CHAPTERV.

CHAPTERV.KEEP thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools: for they consider not that they do evil.SectionIV.——Practical aphorisms grounded on the foregoing.GUARD thou thy steps as one who art walking to the House of the Divinity, and approach rather to hearken than to give, as the fools do, a sacrifice; who do not know when evil is being done.V.(1.)Keep thy feet(the Masorets have altered this to the singular, but without sufficient reason; yet theLXX.support the Kri)as when(occurs chapterv.3 (4),viii.7; ‘as though’ is the meaning here)thou walkest(taking up the word from the last clause above)towards the house of the Deity(theLXX.render, of course correctly as to sense by the double article,τὸν οἶκον τοῦ Θεοῦ——‘Thou art walking to the temple of a Divine Providence’ is the idea),and drawing near to hear(evidently ‘in order to hear’; hence theLXX.renderἐγγὺς τοῦ ἀκούειν; some, however, with the Authorized Version, take this as an imperative, but the sense is better preserved by rendering as theLXX.do),more than giving of the befooled ones(for we must not lose sight of the hiphil form: they are deceived either by themselves or others)a sacrifice.(The curious rendering of theLXX.by no means shows that they did not understand the meaning, or even would have altered the present pointing;ὑπὲρδόμα τῶν ἀφρόνων θυσία σουfulfils their conditions of rendering, which is, if possible, to preserve both the sense and the order, ‘above the gift of fools is thy sacrifice’).Forthey arenot those instructed to the doing of(so theLXX.,τοῦ ποιῆσαι)evil.The sentence is purposely ambiguous and equivocal; it is not clear at first sight whether the fools are those who do evil, or whether it be the doing of evil generally which is the point, but the following will seem to give a fair explanation of this♦difficult passage. The advice given after the considerations above, is to walk reverently, and to listen to what God’s oracle will say, rather than do as fools do,——offer a sacrifice to avert evil, which they do not after all know to be such, and which, if it implies dissatisfaction with these divine providential arrangements, is a foolish, if not sinful, sacrifice. This is further set forth in the following verses.♦“difcult” replaced with “difficult”2 Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utterany¹thing before God: for Godisin heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few.3 For a dream cometh through the multitude of business; and a fool’s voiceis knownby multitude of words.¹Or, word.Do not be hasty with thy lips, nor in thought hurry forth a word against the Almighty, for that Almighty is in the heavens, and thou art upon the earth: on this account let thy words be sparing. Because just as there comes dreaming through a multitude of anxieties, so there comes the voice of a befooled through a multitude of reasonings.(2, 3.)Do not hasten(the hastiness of vexation, see Jobiv.5,xxiii.15, Psalmsvi.10)upon thy mouth(the preposition is by no means redundant),and thy heart do not hurry(the usual word denoting the hurry of want of time. The meaning then is, do not speak, no, do not even think, hastily)to cause to send out a word(with the usual meaning of ‘a reason to be acted on’)before the Deity, because the Deity(as this is a repetition, the word becomes emphatic, ‘that Deity’)in the heavens and thou(emphatic)on the earth, therefore be thy words a few(i.e.diminished rather than increased, hence the following).For comes the dream in the multitude of anxiety, and a voiceofa befooledone (for it is without the article)in the multitude of words(or ‘reasons,’ as above). The argument now passes over from rash speeches to rash vows. A vow is a favourite resource with the foolish for obtaining the accomplishment of their wishes: they think to bribe Providence with gifts and offerings.4 When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; forhe hathno pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed.(2.) Shouldst thou have vowed specially to God, do not be slow to pay it; because there is no providence with the befooled ones: just what thou hast vowed pay.(4.)When thou hast vowed a vow(‘If by any means thou hast done this,’ for considerable emphasis is given by the repetition of ‘vow,’ according to the well-known Hebrew idiom)to God, do not defer to pay it(the alacrity with which men vow is commonly in strong contrast with the tardiness with which they pay),because there is nothingofprovidence(חפץ, with its usual technical meaning, and also equivocal, in the sense of‘pleasure’)in befooledones:with respect to what thou hast vowed, pay(theLXX.renderσὺ οὖν‘thou then,’ but the emphasis given byאת אשרmay easily account for this).5 Betteris itthat thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay.For it is better that thou shouldst not vow, than that thou shouldst be vowing and not pay.(5.)A good is it that thou shouldst not vow(the sentence is ambiguous, but the equivoke is ‘thou hadst betternotvow’),than that thou shouldst vow and not pay.6 Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that itwasan error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands?Do not allow thy mouth to cause thy body to sin; and say not in the presence of God’s messenger, ‘It was but an inadvertence:’ why should the Almighty be angry with your prattle, and put an arrest on the work of your hands?(6.)Do not give with respect to thy mouth(theאתis not redundant, ‘do not appoint,’ which is the meaning ofתתן),to cause to make to sin with respect to thy flesh(the meaning then must be, ‘do not so arrange matters as to cause thy mouth to make thy flesh sin,’ by, that is, preferring the ease, pleasure, of the flesh or the like, to the sacrifice caused by a redemption of the vow),and do not say in the presence of the angel(with the article; had this been noticed as it ought, less difficulty would have been felt in the interpretation of this passage; the angel is the messenger of Providence who comes to require the vow, and whom, of course, with or without sufficient reason, the person bound by the vow expects)that(כי)an error it is: (see Leviticusiv.2, 22, 27, and Numbersxv.24, 25, 29; when too this passage is compared with Leviticusiv.2, we can have no doubt thatלפ׳ מא׳here is the equivalent ofלפ׳ יי׳there)why(LXX.ἵνα μὴ, ‘so that not’),should be angry(Genesisxl.2, Deuteronomyi.24)the Deity over thy voice(Ginsburg, excellently, ‘with thy prattle’),and destroy(as this word is used to signify the ‘giving a pledge,’ this peculiar signification conveys the idea, ‘destroy by exacting a pledge,’ ‘make thee bankrupt by insisting upon payment’)with respect to the work of your hands?7 For in the multitude of dreams and many wordsthere arealsodiversvanities: but fear thou God.For in the multitude of dreams and vanities even so reasons are multiplied thatGodis to be feared.(7.)For in a multitude of dreams(‘conjectures’ probably)and vanities and reasonings, the much(i.e.these reasonings are increased);for(כיis repeated, and this repetition makes it emphatic——‘so indeed’)with respect to the Deity fear.The probable meaning is, ‘fear God under all circumstances: vanity and conjectures only increase the reasons for so doing,’——thus is revealed the real conclusion of the whole treatise.Koheleth now takes up a subject ineffectually discussed before, and solves it with this principle just enunciated: Fear God.8 ¶ If thou seest the oppression of the poor, and violent perverting of judgment and justice in a province, marvel not¹at the matter: forhe that ishigher than the highest regardeth; andthere behigher than they.¹Hebrewat the will, or purpose.(3.) If violent oppression of the poor, and wresting of justice and right, should be observed by you in a jurisdiction, do not be surprised at the providence; for the lofty are watched by one loftier still, and these lofty ones are——subjects.(8.)If oppression of the poor(seechapteriv.1, 3,etc.),and wrestingofjudgment and right, thou seest in a province(במדינה, this has been considered a late word, and asign, moreover, that the writer lived in the country and not in the city, as he says, chapteri.12; but though it occurs in the later Hebrew [1 Kingsxx.14 is the first instance] it is quite regularly formed, and is clearly in place here),do not marvel(Psalmsxlviii.6, Jeremiahiv.9, to ‘be astonished,’ ‘struck with astonishment’)over the providence(החפץwith the article; theLXX.renderτῷ πράγματιin this instance, the word, however, occurs in the technical meaning it has all through the book, seechapteriii.1,v.4 (3));for high from above the high(which theLXX.render word for word,ὑψηλὸς ἐπάνω ὑψηλοῦ)keeps and high ones above them(the sentence is enigmatic, perhaps proverbial, though the meaning is clear. Is it possible that a play was intended betweenמֵעַלandמַעַל, Leviticusv.15, a ‘transgression,’גבהbeing taken in the meaning of swelling up, thus——‘Increasing transgression is increasing regard?’ In the same way theמat the end ofגבהיםwould unite with the word following in utterance, and so help the equivoke).9 ¶ Moreover the profit of the earth is for all: the kinghimselfis served by the field.And besides,(i.) The produce of the earth is all in all: a king is a subject to the field.(9.)And the profit(as this is joined by a conjunction with the former, we must look upon it as a further argument in the same chain of reasoning; the meaning will then be ‘and besides the produce’)of earth(nottheearth, the article is wanting)in all(theLXX.render this byἐπὶwith a dative, hence they understood the preposition here to mean ‘for all,’ which our version follows)it is(feminine, in close apposition therefore with the noun, but this noun must beיתרון, which is feminine, and the meaning is that it exists subjectively, or is always there playing its part)a king(again, nottheking: any king, therefore, however great,——Solomon himself, or any other)to a field(again, notthefield, equivalent to some field; theLXX.render by the simple genitive)is served(niphal; this occurs only twice in the past tense, here and at Ezekielxxxvi.9, both in the sense of tilling; and the niphal future twice, at Deuteronomyxxi.4 and Ezekielxxxvi.34, again with the same meaning——no doubtעבדis used with the signification ‘to serve generally’ in a vast number of places. It must be observed, however, that a niphal is not exactly the same as a passive, but has an objective signification, so that it is often nearer in meaning to the Greek middle voice than our passive. Bearing this in mind, we can have no further doubt over this passage as to its principal scope,——‘the king is served of,’ or ‘a subject to the field.’ The idea is that the very highest are really in a state of abject dependence——a single day’s starvation would have been sufficientto have brought to the dust Solomon or Nebuchadnezzar. The other possible rendering, that ‘the king is served by the field,’ is only the other side of the same truth, and the sentence is equivocal, being ingeniously constructed so as to read either way).10 He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver; nor he that loveth abundance with increase: thisisalso vanity.(ii.) A lover of money no money ever satisfied; and who that loved profusion ever had sufficient income? Another instance of the evanescent.(10.)Loving silver(the Masorets point as a participle, but however correct this may be, the participial notion is in Ecclesiastes apparently not so prominent, as it is when the poel is used written full)not satisfies(i.e.as the nominative follows, ‘shall not be satisfied with’)silver(silveris doubled here, and used of course in the sense of money——the meaning being that ‘a lover of money nomoneyever satisfies’),and who loving in a multitude(i.e.setting his desires in a multitude of goods, or anything else)not(but theLXX.in place ofלאpossibly readלוֹ, ‘to him,’ and this makes far better and more pungent sense——‘to him’ emphatic will then be the meaning)a revenue(Numbersxviii.30, Deuteronomyxxxiii.14, Proverbsiii.14,xviii.20; or, still better, for the word is derived from the rootבוא, ‘to come,’ ‘an income.’ Thus it is seen that the two clauses are aimed respectively against niggardliness and extravagance. The miser and the spendthrift both never have enough);also this is vanity(another instance of the transitory and evanescent, as indeed it is, because these riches look satisfactory and are not).11 When goods increase, they are increased that eat them: and what goodis thereto the owners thereof, saving the beholdingof themwith their eyes?(iii.) As property increases, so increases consumption too; and what success then has ownership, but just the right of beholding it?(11.)In the multitudes of the good(an abstract, with the article, and hence the meaning is ‘In the very increase of the property itself, and as it increases,’ this being the meaning of the plural, which is distributive)multiply the eatings of it(or, for theהmay be considered paragogic, and so making, as it were, an abstract of the poel participle, ‘consumers’),and what is the success(כשרון, seeii.21, references)to the owners of it(i.e.to ownership),except seeing(ראית, this the Masorets alter toראות, but unnecessarily, for there is a slight difference in the sense here, which will account for the unusual grammatical form; a causative or hiphil notion is implied by it; hence theLXX.ἀρχὴ τοῦ ὁρᾶν, ‘the priority to see,’)his eyes?(i.e.each one with his eyes, singular following plural).12 The sleep of a labouring manissweet, whether he eat little or much: but the abundance of the rich will not suffer him to sleep.(iv.) How sweet is the sleep of the slave, if a little, or if much he eats: but a sufficiency to one who is enriched——does not cause rest to him so that he sleeps.(12.)Sweet(but the participial form of the noun must not be overlooked, nor the feminine termination, equivalent to a ‘sweetness,’)is the sleep of the slave(‘of the toiler,’ with the article),if a little, or if themuch he eats(there is a peculiar force in contrasting ‘themuch,’הרבה, with the article, withמעטwithout it; even if he should eat tothe much[i.e.as large a quantity as he can] it will do him no harm: no nightmare will trouble him who has earned his hearty meal by his hard work),but the satisfaction(as contrasted withהרבה)to the enriched it is not that which is causing rest(hiphil participle)to him(emphatic)to sleep(an equivoke here is to be found inהשבעandלעשיר, remembering thatשבע, ‘seven,’ is used so commonly for ‘completeness,’ andעשר, ‘ten,’ as ‘rich’ and ‘overflowing;’ seven with ten has a peculiar meaning in the symbolism of numbers).13 There is a sore evilwhichI have seen under the sun,namely, riches kept for the owners thereof to their hurt.(v.) There is this evil infirmity which I have observed in this work-day world: Riches kept by an owner to his own injury;(13.)There is an evil(abstract, a particular kind of evil),a sickness(another abstract)I have seen under the sun——wealth keeping to(i.e.being kept by)its possessors to their hurt.14 But those riches perish by evil travail: and he begetteth a son, andthere isnothing in his hand.for the wealth itself perishes in an uncertainty which is distressing: so that when he begets an heir, he has in his hand just nothing at all.(14.)And perishes, that riches, that same(as we should say, ‘those very same riches’)in an uncertainty(בענין, another instance of this word; we see that in this case also [seechapteri.13, references], the meaning ‘anxious uncertainty’ exactly suits the context), which isan evil(this anxious care, instead of doing any good, is but a simple mischief),and he is caused to beget a son(to whom, of course, he would have wished to bequeath his wealth), and there isnothing in his hand at all(which theLXX.render by a double negative, and hence we must render ‘and has in his hand even nothing at all’).15 As he came forth of his mother’s womb, naked shall he return to go as he came, and shall take nothing of his labour, which he may carry away in his hand.For naked as when he came forth from the womb of his mother does he go out of the world again; and nothing whatever does he take from his care, which he can hold in his hand.(15.)And as he came out from the womb of his mother naked(which is reserved to the end of the clause, making it emphatic; it is moreover written full, so that a slight additional emphasis is given by this to the ‘stateof nakedness’ existing),he returns to go back(somewhat stronger than goes back——he comes to this state through intermediate stages) justas he came(‘as he was at the first, so now is he at the last’),and nothing at all does he not lift up(Genesisvii.17, ‘bear’ as a burden)in his toil(as we say, ‘havefor hispains,’ observing the meaning ofעמל, not the labour but the anxiety which causes, or results from, the labour)which he takes in his hand.16 And this alsoisa sore evil,thatin all points as he came, so shall he go: and what profit hath he that hath laboured for the wind?Moreover, in this is discovered that evil infirmity, that precisely as he began, so does he leave off; and what possible advantage can there be, that he toiled for the wind?(16.)And, moreover, this same evil sickness, all over against(כל עמתoccurs as two words here only;לעמתis the ordinaryform, it has the meaning of ‘against,’ ‘over against,’ see Exodusxxv.27, 2 Samuelxvi.13; it has been proposed to readכלעמת, in which case the meaning will be as in the above——‘precisely as,’LXX.ὥσπερ γὰρ, but this is to a certain extent to cut the knot rather than untie it. Nowעמתoccurs separately here only, and ifעמתreally exists, it is a noun feminine in regimen; now the meaning ofעם, which is presented both in ‘people’ and in the preposition ‘with,’ gives evidently something ‘collected’ or ‘gathered,’ henceעמהwould mean a ‘collection’ or ‘instance,’ andעמת‘collection’ or ‘instance of,’ and then the exact meaning ofכל ע״will be ‘every instance of his going’),which he comes(close relative, the reason of which is now sufficiently evident, meaning, ‘just as he comes;’ he simply goes round in a circle without accomplishing anything, or returns back on his own track in every instance)so(emphatic, standing apart from its noun, equal ‘just so’)does he go, and what profit to him who has toiled(close relative again, ‘in that he has toiled’)to the wind?(which, seechapteri.6, returns back again as it did before. ‘To’ is here not exactly the same as ‘like to,’ but very near it; but perhaps also because his toil or care is to his spirit, as it has no effect otherwise.)17 All his days also he eateth in darkness, andhe hathmuch sorrow and wrath with his sickness.Moreover, all his days he consumes in darkness: his disappointment is very great indeed: he has sickness and is sorry.(17.)Moreover, all his days in darkness(for, of course, all this time he has never any idea which way he was really going, or what he is doing)he eats(or consumes), anddisappointmentisthe much(or is multiplied),and his sickness and wrath(קצףis that kind of wrath which arises from anger with a person on account of something wrong. This miserable life is summed up, it appears, in four particulars——(1.) All his days he eats in darkness; (2.) the vexation of disappointment consumes him; (3.) he is sick, or rather, in this general sense, he is afflicted; (4.) he is angry, for those mistakes and disappointments.)18 ¶ Beholdthatwhich I have seen:¹it isgood and comelyfor oneto eat and to drink, and to enjoy the good of all his labour that he taketh under the sun²all the days of his life, which God giveth him: for itishis portion.¹Hebrewthere is a good which is comely,etc.²Hebrewthe number of the days.Manifest, then, is that real good which I have observed,viz., that it is proper to eat, and to drink, and so to see good in all one’s toil which one may toil in this hot work-day world, as the tale of one’s daily life. For this is what God gives, and this is one’sownpossession.(18.)Behold(for this introduces the manifest result of his observation)that which I have seen, evenI myself(the result therefore of his own personal experience), a realgood; which also(the full relative here has this meaning, because it is repeated) issuitable to the eating(i.e.active enjoyment),to the drinking(which is passive),and to the seeing of goodness(thelamedis repeated before each full infinitive, and the abstractטובהfollows, which therefore gives the meaning that what he had observed was, ‘that it was proper that one should eat, or one should drink, or should see goodin,’etc.,i.e.any or all of these);and(repeated, meaning ‘and also’)in all his toil which(contracted relative)he toilsover (toil is thus made very emphatic, the meaning is, ‘for which one so earnestly or unceasingly toils,’ for observe also, as no nominative is expressed, the verb is impersonal)under the sun the number(the rootספרhas the meaning to count or enumerate, hence the idea ‘as one is counting one’s days’) ofthe days of his life which gives to him(emphatic)the Deity(nominative following verb, with the usual shade of meaning),because it is his portion(i.e.what belongs to him, but in the future he has no portion,thatno man has any right over).19 Every man also to whom God hath given riches and wealth, and hath given him power to eat thereof, and to take his portion, and to rejoice in his labour; thisisthe gift of God.And beside, should the Almighty appoint to any individuals of the human race, riches, possessions, and the power to enjoy them, and so to make use of their possessions, and rejoice in their toil——this is simply a Divine appointment.(19.)Moreover, all the man(i.e.every one of the human race considered collectively and in the abstract)which gives to him(equivalent to one to whom)God(gives or appoints)wealth and riches, and it is caused him to have power in order to eat(which we have seen is used as the highest type of enjoyment in the active sense)of it, and to take his portion(for a man may possess without being able to eat or enjoy at all, hence the necessity for this clause in the course of the argument;נשאhas the meaning to ‘lift up,’ ‘carry,’ or ‘bear’),and to rejoice in his toil(which——considering the exact meaning assigned in this book toעמל, the ‘care’ one takes in one’s labour——to rejoice in is to see it come to a successful end);this same(the Masorets put here a strong disjunctive accent)a giftofGod it is.20¹For he shall not much remember the days of his life; because God answerethhimin the joy of his heart.¹Or, thoughhe givenot much,yethe remembereth,etc.For the memory of the days of the past life is not of much importance; but the Almighty rather exercises men in their present emotions.(20.)For not the much he remembers(but as no nominative precedes or follows, the verb is impersonal)the days of his life, andfor(the secondכיintroducing a reason in addition to and confirmatory of the first)the Deity answers(this is the only place in which the participle hiphil occurs; in one other place the participle pual——Isaiahliii.4, which differs only from the hiphil in its pointing, occurs evidently in the sense of ‘afflicted,’ which theLXX.render byκακώσει, ‘in affliction.’ The future hiphil is used at 1 Kingsviii.35 and 2 Chroniclesvi.26, parallels, and is translated ‘thou dost afflict them.’ On the whole, however, the meaning, as pointed out by♦Zöckler, and which theLXX.confirm, seems to be, ‘hears them by vouchsafing;’ and as this answer is painful or joyful, as the case may be, and more usually the former, ‘exercises’ would be a suitable rendering)in the joy of(or by means of the joy,בְ־, of theinstrument; it is an abstract in regimen, ‘in the joyousness’ or ‘rejoicings of’)his heart. Thus, then, the two reasons given stand related thus: Present gratification is the lot of humanity, because the past is not much remembered. Thechiefremembrance——for this is the meaning ofהרבה——is not in the past. The deepest sorrows fade away quickly into forgetfulness; and so also the brightest joys. They have, no doubt, some influence by recollection, but notmuch. And thus the Deity, or God regarded as the supreme providential ruler, exercises us. He responds to our anxieties, afflicts us, or chastens us, or causes us pleasure by means of joys given or taken away, as the case may be. Again, these are spoken of as joys of ourhearts, or of our inward desires and consciousness, which is the meaning of ‘heart’ in this book; ouremotional nature, as the idea would stand expressed in the nomenclature of modern philosophy.♦“Zökler” replaced with “Zöckler” for consistency

KEEP thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools: for they consider not that they do evil.

SectionIV.——Practical aphorisms grounded on the foregoing.GUARD thou thy steps as one who art walking to the House of the Divinity, and approach rather to hearken than to give, as the fools do, a sacrifice; who do not know when evil is being done.

SectionIV.——Practical aphorisms grounded on the foregoing.

GUARD thou thy steps as one who art walking to the House of the Divinity, and approach rather to hearken than to give, as the fools do, a sacrifice; who do not know when evil is being done.

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

♦“difcult” replaced with “difficult”

2 Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utterany¹thing before God: for Godisin heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few.3 For a dream cometh through the multitude of business; and a fool’s voiceis knownby multitude of words.¹Or, word.

2 Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utterany¹thing before God: for Godisin heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few.

3 For a dream cometh through the multitude of business; and a fool’s voiceis knownby multitude of words.

¹Or, word.

Do not be hasty with thy lips, nor in thought hurry forth a word against the Almighty, for that Almighty is in the heavens, and thou art upon the earth: on this account let thy words be sparing. Because just as there comes dreaming through a multitude of anxieties, so there comes the voice of a befooled through a multitude of reasonings.

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

4 When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; forhe hathno pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed.

(2.) Shouldst thou have vowed specially to God, do not be slow to pay it; because there is no providence with the befooled ones: just what thou hast vowed pay.

(4.)When thou hast vowed a vow(‘If by any means thou hast done this,’ for considerable emphasis is given by the repetition of ‘vow,’ according to the well-known Hebrew idiom)to God, do not defer to pay it(the alacrity with which men vow is commonly in strong contrast with the tardiness with which they pay),because there is nothingofprovidence(חפץ, with its usual technical meaning, and also equivocal, in the sense of‘pleasure’)in befooledones:with respect to what thou hast vowed, pay(theLXX.renderσὺ οὖν‘thou then,’ but the emphasis given byאת אשרmay easily account for this).

5 Betteris itthat thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay.

For it is better that thou shouldst not vow, than that thou shouldst be vowing and not pay.

(5.)A good is it that thou shouldst not vow(the sentence is ambiguous, but the equivoke is ‘thou hadst betternotvow’),than that thou shouldst vow and not pay.

6 Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that itwasan error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands?

Do not allow thy mouth to cause thy body to sin; and say not in the presence of God’s messenger, ‘It was but an inadvertence:’ why should the Almighty be angry with your prattle, and put an arrest on the work of your hands?

(6.)Do not give with respect to thy mouth(theאתis not redundant, ‘do not appoint,’ which is the meaning ofתתן),to cause to make to sin with respect to thy flesh(the meaning then must be, ‘do not so arrange matters as to cause thy mouth to make thy flesh sin,’ by, that is, preferring the ease, pleasure, of the flesh or the like, to the sacrifice caused by a redemption of the vow),and do not say in the presence of the angel(with the article; had this been noticed as it ought, less difficulty would have been felt in the interpretation of this passage; the angel is the messenger of Providence who comes to require the vow, and whom, of course, with or without sufficient reason, the person bound by the vow expects)that(כי)an error it is: (see Leviticusiv.2, 22, 27, and Numbersxv.24, 25, 29; when too this passage is compared with Leviticusiv.2, we can have no doubt thatלפ׳ מא׳here is the equivalent ofלפ׳ יי׳there)why(LXX.ἵνα μὴ, ‘so that not’),should be angry(Genesisxl.2, Deuteronomyi.24)the Deity over thy voice(Ginsburg, excellently, ‘with thy prattle’),and destroy(as this word is used to signify the ‘giving a pledge,’ this peculiar signification conveys the idea, ‘destroy by exacting a pledge,’ ‘make thee bankrupt by insisting upon payment’)with respect to the work of your hands?

7 For in the multitude of dreams and many wordsthere arealsodiversvanities: but fear thou God.

For in the multitude of dreams and vanities even so reasons are multiplied thatGodis to be feared.

(7.)For in a multitude of dreams(‘conjectures’ probably)and vanities and reasonings, the much(i.e.these reasonings are increased);for(כיis repeated, and this repetition makes it emphatic——‘so indeed’)with respect to the Deity fear.The probable meaning is, ‘fear God under all circumstances: vanity and conjectures only increase the reasons for so doing,’——thus is revealed the real conclusion of the whole treatise.Koheleth now takes up a subject ineffectually discussed before, and solves it with this principle just enunciated: Fear God.

Koheleth now takes up a subject ineffectually discussed before, and solves it with this principle just enunciated: Fear God.

8 ¶ If thou seest the oppression of the poor, and violent perverting of judgment and justice in a province, marvel not¹at the matter: forhe that ishigher than the highest regardeth; andthere behigher than they.¹Hebrewat the will, or purpose.

¹Hebrewat the will, or purpose.

(3.) If violent oppression of the poor, and wresting of justice and right, should be observed by you in a jurisdiction, do not be surprised at the providence; for the lofty are watched by one loftier still, and these lofty ones are——subjects.

(8.)If oppression of the poor(seechapteriv.1, 3,etc.),and wrestingofjudgment and right, thou seest in a province(במדינה, this has been considered a late word, and asign, moreover, that the writer lived in the country and not in the city, as he says, chapteri.12; but though it occurs in the later Hebrew [1 Kingsxx.14 is the first instance] it is quite regularly formed, and is clearly in place here),do not marvel(Psalmsxlviii.6, Jeremiahiv.9, to ‘be astonished,’ ‘struck with astonishment’)over the providence(החפץwith the article; theLXX.renderτῷ πράγματιin this instance, the word, however, occurs in the technical meaning it has all through the book, seechapteriii.1,v.4 (3));for high from above the high(which theLXX.render word for word,ὑψηλὸς ἐπάνω ὑψηλοῦ)keeps and high ones above them(the sentence is enigmatic, perhaps proverbial, though the meaning is clear. Is it possible that a play was intended betweenמֵעַלandמַעַל, Leviticusv.15, a ‘transgression,’גבהbeing taken in the meaning of swelling up, thus——‘Increasing transgression is increasing regard?’ In the same way theמat the end ofגבהיםwould unite with the word following in utterance, and so help the equivoke).

9 ¶ Moreover the profit of the earth is for all: the kinghimselfis served by the field.

And besides,(i.) The produce of the earth is all in all: a king is a subject to the field.

And besides,

(i.) The produce of the earth is all in all: a king is a subject to the field.

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

10 He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver; nor he that loveth abundance with increase: thisisalso vanity.

(ii.) A lover of money no money ever satisfied; and who that loved profusion ever had sufficient income? Another instance of the evanescent.

(10.)Loving silver(the Masorets point as a participle, but however correct this may be, the participial notion is in Ecclesiastes apparently not so prominent, as it is when the poel is used written full)not satisfies(i.e.as the nominative follows, ‘shall not be satisfied with’)silver(silveris doubled here, and used of course in the sense of money——the meaning being that ‘a lover of money nomoneyever satisfies’),and who loving in a multitude(i.e.setting his desires in a multitude of goods, or anything else)not(but theLXX.in place ofלאpossibly readלוֹ, ‘to him,’ and this makes far better and more pungent sense——‘to him’ emphatic will then be the meaning)a revenue(Numbersxviii.30, Deuteronomyxxxiii.14, Proverbsiii.14,xviii.20; or, still better, for the word is derived from the rootבוא, ‘to come,’ ‘an income.’ Thus it is seen that the two clauses are aimed respectively against niggardliness and extravagance. The miser and the spendthrift both never have enough);also this is vanity(another instance of the transitory and evanescent, as indeed it is, because these riches look satisfactory and are not).

11 When goods increase, they are increased that eat them: and what goodis thereto the owners thereof, saving the beholdingof themwith their eyes?

(iii.) As property increases, so increases consumption too; and what success then has ownership, but just the right of beholding it?

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

12 The sleep of a labouring manissweet, whether he eat little or much: but the abundance of the rich will not suffer him to sleep.

(iv.) How sweet is the sleep of the slave, if a little, or if much he eats: but a sufficiency to one who is enriched——does not cause rest to him so that he sleeps.

(12.)Sweet(but the participial form of the noun must not be overlooked, nor the feminine termination, equivalent to a ‘sweetness,’)is the sleep of the slave(‘of the toiler,’ with the article),if a little, or if themuch he eats(there is a peculiar force in contrasting ‘themuch,’הרבה, with the article, withמעטwithout it; even if he should eat tothe much[i.e.as large a quantity as he can] it will do him no harm: no nightmare will trouble him who has earned his hearty meal by his hard work),but the satisfaction(as contrasted withהרבה)to the enriched it is not that which is causing rest(hiphil participle)to him(emphatic)to sleep(an equivoke here is to be found inהשבעandלעשיר, remembering thatשבע, ‘seven,’ is used so commonly for ‘completeness,’ andעשר, ‘ten,’ as ‘rich’ and ‘overflowing;’ seven with ten has a peculiar meaning in the symbolism of numbers).

13 There is a sore evilwhichI have seen under the sun,namely, riches kept for the owners thereof to their hurt.

(v.) There is this evil infirmity which I have observed in this work-day world: Riches kept by an owner to his own injury;

(13.)There is an evil(abstract, a particular kind of evil),a sickness(another abstract)I have seen under the sun——wealth keeping to(i.e.being kept by)its possessors to their hurt.

14 But those riches perish by evil travail: and he begetteth a son, andthere isnothing in his hand.

for the wealth itself perishes in an uncertainty which is distressing: so that when he begets an heir, he has in his hand just nothing at all.

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

15 As he came forth of his mother’s womb, naked shall he return to go as he came, and shall take nothing of his labour, which he may carry away in his hand.

For naked as when he came forth from the womb of his mother does he go out of the world again; and nothing whatever does he take from his care, which he can hold in his hand.

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

16 And this alsoisa sore evil,thatin all points as he came, so shall he go: and what profit hath he that hath laboured for the wind?

Moreover, in this is discovered that evil infirmity, that precisely as he began, so does he leave off; and what possible advantage can there be, that he toiled for the wind?

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

17 All his days also he eateth in darkness, andhe hathmuch sorrow and wrath with his sickness.

Moreover, all his days he consumes in darkness: his disappointment is very great indeed: he has sickness and is sorry.

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

18 ¶ Beholdthatwhich I have seen:¹it isgood and comelyfor oneto eat and to drink, and to enjoy the good of all his labour that he taketh under the sun²all the days of his life, which God giveth him: for itishis portion.¹Hebrewthere is a good which is comely,etc.²Hebrewthe number of the days.

¹Hebrewthere is a good which is comely,etc.²Hebrewthe number of the days.

¹Hebrewthere is a good which is comely,etc.

²Hebrewthe number of the days.

Manifest, then, is that real good which I have observed,viz., that it is proper to eat, and to drink, and so to see good in all one’s toil which one may toil in this hot work-day world, as the tale of one’s daily life. For this is what God gives, and this is one’sownpossession.

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

19 Every man also to whom God hath given riches and wealth, and hath given him power to eat thereof, and to take his portion, and to rejoice in his labour; thisisthe gift of God.

And beside, should the Almighty appoint to any individuals of the human race, riches, possessions, and the power to enjoy them, and so to make use of their possessions, and rejoice in their toil——this is simply a Divine appointment.

(19.)Moreover, all the man(i.e.every one of the human race considered collectively and in the abstract)which gives to him(equivalent to one to whom)God(gives or appoints)wealth and riches, and it is caused him to have power in order to eat(which we have seen is used as the highest type of enjoyment in the active sense)of it, and to take his portion(for a man may possess without being able to eat or enjoy at all, hence the necessity for this clause in the course of the argument;נשאhas the meaning to ‘lift up,’ ‘carry,’ or ‘bear’),and to rejoice in his toil(which——considering the exact meaning assigned in this book toעמל, the ‘care’ one takes in one’s labour——to rejoice in is to see it come to a successful end);this same(the Masorets put here a strong disjunctive accent)a giftofGod it is.

20¹For he shall not much remember the days of his life; because God answerethhimin the joy of his heart.¹Or, thoughhe givenot much,yethe remembereth,etc.

20¹For he shall not much remember the days of his life; because God answerethhimin the joy of his heart.

¹Or, thoughhe givenot much,yethe remembereth,etc.

For the memory of the days of the past life is not of much importance; but the Almighty rather exercises men in their present emotions.

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

♦“Zökler” replaced with “Zöckler” for consistency

Back to Index Next