CHAPTERIII.

CHAPTERIII.III.At this point Koheleth commences another line of argument; he notices that all things proceed according to a fixed and settled order of providence. This truth he brings into great prominence by instancing eight-and-twenty——a fourfold seven——different times or seasons existing in human life. From this he deduces the conclusion, that as it is impossible to alter the order of Providence, the toil of man is useless to effect any real good, so far as this world is concerned. The way in which this thought is worked out is peculiar. Koheleth is both sarcastic and paradoxical in his arguments; but his sarcasms are never ill-natured and his paradoxes promote thought. He also enlivens his subject with a considerable number of plays upon words, and striking and pregnant aphorisms.TO everything there isa season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:SectionIII.——Further demonstration of the vanity of human labour from considerations touching Providence and Morals.TO everything is there a determined period, and a time for every providence under heaven.(1.)To all(human life, that is) is aseason(זמן, this word occurs here and Nehemiahii.6, Estherxi.27, 31, only, and the participle past of the verb Ezrax.14, Nehemiahx.34 (35) 13, 21; it will be seen by an examination of passages that this word differs fromמועד, which both Ezra and Nehemiah also use, and which is the common word in the older books for ‘asacredseason’ or ‘feast.’זמןis a ‘settled time,’ ‘a date.’ Fuerst considers the primary idea of the root is ‘to count.’ It is clear thatמועדwould not have suited this context; this of course so far weakens any argument for the late date of this work as derived from the use of this word),and a time(general, the common word)to all(repeated, and therefore emphatic, equal ‘that is to all’)providences(חפץ, which, however, has the signification desire as well, ‘a satisfactory undertaking therefore;’ Koheleth uses the word technically with a reference to the divine providences of God. The word occurs chapteriii.1, 17,v.4 (3), 8 (7),viii.6,xii.1, 10. TheLXX.here renderπρᾶγμα, but chapterxii.θέλημα)under theheavens(this meaning ofחפץmay account for one use of this phrase here instead of the more usual ‘under the sun,’——heaven being perhaps employed as we sometimes use it, for God’s providence under heaven).2 A time¹to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck upthat whichis planted;¹Hebrewto bear.(1.) A time to be born, and a time to die;(2.) A time to plant, and a time to root up that which is planted;(2.)A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up the planted.3 A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;(3.) A time to slay, and a time to heal;(4.) A time to break walls, and a time to build them up;(3.)A time for slaying, and a time for healing; a time for breaking down, and a time for building up.4 A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;(5.) A time to weep, and a time to laugh;(6.) A time to cry, and a time to play;(4.)A time for weeping, and a time for laughing; a time of wailing, and a time of dancing(there is an alliteration here, and a slight change in construction to the hiphil in the next clause; possibly to mark the close of the first seven pairs).5 A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;(7.) A time to scatter stones away, and a time to gather stones again;(8.) A time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;(5.)A time for scattering stones, and a time of collecting stones(does our Lord allude to this, Markxiii.2?);a time for embracing, and a time to refrain from embracing.6 A time to¹get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;¹Or, seek.(9.) A time to seek, and a time for loss;(10.) A time to keep, and a time to cast away;(6.)A time to seek, and a time to lose(the Masorets consider this a Piel with the sense to destroy);a time for keeping, and a time to cast away.7 A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;(11.) A time to rend, and a time to sew;(12.) A time to be silent, and a time for speech;(7.)A time for rending, and a time for sewing(see Genesisxxxvii.29, 34);a time for being silent, and a time to speak.8 A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.(13.) A time of love, and a time of hate;(14.) A time of war, and a time of peace.(8.)A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.(The slight changes in the rendering correspond to changes in construction in the Hebrew, giving a pleasing variety to the whole passage. There is also an observable difference in the second seven pairs, which enumerate acts more emotional and subjective than the first.)9 What profit hath he that worketh in that wherein he laboureth?What advantage is there to the worker by reason of his own toil?(9.)What profit(something ‘remaining over and above the present,’ in the technical meaning of this word, see chapteri.3, references.)is the working(an active participle with the article, and thus generic, working then as such)in which(full relative, and thus referring to the whole idea; we must render therefore ‘in respect of itsbeing,’ which will be emphatic, as it is followed by the pronoun)it is toil(but we must remember that the exact meaning of this word is——see Genesisxli.51, Isaiahliii.11——the ‘anxiety,’ or ‘care,’ the labour produces. The question then is this, Is there any profit from working in respect of its being care and pains? and the answer is, No. TheLXX.render somewhatad sensum:Τίς περίσσεια τοῦ ποιοῦντος ἐν οἷς αὐτὸς μοχθεῖ, ‘What advantage of him that works in those things whichhetoils?’ The Syriac,(‡ Syriac word)(‡ Syriac word)(‡ Syriac word)(‡ Syriac word)(‡ Syriac word)‘What is the profit in the work in that he toils?’ but both make the meaning clear. This question is answered in the negative, the argument being elaborated with much care).10 I have seen the travail, which God hath given to the sons of men to be exercised in it.I have observed with regard to the uncertainty which is appointed of God to the human race, to be made anxious thereby,(10.)I have seen(or ‘observed,’ as we should write, this formula introducing a matter which observation makes manifest),with regard to the anxiety(ענין, seechapteri.13, references, the meaning previously assigned of ‘anxious care,’ or ‘uncertainty’ generally, the word being used to signify that special form of human misery which consists in theuncertaintyin which man lives; this emphaticאתtheLXX.notice and render by their adverbialσὺν, and to show us that the observation was made, notofthe uncertainty, butwith respect toit)which has appointed(because this is the principal idea) evenGod(the nominative follows, and is without the article, because it is God in his personal character who is here referred to. The article is used when the word occurs generically, as in the sense of ‘the Deity’ or ‘the Almighty,’——‘which it is God’s appointment’ then is the meaning)to the sons of the man(that is, the human race as children of Adam)to be rendered uncertain therewith.11 He hath made everythingbeautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.that the whole is suitable at its proper time. Moreover, with regard to the future, that too is put into their desires, but so that Man cannot find out the working of the Almighty asHeworks it out from its beginning even to its end.(11.)With respect to the whole(again the emphaticאת, and again noted byΣύμπανταin theLXX., some copies reading,σὺν πάντα ἃ, ‘the whole which;’ as this preposition is repeated in the same clause, it is specially emphatic here)he made it fair(that is ‘appropriate,’ which theLXX.renderκαλὰ)in its time(one of these providential times or seasons above spoken of).Moreover(commencing another and additional argument, confirming the above),with respect to the age(againאתrepeated with the article, noticed as before by theLXX., and again by them renderedσὺν, meaning therefore generally, and also with regard to the indefinite future generically it is,etc.)is set(placed by God indeed, but the nominative is so far off that the verb is almost impersonal, or in other words all emphasis on the nominative is lost)in their hearts from the want of which(מבלי, occurs Jobiv.11; this word joined to the full relative must mean ‘but as they do not possess this knowledge of the future or this influence over the age, or course of things present and future, so as to control it,’ for this is the meaning ofעלם, seechapteri.4, references.)does not find(emphatic, as standing before its nominative)the man(i.e.‘Humanity generally cannot find’ or ‘discover’)with respect to the working(theLXX.do not render here byσὺν, probably becauseτὸ ποίημαis clear enough without it)which works(‘is the work of’)the Deity from the beginning even unto(this preposition being separated and joined with a conjunction is much more forcible than the mere affixedמ־above, because, possibly, it is desired to render emphatic this final word which is reserved to the close of the sentence)the end(סוף, which occurs in this book in the sense of a final conclusion, seechapterxii.13, and which in the working of Divine Providence is especially mysterious).12 I know thatthere isno good in them, but fora manto rejoice, and to do good in his life.I am aware that there can be no real good to any, if it be not to rejoice and to see this good in their lives.(12.)I know how there is nothing good(‘nothing’ and ‘good’ are two nouns in closest apposition, and hence having the meaning ‘there is no good thing’)in them(emphatic and a distributive plural, referring toאדםsingular)except to rejoice and to do good(but not in the sense of doing right, which, of course, is foreign to the train of thought, but to the obtaining of good; and as this last idea is repeated from what went before, we have the meaning ‘thatgood’)in their lives(which theLXX.render by the singular ‘in his life,’ noticing the distributive plural. Hence then the sense of the whole passage is plain: ‘I know that there can be no real good thing belonging to them, except it be that they should rejoice and do good each one in their lives,’ and this is exactly true, as death so completely bounds the vision and terminates the earthly existence of every human soul that what is not obtained in this life is clearly not obtained at all. Of course the entire argument proceeds on the supposition that we are regarding the whole matter as under the sun, that is, limited to this earthly stage of existence).13 And also that every man should eat and drink, and enjoy the good of all his labour, itisthe gift of God.And beside, if any way humanity should eat or drink, and thus sees this good by any of his toil, it is simply God’s gift.(13.)And moreover(an additional consideration added to the above)all the man(i.e.all humanity generally, a proposition universally true of the whole of them)when he eats(contract relative with present tense of the verb, ‘as he eats then’——and eating is here put as the general type of use and enjoyment)and drinks(this is not superfluous; a man can drink when he can no longer eat; he can quench the fever thirst when food is loathsome, hence drinking is the type of solace)and sees good(as a past tense follows a present, we have the equivalent of our imperfect; and as also the conjunction is repeated before each verb, we may render them as dependent = ‘if he should eat or even drink, and so should have a sight of a good’)in all his toil(or by means of it).A gift(chapterv.19, see also 1 Kingsxiii.17, where it appears that the meaning of the word is a ‘present.’LXX.δόμα)of God it is(feminine, in close agreement withמתת. Here again we think that there may be noticed a moresubjective, or active idea, when the feminine is used, than with corresponding masculines. In this way we may possibly find a grammatical explanation of the anomalous genders so common in Hebrew. In the Pentateuchהואis used of females, and a possible reason may be that in the earlier stages of the language there was less tendency to regard mere grammatical concords and more to follow the logic of the passage. It is worth noticing that grammatical concord as such becomes more and more developed as the language advances, hence Syriac is as strict as Greek or Latin in this respect. Whatever be the reason, however, the fact of such closer connexion is manifest by a careful collation of places).14 I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor anything taken from it: and God doethit, thatmenshould fear before him.I am aware also that all which the Almighty effects must be done with regard to all time, that to it nothing can be added, and that from it nothing either can be taken away, and that the Almighty acts that men mayfearin his presence;(14.)I know how(and as this is a repetition of the formula in verse 12, we may add the word ‘also’ to show that the argument is a continuation of the above)all which does(or is performed by)the Deity(with the article)it is(emphatic, followed by the verb substantive, and equivalent therefore to ‘it really is’) that whichwill be(and so theLXX.render)to the age(to the indefinite æon, or future that is, or rather, for both present and past are included in this word, to the whole course of present existing things’),to it(in the meaning of ‘over,’ or ‘above,’ as something dominating over, which is the signification ofעל)there is nothing to be added(niphal, which could be added)and from it there is nothing to be diminished(Exodusv.8, Jobxv.4, 8, or restrained. The relevancy of this reasoning is now evident. Human labour and anxiety is vain, for the course of providence cannot be altered by it, and if it could, the alteration would be for the worse; what follows makes this more clear),and the Deity works that they may fear(contract relative, with the present as above. We have also the double jod; it occurs with the single jod at chapterviii.12, and again with double jod at chapterxii.5. There is no doubt a difference of meaning in these cases; see a remarkable illustration of this in regard to the verbיקץin Judgesxvi.14 as compared with verse 20 in the same chapter)from before him(מלפניו, with bothמandל, and hence emphatic, ‘inhispresence’).15 That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth¹that which is past.¹Hebrewthat which is driven away.that what has been is just the present, and whatever is to be is no other than the same present; and that the Almighty will investigate with regard to the wronged.(15.)Whatis thatwhich was?(the contract relative with the verb substantive,i.e.what isthe past?’)the present state of things(כבר, seechapteri.10, references; the word is a substantive with its ordinary technical meaning as used in this book of the ‘present as it now is,’ and of this he says)it is(emphatic)and that which is to be(appointed so to be. TheLXX.renderὅσα τοῦ γίνεσθαι, literally ‘things of the being,’ ‘or to happen’)the present state of things it was(that is, ‘thisverysame present it is;’ each age being in this respect an exact reproduction of what went before it. It never was subject to human control, and never will be)and the Deity(as this word is repeated in the same clause, and standsas a nominative before the verb, it is especially emphatic)seeks(‘asks after,’ ‘inquires for,’ with the object of not allowing it to pass notice, see 1 Samuelxx.16)with respect to a persecuted(person or thing. He does not allow any person or thing who is wronged to pass without notice).No doubtSt.Jerome has completely hit the point of the argument when he writes, ‘Since all things fade with time, and there is a time of destroying and building, weeping and laughing, for silence and speaking, and those other things which are said concerning time, why do we strive and press forward in vain, and imagine the brief labours of life to be perpetual, nor are we content, according to the Gospel, with the evil of to-day, and so take no thought for the morrow?’16 ¶ And moreover I saw under the sun the place of judgment,thatwickednesswasthere; and the place of righteousness,thatiniquitywasthere.Yet, however, I have observed in this work-day world, that in place of justice there is impiety, and in the place even of right there is impiety also.(16.)And yet(an objection to the foregoing)I have seen under the sun(the limitation here introduced requires special attention)a place of the justice(we must not limit place to meanlocality, but take it generally of state or position,etc., and observe also thatהמשפטhas the article, and is therefore generic);therewasthe wickedness(again generic, and hence having the meaning that in place of justice, as one would expect from the proposition stated above, that the Deity has regard to the wronged, just the reverse occurred; this is again enlarged in the following),and in the place of the right there was the wickedness(the meaning is, that ‘just in the very circumstances under which you would expect right to prevail, there you will find rampant and successful wickedness.’רשעhas the meaning of that kind of ‘wickedness’ which goes out into bold and open transgression, see 2 Samuelxxii.22; Psalmx.2, 3, 4, 13).17 I said in mine heart, God shall judge the righteous and the wicked: forthere isa time there for every purpose and for every work.Then said I to myself: With respect to right and wickedness, the Almighty does justice, because there is a time to every providence and dominating over every action which is done there.(17.)I said, I myself, in my heart(which we have noticed commonly introduces a thought more specious than true),with respect to(את, which theLXX.note with their customaryσὺν)the righteous(i.e.what ismaderight ordoneright; notice the hiphil form as compared with that in the above),and with regard to the impiousalsojudges the Deity, forthere isa time to every providence, and upon(or ‘over,’ which theLXX.note byἐπὶ)all the working there(some copies of theLXX.join this to the next verse, but it is more agreeable to the gist of the passage to refer it to the preceding, as the Masoretic text does, and in this case ‘there’ refers back to the age or period).18 I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men,¹that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts.¹Or, that they might clear God and see.Then said I to myself also: By the reasonings of the human race in respect to any discrimination of them by the Divine Creator, it seems that but brutes are they at best.(18.)I said, Idid,in my heart(repeating the formula of the preceding verse, and so lending emphasis to it),upon the speech(this phrase occurs three times, and only in this book,viz.here, and chaptersvii.14 andviii.2. Notwithstanding that a similar phrase occurs Psalmcx.4, with the meaning ‘after the order,’LXX.κατὰ τὴν τάξιν, which is apparently sanctioned byNew Testament exegesis, compare Hebrewsv.6,etc.; this is really not to the point, for that isעל דברתי, the plural, while this is singular. According to strict grammarדברתis the construct ofדברה, and should therefore mean ‘reasoning of,’ just as theLXX.render byπερὶ λαλιᾶς, and this, moreover, will make good sense in every passage in which this phrase occurs)of the sons of Adam(i.e.the human race)to the discriminating them(hence theLXX.διακρινεῖ αὐτοὺς, considering that the root isברר, which has the meaning ‘to sift,’ ‘purify by sifting,’ this is the only instance of the infinitive kal. Now we must take this meaning, observing that the pronoun ‘them,’ which is involved in the termination of the verb, is not emphatic; it is the discrimination of God which is the point, the persons on which this is exercised are subordinate. The Jewish commentators for the most part explainלברםas the third person singular preterite ofברהwith the objective pronominal affixם[the only instance, however, in whichברהhas the meaning ‘to choose’ is 1 Samuelxvii.8]; as, however, some copies readלבררם, we can have no difficulty in referring the word to the rootברר, which makes good sense. It is also to be remarked that thoughברםdoes not exist as a root in Hebrew, it does so in Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic, and the meaning is that which is ‘twisted’ or ‘infolded’——compare Ezekielxxvii.24——a ‘garment’ worked in many colours; this would make good sense also in this place, and may possibly have been an intentional equivoke, which is not surely improbable in a sentence in which such manifest artificial alliteration occurs. The meaning then is, that)the Deity(discriminates men, or makes a distinction between them and the lower creatures; but in what respects? This is discussed at length)and to see(but rather might this form of the infinitive be rendered, for which there is sufficient authority, ‘to the appearance’)that they(contract relative, and hence the meaning is that this appearance belongs to them, and them only. In this may be found the key to the whole passage. In appearance there is no choice or discrimination, as subsequent argument proves, because they are)a cattle(singular, following a plural, and thus giving the meaning that each one is so)they to them(which Mendelssohn explains, following theLXX., ‘when left to themselves,’ or, as we should say, as ‘far as they can tell.’ With this Ewald and Ginsburg agree, who consider this latter clause an ironical ‘ipsissimi,’——‘they themselves, indeed!’ Thus, then, the meaning of the whole passage is, ‘I said, yes, I did in my heart again, so far as human reasonings extend concerning any discrimination the Divine Providence has made of them, and as far as appearances go with them, a mere animal is each one of them, so far as they can tell.’ The sentence is very sarcastic and equivocal, as the alliteration at the endshows. Then, again, if we take the rootברםin the sense of ‘web,’ as we use it for something intricate, in that case we should have the equivoke, ‘concerning the web of Divine Providence so far as it appears to them.’ Again, also, the Syriac renders as ifלברםwereלבראם, ‘their Creator,’ which also makes excellent sense; but this, again, may simply be a rendering of another equivoke. Then, again, there is a possible play betweenבהמהand the same word considered asהמהwith the preposition——all these equivokes assist the sense). Consistent with this is what follows:——19 For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no pre-eminence above a beast: for allisvanity.For the event which happens to the human race, and the event which happens to the brute-creation, is precisely the same event: the one dies just the same death as the other; and the animal life is the same in both; and the pre-eminence of man over the brute is nothing at all; for all alike are evanescent;(19.)For a happening of the sons of man, and a happening of the brute creation, and a happeningwhich isone(as we should say, ‘precisely the same’)to them(the threefold repetition ofמקרה, ‘hap,’ brings this word into strong prominence. It means, of coarse, that which absolutely happens or results, or comes to them in the end. This is exactly the same in both cases, as the sequel shows).As is the death of this, so(‘exactly so’) isthe death of this, andthe spirit(or ‘breath’) isone to all, and the pre-eminence(ומותר, this noun occurs in this form only at Proverbsxiv.23, andxxi.5, and evidently with the meaning of advantage or increase of one thing over another. TheLXX.translate this as if it wereומי יתר, ‘and what profit,’ but this is simply to give the sarcastic turn to the sentence)of the man(humanity generally)over the beasts is nothing, for the whole(in its technical sense of the whole of life, as usual) isa vanity(or evanescent).20 All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.all alike go to the same place; all alike come from the same dust; and all alike return to the same dust again.(20.) Andthe whole goes to one place, the whole(repeating this word so as to bring it into strong prominence)was from the dust, and the whole(again repeated, making the fourth time, and so implying universality)returns to the dust.21 Who knoweth the spirit¹of man that²goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?¹Hebrewof the sons of man.²Hebrewis ascending.For who can tell how that the spirit of man ascends up on high, and that the spirit of the beast descends downwards to the earth?(21.)Who knows?(participle, poel, ‘who is knowing?’ or ‘who is there that knows?’ The question does not assert the fact that thereisno difference between man and beast; on the contrary, this clause is so ingeniously contrived as to assert the very reverse).The spirit of the sons of men(in its usual meaning, of the whole human race)is the ascending(with the article, ‘the ascending thing’),it is(emphatic)to the ascent(the repetition of the same root in a different grammatical form gives prominence to this word. The human soul is, it appears, especially an ‘ASCENDINGthing’);and the spiritof thebeastathing descending(participle, poel with article),it is(emphatic, it really is this)[to the] downwards to the earth(theל, to, twice repeated, gives emphasis——‘even to’).22 Wherefore I perceive thatthere isnothing better, than that a man should rejoice in his own works; for thatishis portion: for who shall bring him to see what shall be after him?Thus I perceived that there can be no real good above that present-pleasure which man can obtain from his work; as that is what belongs to him: for who can bring him to see what may be the subsequent results?(22.)And I saw(‘and thus I observed’)how there is nothing of real-good(in the technical sense in which this word occurs so often in this book)from which(full relative,‘more than that in which,’ or ‘above that he should’)he rejoices, eventhe mandoes (humanity generally),in his workings(or what he accomplishes, plural),for(or, asכיhas occurred in the corresponding clause previously, ‘as’)this is(emphatic)his portion(‘lot’ or ‘inheritance,’ singular):for who(כיagain repeated, so we must render it ‘and as none’)can make him come to see(this is not exactly equivalent to ‘make him see;’ it is rather equivalent to ‘who could enable him to see,’ or ‘who could show him some method how he might discover’)in what(‘of what sort’ is that work which)which will be after him(not in respect of time, but results,——‘consequences,’ therefore). Thus Koheleth’s reasoning is quite clear, conclusive, and connected. Intenparticulars man and beast are alike. (1.) The result is the same to both; (2.) their death is alike; (3.) their spirit or animal life is the same; (4.) there is no pre-eminence of the one over the other; (5.) they are alike evanescent; (6.) they all go to the same place; (7.) they come from the same dust; (8.) and they all go to the same dust, and no one can tell (i.e.for certain, or by ordinary observations) that they differ in this; (9.) man’s soul goes up, (10.) and the beast’s goes down. The arrangement of the whole, it will be seen, is highly artificial.The next stage in the argument opens with ‘I turned and saw.’ That is a further observation of a point in which, it may be remarked incidentally, man does differ from the beast: he is the only animal that weeps. The object here is again to show that mere earthly labour, as such, produces no satisfaction. At this point the argument becomes somewhat less sustained, dealing rather with a succession of instances.

III.At this point Koheleth commences another line of argument; he notices that all things proceed according to a fixed and settled order of providence. This truth he brings into great prominence by instancing eight-and-twenty——a fourfold seven——different times or seasons existing in human life. From this he deduces the conclusion, that as it is impossible to alter the order of Providence, the toil of man is useless to effect any real good, so far as this world is concerned. The way in which this thought is worked out is peculiar. Koheleth is both sarcastic and paradoxical in his arguments; but his sarcasms are never ill-natured and his paradoxes promote thought. He also enlivens his subject with a considerable number of plays upon words, and striking and pregnant aphorisms.

TO everything there isa season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:

SectionIII.——Further demonstration of the vanity of human labour from considerations touching Providence and Morals.TO everything is there a determined period, and a time for every providence under heaven.

SectionIII.——Further demonstration of the vanity of human labour from considerations touching Providence and Morals.

TO everything is there a determined period, and a time for every providence under heaven.

(1.)To all(human life, that is) is aseason(זמן, this word occurs here and Nehemiahii.6, Estherxi.27, 31, only, and the participle past of the verb Ezrax.14, Nehemiahx.34 (35) 13, 21; it will be seen by an examination of passages that this word differs fromמועד, which both Ezra and Nehemiah also use, and which is the common word in the older books for ‘asacredseason’ or ‘feast.’זמןis a ‘settled time,’ ‘a date.’ Fuerst considers the primary idea of the root is ‘to count.’ It is clear thatמועדwould not have suited this context; this of course so far weakens any argument for the late date of this work as derived from the use of this word),and a time(general, the common word)to all(repeated, and therefore emphatic, equal ‘that is to all’)providences(חפץ, which, however, has the signification desire as well, ‘a satisfactory undertaking therefore;’ Koheleth uses the word technically with a reference to the divine providences of God. The word occurs chapteriii.1, 17,v.4 (3), 8 (7),viii.6,xii.1, 10. TheLXX.here renderπρᾶγμα, but chapterxii.θέλημα)under theheavens(this meaning ofחפץmay account for one use of this phrase here instead of the more usual ‘under the sun,’——heaven being perhaps employed as we sometimes use it, for God’s providence under heaven).

2 A time¹to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck upthat whichis planted;¹Hebrewto bear.

2 A time¹to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck upthat whichis planted;

¹Hebrewto bear.

(1.) A time to be born, and a time to die;(2.) A time to plant, and a time to root up that which is planted;

(1.) A time to be born, and a time to die;

(2.) A time to plant, and a time to root up that which is planted;

(2.)A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up the planted.

3 A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;

(3.) A time to slay, and a time to heal;(4.) A time to break walls, and a time to build them up;

(3.) A time to slay, and a time to heal;

(4.) A time to break walls, and a time to build them up;

(3.)A time for slaying, and a time for healing; a time for breaking down, and a time for building up.

4 A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;

(5.) A time to weep, and a time to laugh;(6.) A time to cry, and a time to play;

(5.) A time to weep, and a time to laugh;

(6.) A time to cry, and a time to play;

(4.)A time for weeping, and a time for laughing; a time of wailing, and a time of dancing(there is an alliteration here, and a slight change in construction to the hiphil in the next clause; possibly to mark the close of the first seven pairs).

5 A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;

(7.) A time to scatter stones away, and a time to gather stones again;(8.) A time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;

(7.) A time to scatter stones away, and a time to gather stones again;

(8.) A time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;

(5.)A time for scattering stones, and a time of collecting stones(does our Lord allude to this, Markxiii.2?);a time for embracing, and a time to refrain from embracing.

6 A time to¹get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;¹Or, seek.

6 A time to¹get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;

¹Or, seek.

(9.) A time to seek, and a time for loss;(10.) A time to keep, and a time to cast away;

(9.) A time to seek, and a time for loss;

(10.) A time to keep, and a time to cast away;

(6.)A time to seek, and a time to lose(the Masorets consider this a Piel with the sense to destroy);a time for keeping, and a time to cast away.

7 A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;

(11.) A time to rend, and a time to sew;(12.) A time to be silent, and a time for speech;

(11.) A time to rend, and a time to sew;

(12.) A time to be silent, and a time for speech;

(7.)A time for rending, and a time for sewing(see Genesisxxxvii.29, 34);a time for being silent, and a time to speak.

8 A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.

(13.) A time of love, and a time of hate;(14.) A time of war, and a time of peace.

(13.) A time of love, and a time of hate;

(14.) A time of war, and a time of peace.

(8.)A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.(The slight changes in the rendering correspond to changes in construction in the Hebrew, giving a pleasing variety to the whole passage. There is also an observable difference in the second seven pairs, which enumerate acts more emotional and subjective than the first.)

9 What profit hath he that worketh in that wherein he laboureth?

What advantage is there to the worker by reason of his own toil?

(9.)What profit(something ‘remaining over and above the present,’ in the technical meaning of this word, see chapteri.3, references.)is the working(an active participle with the article, and thus generic, working then as such)in which(full relative, and thus referring to the whole idea; we must render therefore ‘in respect of itsbeing,’ which will be emphatic, as it is followed by the pronoun)it is toil(but we must remember that the exact meaning of this word is——see Genesisxli.51, Isaiahliii.11——the ‘anxiety,’ or ‘care,’ the labour produces. The question then is this, Is there any profit from working in respect of its being care and pains? and the answer is, No. TheLXX.render somewhatad sensum:Τίς περίσσεια τοῦ ποιοῦντος ἐν οἷς αὐτὸς μοχθεῖ, ‘What advantage of him that works in those things whichhetoils?’ The Syriac,(‡ Syriac word)(‡ Syriac word)(‡ Syriac word)(‡ Syriac word)(‡ Syriac word)‘What is the profit in the work in that he toils?’ but both make the meaning clear. This question is answered in the negative, the argument being elaborated with much care).

10 I have seen the travail, which God hath given to the sons of men to be exercised in it.

I have observed with regard to the uncertainty which is appointed of God to the human race, to be made anxious thereby,

(10.)I have seen(or ‘observed,’ as we should write, this formula introducing a matter which observation makes manifest),with regard to the anxiety(ענין, seechapteri.13, references, the meaning previously assigned of ‘anxious care,’ or ‘uncertainty’ generally, the word being used to signify that special form of human misery which consists in theuncertaintyin which man lives; this emphaticאתtheLXX.notice and render by their adverbialσὺν, and to show us that the observation was made, notofthe uncertainty, butwith respect toit)which has appointed(because this is the principal idea) evenGod(the nominative follows, and is without the article, because it is God in his personal character who is here referred to. The article is used when the word occurs generically, as in the sense of ‘the Deity’ or ‘the Almighty,’——‘which it is God’s appointment’ then is the meaning)to the sons of the man(that is, the human race as children of Adam)to be rendered uncertain therewith.

11 He hath made everythingbeautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.

that the whole is suitable at its proper time. Moreover, with regard to the future, that too is put into their desires, but so that Man cannot find out the working of the Almighty asHeworks it out from its beginning even to its end.

(11.)With respect to the whole(again the emphaticאת, and again noted byΣύμπανταin theLXX., some copies reading,σὺν πάντα ἃ, ‘the whole which;’ as this preposition is repeated in the same clause, it is specially emphatic here)he made it fair(that is ‘appropriate,’ which theLXX.renderκαλὰ)in its time(one of these providential times or seasons above spoken of).Moreover(commencing another and additional argument, confirming the above),with respect to the age(againאתrepeated with the article, noticed as before by theLXX., and again by them renderedσὺν, meaning therefore generally, and also with regard to the indefinite future generically it is,etc.)is set(placed by God indeed, but the nominative is so far off that the verb is almost impersonal, or in other words all emphasis on the nominative is lost)in their hearts from the want of which(מבלי, occurs Jobiv.11; this word joined to the full relative must mean ‘but as they do not possess this knowledge of the future or this influence over the age, or course of things present and future, so as to control it,’ for this is the meaning ofעלם, seechapteri.4, references.)does not find(emphatic, as standing before its nominative)the man(i.e.‘Humanity generally cannot find’ or ‘discover’)with respect to the working(theLXX.do not render here byσὺν, probably becauseτὸ ποίημαis clear enough without it)which works(‘is the work of’)the Deity from the beginning even unto(this preposition being separated and joined with a conjunction is much more forcible than the mere affixedמ־above, because, possibly, it is desired to render emphatic this final word which is reserved to the close of the sentence)the end(סוף, which occurs in this book in the sense of a final conclusion, seechapterxii.13, and which in the working of Divine Providence is especially mysterious).

12 I know thatthere isno good in them, but fora manto rejoice, and to do good in his life.

I am aware that there can be no real good to any, if it be not to rejoice and to see this good in their lives.

(12.)I know how there is nothing good(‘nothing’ and ‘good’ are two nouns in closest apposition, and hence having the meaning ‘there is no good thing’)in them(emphatic and a distributive plural, referring toאדםsingular)except to rejoice and to do good(but not in the sense of doing right, which, of course, is foreign to the train of thought, but to the obtaining of good; and as this last idea is repeated from what went before, we have the meaning ‘thatgood’)in their lives(which theLXX.render by the singular ‘in his life,’ noticing the distributive plural. Hence then the sense of the whole passage is plain: ‘I know that there can be no real good thing belonging to them, except it be that they should rejoice and do good each one in their lives,’ and this is exactly true, as death so completely bounds the vision and terminates the earthly existence of every human soul that what is not obtained in this life is clearly not obtained at all. Of course the entire argument proceeds on the supposition that we are regarding the whole matter as under the sun, that is, limited to this earthly stage of existence).

13 And also that every man should eat and drink, and enjoy the good of all his labour, itisthe gift of God.

And beside, if any way humanity should eat or drink, and thus sees this good by any of his toil, it is simply God’s gift.

(13.)And moreover(an additional consideration added to the above)all the man(i.e.all humanity generally, a proposition universally true of the whole of them)when he eats(contract relative with present tense of the verb, ‘as he eats then’——and eating is here put as the general type of use and enjoyment)and drinks(this is not superfluous; a man can drink when he can no longer eat; he can quench the fever thirst when food is loathsome, hence drinking is the type of solace)and sees good(as a past tense follows a present, we have the equivalent of our imperfect; and as also the conjunction is repeated before each verb, we may render them as dependent = ‘if he should eat or even drink, and so should have a sight of a good’)in all his toil(or by means of it).A gift(chapterv.19, see also 1 Kingsxiii.17, where it appears that the meaning of the word is a ‘present.’LXX.δόμα)of God it is(feminine, in close agreement withמתת. Here again we think that there may be noticed a moresubjective, or active idea, when the feminine is used, than with corresponding masculines. In this way we may possibly find a grammatical explanation of the anomalous genders so common in Hebrew. In the Pentateuchהואis used of females, and a possible reason may be that in the earlier stages of the language there was less tendency to regard mere grammatical concords and more to follow the logic of the passage. It is worth noticing that grammatical concord as such becomes more and more developed as the language advances, hence Syriac is as strict as Greek or Latin in this respect. Whatever be the reason, however, the fact of such closer connexion is manifest by a careful collation of places).

14 I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor anything taken from it: and God doethit, thatmenshould fear before him.

I am aware also that all which the Almighty effects must be done with regard to all time, that to it nothing can be added, and that from it nothing either can be taken away, and that the Almighty acts that men mayfearin his presence;

(14.)I know how(and as this is a repetition of the formula in verse 12, we may add the word ‘also’ to show that the argument is a continuation of the above)all which does(or is performed by)the Deity(with the article)it is(emphatic, followed by the verb substantive, and equivalent therefore to ‘it really is’) that whichwill be(and so theLXX.render)to the age(to the indefinite æon, or future that is, or rather, for both present and past are included in this word, to the whole course of present existing things’),to it(in the meaning of ‘over,’ or ‘above,’ as something dominating over, which is the signification ofעל)there is nothing to be added(niphal, which could be added)and from it there is nothing to be diminished(Exodusv.8, Jobxv.4, 8, or restrained. The relevancy of this reasoning is now evident. Human labour and anxiety is vain, for the course of providence cannot be altered by it, and if it could, the alteration would be for the worse; what follows makes this more clear),and the Deity works that they may fear(contract relative, with the present as above. We have also the double jod; it occurs with the single jod at chapterviii.12, and again with double jod at chapterxii.5. There is no doubt a difference of meaning in these cases; see a remarkable illustration of this in regard to the verbיקץin Judgesxvi.14 as compared with verse 20 in the same chapter)from before him(מלפניו, with bothמandל, and hence emphatic, ‘inhispresence’).

15 That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth¹that which is past.¹Hebrewthat which is driven away.

15 That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth¹that which is past.

¹Hebrewthat which is driven away.

that what has been is just the present, and whatever is to be is no other than the same present; and that the Almighty will investigate with regard to the wronged.

(15.)Whatis thatwhich was?(the contract relative with the verb substantive,i.e.what isthe past?’)the present state of things(כבר, seechapteri.10, references; the word is a substantive with its ordinary technical meaning as used in this book of the ‘present as it now is,’ and of this he says)it is(emphatic)and that which is to be(appointed so to be. TheLXX.renderὅσα τοῦ γίνεσθαι, literally ‘things of the being,’ ‘or to happen’)the present state of things it was(that is, ‘thisverysame present it is;’ each age being in this respect an exact reproduction of what went before it. It never was subject to human control, and never will be)and the Deity(as this word is repeated in the same clause, and standsas a nominative before the verb, it is especially emphatic)seeks(‘asks after,’ ‘inquires for,’ with the object of not allowing it to pass notice, see 1 Samuelxx.16)with respect to a persecuted(person or thing. He does not allow any person or thing who is wronged to pass without notice).No doubtSt.Jerome has completely hit the point of the argument when he writes, ‘Since all things fade with time, and there is a time of destroying and building, weeping and laughing, for silence and speaking, and those other things which are said concerning time, why do we strive and press forward in vain, and imagine the brief labours of life to be perpetual, nor are we content, according to the Gospel, with the evil of to-day, and so take no thought for the morrow?’

No doubtSt.Jerome has completely hit the point of the argument when he writes, ‘Since all things fade with time, and there is a time of destroying and building, weeping and laughing, for silence and speaking, and those other things which are said concerning time, why do we strive and press forward in vain, and imagine the brief labours of life to be perpetual, nor are we content, according to the Gospel, with the evil of to-day, and so take no thought for the morrow?’

16 ¶ And moreover I saw under the sun the place of judgment,thatwickednesswasthere; and the place of righteousness,thatiniquitywasthere.

Yet, however, I have observed in this work-day world, that in place of justice there is impiety, and in the place even of right there is impiety also.

(16.)And yet(an objection to the foregoing)I have seen under the sun(the limitation here introduced requires special attention)a place of the justice(we must not limit place to meanlocality, but take it generally of state or position,etc., and observe also thatהמשפטhas the article, and is therefore generic);therewasthe wickedness(again generic, and hence having the meaning that in place of justice, as one would expect from the proposition stated above, that the Deity has regard to the wronged, just the reverse occurred; this is again enlarged in the following),and in the place of the right there was the wickedness(the meaning is, that ‘just in the very circumstances under which you would expect right to prevail, there you will find rampant and successful wickedness.’רשעhas the meaning of that kind of ‘wickedness’ which goes out into bold and open transgression, see 2 Samuelxxii.22; Psalmx.2, 3, 4, 13).

17 I said in mine heart, God shall judge the righteous and the wicked: forthere isa time there for every purpose and for every work.

Then said I to myself: With respect to right and wickedness, the Almighty does justice, because there is a time to every providence and dominating over every action which is done there.

(17.)I said, I myself, in my heart(which we have noticed commonly introduces a thought more specious than true),with respect to(את, which theLXX.note with their customaryσὺν)the righteous(i.e.what ismaderight ordoneright; notice the hiphil form as compared with that in the above),and with regard to the impiousalsojudges the Deity, forthere isa time to every providence, and upon(or ‘over,’ which theLXX.note byἐπὶ)all the working there(some copies of theLXX.join this to the next verse, but it is more agreeable to the gist of the passage to refer it to the preceding, as the Masoretic text does, and in this case ‘there’ refers back to the age or period).

18 I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men,¹that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts.¹Or, that they might clear God and see.

18 I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men,¹that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts.

¹Or, that they might clear God and see.

Then said I to myself also: By the reasonings of the human race in respect to any discrimination of them by the Divine Creator, it seems that but brutes are they at best.

(18.)I said, Idid,in my heart(repeating the formula of the preceding verse, and so lending emphasis to it),upon the speech(this phrase occurs three times, and only in this book,viz.here, and chaptersvii.14 andviii.2. Notwithstanding that a similar phrase occurs Psalmcx.4, with the meaning ‘after the order,’LXX.κατὰ τὴν τάξιν, which is apparently sanctioned byNew Testament exegesis, compare Hebrewsv.6,etc.; this is really not to the point, for that isעל דברתי, the plural, while this is singular. According to strict grammarדברתis the construct ofדברה, and should therefore mean ‘reasoning of,’ just as theLXX.render byπερὶ λαλιᾶς, and this, moreover, will make good sense in every passage in which this phrase occurs)of the sons of Adam(i.e.the human race)to the discriminating them(hence theLXX.διακρινεῖ αὐτοὺς, considering that the root isברר, which has the meaning ‘to sift,’ ‘purify by sifting,’ this is the only instance of the infinitive kal. Now we must take this meaning, observing that the pronoun ‘them,’ which is involved in the termination of the verb, is not emphatic; it is the discrimination of God which is the point, the persons on which this is exercised are subordinate. The Jewish commentators for the most part explainלברםas the third person singular preterite ofברהwith the objective pronominal affixם[the only instance, however, in whichברהhas the meaning ‘to choose’ is 1 Samuelxvii.8]; as, however, some copies readלבררם, we can have no difficulty in referring the word to the rootברר, which makes good sense. It is also to be remarked that thoughברםdoes not exist as a root in Hebrew, it does so in Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic, and the meaning is that which is ‘twisted’ or ‘infolded’——compare Ezekielxxvii.24——a ‘garment’ worked in many colours; this would make good sense also in this place, and may possibly have been an intentional equivoke, which is not surely improbable in a sentence in which such manifest artificial alliteration occurs. The meaning then is, that)the Deity(discriminates men, or makes a distinction between them and the lower creatures; but in what respects? This is discussed at length)and to see(but rather might this form of the infinitive be rendered, for which there is sufficient authority, ‘to the appearance’)that they(contract relative, and hence the meaning is that this appearance belongs to them, and them only. In this may be found the key to the whole passage. In appearance there is no choice or discrimination, as subsequent argument proves, because they are)a cattle(singular, following a plural, and thus giving the meaning that each one is so)they to them(which Mendelssohn explains, following theLXX., ‘when left to themselves,’ or, as we should say, as ‘far as they can tell.’ With this Ewald and Ginsburg agree, who consider this latter clause an ironical ‘ipsissimi,’——‘they themselves, indeed!’ Thus, then, the meaning of the whole passage is, ‘I said, yes, I did in my heart again, so far as human reasonings extend concerning any discrimination the Divine Providence has made of them, and as far as appearances go with them, a mere animal is each one of them, so far as they can tell.’ The sentence is very sarcastic and equivocal, as the alliteration at the endshows. Then, again, if we take the rootברםin the sense of ‘web,’ as we use it for something intricate, in that case we should have the equivoke, ‘concerning the web of Divine Providence so far as it appears to them.’ Again, also, the Syriac renders as ifלברםwereלבראם, ‘their Creator,’ which also makes excellent sense; but this, again, may simply be a rendering of another equivoke. Then, again, there is a possible play betweenבהמהand the same word considered asהמהwith the preposition——all these equivokes assist the sense). Consistent with this is what follows:——

19 For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no pre-eminence above a beast: for allisvanity.

For the event which happens to the human race, and the event which happens to the brute-creation, is precisely the same event: the one dies just the same death as the other; and the animal life is the same in both; and the pre-eminence of man over the brute is nothing at all; for all alike are evanescent;

(19.)For a happening of the sons of man, and a happening of the brute creation, and a happeningwhich isone(as we should say, ‘precisely the same’)to them(the threefold repetition ofמקרה, ‘hap,’ brings this word into strong prominence. It means, of coarse, that which absolutely happens or results, or comes to them in the end. This is exactly the same in both cases, as the sequel shows).As is the death of this, so(‘exactly so’) isthe death of this, andthe spirit(or ‘breath’) isone to all, and the pre-eminence(ומותר, this noun occurs in this form only at Proverbsxiv.23, andxxi.5, and evidently with the meaning of advantage or increase of one thing over another. TheLXX.translate this as if it wereומי יתר, ‘and what profit,’ but this is simply to give the sarcastic turn to the sentence)of the man(humanity generally)over the beasts is nothing, for the whole(in its technical sense of the whole of life, as usual) isa vanity(or evanescent).

20 All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.

all alike go to the same place; all alike come from the same dust; and all alike return to the same dust again.

(20.) Andthe whole goes to one place, the whole(repeating this word so as to bring it into strong prominence)was from the dust, and the whole(again repeated, making the fourth time, and so implying universality)returns to the dust.

21 Who knoweth the spirit¹of man that²goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?¹Hebrewof the sons of man.²Hebrewis ascending.

21 Who knoweth the spirit¹of man that²goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?

¹Hebrewof the sons of man.²Hebrewis ascending.

¹Hebrewof the sons of man.

²Hebrewis ascending.

For who can tell how that the spirit of man ascends up on high, and that the spirit of the beast descends downwards to the earth?

(21.)Who knows?(participle, poel, ‘who is knowing?’ or ‘who is there that knows?’ The question does not assert the fact that thereisno difference between man and beast; on the contrary, this clause is so ingeniously contrived as to assert the very reverse).The spirit of the sons of men(in its usual meaning, of the whole human race)is the ascending(with the article, ‘the ascending thing’),it is(emphatic)to the ascent(the repetition of the same root in a different grammatical form gives prominence to this word. The human soul is, it appears, especially an ‘ASCENDINGthing’);and the spiritof thebeastathing descending(participle, poel with article),it is(emphatic, it really is this)[to the] downwards to the earth(theל, to, twice repeated, gives emphasis——‘even to’).

22 Wherefore I perceive thatthere isnothing better, than that a man should rejoice in his own works; for thatishis portion: for who shall bring him to see what shall be after him?

Thus I perceived that there can be no real good above that present-pleasure which man can obtain from his work; as that is what belongs to him: for who can bring him to see what may be the subsequent results?

(22.)And I saw(‘and thus I observed’)how there is nothing of real-good(in the technical sense in which this word occurs so often in this book)from which(full relative,‘more than that in which,’ or ‘above that he should’)he rejoices, eventhe mandoes (humanity generally),in his workings(or what he accomplishes, plural),for(or, asכיhas occurred in the corresponding clause previously, ‘as’)this is(emphatic)his portion(‘lot’ or ‘inheritance,’ singular):for who(כיagain repeated, so we must render it ‘and as none’)can make him come to see(this is not exactly equivalent to ‘make him see;’ it is rather equivalent to ‘who could enable him to see,’ or ‘who could show him some method how he might discover’)in what(‘of what sort’ is that work which)which will be after him(not in respect of time, but results,——‘consequences,’ therefore). Thus Koheleth’s reasoning is quite clear, conclusive, and connected. Intenparticulars man and beast are alike. (1.) The result is the same to both; (2.) their death is alike; (3.) their spirit or animal life is the same; (4.) there is no pre-eminence of the one over the other; (5.) they are alike evanescent; (6.) they all go to the same place; (7.) they come from the same dust; (8.) and they all go to the same dust, and no one can tell (i.e.for certain, or by ordinary observations) that they differ in this; (9.) man’s soul goes up, (10.) and the beast’s goes down. The arrangement of the whole, it will be seen, is highly artificial.The next stage in the argument opens with ‘I turned and saw.’ That is a further observation of a point in which, it may be remarked incidentally, man does differ from the beast: he is the only animal that weeps. The object here is again to show that mere earthly labour, as such, produces no satisfaction. At this point the argument becomes somewhat less sustained, dealing rather with a succession of instances.

The next stage in the argument opens with ‘I turned and saw.’ That is a further observation of a point in which, it may be remarked incidentally, man does differ from the beast: he is the only animal that weeps. The object here is again to show that mere earthly labour, as such, produces no satisfaction. At this point the argument becomes somewhat less sustained, dealing rather with a succession of instances.

Back to Index Next