CHAPTERIV.SO I returned, and considered all the oppressions that are done under the sun: and behold the tears ofsuch as wereoppressed, and they had no comforter; and on the¹side of their oppressorsthere waspower; but they had no comforter.¹Hebrewhand.BUT to return: I am observing this with regard to all those afflictions which happen in this work-day world. For see now the tear of the afflicted for which there is no comforter: and that in the hand of their afflictors there is power, and yet there is no comforter.IV.(1.)Turned I, and I see(the present tense following the perfect is equivalent to our imperfect, ‘I was again regarding;’ because this point has been touched on before, though in another form, atii.22, 23)with respect to all(את כל,LXX.σύμπαντα)the oppressions(with the article; we must not restrict this to the oppression of one man over another, but take the word in its general sense, as from care, sickness, misfortune,etc.)which are done(the niphal has an objective sense, ‘submitted to,’ or ‘are done upon others’)under the sun, and behold(calling attention to a manifest fact)the tear(singular. This turn of thought, which looks upon each tear as a sorrow, a type and sample of all other sorrows, is very beautiful. Compare Revelationvii.17, andxxi.4, Isaiahxxv.8, for the other side of this,——‘God shall wipe away every tear,’etc.)of the oppressings(the same word as before,העשׁקים, which theLXX., renderingad sensum, express by a passive participle; but the meaning of the passage really requires the same word in both clauses: as far as Koheleth’s argument here is concerned, the existence of the oppressor and oppressed are equally mysterious),and there is nothing to them of comfort(theLXX.render by a participle, ‘comforting,’ ‘no one comforts them’),and in the hand of their oppressors might(this means, no doubt, ‘that the power of the oppressors was so great,’ it was impossible to escape them; but hidden underneath is the thought——which again increases the mystery——that there is a mighty hand which could restrain these if it would),and nothing to them of comfort(repeated, and so emphatic).2 Wherefore I praised the dead which are already dead more than the living which are yet alive.Then I for my part pronounced happy the dead who are at this time dead, above the living in their present [query?pleasant!] lives;(2.)Then I praised, Idid (it was a personal matter, a mere opinion of Koheleth’s),with respect to the dead(with the emphaticאת)which at present(כברseechapteri.10, references, which occurs in the same technical sense as before, ‘this present time or state’)are dead(hence the whole is equivalent to ‘which have finished their lives, and now are in the state of the departed’),above the living which they are living as yet(עֲדֶנָהoccurs here only, and only differs in pointing fromעֶדְנָה, which occurs Genesisxviii.12 only, ‘pleasure.’ It will be seen that this unusual word leads to a strange equivoke, which yet helps the sense.)3 Yea, betteris hethan both they, which hath not yet been, who hath not seen the evil work that is done under the sun.and better off than both those who have not yet been: who have not yet had [the pleasure!] to see that work so evil which will be done to them in this hot work-day world.(3.)And good above both(equals our ‘better off than either’)which as yet(עֲדֶןhere only, differing again fromעֵדֶן, ‘delight,’ ‘Eden,’ only in the pointing)have not been which(this being repeated, is equivalent to ‘even those who’)do not seetheworkingssoevil which are worked(niphal, ‘suffered’)under the sun. It is remarkable that in both cases the sentence may be rendered, without any violence to its grammar, with each of these unusual words, translated ‘pleasantness’ and ‘pleasure’ respectively, as they ought to be thus, ‘Then I praised the dead which are now in the state of the dead, above the living, in so far as they are living pleasantly (Hebrew idiom, pleasantness), and better off than both to whom the pleasure is not, who is not seeing that evil work which is done under the sun.’ No one can, of course, for a moment doubt that the true meaning is given by the former rendering, while this latter is only an equivoke, but it is an equivoke which helps the sense, and gives a peculiar sarcastic tone to the whole. I have endeavoured to represent this in the paraphrase by an equivoke between the words ‘pleasant’ and ‘present,’ which I amalmost inclined to withdraw, so feebly does it render the grave biting sarcasm of the original.Koheleth now touches on another instance of unsatisfactoriness which besets successful toil.4 ¶ Again, I considered all travail, and¹every right work, that²for this a man is envied of his neighbour. Thisisalso vanity and vexation of spirit.¹Hebrewall rightness of work.²Hebrewthis is the envy of a man from his neighbour.I have furthermore myself observed of all toil, when it comes to any successful issue, what envy [hence] arises of a man from his fellows; and this is another instance of evanescence and vexation of spirit.(4.)And I have seen myself(equivalent to ‘I have also observed’),with respect to the whole toil(in respect ‘of all toil whatsoever.’ Notice the twice-repeated emphaticאתandσὺν),and with respect to all success whatever(that is, toil or pains which come to a successful issue——כשרוןoccursii.21, here, andv.11 (10), with the meaning ‘success.’ The verb occursxi.6,x.10; and the only other place in which the root occurs is Estherviii.5. It has been said in consequence to be a late word; but the force of any reasoning, derived from its occurrence, is much weakened by noticing that it is a technical term, and is used to signify the ‘successful issue’ which results. Seechapterxi.6, which is decisive. TheLXX.render byἀνδρείαν, ‘bravery,’ which is also the rendering at chapterv.11)of the working(המעשה, in the usual sense of the working, or what is accomplished),for(or ‘how,’ rather)it is(feminine pronoun emphatic, seechapteriii.13)envy(or jealousy)of a man(notאדםhere, butאיש, ‘any one,’ or ‘one.’ German, ‘man.’ The meaning then is, ‘one’s jealousy’)over his neighbour.(Thus the whole sentiment is, that Koheleth had observed that even whentoil, the trouble attending labour, seemed to have a successful result, it produced more envy than pleasure, which Koheleth expresses by the pregnant words, ‘It is just the envy of a man over his neighbour.’)Also thisisa vanityandvexation of spirit(i.e.is another instance of it).5 The fool foldeth his hands together, and eateth his own flesh.The befooled wrings his hands and eats his heart,(5.)The fool(i.e.the ‘befooled,’הכסיל, doubtless by envy)folds(occursiii.5, 2 Kingsiv.16; or perhaps ‘wrings’)his hands and eats his flesh. (It has been much disputed what we are to understand by this figure; but Proverbsvi.10,xxiv.23——where the same formula occurs to express the idleness of the sluggard——seems conclusive as to the meaning of folding his hands, as also ‘flesh’ in this book has a technical meaning, ‘the sensuous nature’——seechapterii.3. We can best understand it of the self-mortification of envy: thus the connexion will be apparent both with what went before, and is to follow).6 Betterisan handfulwithquietness, than both the hands fullwithtravail and vexation of spirit.and yet a real good is but a fistful of rest; better than both palms full of toil and vexation of spirit.(6.)Good(i.e.a real good)filling a hand(כף, ‘the open palm’)with rest, than to fill(which repeated twice is emphatic) thedouble hand(חפניםoccurs only Exodusix.8, Leviticusxvi.12, Proverbsxxx.4, Ezekielx.2, 7,——the ‘two hands’ held together so as to hold the most they can)of a toilandvexation of spirit.7 ¶ Then I returned, and I saw vanity under the sun.Furthermore I have observed also another instance of evanescence within this hot work-day world.(7.)And I turned, I myself, and Isee(the same formula introducing another instance of the same kind)a vanity(an instance of vanity)under the sun.8 There is onealone, andthere isnot a second; yea, he hath neither child nor brother: yetis thereno end of all his labour; neither is his eye satisfied with riches; neithersaith he, For whom do I labour, and bereave my soul of good? Thisisalso vanity, yea, itisa sore travail.There exists a solitary who has no fellow; neither son nor brother has he, yet there is no end to all his toils: and besides no satisfaction to himself in all his wealth: who never asks, ‘For whom am I now toiling and depriving myself of good?’ This is an instance of evanescence and uncertainty, which is evil and nothing else.(8.)There is one, and there is not a second(evidently meaning that there is one who is quite alone in the world).Moreover, son and brother there is not to him(i.e.he has emphatically neither posterity nor relationship to account for this desire of accumulating which Koheleth is subsequently about to bring forward: his love of accumulation is purelyselfish),and there is nothing of an end(אין, ‘nothing,’ is repeated three times: ‘Noend at all’ is therefore the meaning. This continual harping on thenothingnessof the miser’s state is an exceedingly effective piece of oratory)to all his toil. Moreover, his eyes(altered by the Masorets to the singular, but without much taste: ‘both his eyes devour his wealth’)does not satisfy(feminine singular; hence, as theLXX.show, the word must refer to eyes as its subject; they render ‘is not filled with,’ for it is a case of a distributive plural)wealth. And for whom do I(the oratio obliqua is dropped, and the directa used in its place; or perhaps with this meaning does this ego)toil, and depriving my soul(with the usual meaning, ‘myself’)of good?(abstract.)Also thisis avanity andananxietywhichan evil is(emphatic) ‘indeed’ (equivalent to ‘an evil and nothing else,’ or ‘is simply an evil’; other anxieties may be beneficial, this cannot be. This is the reason why we haveרע, and notרעה, the abstract, as we should have expected).9 ¶ Twoarebetter than one; because they have a good reward for their labour.Good things are companionships, and better than solitaries; for these indeed have some reward for their labour.(9.)Good(things) arethe doubles(i.e.union in the abstract),better than the single(again, for the same reason, with the article),because(literally ‘which,’ the full relative, and referring back to the whole idea)there is(exists, ‘because there exists,’)a reward, a good(i.e.a real good; for to love one’s neighbour as one’s self is one of the real good things of this world)in the toil of them.10 For if they fall, the one will lift up his fellow: but woe to himthat isalone when he falleth; forhe hathnot another to help him up.Because if one falls, then his fellow sets him up again: but sad is it to the solitary when he slips, for there is no second to set him up.(10.)For if they fall, the one(singular,following plural, either one or other fall, that is) thenis caused to stand his fellow(Judgesxx.11, Psalmsxlv.7),and woe to him(inthisform at this place only, perhaps because of the play upon the wordאֵי לוֹ‘where is he?’ an equivoke which helps the sense)the single one which falls(contracted relative, ‘when or as he falls,’)and there is no second to make him stand.11 Again, if two lie together, then they have heat: but how can one be warmalone?Moreover, if two lie together they keep each other warm: but how can one be warm alone?(11.)Moreover(an additional instance of the advantage of companionship, taken from the passive side, as the other was from the active side of this matter),if they lie down, two of them, and heat to them(i.e.‘there is certainly warmth for them’),but to the single one, how can he be warmed?12 And if one prevail against him, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken.And where one would fail, two will prevail; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken.(12.)And if they prevail over(impersonal,anyprevail over)the single, the doubles will stand before him(plural, the idea is that there are two to one),and the cordwhich isthe triplex is not in haste broken(Jeremiahviii.16; Judgesxvi.9).13 Betterisa poor and a wise child than an old and foolish king,¹who will no more be admonished.¹Hebrewwho knoweth not to be admonished.A Poor and Prudent young man is better than a Perverse old king, who cannot be prevailed on to listen to a warning.(13.)Good is a child, poor(מסכן, occurs chapteriv.13,ix.15, 16 only; the root occurs in the sense ‘profitable,’ see Jobxxii.2; the idea seems to be, that kind of poverty which is economical and sparing)and wise from(‘above,’ that is; the ordinaryמ־of comparison;) aking old(זקן, the alliteration betweenmiscanandzakangives pungency. We have rendered this in the paraphrase by a corresponding alliteration)and befooled, who does not knowhowtobewarned as yet.(The allusion here to Solomon is palpable, and this may account for the apparently redundantעוד, ‘as yet,’ at the end of the sentence.)14 For out of prison he cometh to reign; whereas alsohe that isborn in his kingdom becometh poor.For from a prison-house of plotters he comes forth to reign, and beside in his kingdom is the birthplace of meanness.(14.)For from the house of rebels(הסוריםis considered a contraction forהאסורים, ‘prison;’ but, to say the least, this is a violation of the critical canon, which bids us prefer the harder reading. That the derivation fromסור, ‘to turn aside,’ hence ‘revolters,’ is contrary to the pointing, is not a valid objection, because the Masorets pointed as they did to explain a difficulty; so also theLXX., who readδεσμῶνandδεσμίων. If possible, we ought to preserve intact the unpointed text. The exact and literal meaning is, as the text stands, ‘from the house of the turners-aside,’i.e.those conspirators and wicked men, sycophants, who will be flattering him to promote their own interest, and this was exactly Solomon’s case)he goes out to reign, for(the secondכי, with the meaning ‘so’)also(‘moreover;’ this particle, as we have seen, usually introduces an additional reason, confirming the one which went before)in his kingdom is begotten(♦נולד,noled, a play uponילד,jeled, above)want(רשis poverty in the sense of indigence and meanness; compare 1 Samuelxviii.23, and Proverbsxix.1, 7, 22; as, however,רשhas the form of a concrete, we must remember that it involves the idea of a poor man, hence there is a sarcastic ambiguity, heightened by alliteration. Take theLXX.and Masorets’ sense, which is merely to allow the obvious play betweenהסוריםandהאסורים, and the sentiment is true, and, curiously enough, equally corresponds with the history).♦“נלד” replaced with “נולד”The following passage is one of great difficulty, but a very careful attention to its precise wording and the equivoke it contains, may perhaps afford a solution.15 I considered all the living which walk under the sun, with the second child that shall stand up in his stead.I have observed of all lives whatsoever, as they are progressing in this work-day world, in regard to any successors which may arise in their places,(15.)I have seen(‘observed as matter of fact’),with respect to all the lives(which theLXX.renderσύμπαντας τοὺς ζῶντας),the proceeding ones(participle, piel plural with the article——LXX.τοὺς περιπατοῦντας——occurs here and Psalmsciv.3, Proverbsvi.11; ‘as they are advancing’ must be the meaning, and hence the observation was made with regard to theprogressof these lives),under the sun(that is, in this stage of their existence; the limitation here is excessively important,)together with the child(with the article, generic, and giving the meaning of that which is ‘begotten of them,’ of course children primarily, but not exclusively; the ‘heir’ or ‘successors’ would represent the idea),the second(i.e.theimmediatesuccessor)who stands in their stead(plural, which nevertheless theLXX.renderἀντ’ αὐτοῦ, and rightly, because it is an instance of a distributive plural, with regard toהילד).16There isno end of all the people,evenof all that have been before them: they also that come after shall not rejoice in him. Surely this alsoisvanity and vexation of spirit.that no result was ever reached by the [moiling] multitude in the past: and as to what succeeds them, they will have no [earthly] pleasure in that. Another instance of evanescence and vexing of spirit.(16.)There is nothingofan end(i.e.‘result,’ occurs chapteriv.8, 16)to all the people(with the article,τῷ παντὶ λαῷ,LXX.——and in this book it appears as a collective for the human race——seechapterxii.9),to all(repeated, hence with the meaning, ‘that is to all those’)that(full relative)were before them(but ‘before’ in the sense of in their ‘presence,’ not in the sense of ‘before their time’),moreover(introducing an additional reason),the succeeding ones——(see 2 Chroniclesix.29,xii.15, which will give the exact meaning)not(rather emphatic from its position, ‘not at all’)will they(i.e.the people before them)rejoice in it(‘it’ is a singular following a plural, and hence a distributive, ‘any successor’)for also thisisa vanity(an instance of evanescence)and vexing(not ‘vexation,’ because this comes from within)of spirit.Thus the sense is clear; it is the conclusion of the argument. Koheleth’s observation has regard to the progress of lives in relation to anything that may or is to be produced by them in the way of heritage——or, in other words, he asks how farthe present state of things can be explained on the theory that it is a working for posterity, and he shows that this is not an explanation, for there is no result obtained by the collective people in the present, because each age is the same morally as that which went before it; while, of course, with regard to what is to succeed, the present generation cannot rejoice in that, because they will be all dead, and as the argument is limited to what takes place under the sun, so all so-called progress is but an instance of evanescence. The idea, if not that contained in the observation of one who selfishly observed, when requested to care for posterity, ‘that as posterity had done nothing for him, he did not see why he should do anything for posterity,’ rests on the same facts.The sentence also, it appears, contains a remarkable equivoke.לכל העם לכלsounds very likeלכל העמל כל, and this division of the words will make such good and pungent sense that we can hardly imagine that the equivoke was unintentional. The equivoke is sought to be rendered in the paraphrase by the addition of the words enclosed in the brackets.At this point we come to another division in the book. Certain practical exhortations follow, deduced from the previous arguments, concerning human conduct, under the circumstances above set forth.
SO I returned, and considered all the oppressions that are done under the sun: and behold the tears ofsuch as wereoppressed, and they had no comforter; and on the¹side of their oppressorsthere waspower; but they had no comforter.¹Hebrewhand.
SO I returned, and considered all the oppressions that are done under the sun: and behold the tears ofsuch as wereoppressed, and they had no comforter; and on the¹side of their oppressorsthere waspower; but they had no comforter.
¹Hebrewhand.
¹Hebrewhand.
¹Hebrewhand.
BUT to return: I am observing this with regard to all those afflictions which happen in this work-day world. For see now the tear of the afflicted for which there is no comforter: and that in the hand of their afflictors there is power, and yet there is no comforter.
BUT to return: I am observing this with regard to all those afflictions which happen in this work-day world. For see now the tear of the afflicted for which there is no comforter: and that in the hand of their afflictors there is power, and yet there is no comforter.
IV.(1.)Turned I, and I see(the present tense following the perfect is equivalent to our imperfect, ‘I was again regarding;’ because this point has been touched on before, though in another form, atii.22, 23)with respect to all(את כל,LXX.σύμπαντα)the oppressions(with the article; we must not restrict this to the oppression of one man over another, but take the word in its general sense, as from care, sickness, misfortune,etc.)which are done(the niphal has an objective sense, ‘submitted to,’ or ‘are done upon others’)under the sun, and behold(calling attention to a manifest fact)the tear(singular. This turn of thought, which looks upon each tear as a sorrow, a type and sample of all other sorrows, is very beautiful. Compare Revelationvii.17, andxxi.4, Isaiahxxv.8, for the other side of this,——‘God shall wipe away every tear,’etc.)of the oppressings(the same word as before,העשׁקים, which theLXX., renderingad sensum, express by a passive participle; but the meaning of the passage really requires the same word in both clauses: as far as Koheleth’s argument here is concerned, the existence of the oppressor and oppressed are equally mysterious),and there is nothing to them of comfort(theLXX.render by a participle, ‘comforting,’ ‘no one comforts them’),and in the hand of their oppressors might(this means, no doubt, ‘that the power of the oppressors was so great,’ it was impossible to escape them; but hidden underneath is the thought——which again increases the mystery——that there is a mighty hand which could restrain these if it would),and nothing to them of comfort(repeated, and so emphatic).
IV.(1.)Turned I, and I see(the present tense following the perfect is equivalent to our imperfect, ‘I was again regarding;’ because this point has been touched on before, though in another form, atii.22, 23)with respect to all(את כל,LXX.σύμπαντα)the oppressions(with the article; we must not restrict this to the oppression of one man over another, but take the word in its general sense, as from care, sickness, misfortune,etc.)which are done(the niphal has an objective sense, ‘submitted to,’ or ‘are done upon others’)under the sun, and behold(calling attention to a manifest fact)the tear(singular. This turn of thought, which looks upon each tear as a sorrow, a type and sample of all other sorrows, is very beautiful. Compare Revelationvii.17, andxxi.4, Isaiahxxv.8, for the other side of this,——‘God shall wipe away every tear,’etc.)of the oppressings(the same word as before,העשׁקים, which theLXX., renderingad sensum, express by a passive participle; but the meaning of the passage really requires the same word in both clauses: as far as Koheleth’s argument here is concerned, the existence of the oppressor and oppressed are equally mysterious),and there is nothing to them of comfort(theLXX.render by a participle, ‘comforting,’ ‘no one comforts them’),and in the hand of their oppressors might(this means, no doubt, ‘that the power of the oppressors was so great,’ it was impossible to escape them; but hidden underneath is the thought——which again increases the mystery——that there is a mighty hand which could restrain these if it would),and nothing to them of comfort(repeated, and so emphatic).
2 Wherefore I praised the dead which are already dead more than the living which are yet alive.
2 Wherefore I praised the dead which are already dead more than the living which are yet alive.
Then I for my part pronounced happy the dead who are at this time dead, above the living in their present [query?pleasant!] lives;
Then I for my part pronounced happy the dead who are at this time dead, above the living in their present [query?pleasant!] lives;
(2.)Then I praised, Idid (it was a personal matter, a mere opinion of Koheleth’s),with respect to the dead(with the emphaticאת)which at present(כברseechapteri.10, references, which occurs in the same technical sense as before, ‘this present time or state’)are dead(hence the whole is equivalent to ‘which have finished their lives, and now are in the state of the departed’),above the living which they are living as yet(עֲדֶנָהoccurs here only, and only differs in pointing fromעֶדְנָה, which occurs Genesisxviii.12 only, ‘pleasure.’ It will be seen that this unusual word leads to a strange equivoke, which yet helps the sense.)
(2.)Then I praised, Idid (it was a personal matter, a mere opinion of Koheleth’s),with respect to the dead(with the emphaticאת)which at present(כברseechapteri.10, references, which occurs in the same technical sense as before, ‘this present time or state’)are dead(hence the whole is equivalent to ‘which have finished their lives, and now are in the state of the departed’),above the living which they are living as yet(עֲדֶנָהoccurs here only, and only differs in pointing fromעֶדְנָה, which occurs Genesisxviii.12 only, ‘pleasure.’ It will be seen that this unusual word leads to a strange equivoke, which yet helps the sense.)
3 Yea, betteris hethan both they, which hath not yet been, who hath not seen the evil work that is done under the sun.
3 Yea, betteris hethan both they, which hath not yet been, who hath not seen the evil work that is done under the sun.
and better off than both those who have not yet been: who have not yet had [the pleasure!] to see that work so evil which will be done to them in this hot work-day world.
and better off than both those who have not yet been: who have not yet had [the pleasure!] to see that work so evil which will be done to them in this hot work-day world.
(3.)And good above both(equals our ‘better off than either’)which as yet(עֲדֶןhere only, differing again fromעֵדֶן, ‘delight,’ ‘Eden,’ only in the pointing)have not been which(this being repeated, is equivalent to ‘even those who’)do not seetheworkingssoevil which are worked(niphal, ‘suffered’)under the sun. It is remarkable that in both cases the sentence may be rendered, without any violence to its grammar, with each of these unusual words, translated ‘pleasantness’ and ‘pleasure’ respectively, as they ought to be thus, ‘Then I praised the dead which are now in the state of the dead, above the living, in so far as they are living pleasantly (Hebrew idiom, pleasantness), and better off than both to whom the pleasure is not, who is not seeing that evil work which is done under the sun.’ No one can, of course, for a moment doubt that the true meaning is given by the former rendering, while this latter is only an equivoke, but it is an equivoke which helps the sense, and gives a peculiar sarcastic tone to the whole. I have endeavoured to represent this in the paraphrase by an equivoke between the words ‘pleasant’ and ‘present,’ which I amalmost inclined to withdraw, so feebly does it render the grave biting sarcasm of the original.Koheleth now touches on another instance of unsatisfactoriness which besets successful toil.
(3.)And good above both(equals our ‘better off than either’)which as yet(עֲדֶןhere only, differing again fromעֵדֶן, ‘delight,’ ‘Eden,’ only in the pointing)have not been which(this being repeated, is equivalent to ‘even those who’)do not seetheworkingssoevil which are worked(niphal, ‘suffered’)under the sun. It is remarkable that in both cases the sentence may be rendered, without any violence to its grammar, with each of these unusual words, translated ‘pleasantness’ and ‘pleasure’ respectively, as they ought to be thus, ‘Then I praised the dead which are now in the state of the dead, above the living, in so far as they are living pleasantly (Hebrew idiom, pleasantness), and better off than both to whom the pleasure is not, who is not seeing that evil work which is done under the sun.’ No one can, of course, for a moment doubt that the true meaning is given by the former rendering, while this latter is only an equivoke, but it is an equivoke which helps the sense, and gives a peculiar sarcastic tone to the whole. I have endeavoured to represent this in the paraphrase by an equivoke between the words ‘pleasant’ and ‘present,’ which I amalmost inclined to withdraw, so feebly does it render the grave biting sarcasm of the original.
Koheleth now touches on another instance of unsatisfactoriness which besets successful toil.
4 ¶ Again, I considered all travail, and¹every right work, that²for this a man is envied of his neighbour. Thisisalso vanity and vexation of spirit.¹Hebrewall rightness of work.²Hebrewthis is the envy of a man from his neighbour.
4 ¶ Again, I considered all travail, and¹every right work, that²for this a man is envied of his neighbour. Thisisalso vanity and vexation of spirit.
¹Hebrewall rightness of work.²Hebrewthis is the envy of a man from his neighbour.
¹Hebrewall rightness of work.
¹Hebrewall rightness of work.
²Hebrewthis is the envy of a man from his neighbour.
²Hebrewthis is the envy of a man from his neighbour.
I have furthermore myself observed of all toil, when it comes to any successful issue, what envy [hence] arises of a man from his fellows; and this is another instance of evanescence and vexation of spirit.
I have furthermore myself observed of all toil, when it comes to any successful issue, what envy [hence] arises of a man from his fellows; and this is another instance of evanescence and vexation of spirit.
(4.)And I have seen myself(equivalent to ‘I have also observed’),with respect to the whole toil(in respect ‘of all toil whatsoever.’ Notice the twice-repeated emphaticאתandσὺν),and with respect to all success whatever(that is, toil or pains which come to a successful issue——כשרוןoccursii.21, here, andv.11 (10), with the meaning ‘success.’ The verb occursxi.6,x.10; and the only other place in which the root occurs is Estherviii.5. It has been said in consequence to be a late word; but the force of any reasoning, derived from its occurrence, is much weakened by noticing that it is a technical term, and is used to signify the ‘successful issue’ which results. Seechapterxi.6, which is decisive. TheLXX.render byἀνδρείαν, ‘bravery,’ which is also the rendering at chapterv.11)of the working(המעשה, in the usual sense of the working, or what is accomplished),for(or ‘how,’ rather)it is(feminine pronoun emphatic, seechapteriii.13)envy(or jealousy)of a man(notאדםhere, butאיש, ‘any one,’ or ‘one.’ German, ‘man.’ The meaning then is, ‘one’s jealousy’)over his neighbour.(Thus the whole sentiment is, that Koheleth had observed that even whentoil, the trouble attending labour, seemed to have a successful result, it produced more envy than pleasure, which Koheleth expresses by the pregnant words, ‘It is just the envy of a man over his neighbour.’)Also thisisa vanityandvexation of spirit(i.e.is another instance of it).
(4.)And I have seen myself(equivalent to ‘I have also observed’),with respect to the whole toil(in respect ‘of all toil whatsoever.’ Notice the twice-repeated emphaticאתandσὺν),and with respect to all success whatever(that is, toil or pains which come to a successful issue——כשרוןoccursii.21, here, andv.11 (10), with the meaning ‘success.’ The verb occursxi.6,x.10; and the only other place in which the root occurs is Estherviii.5. It has been said in consequence to be a late word; but the force of any reasoning, derived from its occurrence, is much weakened by noticing that it is a technical term, and is used to signify the ‘successful issue’ which results. Seechapterxi.6, which is decisive. TheLXX.render byἀνδρείαν, ‘bravery,’ which is also the rendering at chapterv.11)of the working(המעשה, in the usual sense of the working, or what is accomplished),for(or ‘how,’ rather)it is(feminine pronoun emphatic, seechapteriii.13)envy(or jealousy)of a man(notאדםhere, butאיש, ‘any one,’ or ‘one.’ German, ‘man.’ The meaning then is, ‘one’s jealousy’)over his neighbour.(Thus the whole sentiment is, that Koheleth had observed that even whentoil, the trouble attending labour, seemed to have a successful result, it produced more envy than pleasure, which Koheleth expresses by the pregnant words, ‘It is just the envy of a man over his neighbour.’)Also thisisa vanityandvexation of spirit(i.e.is another instance of it).
5 The fool foldeth his hands together, and eateth his own flesh.
5 The fool foldeth his hands together, and eateth his own flesh.
The befooled wrings his hands and eats his heart,
The befooled wrings his hands and eats his heart,
(5.)The fool(i.e.the ‘befooled,’הכסיל, doubtless by envy)folds(occursiii.5, 2 Kingsiv.16; or perhaps ‘wrings’)his hands and eats his flesh. (It has been much disputed what we are to understand by this figure; but Proverbsvi.10,xxiv.23——where the same formula occurs to express the idleness of the sluggard——seems conclusive as to the meaning of folding his hands, as also ‘flesh’ in this book has a technical meaning, ‘the sensuous nature’——seechapterii.3. We can best understand it of the self-mortification of envy: thus the connexion will be apparent both with what went before, and is to follow).
(5.)The fool(i.e.the ‘befooled,’הכסיל, doubtless by envy)folds(occursiii.5, 2 Kingsiv.16; or perhaps ‘wrings’)his hands and eats his flesh. (It has been much disputed what we are to understand by this figure; but Proverbsvi.10,xxiv.23——where the same formula occurs to express the idleness of the sluggard——seems conclusive as to the meaning of folding his hands, as also ‘flesh’ in this book has a technical meaning, ‘the sensuous nature’——seechapterii.3. We can best understand it of the self-mortification of envy: thus the connexion will be apparent both with what went before, and is to follow).
6 Betterisan handfulwithquietness, than both the hands fullwithtravail and vexation of spirit.
6 Betterisan handfulwithquietness, than both the hands fullwithtravail and vexation of spirit.
and yet a real good is but a fistful of rest; better than both palms full of toil and vexation of spirit.
and yet a real good is but a fistful of rest; better than both palms full of toil and vexation of spirit.
(6.)Good(i.e.a real good)filling a hand(כף, ‘the open palm’)with rest, than to fill(which repeated twice is emphatic) thedouble hand(חפניםoccurs only Exodusix.8, Leviticusxvi.12, Proverbsxxx.4, Ezekielx.2, 7,——the ‘two hands’ held together so as to hold the most they can)of a toilandvexation of spirit.
(6.)Good(i.e.a real good)filling a hand(כף, ‘the open palm’)with rest, than to fill(which repeated twice is emphatic) thedouble hand(חפניםoccurs only Exodusix.8, Leviticusxvi.12, Proverbsxxx.4, Ezekielx.2, 7,——the ‘two hands’ held together so as to hold the most they can)of a toilandvexation of spirit.
7 ¶ Then I returned, and I saw vanity under the sun.
7 ¶ Then I returned, and I saw vanity under the sun.
Furthermore I have observed also another instance of evanescence within this hot work-day world.
Furthermore I have observed also another instance of evanescence within this hot work-day world.
(7.)And I turned, I myself, and Isee(the same formula introducing another instance of the same kind)a vanity(an instance of vanity)under the sun.
(7.)And I turned, I myself, and Isee(the same formula introducing another instance of the same kind)a vanity(an instance of vanity)under the sun.
8 There is onealone, andthere isnot a second; yea, he hath neither child nor brother: yetis thereno end of all his labour; neither is his eye satisfied with riches; neithersaith he, For whom do I labour, and bereave my soul of good? Thisisalso vanity, yea, itisa sore travail.
8 There is onealone, andthere isnot a second; yea, he hath neither child nor brother: yetis thereno end of all his labour; neither is his eye satisfied with riches; neithersaith he, For whom do I labour, and bereave my soul of good? Thisisalso vanity, yea, itisa sore travail.
There exists a solitary who has no fellow; neither son nor brother has he, yet there is no end to all his toils: and besides no satisfaction to himself in all his wealth: who never asks, ‘For whom am I now toiling and depriving myself of good?’ This is an instance of evanescence and uncertainty, which is evil and nothing else.
There exists a solitary who has no fellow; neither son nor brother has he, yet there is no end to all his toils: and besides no satisfaction to himself in all his wealth: who never asks, ‘For whom am I now toiling and depriving myself of good?’ This is an instance of evanescence and uncertainty, which is evil and nothing else.
(8.)There is one, and there is not a second(evidently meaning that there is one who is quite alone in the world).Moreover, son and brother there is not to him(i.e.he has emphatically neither posterity nor relationship to account for this desire of accumulating which Koheleth is subsequently about to bring forward: his love of accumulation is purelyselfish),and there is nothing of an end(אין, ‘nothing,’ is repeated three times: ‘Noend at all’ is therefore the meaning. This continual harping on thenothingnessof the miser’s state is an exceedingly effective piece of oratory)to all his toil. Moreover, his eyes(altered by the Masorets to the singular, but without much taste: ‘both his eyes devour his wealth’)does not satisfy(feminine singular; hence, as theLXX.show, the word must refer to eyes as its subject; they render ‘is not filled with,’ for it is a case of a distributive plural)wealth. And for whom do I(the oratio obliqua is dropped, and the directa used in its place; or perhaps with this meaning does this ego)toil, and depriving my soul(with the usual meaning, ‘myself’)of good?(abstract.)Also thisis avanity andananxietywhichan evil is(emphatic) ‘indeed’ (equivalent to ‘an evil and nothing else,’ or ‘is simply an evil’; other anxieties may be beneficial, this cannot be. This is the reason why we haveרע, and notרעה, the abstract, as we should have expected).
(8.)There is one, and there is not a second(evidently meaning that there is one who is quite alone in the world).Moreover, son and brother there is not to him(i.e.he has emphatically neither posterity nor relationship to account for this desire of accumulating which Koheleth is subsequently about to bring forward: his love of accumulation is purelyselfish),and there is nothing of an end(אין, ‘nothing,’ is repeated three times: ‘Noend at all’ is therefore the meaning. This continual harping on thenothingnessof the miser’s state is an exceedingly effective piece of oratory)to all his toil. Moreover, his eyes(altered by the Masorets to the singular, but without much taste: ‘both his eyes devour his wealth’)does not satisfy(feminine singular; hence, as theLXX.show, the word must refer to eyes as its subject; they render ‘is not filled with,’ for it is a case of a distributive plural)wealth. And for whom do I(the oratio obliqua is dropped, and the directa used in its place; or perhaps with this meaning does this ego)toil, and depriving my soul(with the usual meaning, ‘myself’)of good?(abstract.)Also thisis avanity andananxietywhichan evil is(emphatic) ‘indeed’ (equivalent to ‘an evil and nothing else,’ or ‘is simply an evil’; other anxieties may be beneficial, this cannot be. This is the reason why we haveרע, and notרעה, the abstract, as we should have expected).
9 ¶ Twoarebetter than one; because they have a good reward for their labour.
9 ¶ Twoarebetter than one; because they have a good reward for their labour.
Good things are companionships, and better than solitaries; for these indeed have some reward for their labour.
Good things are companionships, and better than solitaries; for these indeed have some reward for their labour.
(9.)Good(things) arethe doubles(i.e.union in the abstract),better than the single(again, for the same reason, with the article),because(literally ‘which,’ the full relative, and referring back to the whole idea)there is(exists, ‘because there exists,’)a reward, a good(i.e.a real good; for to love one’s neighbour as one’s self is one of the real good things of this world)in the toil of them.
(9.)Good(things) arethe doubles(i.e.union in the abstract),better than the single(again, for the same reason, with the article),because(literally ‘which,’ the full relative, and referring back to the whole idea)there is(exists, ‘because there exists,’)a reward, a good(i.e.a real good; for to love one’s neighbour as one’s self is one of the real good things of this world)in the toil of them.
10 For if they fall, the one will lift up his fellow: but woe to himthat isalone when he falleth; forhe hathnot another to help him up.
10 For if they fall, the one will lift up his fellow: but woe to himthat isalone when he falleth; forhe hathnot another to help him up.
Because if one falls, then his fellow sets him up again: but sad is it to the solitary when he slips, for there is no second to set him up.
Because if one falls, then his fellow sets him up again: but sad is it to the solitary when he slips, for there is no second to set him up.
(10.)For if they fall, the one(singular,following plural, either one or other fall, that is) thenis caused to stand his fellow(Judgesxx.11, Psalmsxlv.7),and woe to him(inthisform at this place only, perhaps because of the play upon the wordאֵי לוֹ‘where is he?’ an equivoke which helps the sense)the single one which falls(contracted relative, ‘when or as he falls,’)and there is no second to make him stand.
(10.)For if they fall, the one(singular,following plural, either one or other fall, that is) thenis caused to stand his fellow(Judgesxx.11, Psalmsxlv.7),and woe to him(inthisform at this place only, perhaps because of the play upon the wordאֵי לוֹ‘where is he?’ an equivoke which helps the sense)the single one which falls(contracted relative, ‘when or as he falls,’)and there is no second to make him stand.
11 Again, if two lie together, then they have heat: but how can one be warmalone?
11 Again, if two lie together, then they have heat: but how can one be warmalone?
Moreover, if two lie together they keep each other warm: but how can one be warm alone?
Moreover, if two lie together they keep each other warm: but how can one be warm alone?
(11.)Moreover(an additional instance of the advantage of companionship, taken from the passive side, as the other was from the active side of this matter),if they lie down, two of them, and heat to them(i.e.‘there is certainly warmth for them’),but to the single one, how can he be warmed?
(11.)Moreover(an additional instance of the advantage of companionship, taken from the passive side, as the other was from the active side of this matter),if they lie down, two of them, and heat to them(i.e.‘there is certainly warmth for them’),but to the single one, how can he be warmed?
12 And if one prevail against him, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken.
12 And if one prevail against him, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken.
And where one would fail, two will prevail; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken.
And where one would fail, two will prevail; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken.
(12.)And if they prevail over(impersonal,anyprevail over)the single, the doubles will stand before him(plural, the idea is that there are two to one),and the cordwhich isthe triplex is not in haste broken(Jeremiahviii.16; Judgesxvi.9).
(12.)And if they prevail over(impersonal,anyprevail over)the single, the doubles will stand before him(plural, the idea is that there are two to one),and the cordwhich isthe triplex is not in haste broken(Jeremiahviii.16; Judgesxvi.9).
13 Betterisa poor and a wise child than an old and foolish king,¹who will no more be admonished.¹Hebrewwho knoweth not to be admonished.
13 Betterisa poor and a wise child than an old and foolish king,¹who will no more be admonished.
¹Hebrewwho knoweth not to be admonished.
¹Hebrewwho knoweth not to be admonished.
¹Hebrewwho knoweth not to be admonished.
A Poor and Prudent young man is better than a Perverse old king, who cannot be prevailed on to listen to a warning.
A Poor and Prudent young man is better than a Perverse old king, who cannot be prevailed on to listen to a warning.
(13.)Good is a child, poor(מסכן, occurs chapteriv.13,ix.15, 16 only; the root occurs in the sense ‘profitable,’ see Jobxxii.2; the idea seems to be, that kind of poverty which is economical and sparing)and wise from(‘above,’ that is; the ordinaryמ־of comparison;) aking old(זקן, the alliteration betweenmiscanandzakangives pungency. We have rendered this in the paraphrase by a corresponding alliteration)and befooled, who does not knowhowtobewarned as yet.(The allusion here to Solomon is palpable, and this may account for the apparently redundantעוד, ‘as yet,’ at the end of the sentence.)
(13.)Good is a child, poor(מסכן, occurs chapteriv.13,ix.15, 16 only; the root occurs in the sense ‘profitable,’ see Jobxxii.2; the idea seems to be, that kind of poverty which is economical and sparing)and wise from(‘above,’ that is; the ordinaryמ־of comparison;) aking old(זקן, the alliteration betweenmiscanandzakangives pungency. We have rendered this in the paraphrase by a corresponding alliteration)and befooled, who does not knowhowtobewarned as yet.(The allusion here to Solomon is palpable, and this may account for the apparently redundantעוד, ‘as yet,’ at the end of the sentence.)
14 For out of prison he cometh to reign; whereas alsohe that isborn in his kingdom becometh poor.
14 For out of prison he cometh to reign; whereas alsohe that isborn in his kingdom becometh poor.
For from a prison-house of plotters he comes forth to reign, and beside in his kingdom is the birthplace of meanness.
For from a prison-house of plotters he comes forth to reign, and beside in his kingdom is the birthplace of meanness.
(14.)For from the house of rebels(הסוריםis considered a contraction forהאסורים, ‘prison;’ but, to say the least, this is a violation of the critical canon, which bids us prefer the harder reading. That the derivation fromסור, ‘to turn aside,’ hence ‘revolters,’ is contrary to the pointing, is not a valid objection, because the Masorets pointed as they did to explain a difficulty; so also theLXX., who readδεσμῶνandδεσμίων. If possible, we ought to preserve intact the unpointed text. The exact and literal meaning is, as the text stands, ‘from the house of the turners-aside,’i.e.those conspirators and wicked men, sycophants, who will be flattering him to promote their own interest, and this was exactly Solomon’s case)he goes out to reign, for(the secondכי, with the meaning ‘so’)also(‘moreover;’ this particle, as we have seen, usually introduces an additional reason, confirming the one which went before)in his kingdom is begotten(♦נולד,noled, a play uponילד,jeled, above)want(רשis poverty in the sense of indigence and meanness; compare 1 Samuelxviii.23, and Proverbsxix.1, 7, 22; as, however,רשhas the form of a concrete, we must remember that it involves the idea of a poor man, hence there is a sarcastic ambiguity, heightened by alliteration. Take theLXX.and Masorets’ sense, which is merely to allow the obvious play betweenהסוריםandהאסורים, and the sentiment is true, and, curiously enough, equally corresponds with the history).♦“נלד” replaced with “נולד”The following passage is one of great difficulty, but a very careful attention to its precise wording and the equivoke it contains, may perhaps afford a solution.
(14.)For from the house of rebels(הסוריםis considered a contraction forהאסורים, ‘prison;’ but, to say the least, this is a violation of the critical canon, which bids us prefer the harder reading. That the derivation fromסור, ‘to turn aside,’ hence ‘revolters,’ is contrary to the pointing, is not a valid objection, because the Masorets pointed as they did to explain a difficulty; so also theLXX., who readδεσμῶνandδεσμίων. If possible, we ought to preserve intact the unpointed text. The exact and literal meaning is, as the text stands, ‘from the house of the turners-aside,’i.e.those conspirators and wicked men, sycophants, who will be flattering him to promote their own interest, and this was exactly Solomon’s case)he goes out to reign, for(the secondכי, with the meaning ‘so’)also(‘moreover;’ this particle, as we have seen, usually introduces an additional reason, confirming the one which went before)in his kingdom is begotten(♦נולד,noled, a play uponילד,jeled, above)want(רשis poverty in the sense of indigence and meanness; compare 1 Samuelxviii.23, and Proverbsxix.1, 7, 22; as, however,רשhas the form of a concrete, we must remember that it involves the idea of a poor man, hence there is a sarcastic ambiguity, heightened by alliteration. Take theLXX.and Masorets’ sense, which is merely to allow the obvious play betweenהסוריםandהאסורים, and the sentiment is true, and, curiously enough, equally corresponds with the history).
♦“נלד” replaced with “נולד”
♦“נלד” replaced with “נולד”
♦“נלד” replaced with “נולד”
The following passage is one of great difficulty, but a very careful attention to its precise wording and the equivoke it contains, may perhaps afford a solution.
15 I considered all the living which walk under the sun, with the second child that shall stand up in his stead.
15 I considered all the living which walk under the sun, with the second child that shall stand up in his stead.
I have observed of all lives whatsoever, as they are progressing in this work-day world, in regard to any successors which may arise in their places,
I have observed of all lives whatsoever, as they are progressing in this work-day world, in regard to any successors which may arise in their places,
(15.)I have seen(‘observed as matter of fact’),with respect to all the lives(which theLXX.renderσύμπαντας τοὺς ζῶντας),the proceeding ones(participle, piel plural with the article——LXX.τοὺς περιπατοῦντας——occurs here and Psalmsciv.3, Proverbsvi.11; ‘as they are advancing’ must be the meaning, and hence the observation was made with regard to theprogressof these lives),under the sun(that is, in this stage of their existence; the limitation here is excessively important,)together with the child(with the article, generic, and giving the meaning of that which is ‘begotten of them,’ of course children primarily, but not exclusively; the ‘heir’ or ‘successors’ would represent the idea),the second(i.e.theimmediatesuccessor)who stands in their stead(plural, which nevertheless theLXX.renderἀντ’ αὐτοῦ, and rightly, because it is an instance of a distributive plural, with regard toהילד).
(15.)I have seen(‘observed as matter of fact’),with respect to all the lives(which theLXX.renderσύμπαντας τοὺς ζῶντας),the proceeding ones(participle, piel plural with the article——LXX.τοὺς περιπατοῦντας——occurs here and Psalmsciv.3, Proverbsvi.11; ‘as they are advancing’ must be the meaning, and hence the observation was made with regard to theprogressof these lives),under the sun(that is, in this stage of their existence; the limitation here is excessively important,)together with the child(with the article, generic, and giving the meaning of that which is ‘begotten of them,’ of course children primarily, but not exclusively; the ‘heir’ or ‘successors’ would represent the idea),the second(i.e.theimmediatesuccessor)who stands in their stead(plural, which nevertheless theLXX.renderἀντ’ αὐτοῦ, and rightly, because it is an instance of a distributive plural, with regard toהילד).
16There isno end of all the people,evenof all that have been before them: they also that come after shall not rejoice in him. Surely this alsoisvanity and vexation of spirit.
16There isno end of all the people,evenof all that have been before them: they also that come after shall not rejoice in him. Surely this alsoisvanity and vexation of spirit.
that no result was ever reached by the [moiling] multitude in the past: and as to what succeeds them, they will have no [earthly] pleasure in that. Another instance of evanescence and vexing of spirit.
that no result was ever reached by the [moiling] multitude in the past: and as to what succeeds them, they will have no [earthly] pleasure in that. Another instance of evanescence and vexing of spirit.
(16.)There is nothingofan end(i.e.‘result,’ occurs chapteriv.8, 16)to all the people(with the article,τῷ παντὶ λαῷ,LXX.——and in this book it appears as a collective for the human race——seechapterxii.9),to all(repeated, hence with the meaning, ‘that is to all those’)that(full relative)were before them(but ‘before’ in the sense of in their ‘presence,’ not in the sense of ‘before their time’),moreover(introducing an additional reason),the succeeding ones——(see 2 Chroniclesix.29,xii.15, which will give the exact meaning)not(rather emphatic from its position, ‘not at all’)will they(i.e.the people before them)rejoice in it(‘it’ is a singular following a plural, and hence a distributive, ‘any successor’)for also thisisa vanity(an instance of evanescence)and vexing(not ‘vexation,’ because this comes from within)of spirit.Thus the sense is clear; it is the conclusion of the argument. Koheleth’s observation has regard to the progress of lives in relation to anything that may or is to be produced by them in the way of heritage——or, in other words, he asks how farthe present state of things can be explained on the theory that it is a working for posterity, and he shows that this is not an explanation, for there is no result obtained by the collective people in the present, because each age is the same morally as that which went before it; while, of course, with regard to what is to succeed, the present generation cannot rejoice in that, because they will be all dead, and as the argument is limited to what takes place under the sun, so all so-called progress is but an instance of evanescence. The idea, if not that contained in the observation of one who selfishly observed, when requested to care for posterity, ‘that as posterity had done nothing for him, he did not see why he should do anything for posterity,’ rests on the same facts.The sentence also, it appears, contains a remarkable equivoke.לכל העם לכלsounds very likeלכל העמל כל, and this division of the words will make such good and pungent sense that we can hardly imagine that the equivoke was unintentional. The equivoke is sought to be rendered in the paraphrase by the addition of the words enclosed in the brackets.At this point we come to another division in the book. Certain practical exhortations follow, deduced from the previous arguments, concerning human conduct, under the circumstances above set forth.
(16.)There is nothingofan end(i.e.‘result,’ occurs chapteriv.8, 16)to all the people(with the article,τῷ παντὶ λαῷ,LXX.——and in this book it appears as a collective for the human race——seechapterxii.9),to all(repeated, hence with the meaning, ‘that is to all those’)that(full relative)were before them(but ‘before’ in the sense of in their ‘presence,’ not in the sense of ‘before their time’),moreover(introducing an additional reason),the succeeding ones——(see 2 Chroniclesix.29,xii.15, which will give the exact meaning)not(rather emphatic from its position, ‘not at all’)will they(i.e.the people before them)rejoice in it(‘it’ is a singular following a plural, and hence a distributive, ‘any successor’)for also thisisa vanity(an instance of evanescence)and vexing(not ‘vexation,’ because this comes from within)of spirit.Thus the sense is clear; it is the conclusion of the argument. Koheleth’s observation has regard to the progress of lives in relation to anything that may or is to be produced by them in the way of heritage——or, in other words, he asks how farthe present state of things can be explained on the theory that it is a working for posterity, and he shows that this is not an explanation, for there is no result obtained by the collective people in the present, because each age is the same morally as that which went before it; while, of course, with regard to what is to succeed, the present generation cannot rejoice in that, because they will be all dead, and as the argument is limited to what takes place under the sun, so all so-called progress is but an instance of evanescence. The idea, if not that contained in the observation of one who selfishly observed, when requested to care for posterity, ‘that as posterity had done nothing for him, he did not see why he should do anything for posterity,’ rests on the same facts.
The sentence also, it appears, contains a remarkable equivoke.לכל העם לכלsounds very likeלכל העמל כל, and this division of the words will make such good and pungent sense that we can hardly imagine that the equivoke was unintentional. The equivoke is sought to be rendered in the paraphrase by the addition of the words enclosed in the brackets.
At this point we come to another division in the book. Certain practical exhortations follow, deduced from the previous arguments, concerning human conduct, under the circumstances above set forth.