doing of (so the LXX., τοῦ ποιῆσαι) evil. The sentence is purposely ambiguous and equivocal; it is not clear at first sight whether the fools are those who do evil, or whether it be the doing of evil generally which is the point, but the following will seem to give a fair explanation of this ♦difficult passage. The advice given after the considerations above, is to walk reverently, and to listen to what God’s oracle will say, rather than do as fools do,——offer a sacrifice to avert evil, which they do not after all know to be such, and which, if it implies dissatisfaction with these divine providential arrangements, is a foolish, if not sinful, sacrifice. This is further set forth in the following verses.

(2, 3.) Do not hasten (the hastiness of vexation, see Job iv. 5, xxiii. 15, Psalms vi. 10) upon thy mouth (the preposition is by no means redundant), and thy heart do not hurry (the usual word denoting the hurry of want of time. The meaning then is, do not speak, no, do not even think, hastily) to cause to send out a word (with the usual meaning of ‘a reason to be acted on’) before the Deity, because the Deity (as this is a repetition, the word becomes emphatic, ‘that Deity’) in the heavens and thou (emphatic) on the earth, therefore be thy words a few (i.e. diminished rather than increased, hence the following). For comes the dream in the multitude of anxiety, and a voice of a befooled one (for it is without the article) in the multitude of words (or ‘reasons,’ as above). The argument now passes over from rash speeches to rash vows. A vow is a favourite resource with the foolish for obtaining the accomplishment of their wishes: they think to bribe Providence with gifts and offerings.

(4.) When thou hast vowed a vow (‘If by any means thou hast done this,’ for considerable emphasis is given by the repetition of ‘vow,’ according to the well-known Hebrew idiom) to God, do not defer to pay it (the alacrity with which men vow is commonly in strong contrast with the tardiness with which they pay), because there is nothing of providence (חפץ, with its usual technical meaning, and also equivocal, in the sense of ‘pleasure’) in befooled ones: with respect to what thou hast vowed, pay (the LXX. render σὺ οὖν ‘thou then,’ but the emphasis given by את אשר may easily account for this).

(8.) If oppression of the poor (see chapter iv. 1, 3, etc.), and wresting of judgment and right, thou seest in a province (במדינה, this has been considered a late word, and a sign, moreover, that the writer lived in the country and not in the city, as he says, chapter i. 12; but though it occurs in the later Hebrew [1 Kings xx. 14 is the first instance] it is quite regularly formed, and is clearly in place here), do not marvel (Psalms xlviii. 6, Jeremiah iv. 9, to ‘be astonished,’ ‘struck with astonishment’) over the providence (החפץ with the article; the LXX. render τῷ πράγματι in this instance, the word, however, occurs in the technical meaning it has all through the book, see chapter iii. 1, v. 4 (3)); for high from above the high (which the LXX. render word for word, ὑψηλὸς ἐπάνω ὑψηλοῦ) keeps and high ones above them (the sentence is enigmatic, perhaps proverbial, though the meaning is clear. Is it possible that a play was intended between מֵעַל and מַעַל, Leviticus v. 15, a ‘transgression,’ גבה being taken in the meaning of swelling up, thus——‘Increasing transgression is increasing regard?’ In the same way the מ at the end of גבהים would unite with the word following in utterance, and so help the equivoke).

(9.) And the profit (as this is joined by a conjunction with the former, we must look upon it as a further argument in the same chain of reasoning; the meaning will then be ‘and besides the produce’) of earth (not the earth, the article is wanting) in all (the LXX. render this by ἐπὶ with a dative, hence they understood the preposition here to mean ‘for all,’ which our version follows) it is (feminine, in close apposition therefore with the noun, but this noun must be יתרון, which is feminine, and the meaning is that it exists subjectively, or is always there playing its part) a king (again, not the king: any king, therefore, however great,——Solomon himself, or any other) to a field (again, not the field, equivalent to some field; the LXX. render by the simple genitive) is served (niphal; this occurs only twice in the past tense, here and at Ezekiel xxxvi. 9, both in the sense of tilling; and the niphal future twice, at Deuteronomy xxi. 4 and Ezekiel xxxvi. 34, again with the same meaning——no doubt עבד is used with the signification ‘to serve generally’ in a vast number of places. It must be observed, however, that a niphal is not exactly the same as a passive, but has an objective signification, so that it is often nearer in meaning to the Greek middle voice than our passive. Bearing this in mind, we can have no further doubt over this passage as to its principal scope,——‘the king is served of,’ or ‘a subject to the field.’ The idea is that the very highest are really in a state of abject dependence——a single day’s starvation would have been sufficient to have brought to the dust Solomon or Nebuchadnezzar. The other possible rendering, that ‘the king is served by the field,’ is only the other side of the same truth, and the sentence is equivocal, being ingeniously constructed so as to read either way).

(11.) In the multitudes of the good (an abstract, with the article, and hence the meaning is ‘In the very increase of the property itself, and as it increases,’ this being the meaning of the plural, which is distributive) multiply the eatings of it (or, for the ה may be considered paragogic, and so making, as it were, an abstract of the poel participle, ‘consumers’), and what is the success (כשרון, see ii. 21, references) to the owners of it (i.e. to ownership), except seeing (ראית, this the Masorets alter to ראות, but unnecessarily, for there is a slight difference in the sense here, which will account for the unusual grammatical form; a causative or hiphil notion is implied by it; hence the LXX. ἀρχὴ τοῦ ὁρᾶν, ‘the priority to see,’) his eyes? (i.e. each one with his eyes, singular following plural).

(12.) Sweet (but the participial form of the noun must not be overlooked, nor the feminine termination, equivalent to a ‘sweetness,’) is the sleep of the slave (‘of the toiler,’ with the article), if a little, or if the much he eats (there is a peculiar force in contrasting ‘the much,’ הרבה, with the article, with מעט without it; even if he should eat to the much [i.e. as large a quantity as he can] it will do him no harm: no nightmare will trouble him who has earned his hearty meal by his hard work), but the satisfaction (as contrasted with הרבה) to the enriched it is not that which is causing rest (hiphil participle) to him (emphatic) to sleep (an equivoke here is to be found in השבע and לעשיר, remembering that שבע, ‘seven,’ is used so commonly for ‘completeness,’ and עשר, ‘ten,’ as ‘rich’ and ‘overflowing;’ seven with ten has a peculiar meaning in the symbolism of numbers).

(14.) And perishes, that riches, that same (as we should say, ‘those very same riches’) in an uncertainty (בענין, another instance of this word; we see that in this case also [see chapter i. 13, references], the meaning ‘anxious uncertainty’ exactly suits the context), which is an evil (this anxious care, instead of doing any good, is but a simple mischief), and he is caused to beget a son (to whom, of course, he would have wished to bequeath his wealth), and there is nothing in his hand at all (which the LXX. render by a double negative, and hence we must render ‘and has in his hand even nothing at all’).

(15.) And as he came out from the womb of his mother naked (which is reserved to the end of the clause, making it emphatic; it is moreover written full, so that a slight additional emphasis is given by this to the ‘state of nakedness’ existing), he returns to go back (somewhat stronger than goes back——he comes to this state through intermediate stages) just as he came (‘as he was at the first, so now is he at the last’), and nothing at all does he not lift up (Genesis vii. 17, ‘bear’ as a burden) in his toil (as we say, ‘have for his pains,’ observing the meaning of עמל, not the labour but the anxiety which causes, or results from, the labour) which he takes in his hand.

(16.) And, moreover, this same evil sickness, all over against (כל עמת occurs as two words here only; לעמת is the ordinary form, it has the meaning of ‘against,’ ‘over against,’ see Exodus xxv. 27, 2 Samuel xvi. 13; it has been proposed to read כלעמת, in which case the meaning will be as in the above——‘precisely as,’ LXX. ὥσπερ γὰρ, but this is to a certain extent to cut the knot rather than untie it. Now עמת occurs separately here only, and if עמת really exists, it is a noun feminine in regimen; now the meaning of עם, which is presented both in ‘people’ and in the preposition ‘with,’ gives evidently something ‘collected’ or ‘gathered,’ hence עמה would mean a ‘collection’ or ‘instance,’ and עמת ‘collection’ or ‘instance of,’ and then the exact meaning of כל ע״ will be ‘every instance of his going’), which he comes (close relative, the reason of which is now sufficiently evident, meaning, ‘just as he comes;’ he simply goes round in a circle without accomplishing anything, or returns back on his own track in every instance) so (emphatic, standing apart from its noun, equal ‘just so’) does he go, and what profit to him who has toiled (close relative again, ‘in that he has toiled’) to the wind? (which, see chapter i. 6, returns back again as it did before. ‘To’ is here not exactly the same as ‘like to,’ but very near it; but perhaps also because his toil or care is to his spirit, as it has no effect otherwise.)

(17.) Moreover, all his days in darkness (for, of course, all this time he has never any idea which way he was really going, or what he is doing) he eats (or consumes), and disappointment is the much (or is multiplied), and his sickness and wrath (קצף is that kind of wrath which arises from anger with a person on account of something wrong. This miserable life is summed up, it appears, in four particulars——(1.) All his days he eats in darkness; (2.) the vexation of disappointment consumes him; (3.) he is sick, or rather, in this general sense, he is afflicted; (4.) he is angry, for those mistakes and disappointments.)

(18.) Behold (for this introduces the manifest result of his observation) that which I have seen, even I myself (the result therefore of his own personal experience), a real good; which also (the full relative here has this meaning, because it is repeated) is suitable to the eating (i.e. active enjoyment), to the drinking (which is passive), and to the seeing of goodness (the lamed is repeated before each full infinitive, and the abstract טובה follows, which therefore gives the meaning that what he had observed was, ‘that it was proper that one should eat, or one should drink, or should see good in,’ etc., i.e. any or all of these); and (repeated, meaning ‘and also’) in all his toil which (contracted relative) he toils over (toil is thus made very emphatic, the meaning is, ‘for which one so earnestly or unceasingly toils,’ for observe also, as no nominative is expressed, the verb is impersonal) under the sun the number (the root ספר has the meaning to count or enumerate, hence the idea ‘as one is counting one’s days’) of the days of his life which gives to him (emphatic) the Deity (nominative following verb, with the usual shade of meaning), because it is his portion (i.e. what belongs to him, but in the future he has no portion, that no man has any right over).

(20.) For not the much he remembers (but as no nominative precedes or follows, the verb is impersonal) the days of his life, and for (the second כי introducing a reason in addition to and confirmatory of the first) the Deity answers (this is the only place in which the participle hiphil occurs; in one other place the participle pual——Isaiah liii. 4, which differs only from the hiphil in its pointing, occurs evidently in the sense of ‘afflicted,’ which the LXX. render by κακώσει, ‘in affliction.’ The future hiphil is used at 1 Kings viii. 35 and 2 Chronicles vi. 26, parallels, and is translated ‘thou dost afflict them.’ On the whole, however, the meaning, as pointed out by ♦Zöckler, and which the LXX. confirm, seems to be, ‘hears them by vouchsafing;’ and as this answer is painful or joyful, as the case may be, and more usually the former, ‘exercises’ would be a suitable rendering) in the joy of (or by means of the joy, בְ־, of the instrument; it is an abstract in regimen, ‘in the joyousness’ or ‘rejoicings of’) his heart. Thus, then, the two reasons given stand related thus: Present gratification is the lot of humanity, because the past is not much remembered. The chief remembrance——for this is the meaning of הרבה——is not in the past. The deepest sorrows fade away quickly into forgetfulness; and so also the brightest joys. They have, no doubt, some influence by recollection, but not much. And thus the Deity, or God regarded as the supreme providential ruler, exercises us. He responds to our anxieties, afflicts us, or chastens us, or causes us pleasure by means of joys given or taken away, as the case may be. Again, these are spoken of as joys of our hearts, or of our inward desires and consciousness, which is the meaning of ‘heart’ in this book; our emotional nature, as the idea would stand expressed in the nomenclature of modern philosophy.