Ecclesiastes 1 commentary

Much is to be learned by comparing one part of Scripture with another. We here behold Solomon returning from the broken and empty cisterns of the world, to the Fountain of living water; recording his own folly and shame, the bitterness of his disappointment, and the lessons he had learned. Those that have taken warning to turn and live, should warn others not to go on and die. He does not merely say all things are vain, but that they are vanity. VANITY OF VANITIES, ALL IS VANITY. This is the text of the preacher's sermon, of which in this book he never loses sight. If this world, in its present state, were all, it would not be worth living for; and the wealth and pleasure of this world, if we had ever so much, are not enough to make us happy. What profit has a man of all his labour? All he gets by it will not supply the wants of the soul, nor satisfy its desires; will not atone for the sins of the soul, nor hinder the loss of it: what profit will the wealth of the world be to the soul in death, in judgment, or in the everlasting state?

All things change, and never rest. Man, after all his labour, is no nearer finding rest than the sun, the wind, or the current of the river. His soul will find no rest, if he has it not from God. The senses are soon tired, yet still craving what is untried.

Men's hearts and their corruptions are the same now as in former times; their desires, and pursuits, and complaints, still the same. This should take us from expecting happiness in the creature, and quicken us to seek eternal blessings. How many things and persons in Solomon's day were thought very great, yet there is no remembrance of them now!

Solomon tried all things, and found them vanity. He found his searches after knowledge weariness, not only to the flesh, but to the mind. The more he saw of the works done under the sun, the more he saw their vanity; and the sight often vexed his spirit. He could neither gain that satisfaction to himself, nor do that good to others, which he expected. Even the pursuit of knowledge and wisdom discovered man's wickedness and misery; so that the more he knew, the more he saw cause to lament and mourn. Let us learn to hate and fear sin, the cause of all this vanity and misery; to value Christ; to seek rest in the knowledge, love, and service of the Saviour.

INTRODUCTION

The Hebrew title is Koheleth, which the speaker in it applies to himself (Ec 1:12), "I, Koheleth, was king over Israel." It means an Assembler or Convener of a meeting and a Preacher to such a meeting. The feminine form of the Hebrew noun, and its construction once (Ec 7:27) with a feminine verb, show that it not only signifies Solomon, the Preacher to assemblies (in which case it is construed with the verb or noun masculine), but also Divine Wisdom (feminine in Hebrew) speaking by the mouth of the inspired king. In six cases out of seven it is construed with the masculine. Solomon was endowed with inspired wisdom (1Ki 3:5-14; 6:11, 12; 9:1-9; 11:9-11), specially fitting him for the task. The Orientals delight in such meetings for grave discourse. Thus the Arabs formerly had an assembly yearly, at Ocadh, for hearing and reciting poems. Compare "Masters of assemblies" (see on Ec 12:11, also Ec 12:9). "The Preacher taught the people knowledge," probably viva voce ("orally"); 1Ki 4:34; 10:2, 8, 24; 2Ch 9:1, 7, 23, plainly refer to a somewhat public divan met for literary discussion. So "spake," thrice repeated (1Ki 4:32, 33), refers not to written compositions, but to addresses spoken in assemblies convened for the purpose. The Holy Ghost, no doubt, signifies also by the term that Solomon's doctrine is intended for the "great congregation," the Church of all places and ages (Psa 22:25; 49:2-4).

Solomon was plainly the author (Ec 1:12, 16; 2:15; 12:9). That the Rabbins attribute it to Isaiah or Hezekiah is explicable by supposing that one or the other inserted it in the canon. The difference of its style, as compared with Proverbs and Song of Solomon, is due to the difference of subjects, and the different period of his life in which each was written; the Song, in the fervor of his first love to God; Proverbs, about the same time, or somewhat later; but Ecclesiastes in late old age, as the seal and testimony of repentance of his apostasy in the intervening period: Psa 89:30, 33 proves his penitence. The substitution of the title Koheleth for Solomon (that is, peace), may imply that, having troubled Israel, meantime he forfeited his name of peace (1Ki 11:14, 23); but now, having repented, he wishes to be henceforth a Preacher of righteousness. The alleged foreign expressions in the Hebrew may have been easily imported, through the great intercourse there was with other nations during his long reign. Moreover, supposed Chaldaisms may be fragments preserved from the common tongue of which Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee, and Arabic were offshoots.

The Scope of Ecclesiastes is to show the vanity of all mere human pursuits, when made the chief end, as contrasted with the real blessedness of true wisdom, that is, religion. The immortality of the soul is dwelt on incidentally, as subsidiary to the main scope. Moses' law took this truth for granted but drew its sanctions of rewards and punishments in accordance with the theocracy, which was under a special providence of God as the temporal King of Israel, from the present life, rather than the future. But after Israel chose an earthly king, God withdrew, in part, His extraordinary providence, so that under Solomon, temporal rewards did not invariably follow virtue, and punishments vice (compare Ec 2:16; 3:19; 4:1; 5:8; 7:15; 8:14; 9:2, 11). Hence the need arises to show that these anomalies will be rectified hereafter, and this is the grand "conclusion," therefore, of the "whole" book, that, seeing there is a coming judgment, and seeing that present goods do not satisfy the soul, "man's whole duty is to fear God and keep his commandments" (Ec 12:13, 14), and meanwhile, to use, in joyful and serene sobriety, and not abuse, the present life (Ec 3:12, 13).

It is objected that sensual epicurism seems to be inculcated (Ec 3:12, 13, 22, &c.); but it is a contented, thankful enjoyment of God's present gifts that is taught, as opposed to a murmuring, anxious, avaricious spirit, as is proved by Ec 5:18, compare with Ec 5:11-15, not making them the chief end of life; not the joy of levity and folly; a misunderstanding which he guards against in Ec 7:2-6; 11:9; 12:1. Again, Ec 7:16; 9:2-10, might seem to teach fatalism and skepticism. But these are words put in the mouth of an objector; or rather, they were the language of Solomon himself during his apostasy, finding an echo in the heart of every sensualist, who wishes to be an unbeliever, and, who, therefore, sees difficulties enough in the world around wherewith to prop up his wilful unbelief. The answer is given (Ec 7:17, 18; 9:11, 12; 11:1, 6; 12:13). Even if these passages be taken as words of Solomon, they are to be understood as forbidding a self-made "righteousness," which tries to constrain God to grant salvation to imaginary good works and external strictness with which it wearies itself; also, that speculation which tries to fathom all God's inscrutable counsels (Ec 8:17), and that carefulness about the future forbidden in Mt 6:25.

The Chief Good is that the possession of that which makes us happy, is to be sought as the end, for its own sake; whereas, all other things are but means towards it. Philosophers, who made it the great subject of inquiry, restricted it to the present life, treating the eternal as unreal, and only useful to awe the multitude with. But Solomon shows the vanity of all human things (so-called philosophy included) to satisfy the soul, and that heavenly wisdom alone is the chief good. He had taught so when young (Pr 1:20; 8:1); so also; in Song of Solomon, he had spiritualized the subject in an allegory; and now, after having long personally tried the manifold ways in which the worldly seek to reach happiness, he gives the fruit of his experience in old age.

It is divided into two parts--Ec 1:1-6:10 showing the vanity of earthly things; Ec 6:10-12:14, the excellence of heavenly wisdom. Deviations from strict logical methods occur in these divisions, but in the main they are observed. The deviations make it the less stiff and artificial, and the more suited to all capacities. It is in poetry; the hemistichal division is mostly observed, but occasionally not so. The choice of epithets, imagery, inverted order of words, ellipses, parallelism, or, in its absence, similarity of diction, mark versification.

CHAPTER 1

Ec 1:1-18. Introduction.

1. the Preacher--and Convener of assemblies for the purpose. See my Preface. Koheleth in Hebrew, a symbolical name for Solomon, and of Heavenly Wisdom speaking through and identified with him. Ec 1:12 shows that "king of Jerusalem" is in apposition, not with "David," but "Preacher."

of Jerusalem--rather, "in Jerusalem," for it was merely his metropolis, not his whole kingdom.

2. The theme proposed of the first part of his discourse.

Vanity of vanities--Hebraism for the most utter vanity. So "holy of holies" (Ex 26:33); "servant of servants" (Ge 9:25). The repetition increases the force.

all--Hebrew, "the all"; all without exception, namely, earthly things.

vanity--not in themselves, for God maketh nothing in vain (1Ti 4:4, 5), but vain when put in the place of God and made the end, instead of the means (Psa 39:5, 6; 62:9; Mt 6:33); vain, also, because of the "vanity" to which they are "subjected" by the fall (Ro 8:20).

3. What profit ... labour--that is, "What profit" as to the chief good (Mt 16:26). Labor is profitable in its proper place (Ge 2:15; 3:19; Pr 14:23).

under the sun--that is, in this life, as opposed to the future world. The phrase often recurs, but only in Ecclesiastes.

4. earth ... for ever--(Psa 104:5). While the earth remains the same, the generations of men are ever changing; what lasting profit, then, can there be from the toils of one whose sojourn on earth, as an individual, is so brief? The "for ever" is comparative, not absolute (Psa 102:26).

5. (Psa 19:5, 6). "Panting" as the Hebrew for "hasteth"; metaphor, from a runner (Psa 19:5, "a strong man") in a "race." It applies rather to the rising sun, which seems laboriously to mount up to the meridian, than to the setting sun; the accents too favor Maurer, "And (that too, returning) to his place, where panting he riseth."

6. according to his circuits--that is, it returns afresh to its former circuits, however many be its previous veerings about. The north and south winds are the two prevailing winds in Palestine and Egypt.

7. By subterraneous cavities, and by evaporation forming rain clouds, the fountains and rivers are supplied from the sea, into which they then flow back. The connection is: Individual men are continually changing, while the succession of the race continues; just as the sun, wind, and rivers are ever shifting about, while the cycle in which they move is invariable; they return to the point whence they set out. Hence is man, as in these objects of nature which are his analogue, with all the seeming changes "there is no new thing" (Ec 1:9).

8. Maurer translates, "All words are wearied out," that is, are inadequate, as also, "man cannot express" all the things in the world which undergo this ceaseless, changeless cycle of vicissitudes: "The eye is not satisfied with seeing them," &c. But it is plainly a return to the idea (Ec 1:3) as to man's "labor," which is only wearisome and profitless; "no new" good can accrue from it (Ec 1:9); for as the sun, &c., so man's laborious works move in a changeless cycle. The eye and ear are two of the taskmasters for which man toils. But these are never "satisfied" (Ec 6:7; Pr 27:20). Nor can they be so hereafter, for there will be nothing "new." Not so the chief good, Jesus Christ (Joh 4:13, 14; Re 21:5).

9. Rather, "no new thing at all"; as in Nu 11:6. This is not meant in a general sense; but there is no new source of happiness (the subject in question) which can be devised; the same round of petty pleasures, cares, business, study, wars, &c., being repeated over and over again [Holden].

10. old time--Hebrew, "ages."

which was--The Hebrew plural cannot be joined to the verb singular. Therefore translate: "It hath been in the ages before; certainly it hath been before us" [Holden]. Or, as Maurer: "That which has been (done) before us (in our presence, 1Ch 16:33), has been (done) already in the old times."

11. The reason why some things are thought "new," which are not really so, is the imperfect record that exists of preceding ages among their successors.

those that ... come after--that is, those that live still later than the "things, rather the persons or generations, Ec 1:4, with which this verse is connected, the six intermediate verses being merely illustrations of Ec 1:4 [Weiss], that are to come" (Ec 2:16; 9:5).

12. Resumption of Ec 1:1, the intermediate verses being the introductory statement of his thesis. Therefore, "the Preacher" (Koheleth) is repeated.

was king--instead of "am," because he is about to give the results of his past experience during his long reign.

in Jerusalem--specified, as opposed to David, who reigned both in Hebron and Jerusalem; whereas Solomon reigned only in Jerusalem. "King of Israel in Jerusalem," implies that he reigned over Israel and Judah combined; whereas David, at Hebron, reigned only over Judah, and not, until he was settled in Jerusalem, over both Israel and Judah.

13. this sore travail--namely, that of "searching out all things done under heaven." Not human wisdom in general, which comes afterwards (Ec 2:12, &c.), but laborious enquiries into, and speculations about, the works of men; for example, political science. As man is doomed to get his bread, so his knowledge, by the sweat of his brow (Ge 3:19) [Gill].

exercised--that is, disciplined; literally, "that they may thereby chastise, or humble themselves."

14. The reason is here given why investigation into man's "works" is only "sore travail" (Ec 1:13); namely, because all man's ways are vain (Ec 1:18) and cannot be mended (Ec 1:15).

vexation of--"a preying upon"

the Spirit--Maurer translates; "the pursuit of wind," as in Ec 5:16; Ho 12:1, "Ephraim feedeth on wind." But old versions support the English Version.

15. Investigation (Ec 1:13) into human ways is vain labor, for they are hopelessly "crooked" and "cannot be made straight" by it (Ec 7:13). God, the chief good, alone can do this (Is 40:4; 45:2).

wanting--(Da 5:27).

numbered--so as to make a complete number; so equivalent to "supplied" [Maurer]. Or, rather, man's state is utterly wanting; and that which is wholly defective cannot be numbered or calculated. The investigator thinks he can draw up, in accurate numbers, statistics of man's wants; but these, including the defects in the investigator's labor, are not partial, but total.

16. communed with ... heart--(Ge 24:45).

come to great estate--Rather, "I have magnified and gotten" (literally, "added," increased), &c.

all ... before me in Jerusalem--namely, the priests, judges, and two kings that preceded Solomon. His wisdom exceeded that of all before Jesus Christ, the antitypical Koheleth, or "Gatherer of men," (Lu 13:34), and "Wisdom" incarnate (Mt 11:19; 12:42).

had ... experience--literally, "had seen" (Jr 2:31). Contrast with this glorying in worldly wisdom (Jr 9:23, 24).

17. wisdom ... madness--that is, their effects, the works of human wisdom and folly respectively. "Madness," literally, "vaunting extravagance"; Ec 2:12; 7:25, &c., support English Version rather than Dathe, "splendid matters." "Folly" is read by English Version with some manuscripts, instead of the present Hebrew text, "prudence." If Hebrew be retained, understand "prudence," falsely so called (1Ti 6:20), "craft" (Da 8:25).

18. wisdom ... knowledge--not in general, for wisdom, &c., are most excellent in their place; but speculative knowledge of man's ways (Ec 1:13, 17), which, the farther it goes, gives one the more pain to find how "crooked" and "wanting" they are (Ec 1:15; 12:12).

The words of the Preacher - Literally, "The words of Choheleth, son of David, king of Jerusalem." But the Targum explains it thus: "The words of the prophecy, which Choheleth prophesied; the same is Solomon, son of David the king, who was in Jerusalem. For when Solomon, king of Israel, saw by the spirit of prophecy that the kingdom of Rehoboam his son was about to be divided with Jeroboam, the son of Nebat; and the house of the sanctuary was about to be destroyed, and the people of Israel sent into captivity; he said in his word - Vanity of vanities is all that I have labored, and David my father; they are altogether vanity." The word קהלת Koheleth is a feminine noun, from the root קהל kahal, to collect, gather together, assemble; and means, she who assembles or collects a congregation; translated by the Septuagint, ekklhsiasthv, a public speaker, a speaker in an assembly; and hence translated by us a preacher. In my old MS. Bible it is explained thus: a talker to the peple; or togyder cleping.

Vanity of vanities - As the words are an exclamation, it would be better to translate, O vanity of vanities! Emptiness of emptinesses.

True, substantial good is not to be found in any thing liable to change and corruption.

The author referred to in the introduction begins his paraphrase thus: - "O vain deluding world! whose largest gifts

Thine emptiness betray, like painted clouds,

Or watery bubbles: as the vapor flies,

Dispersed by lightest blast, so fleet thy joys,

And leave no trace behind. This serious truth

The royal preacher loud proclaims, convinced

By sad experience; with a sigh repeats

The mournful theme, that nothing here below

Can solid comfort yield: 'tis all a scene.

Of vanity, beyond the power of words

To express, or thought conceive. Let every man

Survey himself, then ask, what fruit remains

Of all his fond pursuits? What has he gain'd,

By toiling thus for more than nature's wants

Require? Why thus with endlness projects rack'd

His heated brain, and to the laboring mind,

Repose denied? Why such expense of time,

That steals away so fast, and ne'er looks back?Could man his wish obtain, how short the space

For his enjoyment! No less transient here

The time of his duration, than the things

Thus anxiously pursued. For, as the mind,

In search of bliss, fix'd on no solid point,

For ever fluctuates; so our little frames,

In which we glory, haste to their decline,

Nor permanence can find. The human race

Drop like autumnal leaves, by spring revived:

One generation from the stage of life

Withdraws, another comes, and thus makes room

For that which follows. Mightiest realms decay,

Sink by degrees; and lo! new form'd estates

Rise from their ruins. Even the earth itself,

Sole object of our hopes and fears,

Shall have its period, though to man unknown."

What profit hath a man - What is the sum of the real good he has gained by all his toils in life? They, in themselves, have neither made him contented nor happy.

One generation passeth away - Men succeed each other in unceasing generations: but the earth is still the same; it undergoes no change that leads to melioration, or greater perfection. And it will continue the same לעולם leolam, during the whole course of time; till the end of all things arrives.

, Ecc 1:6

These verses are confused by being falsely divided. The first clause of the sixth should be joined to the fifth verse. "The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he ariseth; going to the south, and circulating to the north."

"The wind is continually whirling about, and the wind returneth upon its whirlings."

It is plain, from the clause which I have restored to the fifth verse, that the author refers to the approximations of the sun to the northern and southern tropics, viz., of Cancer and Capricorn.

All the versions agree in applying the first clause of the sixth verse to the sun, and not to the wind. Our version alone has mistaken the meaning. My old MS. Bible is quite correct:

The sunne riisith up, and goth doun, and to his place turnith agein; and there agein riising, goth about bi the south, and then agein to the north.

The author points out two things here:

1. Day and night, marked by the appearance of the sun above the horizon; proceeding apparently from east to west; where he sinks under the horizon, and appears to be lost during the night.

2. His annual course through the twelve signs of the zodiac, when, from the equinoctial, he proceeds southward to the tropic of Capricorn; and thence turneth about towards the north, till he reaches the tropic of Cancer; and so on.

All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full - The reason is, nothing goes into it either by the; rivers or by rain, that does not come from it: and to the place whence the rivers come, whether from the sea originally by evaporation, or immediately by rain, thither they return again; for the water exhaled from the sea by evaporation is collected in the clouds, and in rain, etc., falls upon the tops of the mountains; and, filtered through their fissures, produce streams, several of which uniting, make rivers, which flow into the sea. The water is again evaporated by the sun; the vapors collected are precipitated; and, being filtered through the earth, become streams, etc., as before.

All things are full of labor - It is; impossible to calculate how much anxiety, pain, labor, and fatigue are necessary in order to carry on the common operations of life. But an endless desire of gain, and an endless curiosity to unfitness a variety of results, cause men to, labor on. The eye sees much, but wishes to, see more. The ear hears of many things; but is curious to have the actual knowledge of them. So desire and curiosity carry men, under the Divine providence, through all the labors and pains of life.

The thing that hath been - Every thing in the whole economy of nature has its revolutions; summer and winter, heat and cold, rain and drought, seedtime and autumn, with the whole system of corruption and generation, alternately succeed each other, so that whatever has been shall be again. There is really, physically, and philosophically, nothing absolutely new under the sun, in the course of sublunary things. The same is the case in all the revolutions of the heavens.

Is there any thing, etc. - The original is beautiful. "Is there any thing which will say, See this! it is new?" Men may say this of their discoveries, etc.; but universal nature says, It is not new. It has been, and it will be.

There is no remembrance - I believe the general meaning to be this: Multitudes of ancient transactions have been lost, because they were not recorded; and of many that have been recorded, the records are lost. And this will be the case with many others which are yet to occur. How many persons, not much acquainted with books, have supposed that certain things were their own discoveries, which have been written or printed even long before they were born! Dutens, in his Origin of the Discoveries attributed to the Moderns, has made a very clear case.

I the Preacher was king - This is a strange verse, and does not admit of an easy solution. It is literally, "I, Choheleth, have been king over Israel, in Jerusalem." This book, as we have already seen, has been conjectured by some to have been written about the time that Ptolemy Philadelphus formed his great library at Alexandria, about two hundred and eighty-five years before our Lard; and from the multitude of Jews that dwelt there, and resorted to that city for the sake of commerce, it was said there was an Israel in Alexandria. See the introduction.

It has also been conjectured from this, that if the book were written by Solomon, it was intended to be a posthumous publication. "I that was king, still continue to preach and instruct you." Those who suppose the book to have been written after Solomon's fall, think that he speaks thus through humility. "I was once worthy of the name of king: but I fell into all evil; and, though recovered, I am no longer worthy of the name." I am afraid this is not solid.

And I gave my heart to seek and search - While Solomon was faithful to his God he diligently cultivated his mind. His giving himself to the study of natural history, philosophy, poetry, etc., are sufficient proofs of it. He had not intuitive knowledge from God; but he had a capacity to obtain every kind of knowledge useful to man.

This sore travail - This is the way in which knowledge is to be acquired; and in order to investigate the operations of nature, the most laborious discussions and perplexing experiments must be instituted, and conducted to their proper results. It is God's determination that knowledge shall be acquired in no other way.

Behold, all is vanity - After all these discussions and experiments, when even the results have been the most successful, I have found only rational satisfaction; but not that supreme good by which alone the soul can be made happy.

O curas hominum! O quantum est in rebus inane! "How anxious are our cares, and yet how vain

The bent of our desires!"

Pers. Sat. i., 5: 1.

That which is crooked cannot be made straight - There are many apparent irregularities and anomalies in nature for which we cannot account; and there are many defects that cannot be supplied. This is the impression from a general view of nature; but the more we study and investigate its operations, the more we shall be convinced that all is a consecutive and well-ordered whole; and that in the chain of nature not one link is broken, deficient, or lost.

I communed with mine own heart - Literally, "I spoke, I, with my heart, saying." When successful in my researches, but not happy in my soul, though easy in my circumstances, I entered into my own heart, and there inquired the cause of my discontent. He found that, though -

1. He had gotten wisdom beyond all men;

2. Wealth and honors more than any other;

3. Practical wisdom more than all his predecessors;

4. Had tried pleasure and animal gratification, even to their extremes; yet after all this he had nothing but vexation of spirit.

None of these four things, nor the whole of them conjoined, could afford him such a happiness as satisfies the soul. Why was all this? Because the soul was made for God, and in the possession of him alone can it find happiness.

To know madness and folly - הוללות ושכלות holloth vesichluth. Παραβολας και επιστημην, "Parables and science." - Septuagint. So the Syriac; nearly so the Arabic. "What were error and foolishness." - Coverdale. Perhaps gayety and sobriety may be the better meaning for these two difficult words. I can scarcely think they are taken in that bad sense in which our translation exhibits them. "I tried pleasure in all its forms; and sobriety and self-abnegation to their utmost extent." Choheleth paraphrases, "Even fools and madmen taught me rules."

For in much wisdom is much grief - The more we know of ourselves the less satisfied shall we be with our own hearts; and the more we know of mankind the less willing shall we be to trust them, and the less shall we admire them.

Be that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow - And why so? Because, independently of God, the principal objects of knowledge are natural and moral evils.

The Targum gives a curious paraphrase here: "The man who multiplies wisdom, when he sins and is not converted to repentance, multiplies the indignation of God against himself; and the man who adds science, and yet dies in his childhood, adds grief of heart to his relatives." A man in science; a foolish child in conduct. How pained must they be who had the expense of his education! But there are many men-children of this sort in every age and country.

The preacher - Who was not only a king, but also a teacher of God's people: who having sinned grievously in the eyes of all the world, thought himself obliged to publish his repentance, and to give publick warning to all, to avoid those rocks upon which he had split.

Vanity - Not only vain, but vanity in the abstract, which denotes extreme vanity. Saith - Upon deep consideration and long experience, and by Divine inspiration. This verse contains the general proposition, which he intends particularly to demonstrate in the following book. All - All worldly things. Is vanity - Not in themselves for they are God's creatures and therefore good in their kinds, but in reference to that happiness, which men seek and expect to find in them. So they are unquestionably vain, because they are not what they seem to be, and perform not what they promise, but instead of that are the occasions of innumerable cares, and fears, and sorrows, and mischiefs. Nay, they are not only vanity but vanity of vanities, the vainest vanity, vanity in the highest degree. And this is redoubled, because the thing is certain, beyond all possibility of dispute.

What profit - What real and abiding benefit? None at all. All is unprofitable as to the attainment of that happiness which all men are enquiring after. His labour - Heb. his toilsome labour, both of body and mind in the pursuit of riches, or pleasures, or other earthly things. Under the sun - In all worldly matters, which are usually transacted in the day time, or by the light of the sun. By this restriction he implies that the happiness which in vain is sought for in this lower world, is really to be found in heavenly places and things.

Passeth - Men continue but for one, and that a short age, and then they leave all their possessions, and therefore they cannot be happy here, because happiness must needs be unchangeable and eternal; or else the certain knowledge of the approaching loss of all these things will rob a man of solid contentment in them. Abideth - Through all successive generations of men; and therefore man is more mutable than the very earth upon which he stands, and which, together with all the comforts which he enjoyed in it, he leaves behind to be possessed by others.

The sun - The sun is in perpetual motion, rising, setting, and rising again, and so constantly repeating its course in all succeeding days, and years, and ages; and the like he observes concerning the winds and rivers, ver.6,7, and the design of these similitudes seem to be; to shew the vanity of all worldly things, and that man's mind can never be satisfied with them, because there is nothing in the world but a constant repetition of the same things, which is so irksome, that the consideration thereof hath made some persons weary of their lives; and there is no new thing under the sun, as is added in the foot of the account, ver.9, which seems to be given us as a key to understand the meaning of the foregoing passages. And this is certain from experience that the things of this world are so narrow, and the mind of man so vast, that there must be something new to satisfy the mind; and even delightful things by too frequent repetition, are so far from yielding satisfaction, that they grow tedious and troublesome.

The wind - The wind also sometimes blows from one quarter of the world, and sometimes from another; successively returning to the same quarters in which it had formerly been.

Is not full - So as to overflow the earth. Whereby also he intimates the emptiness of mens minds, notwithstanding all the abundance of creature comforts. Rivers come - Unto the earth in general, from whence they come or flow into the sea, and to which they return by the reflux of the sea. For he seems to speak of the visible and constant motion of the waters, both to the sea and from it, and then to it again in a perpetual reciprocation.

All things - Not only the sun, and winds, and rivers, but all other creatures. Labour - They are in continual restlessness and change, never abiding in the same state. Is not satisfied - As there are many things in the world vexatious to men, so even those things which are comfortable, are not satisfactory, but men are constantly desiring some longer continuance or fuller enjoyment of them, or variety in them. The eye and ear are here put for all the senses, because these are most spiritual and refined, most curious and inquisitive, most capable of receiving satisfaction, and exercised with more ease and pleasure than the other senses.

There is - There is nothing in the world but a continued and tiresome repetition of the same things. The nature and course of the beings and affairs of the world, and the tempers of men, are the same that they ever were and shall ever be; and therefore, because no man ever yet received satisfaction from worldly things, it is vain for any person hereafter to expect it. No new thing - In the nature of things, which might give us hopes of attaining that satisfaction which hitherto things have not afforded.

No remembrance - This seems to be added to prevent the objection, There are many inventions and enjoyments unknown to former ages. To this he answers, This objection is grounded only upon our ignorance of ancient times which if we exactly knew or remembered, we should easily find parallels to all present occurrences. There are many thousands of remarkable speeches and actions done in this and the following ages which neither are, nor ever will be, put into the publick records or histories, and consequently must unavoidably be forgotten in succeeding ages; and therefore it is just and reasonable to believe the same concerning former ages.

I was king - Having asserted the vanity of all things in the general, he now comes to prove his assertion in those particulars wherein men commonly seek, and with greatest probability expect to find, true happiness. He begins with secular wisdom. And to shew how competent a judge he was of this matter, he lays down this character, That he was the preacher, which implies eminent knowledge; and a king, who therefore had all imaginable opportunities and advantages for the attainment of happiness, and particularly for the getting of wisdom, by consulting all sorts of books and men, by trying all manner of experiments; and no ordinary king, but king over Israel, God's own people, a wise and an happy people, whose king he was by God's special appointment and furnished by God, with singular wisdom for that great trust; and whose abode was in Jerusalem where were the house of God and the most wise and learned of the priests attending upon it, and the seats of justice, and colleges or assemblies of the wisest men of their nation. All these concurring in him, which rarely do in any other men, make the argument drawn from his experience more convincing.

I gave my heart - Which phrase denotes his serious and fixed purpose, and his great industry in it. To search - To seek diligently and accurately. By wisdom - By the help of that wisdom wherewith God had endowed me. Concerning - Concerning all the works of God and men in this lower world; the works of nature; the works of Divine providence; and the works and depths of human policy. This travel - This difficult and toilsome work of searching out these things, God hath inflicted as a just punishment upon man for his eating of the tree of knowledge. To be exercised - To employ themselves in the painful study of these things.

Seen - Diligently observed. Vanity - Not only unsatisfying, but also an affliction or breaking to a man's spirit.

Crooked - All our knowledge serves only to discover our miseries, but is utterly insufficient to remove them; it cannot rectify those disorders which are either in our own hearts and lives, or in the men and things of the world. Wanting - In our knowledge. Or, counted out to us from the treasures of human learning. But what is wanting, will still be so. And that which is wanting in our own knowledge, is so much that it cannot be numbered. The more we know, the more we see of our own ignorance.

Communed - I considered within myself. Great - In wisdom. Have gotten - As I had a large stock of wisdom infused into me by God, so I have greatly improved it by conversation, and study, and experience. Than all - Whether governors, or priests, or private persons. In Jerusalem - Which was then the most eminent place in the world for wisdom.

To know - That I might throughly understand the nature and difference of truth and error, of virtue and vice.

Grief - Or, displeasure within himself, and against his present condition. Sorrow - Which he does many ways, because he gets his knowledge with hard and wearisome labour, both of mind and body, with the consumption of his spirits, and shortening of his life; because he is often deceived with knowledge falsely so called, and often mistakes error for truth, and is perplexed with manifold doubts, from which ignorant men are wholly free; because he hath the clearer prospect into, and quicker sense of his own ignorance, and infirmities, and disorders, and withal how vain and ineffectual all his knowledge is for the prevention or removal of them; and because his knowledge is very imperfect and unsatisfying, yet increasing his thirst after more knowledge; lastly, because his knowledge quickly fades and dies with him, and then leaves him in no better, and possibly in a much worse condition than the meanest and most unlearned man in the world.

1 THe words of the preacher , the son of David, king in Jerusalem .

Who was not onely a King, but also a Teacher of God's People, which he did both by Words, upon some solemn occasions, and by Writings. Who having sinned grievously and scandalously in the Eyes of all the World, justly thought himself obliged to Preach or Publish his true Repentance for all his folly and wickedness, and to give publick warning and wholesom counsels to all Persons to avoid those Rocks upon which he had split. The Hebrew properly signifies either gathering or gathered, and so it signifies, either 1. a Preacher, as it is commonly rendred, whose Office it is to gather in Souls unto God or his Church. Or 2. A Penitent or Convert, or, one gathered, or brought back by true Repentance to God, and to his Church, from which he had so wickedly revolted.

This is added partly as a description of the Person or Author of this Book, Solomon, who was the onely Man that was both Son of David, properly so called, and King in Ierusalem: and partly as an aggravation of his sin, because he was the Son of David, a wise and godly Father; who had given him both excellent counsel, and, for his general course, a good example; and for the evil example which he gave him in the matter of Uriah, that also, considered with his hearty and effectual Repentance for it, and the dreadful punishments of it upon his Person and Family, was a fair warning and most powerful instruction to him to learn by his Fathers example, and because he was a King, not by Birth, for he was not David's eldest Son, but by the special favour and designation of that God whom he had now so ill requited, and that in Ierusalem, an Holy City, the place of God's special presence, and of his worship, where he had daily opportunities to know, and obligations to practise better things, which place he had defiled by his horrid sins, and thereby made it and all God's People, and the true Religion, and the Name of the blessed God, odious and contemptible amongst all the Nations round about him.

2. Vanity of vanities , saith the preacher , vanity of vanities; all is vanity .

Not onely vain, but vanity in the Abstract, which notes extream vanity, especially where the word is thus doubled, as a King of Kings, is the chief of Kings, and a Servant of Servants is the vilest of Servants, and a Song of Songs, is a most excellent Song.

Upon deep consideration and long experience, and by Divine inspiration. This Verse contains the general Proposition, which he intends particularly to demonstrate in the whole following Book.

Not in themselves, for so they are God's Creatures and therefore good and really useful in their kinds, but in reference to men, and to that happiness, which men seek and confidently expect to find in them. So they are unquestionably vain, because they are not what they seem to be, and perform not what they promise, content and satisfaction, but instead of that are commonly the causes or occasions of innumerable cares, and fears, and sorrows, and mischiefs, and because they are altogether unsuitable to the noble Mind or Soul of Man, both in nature or quality, and in duration, as being unstable and perishing things. And this vanity of them is here repeated again and again, partly because it was most deeply fixed, and perpetually present in Solomon's Thoughts; partly to shew the unquestionable certainty and vast importance of this truth; and partly that he might more throughly awaken the dull and stupid minds of men to the consideration of it, and might wean mens Hearts from those things upon which he knew they excessively doted.

e All worldly things, and all mens designs, and studies, and works about them.

Marginal references: Ps. 39. 5. 6. & 62. 9. & 144. 4. Ch. 12. 8.; Heb. this all.; Rom 8. 20.

3 What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the Sun .

Or, as others render it, What remainder? What real and abiding benefit hath a Man by it? None at all. All is unprofitable as to the attainment of that happiness which Solomon here is, and all men in the World are enquiring after.

Heb. his toilsom labour, both of Body and Mind in the pursuit of Riches, or Pleasures, or other earthly things.

In all sublunary or worldly matters, which are usually transacted in the Day time, or by the light of the Sun. By this restriction he implies that that profit and happiness which in vain is sought for in this lower World is really and onely to be found in Heavenly places and things.

Marginal references: Ch. 2. 22. & 3. 9.

4 One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh but the earth abideth for ever .

i. e. Through all successive Generations of men: and therefore Man in this respect is more mutable and miserable than the very Earth upon which he stands. and which, together with all the glories and comforts which he enjoyed in it, he leaveth behind him to be possessed by others.

k Men continue but for one, and that a short Age, and then they leave all their possessions to the succeding Age, and therefore they cannot be happy here, because happiness must needs be unchangeable and eternal, or else the perpetual fear and certain knowledge of the approaching loss of all these things will rob a Man of all solid contentment in them.

Marginal references: Ps. 104. 5. & 119. 9.; Heb. standeth.

5 The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose .

The Sun is in perpetual motion somtimes arising, and somtimes setting and then arising again, and so constantly repeating its courses in all succeeding Days, and Years, and Ages; and the like he observes concerning the Winds and Rivers, as he observes, v. 6, 7. And the design of these similitudes seems to be, either 1. that by representing the constant changes and restless motions of these particular things he might intimate that it is so with all other earthly things; and therefore no Man can expect satisfaction from them. Or 2. that by comparing the Sun, and Wind, and Rivers, as v. 4. he compared the Earth, with Man, he might shew that Man, considered as mortal, is in a more unhappy condition than these things, because when the Earth abides, Man goes; and when the Sun sets, he riseth again, and so the Wind and Rivers return to their former place and state, but Man when once he dies, he never returns again to this life; of which comparison, see Iob 14. 7, 12. Or, 3. to shew the vanity of all worldly things, and that Man's mind can never be satisfied with them, because there is nothing in the World but a constant repetition of the same things, which is so irksome a thing, that the consideration thereof hath made some Persons weary of their lives, and there is no new thing under the Sun, as is added in the foot of the account, v. 9. which seems to me to be given us as a Key to understand the meaning of the foregoing passages. And this is manifest and certain from experience that the things of this World are so narrow, and the mind of Man so vast, that there must be somthing new to satisfie the Mind, and even delightful things by too frequent repetition or long continuance are so far from yielding satisfaction, that they grow tedious and troublesom.

Marginal references: Heb. panteth.

6 The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north ; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits .

The Wind also somtimes blows from one quarter of the World, and somtimes from another; all of them being Synechdochically comprehended under these two eminent quarters. But because this word, the Wind is not expressed in the Hebrew, but is onely borrowed or understood from the latter clause of the Verse, this first clause is by other judicious Interpreters understood of the Sun, of whom he last spake; the words being thus rendred according to the Hebrew, He (the Sun) goeth towards the South (which he doth one half of the Year) and turneth about unto the North, which he doth the other half. And so here is the whole motion of the Sun towards the four quarters of the World particularly described, his daily motion from East to West, and back again, v. 5. and his Yearly motion from North to South, between the Signs of Cancer and Capricorn.

This clause is by all understood of the Wind, which is fitly mentioned immediately after the Sun, because it hath its rise from the Sun, who is therefore called the Father of Winds, and the Winds do usually rise with the Sun, and are laid when he sets. But then it is rendred thus, and that very agreeably to the Hebrew, the Wind goeth continually whirling or compassing about, and he returneth again to his circuits, being somtimes in one, and somtimes in another quarter, and successively returning to the same quarters in which he had formerly been.

7 All the rivers run into the sea, yet the sea is not full : unto the place from whence the rivers come , thither they return again.

To wit, to the brink, or so as to overflow the Earth, which might be expected from such vast accessions to it. Whereby also he intimates the emptiness and dissatisfaction of mens minds, notwithstanding all the abundance of Creature comforts.

Either 1. unto the Sea, from whence they are supposed to return into their proper Channels, and then, as it is expressed, thither (i. e. into the Sea) they return again. Or 2. unto their Springs or Fountains, to which the Waters return by secret passages of the Earth, as is manifest from the Caspian Sea, and reasonably supposed in other places. Or rather 3. unto the Earth in general, from whence they come or flow into the Sea, and to which they return again by the reflux of the Sea. For he seems to speak of the visible and constant motion of the Waters, both to the Sea and from it, and then to it again in a perpetual reciprocation: which agrees best with the former similitudes, v. 5, 6.

Marginal references: Job 38. 10. Psa. 104 8. 9.; Heb. unto the place that the Rivers go, thither they return to go.

8 All things are full of labour , man cannot utter it : the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing .

Not onely the Sun, and Winds, and Rivers, which I have mentioned, but all other Creatures.

Both subjectively, as they are in continual restlesness and change, never abiding in the same state or place; and efficiently, as they cause great and sore labour to men, in getting, and keeping, and enjoying of them, yea even in the study of them, as is noted hereafter.

The labour is inexpressibly and unconceivably great.

As there are many things in the World troublesome and vexatious to mens senses and minds, so even those things which are comfortable and acceptable to them are not satisfactory, but men are constantly desiring some longer continuance or fuller enjoyment of them, or variety in them, and they never say, It is enough, I desire no more. The Eye and Ear are here synedochically put for all the senses, because these are most Spiritual and refined, most curious and inquisitive, most capable of receiving satisfaction, because they are exercised with more ease and pleasure than the other senses, whose satisfactions are oft attended with greater weariness, and manifold dangers, and inconveniences.

9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done, is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

There is nothing in the World but a continued and tiresom repetition of the same things, the Nature and course of the beings and affairs of the World, and the tempers of mens minds, are generally the same that they ever were and shall ever be; and therefore because no Man ever yet received satisfaction from any worldly things, it is a vain and foolish thing for any Person hereafter to expect it.

To wit, in the nature of things, which might give us hopes of attaining that satisfaction which things have not hitherto afforded. For otherwise this doth not restrain the God of Nature, who hath frequently done and still can do, new and miraculous works, and who can and doth discover to particular Persons new inventions, when it pleaseth him.

Marginal references: Ch. 3. 15.; Heb. what is it that hath been? the [illegible: 1 word] that shall [illegible: 1 word]. So Gr.

10 Is there any thing whereof it may be said, see, this is new ? it hath been already of old time , which was before us.

For the proof hereof I appeal to the consciences and experiences of all men.

The same things have been said and done before, though possibly we did not know it.

11 There is no remembrance of former things ; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come, with those that shall come after .

This seems to be added to prevent this Objection, There are many new inventions and enjoyments unknown to former Ages. To this he answers, This Objection is grounded onely upon our ignorance of ancient times and things, which is very great, and which if we did exactly know or remember, we should easily find Parallels to all present occurrences in former Ages.

This clause tends both to illustrate and confirm the former. The sense is, There are many thousands of remarkable speeches and actions done in this, and the following Ages which neither are nor ever will be put into the publick Records or Histories, and consequently they must unavoidably be forgotten and lost unto succeeding Ages; and therefore it is just and reasonable to believe the same concerning former Ages; seeing the same causes are most likely to produce the same effects.

12 I the preacher was king over Israel in Jerusalem .

This Verse is a Preface to the following Discourse, that by the consideration of the quality of the Speaker they might be induced to give more attention and respect to his words. Having asserted the vanity of all things in the general, he now comes to prove his assertion in all those particulars wherein men commonly seek and with greatest probability expect to find true happiness. He begins with secular Wisdom. And to shew how competent a judge he was of this matter, he lays down his Character, that he was the Preacher, which implies eminent knowledge and ability to teach others, or, the Convert, who had learnt by dear bought experience what he now taught them; and a King, who therefore had all imaginable opportunities and advantages for the attainment of happiness, and particularly for the getting of Wisdom, by consulting all sorts of Books and Men, by trying all manner of experiments, and many other ways; and no ordinary King, but King over Israel God's own and onely beloved People, a wise and an happy People, Deut. 4. 6, 7. & 33. 29. whose King he was by God's special and gracious appointment, and furnished by God with singular Wisdom for the discharge of that great trust; and whose Royal Palace, and abode was in Ierusalem, where were the House of God and the most wise and learned of the Priests attending upon it, and the Seats of Justice, and the Colledges or Assemblies of the wisest Men of their Nation, of which see 2 Kings 22. 14. 1 Chron. 25. 8, &c. Psal. 122. 5. All which helps concurring together in him, which very rarely do in any other men, makes the argument drawn from his experience more convincing and undeniable.

13 And I gave my heart to seek and search out by wisdom concerning all things that are done under heaven : this sore travel hath God given to the sons of man , to be exercised therewith .

Which Phrase notes his serious and fixed purpose, his great industry and alacrity in it.

To seek diligently and accurately.

Wisely, or by the help of that Wisdom wherewith God had endowed me.

Concerning all the works of God and Men in this lower World, the works of Nature, and their causes, effects, properties and operations, the works of Divine Providence, and God's counsels and ends in them, the work and depths of humane policy in the conduct of Personal, and Domestical, and Publick Affairs.

This difficult and toilsom work of searching out these things

God hath inflicted this as a just punishment upon Man for his eating of the Tree of Knowledge, that instead of that sweet and perfect knowledge which God had freely infused into Man at his first Creation, he should now grope after some small parcels or fragments of it, and those too not to be gotte[illegible: 1+ letters] without the sweat of his brows and brains.

To employ themselves in the painful study of these things, which now is both their duty and their punishment. Or, as it is rendred in the margent, and by many others, to afflict them in or by it, to chastise their former curiosity, and to give them matter of continual humiliation and vexation. And therefore knowledge is so far from making men happy, that it exposeth them to trouble and infelicity.

Marginal references: Or, to afflict th[illegible: 1+ letters]n.

14 I have seen all the works that are done under the sun, and behold , all is vanity and vexation of spirit .

i. e. Diligently observed, and in great measure understood.

For it was a great surprise to me, and therefore may seem strange to you.

And not only unsatisfying, but also troublesom, and an affliction or breaking to a mans spirit or mind. Or, as others, both ancient and modern Translators, render it, a feeding upon wind, as these very words, save only that there is the verb from which this noun seems most probably deduced, are rendred, Hos. 12. 1. where also it signifies a fruitless or lost labour, and a disappointment of their hopes and desires of satisfaction. And so this is arepetition of the same thing in other words, according to the manner of these Books.

15 That which is crooked cannot be made streight : and that which is wanting cannot be numbred .

All our knowledg serves only to discover our diseases and miseries, but is o[illegible: 1+ letters]t it self utterly insufficient to heal or remove them; it cannot rectify those confusions and disorders which are either in our own Hearts and Lives, or in the men and things of the world.

To wit, in our knowledg, and in order to mans compleat satisfaction and felicity.

We know little of what we should or might know, or did know in the state of Innocency, or shall know in the future Life.

Marginal references: [illegible: 1 word] 13.; [illegible: 1 word] [illegible: 1 word].

16 I communed with mine own heart , saying, Lo, I am come to great estate , and have gotten more wisdom than all they that have been before me in Jerusalem : yea, my heart had great experience of wisdom and knowledg .

I considered within my self in what condition I was, and what degrees of knowledg I had gained, and whether it was not my ignorance that made me unable to rectifie those errours, and supply those wants, and wiser Men could do it, though I could not.

Heb. I am grown great, to wit, in Wisdom: Or, I have magnified, or greatly enlarged.

Heb. have added. As I had a large stock of Wisdom insused into me by God, 1 King. 3. 12. & 4. 29. so I have greatly improved it by Conversation, and Study, and Experience.

Whether Governours, or Priests, or private Persons. Which was no vain boast, but a known and confessed truth, and profession hereof was necessary to demonstrate his assertion.

Which was then the most eminent place in the World for Wisdom and Knowledg.

Heb. had seen much; which intimates that his Knowledg was clear, and certain, and experimental, as that is which we have from our own eye-sight.

Two words signifying the same thing, as may be gathered from v. 18. and from the promiscuous use of them in this Book, and in the Proverbs, and elsewhere, and implying all manner of knowledge, divine or humane, speculative or practical, political or philosophical.

Marginal references: [illegible: 1 word]. 4. 30. [illegible: 1 word] 7, 23.; [illegible: 1 word] [illegible: 1 word] [illegible: 1 word]

17 And I gave my heart to know wisdom, and to know madness and folly : I perceived that this also is vexation of spirit .

That I might throughly understand the nature and difference of Truth and Errour, of Virtue and Vice, all things being best understood by contraries, and might discern if there were any opinion or practice amongst Men, which would give him full satisfaction.

Or, feeding upon wind, as v. 14.

Marginal references: [illegible: 1 word] 2. 12. [illegible: 1 word]. 23. 25.

18 For in much wisdom is much grief : and he that encreaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow .

Or, indignation, or displeasure within himself, and against his present condition.

Which he doth many ways, partly because he gets his knowledg with hard and wearisom labour, both of Mind and Body, with the consumption of his Spirits, and shortning and imbitterment of his Life; partly because he is oft deceived with knowledg falsly so called, and oft mistakes Errours for Truths, and is perplexed with manifold doubts, from which ignorant Men are wholly free; partly because he foresees, and consequently feels the terrour of many miseries which are, or are likely to come to pass, which are unobserved by less knowing persons, and which possibly never happen; partly because he hath the clearer prospect into, and quicker sense of his own Ignorance, and Infirmities, and Disorders, and withal how vain and ineffectual all his knowledg is for the prevention or removal of them: and partly because his Knowledg is very imperfect and unsatisfying, yet increasing his thirst after more Knowledg, and consequently after more dissatisfaction, because instead of that just Honour, and Delight, and Advantage which he expects from it, he meets with nothing but Envy, and Opposition, and contempt, because his Knowledg quickly fades and dies with him, and then leaves him in no better, and possibly in a much worse condition than the meanest, and most unlearned man in the World.

Marginal references: Or, indignation.

The Book of Ecclesiastes

Introduction

If we look at the world without God, it appears what it is - a magnificent, graduated combination of diverse classes of beings, connected causes and effects, well-calculated means and ends. But thus contemplated, the world as a whole remains a mystery. If, with the atheist, we lay aside the idea of God, then, notwithstanding the law of causation, which is grounded in our mental nature, we abandon the question of the origin of the world. If, with the pantheist, we transfer the idea of God to the world itself, then the effect is made to be as one with the cause - not, however, without the conception of God, which is inalienable in man, reacting against it; for one cannot but distinguish between substance and its phenomena. The mysteries of the world which meet man as a moral being remain, under this view of the world, altogether without solution. For the moral order of the world presupposes an absolutely good Being, from whom it has proceeded, and who sustains it; it demands a Lawgiver and a Judge. Apart from the reference to this Being, the distinction between good and evil loses its depth and sharpness. Either there is no God, or all that is and happens is a moment in the being and life of God Himself, who is identical with the world: thus must the world-destructive power of sin remain unrecognised. The opinion as to the state of the world will, from a pantheistic point of view, rise to optimism; just as, on the other hand, from an atheistic point of view, it will sink to pessimism. The commanding power of goodness even the atheist may recognise by virtue of the inner law peculiar to man as a moral being, but the divine consecration is wanting to this goodness; and if human life is a journey from nothing to nothing, then this will be the best of all goodness: that man set himself free from the evil reality, and put his confidence in nothing. “Him who views the world,” says Buddhism, “as a water-bubble, a phantom, the king of death does not terrify. What pleasure, what joy is in this world? Behold the changing form-it is undone by old age; the diseased body - it dissolves and corrupts! 'I have sons and treasures; here will I dwell in the season of the cold, and there in the time of the heat:' thus thinks the fool; and cares not for, and sees not, the hindrances thereto. Him who is concerned about sons and treasures - the man who has his heart so entangled - death tears away, as the torrent from the forest sweeps away the slumbering village.” The view taken of the world, and the judgment formed regarding it, in the Book of Ecclesiastes, are wholly different. While in the Book of Esther faith in God remains so much in the background that there is nowhere in it express mention made of God, the name of God occurs in Ecclesiastes no fewer than thirty-seven times,האלהים, Ecc 2:24, Ecc 2:26; Ecc 3:11, Ecc 3:14 (twice), 15, 17, 18; Ecc 5:1, Ecc 5:5-6, Ecc 5:17-18 (Ecc 5:1, Ecc 5:2, Ecc 5:6-7, Ecc 5:18-19), 19 (20); Ecc 6:2 (twice); Ecc 7:13-14, Ecc 7:26, Ecc 7:29; Ecc 8:15, Ecc 8:17; Ecc 9:1, Ecc 9:7; Ecc 11:5, Ecc 11:9; Ecc 12:7, Ecc 12:13-14. אלהים, Ecc 3:10, Ecc 3:13; Ecc 5:3, Ecc 5:18; Ecc 7:18; Ecc 8:2, Ecc 8:13. and that in such a way that the naming of Him is at the same time the confession of Him as the True God, the Exalted above the world, the Governor and the Ruler over all. And not only that: the book characterizes itself as a genuine product of the Israelitish Chokma by this, that, true to its motto, it places the command, “Fear Thou God,” Ecc 5:6, Ecc 5:7, Ecc 12:13, in the foremost rank as a fundamental moral duty; that it makes, Ecc 8:12, the happiness of man to be dependent thereon; that it makes, Ecc 7:18; Ecc 11:9; Ecc 12:14, his final destiny to be conditioned by his fearing God; and that it contemplates the world as one that was created by God very good, Ecc 3:11; Ecc 7:29, and as arranged, Ecc 3:14, and directed so that men should fear Him. These primary principles, to which the book again and again returns, are of special importance for a correct estimate of it.

Of like decisive importance for the right estimate of the theistic, and at the same time also the pessimistic, view of the world presented by Koheleth is this, that he knows of no future life compensating for the troubles of the present life, and resolving its mystery. It is true that he says, Ecc 12:7, that the life-spirit of the man who dies returns to God who gave it, as the body returns to the dust of which it is formed; but the question asked in Ecc 3:21 shows that this preferring of the life-spirit of man to that of a beast was not, in his regard, raised above all doubt. And what does this return to God mean? By no means such a return unto God as amounts to the annihilation of the separate existence of the spirit of man; for, in the first place, there is the supposition of this separate existence running through the Bible; in the second place, נתנה, Ecc 12:7, does not point to an emanation; and in the third place, the idea of Hades prevailing in the consciousness of the ages before Christ, and which is also that of Koheleth, proves the contrary. Man exists also beyond the grave, but without the light and the force of thought and activity characterizing his present life, Ecc 9:5, Ecc 9:10. The future life is not better, but is worse than the present, a dense darkness enduring “for ever,” Ecc 9:6; Ecc 11:8; Ecc 12:5. It is true, indeed, that from the justice of God, and the experiences of the present life as standing in contradiction thereto, Ecc 8:14, the conclusion is drawn, Ecc 12:14; Ecc 11:9, that there is a last decisive judgment, bringing all to light; but this great thought, in which the interest of the book in the progress of religious knowledge comes to a climax, is as yet only an abstract postulate of faith, and not powerful enough to brighten the future; and therefore, also, not powerful enough to lift us above the miseries of the present.

That the author gives utterance to such thoughts of the future as Ecc 12:7 and Ecc 11:9; Ecc 12:14 - to which Wisd. 3:1 (“The souls of the righteous are in God' hand, and no trouble moves them”) and Dan 12:2 (“Many that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt”) are related, as being their expansion, - warrants the supposition that he disputes as little as Job does in chap. 14 the reality of a better future; but only that the knowledge of such a future was not yet given to him. In general, for the first time in the N.T. era, the hope of a better future becomes a common portion of the church’s creed, resting on the basis of faith in the history of redemption warranting it; and is advanced beyond the isolated prophetic gleams of light, the mere postulates of faith that were ventured upon, and the unconfirmed opinions, of the times preceding Christ. The N.T. Scripture shows how altogether different this world of sin and of change appears to be since a world of recompense and of glory has been revealed as its background; since the Lord has pronounced as blessed those who weep, and not those who laugh; and since, with the apostle (Rom 8:18), we may be convinced that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that shall be revealed to us. The goal of human life, with its labour and its sufferings, is now carried beyond the grave. That which is done under the sun appears only as a segment of the universal and everlasting operation, governed by the wisdom of God, the separate portions of which can only be understood in their connection with the whole. The estimate taken of this present world, apart from its connection with the future, must be one-sided. There are two worlds: the future is the solution of the mystery of the present.

A N.T. believer would not be able to write such a book as that of Job, or even as that of Ecclesiastes, without sinning against revealed truth; without renouncing the better knowledge meanwhile made possible; without falling back to an O.T. standpoint. The author of the Book of Ecclesiastes is related to revealed religion in its O.T. manifestation, - he is a believer before the coming of Christ; but not such an one as all, or as most were, but of peculiar character and position. There are some natures that have a tendency to joyfulness, and others to sadness. The author of this book does not belong to the latter class; for if he did, the call to rejoice, Ecc 11:9, Ecc 8:15, etc., would not as it does pervade his book, as the χαίρετε, though in a deeper sense, pervades the Epistle to the Philippians. Neither does he belong to those superficial natures which see almost everything in a rosy light, which quickly and easily divest themselves of their own and of others’ sorrows, and on which the stern earnestness of life can make no deep and lasting impressions. Nor is he a man of feeling, whom his own weakness makes a prophet of evil; not a predominatingly passive man, who, before he could fully know the world, withdrew from it, and now criticises it from his own retired corner in a careless, inattentive mood; but a man of action, with a penetrating understanding and a faculty of keen observation; a man of the world, who, from his own experience, knows the world on all its sides; a restless spirit, who has consumed himself in striving after that which truly satisfies. That this man, who was forced to confess that all science and art, all that table dainties, and the love of women, and riches, and honour yielded him, was at last but vanity and vexation of spirit, and who gained so deep an insight into the transitoriness and vanity of all earthly things, into the sorrows of this world of sin and death, and their perplexing mysteries, does not yet conclude by resigning himself to atheism, putting “Nothing” (Nirvâna), or blind Fate, in the place of God, but firmly holds that the fear of God is the highest duty and the condition of all true prosperity, as it is the highest truth and the surest knowledge - that such is the case with him may well excite our astonishment; as well as this also, that he penetrates the known illusory character of earthly things in no overstrained manner, despising the world in itself, and also the gifts of God in it, but that he places his ultimatum as to the pure enjoyment of life within the limits of the fear of God, and extends it as widely as God permits. One might therefore call the Book of Koheleth, “The Song of the Fear of God,” rather than, as H. Heine does, “The Song of Scepticism;” for however great the sorrow of the world which is therein expressed, the religious conviction of the author remains in undiminished strength; and in the midst of all the disappointments in the present world, his faith in God, and in the rectitude of God, and in the victory of the good, stands firm as a rock, against which all the waves dash themselves into foam. “This book,” says another recent author,Hartmann’s Das Lied vom Ewigen, St. Galle 1859, p. 12. “which contains almost as many contradictions as verses, may be regarded as the Breviary of the most modern materialism, and of extreme licentiousness.” He who can thus speak has not read the book with intelligence. The appearance of materialism arises from this, that the author sees in the death of man an end similar to that of beasts; and that is certainly so far true, but it is not the whole truth. In the knowledge of the reverse side of the matter he does not come beyond the threshold, because His hand was not yet there - viz. the hand of the Arisen One - which could help him over it. And as for the supposed licentiousness, Ecc 9:7-9 shows, by way of example, how greatly the fear of God had guarded him from concluding his search into all earthly things with the disgust of a worn-out libertine.

But there are certainly self-contradictions in the Book of Ecclesiastes. They have a twofold ground. They are, on the one hand, the reflection of the self-contradicting facts which the author affirms. Thus, e.g., Ecc 3:11, he says that God has set eternity in the heart of man, but that man cannot find out from the beginning to the end the work which God maketh; Ecc 3:12-13, that the best thing in this world is for a man to enjoy life; but to be able to do this, is a gift of God; Ecc 8:12, Ecc 8:14, that it goes well with them that fear God, but ill with the godless. But there is also the contrary - which is just the ground-tone of the book, that everything has its But; only the fear of God, after all that appertains to the world is found to be as vanitas vanitatum, remains as the kernel without the shell, but the commandment of the fear of God as a categorical imperative, the knowledge that the fear of God is in itself the highest happiness, and fellowship with God the highest good, remain unexpressed; the fear of God is not combined with the love of God, as e.g., in Ps 73 it serves only for warning and not for comfort. On the other hand, the book also contains contradictions, which consists in contrasts which the author is not in a condition to explain and adjust. Thus, e.g., the question whether the spirit of a dying man, in contrast to that of a beast, takes its way upwards, Ecc 3:21, is proposed as one capable of a double answer; but Ecc 12:7 answers it directly in the affirmative; the author has good grounds for the affirmative, but yet no absolute proofs. And while he denies the light of consciousness and the energy of activity to those who have gone down to Hades, Ecc 9:10, he maintains that there is a final decisive judgment of a holy and righteous God of all human conduct, Ecc 11:9; Ecc 12:14, which, since there is frequently not a righteous requital given on earth, Ecc 8:14, and since generally the issue here does not bring to light, Ecc 9:2, the distinction between the righteous and the wicked, will take place in eternity; but it is difficult to comprehend how he has reconciled the possibility of such a final judgment with the shadowy nature of existence after death.

The Book of Koheleth is, on the one side, a proof of the power of revealed religion which has grounded faith in God, the One God, the All-wise Creator and Governor of the world, so deeply and firmly in the religious consciousness, that even the most dissonant and confused impressions of the present world are unable to shake it; and, on the other side, it is a proof of the inadequacy of revealed religion in its O.T. form, since the discontent and the grief which the monotony, the confusion, and the misery of this earth occasion, remain thus long without a counterbalance, till the facts of the history of redemption shall have disclosed and unveiled the heavens above the earth. In none of the O.T. books does the Old Covenant appear as it does in the Book of Koheleth, as “that which decayeth and waxeth old, and is ready to vanish away” (Heb 8:13). If the darkness of earth must be enlightened, then a New Covenant must be established; for heavenly love, which is at the same time heavenly wisdom, enters into human nature and overcomes sin, death, and Hades, and removes the turning-point of the existence of man from this to the future life. The finger of prophecy points to this new era. And Koheleth, from amid his heaps of ruins, shows how necessary it is that the heavens should now soon open above the earth.

It is a view of the world, dark, and only broken by scattered gleams of light, not disowning its sullenness even where it recommends the happy enjoyment of life, which runs through the book in a long series of dissonances, and gives to it a peculiar character. It is thus intentionally a homogeneous whole; but is it also divided into separate parts according to a plan? That we may be able to answer this question, we subject the contents of the book to a searching analysis, step by step, yet steadily keeping the whole in view. This will at the same time also serve as a preparation for the exposition of the book.

Here below, all things under the sun are vanity. The labour of man effects nothing that is enduring, and all that is done is only a beginning and a vanishing away again, repeating itself in a never-ending circle: these are the thoughts of the book which stand as its motto, Ecc 1:2-11.Koheleth-Solomon, who had been king, then begins to set forth the vanity of all earthly things from his own experience. The striving after secular knowledge, Ecc 1:12., has proved to him unsatisfactory, as has also the striving after happiness in pleasure and in procuring the means of all imaginable gratifications, Ecc 2:1-11; wisdom is vanity, for the wise man falls under the stroke of death as well as the fool, and is forgotten, Ecc 2:12-17; the riches are vanity, for they become the inheritance, one knows not whether or a worthy or of an unworthy heir, Ecc 2:18-21; and, besides, pure enjoyment, like wisdom and knowledge, depends not merely on the will of man, but both are the gift of God, Ecc 2:22. Everything has its time appointed by God, but man is unable to survey either backwards or forwards the work of God, which fills eternity, notwithstanding the impulse to search into it which is implanted within him; his dependence in all things, even in pure enjoyment, must become to him a school in which to learn the fear of God, who maintains all things unchangeably, for forms the course of that which is done, Ecc 3:1-15. If he sees injustice prevailing in the place of justice, God’s time for righteous interference has not yet come, Ecc 3:16-17. If God wishes to try men, they shall see that they are dependent like the beasts, and liable to death without any certain distinction from the beasts - there is nothing better than that this fleeting life should be enjoyed as well as may be, Ecc 3:18.Koheleth now further records the evils that are under the sun: oppression, in view of which death is better than life, and not to have been at all is better than both, Ecc 4:1-3; envy, Ecc 4:4; the restlessness of labour, from which only the fool sets himself free, Ecc 4:5-6; the aimless trouble and parsimony of him who stands alone, Ecc 4:7-12; the disappointment of the hopes placed on an upstart who has reached the throne, Ecc 4:13-16.

Up to this point there is connection. There now follow rules, externally unconnected, for the relation of man to Him who is the Disposer of all things; regarding his frequenting the house of God, Ecc 5:1; prayer, Ecc 5:2; and praise, Ecc 5:3-6.

Then a catalogue of vanities is set forth: the insatiable covetous plundering of the lowly by those who are above them in despotic states, whereat the author praises, Ecc 5:7-8, the patriarchal state based on agriculture; and the nothingness and uncertainty of riches, which do not make the rich happier than the labourer, Ecc 5:9-11; which sometimes are lost without any to inherit them, Ecc 5:12-14; and which their possessor, at all events, must leave behind him when he dies, Ecc 5:15-16. Riches have only a value when by means of them a purer enjoyment is realized as the gift of God, Ecc 5:17. For it happens that God gives to a man riches, but to a stranger the enjoyment thereof, Ecc 6:1-2. An untimely birth is better than a man who has an hundred children, a long life, and yet who has no enjoyment of life even to his death, Ecc 6:3-6. desire stretching on into the future is torment; only so much as a man truly enjoys has he of all his labour, Ecc 6:7-9; what man shall be is predestinated, all contendings against it are useless: the knowledge of that which is good for him, and of the future, is in the power of no man, Ecc 6:10.

There now follow, without a premeditated plan, rules for the practical conduct of life, loosely connecting themselves with the “what is good,” Ecc 6:12, by the catchword “good:” first six (probably originally seven) proverbs of two things each, whereof the one is better than the other, Ecc 7:1-9; then three with the same catch-word, but without comparison, Ecc 7:10-14.

This series of proverbs is connected as a whole, for their ultimatum is a counsel to joy regulated by the fear of God within the narrow limits of this life, constituted by God of good and bad days, and terminating in the darkness of death. But this joy is also itself limited, for the deep seriousness of the memento mori is mingled with it, and sorrow is declared to be morally better than laughter.

With Ecc 7:15, the I, speaking from personal experience, again comes into the foreground; but counsels and observations also here follow each other aphoristically, without any close connection with each other. Koheleth warns against an extreme tendency to the side of good as well as to that of evil: he who fears God knows how to avoid extremes, Ecc 7:15-18. Nothing affords a stronger protection than wisdom, for (?) with all his righteousness a man makes false steps, Ecc 7:19-20. Thou shalt not always listen, lest thou hear something about thyself, - also thou thyself hast often spoken harshly regarding others, Ecc 7:21-22. He has tried everything, but in his strivings after wisdom, and in his observation of the distinction between wisdom and folly, he has found nothing more dangerous than the snares of women; among a thousand men he found one man; but one woman such as she ought to be, he found not; he found in general that God made men upright, but that they have devised many kinds of by-ways, Ecc 7:23.

As the wise man considers women and men in general, wisdom teaches him obedience to the king to whom he has sworn fealty, and, under despotic oppression, patient waiting for the time of God’s righteous interference, Ecc 8:1-9. In the time of despotic domination, it occurs that the godless are buried with honour, while the righteous are driven away and forgotten, Ecc 8:10. God’s sentence is to be waited for, the more deliberately men give themselves to evil; God is just, but, in contradiction to His justice, it is with the righteous as with the wicked, and with the wicked as with the righteous, here on earth, Ecc 8:11-14. In view of these vanities, then, it is the most desirable thing for a man to eat and drink, and enjoy himself, for that abides with him of his labour during the day of his life God has given him, Ecc 8:15. Restless labour here leads to nothing; all the efforts of man to comprehend the government of God are in vain, Ecc 8:16. For on closer consideration, it appears that the righteous also, with all their actions, are ruled by God, and generally that in nothing, not even in his affections, is man his own master; and, which is the worst thing of all, because it impels men to a wicked, mad abuse of life, to the righteous and the unrighteous, death at last comes alike; it is also the will of God towards man that he should spend this transient life in cheerful enjoyment and in vigorous activity before it sinks down into the night of Hades, Ecc 9:1-10. The fruits of one’s labour are not to be gained by force, even the best ability warrants it not, an incomprehensible fate finally frustrates all, Ecc 9:11-12.

There now follows, but in loose connection as to thought with the preceding, a section relating to wisdom and folly, and the discordances as to the estimate of both here below, along with diverse kinds of experiences and proverbs, Eccl 9:13-10:15. Only one proverb is out of harmony with the general theme, viz., Ecc 10:4, which commends resignation under the abullition of the wrath of the ruler. The following proverb, Ecc 10:5-6, returns to the theme, but connecting itself with the preceding; the relation of rulers and the ruled to each other is kept principally in view by Koheleth.

With a proverb relating to kings and princes, good and bad, a new departure is made. Riotous living leads to slothfulness; and in contrast to this (but not without the intervention of a warning not to curse the king) follow exhortations to provident, and, at the same time, bold, and all-attempting activity; for the future is God’s, and not to be reckoned on, Eccl 10:16-11:6. The light is sweet; and life, however long it may last, in view of the uncertain dark future, is worthy of being enjoyed, Ecc 11:7-8. Thus Koheleth, at the end of this last series of proverbs, has again reached his Ceterum censeo; he formulates it, in an exhortation to a young man to enjoy his life - but without forgetting God, to whom he owes it, and to whom he has to render an account - before grey-haired old age and death overtake him, into a full-toned finale, 11:9-12:7. The last word of the book, Ecc 12:8, is parallel with the first (Ecc 1:1): “O! vanity of vanities; All is vain!”

An epilogue, from the same hand as the book seals its truth: it is written as from the very soul of Solomon; it issues from the same fountain of wisdom. The reader must not lose himself in reading many books, for the sum of all knowledge that is of value to man is comprehended in one sentence: “Fear God, for He shall bring every work into judgment,” Ecc 12:9.

If we look back on this compendious reproduction of the contents and of the course of thought of the book, there appears everywhere the same view of the world, along with the same ultimatum; and as a pictorial overture opens the book, a pictorial finale closes it. But a gradual development, a progressive demonstration, is wanting, and so far the grouping together of the parts is not fully carried out; the connection of the thoughts if more frequently determined by that which is external and accidental, and not unfrequently an incongruous element is introduced into the connected course of kindred matters. The Solomonic stamp impressed on chap. 1 and 2 begins afterwards to be effaced. The connection of the confessions that are made becomes aphoristic in chap. 3; and the proverbs that are introduced do not appropriately fall into their place. The grounds, occasions, and views which determine the author to place confessions and moral proverbs in such an order after one another, for the most part withdraw themselves from observation. All attempts to show, in the whole, not only oneness of spirit, but also a genetic progress, an all-embracing plan, and an organic connection, have hitherto failed, and must fail.“Ajunt Hebraei, quum inter cetera scripta Salomonis, quae antiquata sunt nec in memoria duraverunt, et hic liber obliterandus videretur, et quod vanas assereret Dei creaturas et totum putaret esse pro nihilo, et potum et cibum et delicias transeuntes praeferret omnibus, ex hoc uno capitulo (Ecc 12:13)meruisse auctoritatem, ut in divinorum voluminum numero poneretur.” - Jerome.

In presenting this view of the spirit and plan of the Book of Koheleth, we have proceeded on the supposition that it is a post-exilian book, that it is one of the most recent of the books of the O.T. It is true, indeed, that tradition regards it as Solomonic. According to Bathra 15 a, the Hezekiah-Collegium vid., Del. on Proverbs, p. 5] must have “written” - that is, collected into a written form - the Book of Isaiah, as also the Proverbs, the Song, and Koheleth. The Midrash regards it as Solomon’s, and as written in the evening of his days; while the Song was written in his youth, and the Proverbs when he was in middle age (Jalkut, under Pro 1:1). If in Rosch haschana 21 b it is said that Koheleth sought to be a second Moses, and to open the one of the fifty gates of knowledge which was unopened by Moses, but that this was denied to him, it is thereby assumed that he was the incomparable king, as Moses was the incomparable prophet. And Bloch, in his work on the origin and era of the Book of Koheleth (1872), is right in saying that all objections against the canonicity of the book leave the Solomonic authorship untouched. In the first Christian century, the Book of Koheleth was an antilegomenon. In the Introduction to the Song we have traced to their sources the two collections of legal authorities according to which the question of the canonicity of the Book of Koheleth is decided. The Synod of Jabne (Jamnia), about 90, decided the canonicity of the book against the school of Shammai. The reasons advanced by the latter against the canonicity are seen from Shabbath 30 b, and Megilla 7 a. From the former we learn that they regarded the words of the book, particularly Ecc 2:2 (where they must have read מהוּלּל, “worthy to be praised”), cf. Ecc 7:3, and Ecc 8:15, 22, as contradictory (cf. Proverbs, p. 31); and from the latter, that they hence did not recognise its inspiration. According to theMidrash Koheleth, under Ecc 11:9, they were stumbled also by the call to the enjoyment of pleasure, and to walk in the way of the desire of the heart, which appeared to stand in contradiction to the Tôra (cf. Ecc 11:9 with Num 15:39), and to savour of heresy. But belief in the Solomonic authorship remained, notwithstanding, uninjured; and the admonitions to the fear of God, with reference to the future judgment, carried them over the tendency of these observations. Already, at the time of Herod the Great (Bathra 4 a), and afterwards, in the time of R. Gamaliel (Shabbath 30 b), the book was cited as Holy Scripture; and when, instead of the book, the author was named, the formula of citation mentioned the name of Solomon; or the book was treated as equally Solomonic with Proverbs and the Song (Erubin 21 b).

Even the doubtfulness of its contents could give rise to no manner of doubt as to the author. Down till the new era beginning with Christianity, and, in the main, even till the Reformation-century, no attention was paid to the inner and historico-literary marks which determine the time of the origin of a book. The Reformation first called into existence, along with the criticism of dogmatic traditions, at the same time also biblical criticism, which it raised to the place of an essential part of the science of Scripture. Luther, in his Tischreden (Table-Talk), is the first who explained the Preacher as one of the most recent books of the O.T.: he supposed that the book had not reached us in its completed form; that it was written by Sirach rather than by Solomon; and that it might be, “as a Talmud, collected from many books, perhaps from the library of King Ptolemy Euergetes, in Egypt.”Tischreden, ed. Förstemann-Bindseil, p. 400f. The expression here almost appears as if Luther had confounded Ecclesiastes (Koheleth) with Ecclesiasticus (Sirach). At a later period he maintained that the book contained a collection of Solomonic sayings, not executed, however, by Solomon himself.

These are only passing utterances, which have no scientific value; among his contemporaries, and till the middle of the century following, they found no acceptance. Hugo Grotius (1644) is the first who, like Luther, rejects its Solomonic authorship, erroneously supposing, with him, that it is a collection of diverse sayings of the wise, περὶ τῆς εὐδαιμονίας; but on one point he excellently hits the nail on the head: Argumentum ejus rei habeo multa vocabula, quae non alibi quam in Daniele, Esdra et Chaldaeis interpretibus reperias. This observation is warranted. If the Book of Koheleth were of old Solomonic origin, then there is no history of the Hebrew language. But Bernstein (Quaestiones nonnullae Kohelethanae, 1854) is right in saying that the history of the Hebrew language and literature is certainly divided into two epochs by the Babylonish exile, and that the Book of Koheleth bears the stamp of the post-exilian form of the language.

Words in Koheleth (Eccelsiastes)List of the Hapaxlegomena, and of the Words and Forms in the Book of Koheleth belonging to a more recent Period of the Language

Aviyonah, 12:5; cf. Ma'seroth 4:6, Berachoth 36 a.

Adam, opp. ishah, only at 7:28.

Izzen, Pi., only 12:9; not Talm. אי, Ecc 10:16; אילו, Ecc 4:10, instead of the older אוי; cf. הי, Eze 2:10; like אי ל, Shemoth rabba, c. 46; אי ם, “Alas, now bad!” Targ. Jer 2; Lev 26:29; אי ע, “Alas for the meek!” Berachoth 6 b; cf. Sanhedrin 11 a.

Illu, “if,” Ecc 6:6; Est 7:4, of אם (אין) and לוּ (לא, read לא, Eze 3:6); Targ. Deu 32:29 = Heb. לוּ, common in the Mishna, e.g., Maccoth i. 10.

Asurim, only Ecc 7:26; cf. Jdg 15:14; Seder olam rabba, c. 25; cf. at Ecc 4:14.

Baale asupoth, only Ecc 12:11; cf. Sanhedrin 12 a, Jer. Sanhedrin x. 1.

Bihel, only Ecc 5:1; Ecc 7:9; as Hiph. Est 6:14; cf. the transitive use of the Pih. Est 2:9, like Targ. bahel (= ithbehel) and behilu, haste.

Bur, only Ecc 9:1; cf. the Talm. al buriv, altogether free from error and sin.

Behuroth, only Ecc 11:9; Ecc 12:1; cf. Mibehurav, Num 11:28.

Batel, Ecc 12:3; elsewhere only in the Chald. of Ezra; common in the Mishna, e.g., Aboth i. 5.

Beth olam (cf. Eze 26:20), 12:5; cf. Tosifta Berachoth iii., Targ. Isa 14:18; Isa 42:11.

Bechen, Ecc 8:10; Est 4:16; elsewhere only Targ., e.g., Isa 16:5.

Baal hallashon, Ecc 10:11; cf. baal bashar, corpulent, Berachoth 13 b; ball hahhotam, the large-nosed, carrying the nose high, Taanith 29a.

Gibber, only at Ecc 10:10, to exert oneself; elsewhere: to prevail.

Gummats, only Ecc 10:8, Syr., and in the Targ. of the Hag. (cf. Targ. Psa 7:16).

Divrath, vid., under שׁ.

Hoveh, Ecc 2:22; cf. Shabbath vi. 6, Erubin i. 10, Jebamoth xv. 2.

Holeloth, Ecc 1:17; Ecc 2:12; Ecc 7:25; Ecc 9:3; and holeluth, madness, only in the Book of Koheleth, Ecc 10:13.

Zichron, as primary form, Ecc 1:11; Ecc 2:16; vid., at Lev 23:24, the connecting form.

Zeman, Ecc 3:1; Neh 2:6; Est 9:27, Est 9:31; elsewhere only in the bibl. Chald. with שׁעה, ὧρα, the usual Mishnic word for καιρός and χρόνος.

Holah (malum), aegrum, Ecc 5:12, Ecc 5:15; for this nahhlah is used in Isa 17:11; Nah 3:19; Jer 10:19; Jer 14:17.

Ben-hhorim (liber, in contrast to eved, servus), Ecc 10:17; cf. חרות (freedom) on the coins of the Revolution of the Roman period; the usual Talm. word, even of possessions, such as praedium liberum, aedes liberae of the Roman law.

Hhuts min, only at Ecc 2:25 (Chald. bar min); frequent in the Mishna, e.g., Middoth 2:3.

Hhush, Ecc 2:25; in the Talm. and Syr. of sorrowful experiences; here (cf. Job 20:2), of the experiences derived from the senses, and experiences in general, as in the Rabb. the five senses are called חושים.

Hhayalim, Ecc 10:10; everywhere else, also in Aram., meaning war=hosts, except at Isa 30:6, where it denotes opes, treasures.

Hhesron, Ecc 1:15, a common word in the post-bibl. language.Vid., my Geschichte der jüd. Poesie, p. 187f.

Heephets, Ecc 3:1, Ecc 3:17; Ecc 5:7; Ecc 8:6; cf. Isa 58:3, Isa 58:13. The primary unweakened meaning is found at Ecc 5:3; Ecc 12:1, Ecc 12:10. The weakening of the original meaning may have already early begun; in the Book of Koheleth it has advanced as far as in the language of the Mishna, e.g., Mezia iv. 6.

Hheshbon, Ecc 7:25, Ecc 7:27; Ecc 9:10. Plur. at Ecc 7:29, machinationes; only in 2Ch 26:15 in the sense of machinae bellicae; but as in Koheleth, so also in Shabbath 150 a.

Hhathhhatim, only at Ecc 12:5.

Tahhanah, Ecc 12:4; cf. tehhon, Lam 5:3, which is foreign to the Mishna, but is used as corresponding to the older rehhaim, in the same way as the vulgar Arab. mathanat and tahwan, instead of the older raha.Vid., Eli Smith in my Jud.-Arab. Poesien aus vormuh. Zeit. (1874), p. 40. יאשׁ, Pih., only Ecc 2:20. Talm. Nithpa. נתיאשׁ, to abandon hope, e.g., Kelim xxvi. 8.

Yegiyah, only Ecc 12:12; an abstract such as may be formed from all verbs, and particularly is more frequently formed in the more modern than in the more ancient language.

Yother, as a participial adj.: “that which remains” (cf. 1Sa 15:15) = “gain,” Ecc 6:11; Ecc 7:11; or “superiority,” Ecc 6:8. As an adv.: “more” (cf. Est 6:6), “particularly,” Ecc 2:15; Ecc 7:16; Ecc 12:9, Ecc 12:12. In the Talm. Heb., used in the sense of “remaining over” (Kiddushin 24 b); and as an adv., in the sense of plus or magis (e.g., Chullin 57 b).

Yaphěh, Ecc 3:11; Ecc 5:17, as e.g., Jer. Pesachim ix. 9 (b. Pesachim 99a): “Silence is well-becoming (יפה) the wise; how much more fools!”

Yithron, Ecc 2:13 (twice), Ecc 7:12 (synon. mothar, Ecc 3:1); more frequently “real gain,” Ecc 1:3; Ecc 2:11; Ecc 3:9; Ecc 5:15; Ecc 10:10; “superiority and gain,” Ecc 5:8. Peculiar (= Aram. yuthran) to the Book of Koheleth, and in Rabb., whence it is derived.

Keěhhad, Ecc 11:6; Isa 65:25, Chron., Ezra, Nehem., the Chald. kahhada; Syr. okchado; frequent in the Mish., e.g., Bechoroth vii. 4; Kilajim i. 9.

Kevar, adv., Ecc 1:10; Ecc 2:12, Ecc 2:16; Ecc 3:15; Ecc 4:2; Ecc 6:10; Ecc 9:6-7; common in the Mishna, e.g., Erubin iv. 2, Nedarim, v. 5; in Aram., more frequently in the sense of “perhaps” than of “formerly.”

Kasher, Ecc 11:6; Est 8:5; in the Mishna, the word commonly used of that which is legally admissible; Hiph. verbal noun, hachsēr, only at Ecc 10:10; in the Mishna, of arranging according to order; in the superscription of the tract, macshirin, of making susceptible of uncleanness. Cf. e.g., Menachoth 48b. The word is generally pointed הכשרּ, but more correctly הכשׁר.Vid., my Heb. Römerbrief, p. 79. Cf. Stein’s Talm. Termin. (1869), under כּשׁר and הכשׁר.

Kishron, only at Ecc 2:21; Ecc 4:4; Ecc 5:10; not found in the Mishna.

Levad, tantummodo, Ecc 7:29; similar, but not quite the same, at Isa 26:13.

Lǎhǎg, exclusively Ecc 12:12; not Talm.; from the verb lāhǎg (R. לה), to long eagerly for; Syr. lahgoz, vapour (of breathing, exhalare); cogn. Higgāyon (hěgěh), according to which it is explained in Jer. Sanhedrin x. 1 and elsewhere.

Lavah, Ecc 8:15, as in the Mishna: to conduct a guest, to accompany a traveller; whence the proverb: לוואיי לווניה, he who gives a convoy to the dead, to him it will be given, Kethuboth 72a; cf. לוּוּי, a standing surname, Negaïm xiv. 6.

Medinah, Ecc 5:7, and in no book besides before the Exile.

Madda', Ecc 10:20; elsewhere only in the Chr. and Dan.; Targ. מנדּע.

Meleah, gravida, only Ecc 11:5, as in the Mishna, e.g., Jebamoth xvi. 1.

Mǎlāk, Ecc 5:5; cf. Mal 2:7, in the sense of the later sheluahh shamaim, delegated of God.Vid., my "Discussion der Amtsfrage in Mishna u. Gemara," Luth. Zeitsch. (1854), pp. 446-449.

Miskēn, only Ecc 4:13; Ecc 9:15-16; but cf. miskenuth. Deu 8:9, and mesukan, Isa 40:20.

Masmeroth, Ecc 12:11 = מס, Jer 10:4; cf. Isa 41:7; 1Ch 22:3; 2Ch 3:9.

Meattim, 2Ch 5:1,; a plur. only at Psa 109:8.

Mikrěh, more frequently in the Book of Koheleth than in any other book; and at Ecc 3:19, used as explained in the Comm.

Mērots, exclusively Ecc 9:11 (elsewhere merutsah).

Māshǎk, Ecc 2:3; cf. Chagiga 14a, Sifri 135b, ed. Friedmann.

Mishlahhath, Ecc 8:8 (cf. Psa 78:49).

Nāga', Hiph. with ěl, Ecc 8:14, as at Est 9:26; Aram. מטא ל, e.g., Targ. Jer. to Exo 33:13.

Nāhǎg, Ecc 2:3, as in the Mishna, e.g., Aboda Zara iii. 4, 54b; cf. Targ. Koh. x. 4.

Nahhath, Ecc 6:5, as in the common phrase nahhath ruahh; cf. נוח לו וגו, “It were better for him,” etc., Jer. Berachoth 1:2. This נוח לו, for Koheleth's נחת לו, is frequent.

Nātǎ', Ecc 12:11 (for which, Isa 22:23, tākǎ'; Mishna, קבא; Jer. Sanhedrin x. 1), as Dan 11:45. סבל, Hithpa., only at Ecc 12:5.

Sof, Ecc 3:11; Ecc 7:2; Ecc 12:13; Joe 2:20; 2Ch 20:16, the more modern word which later displaced the word ahharith, 2Ch 7:8; 2Ch 10:13 (cf. Berachoth i. 1), but which is not exactly equivalent to it; for sof dāvār, Ecc 12:13,Vid., Heb. Römerbrief, pp. 81, 84. which has the meaning of summa summarum, ahharith davar, would be inapplicable.

Sāchāl, Ecc 2:19; Ecc 7:17; Ecc 10:3 (twice), Ecc 10:14; Jer 4:22; Jer 5:21; in the Book of Koheleth, the synon. of the yet more frequently used כּסיל, the Targ. word.

Sěchěl, exclusively Jer 10:6.

Sichluth, Ecc 1:17 (here with שׂ), Ecc 2:3, Ecc 2:12-13; Ecc 7:25; Ecc 10:1, Ecc 10:13 (synon. kesiluth, Pro 9:13). סכן, Niph. Ecc 10:9; cf. Berachoth i. 3. The Targ.-Talm. Ithpa. אסתּכּן, “to be in danger,” corresponds with the Niph. ‛Avād, exclusively Ecc 9:1, like the Syr. 'bad, Jewish-Aram. עובד. ‛Aděn (formed of עד†אŸ fo de), adhuc, with לא, nondum, Ecc 4:3. ‛Aděnāh (of ǎḋhēnnāh), adhuc, Ecc 4:2; Mishnic עדין, e.g., Nedarim xi. 10. עות, Hithpa. only at Ecc 12:3. ‛Amǎd, Ecc 2:9; Ecc 8:3, as Jer 48:11; Psa 102:27.

Ummǎth, vid., under שׁ. ‛Anāh, Ecc 5:19; Ecc 10:19.

Inyān, exclusively in the Book of Koheleth, Ecc 1:13; Ecc 2:23, Ecc 2:26; Ecc 3:10; Ecc 4:8; Ecc 5:2, Ecc 5:13; Ecc 8:16, one of the most extensive words of the post-bibl. Heb.; first, of the object of employment, e.g., Kiddushin 6a, “occupied with this object;” also Aram. Bathra 114b. ‛Atsǎltǎyim, double impurity, i.e., where the one hand is as impure as the other, only at Ecc 10:18. ‛Asāh, with lěhhěm, Ecc 10:19, as at Dan 5:1 : ǎvǎd lěhhěm; in the N.T. Mar 6:21, ποιεῖν δεῖπνον. Otherwise Eze 4:15, where asah lehhem is used of preparing food. With the obj. of the time of life, Ecc 6:12; cf. Act 15:33. With tov, not only “to do good,” Ecc 7:20, but also “to act well,” “to spend a pleasant life,” Ecc 3:12.

Pardēs (Sol 4:13; Neh 2:8), plur. Ecc 2:5, flower-gardens, parks, as Mezî'a 103 a, פרדיסי.

Pēshěr, explicatio, Ecc 8:1, elsewhere only in the Chald. parts of Dan. Ara. for the older פּהרון and שׁבר, of which the Targ. word is פּשׁר and פּוּשׁרן, Talm. pish¦raah, “adjustment of a controverted matter.”

Pithgam in the Chald. parts of Ezra and Daniel, but only as a Hebraised Persian word in Dan 8:11; Est 1:20; common in the Targ. and in the Syr., but not in the Talm.

Kilkǎl (Kālāl, Eze 1:7; Dan 10:6), exclusively at Ecc 10:10 (on the contrary, at Eze 21:26, it means “to agitate”).

Reuth, only Ecc 5:10; Keri, for which Chethî̂b ראית, which may be read ראית, ראית (cf. Eze 28:17), or ראיּת; the latter two of these forms are common in the Mishna, and have there their special meanings proceeding from the fundamental idea of seeing. רדף, Niph. part., only Ecc 3:15.

Reuth, besides the Chald. parts of Ezra, occurs only seven times in the Book of Koheleth, Ecc 1:14; Ecc 2:11, Ecc 2:17, Ecc 2:26; Ecc 4:4, Ecc 4:6; Ecc 6:9.

Raeyon, Ecc 1:17; Ecc 2:22; Ecc 3:16; elsewhere only in the Chald. parts of Daniel and in the Targ. שׁ, this in and of itself is in no respect modern, but, as the Babyl.-Assyr. אש, the Phoen. sa, shows, is the relative (originally demonstrative) belonging to the oldest period of the language, which in the Mishna has altogether supplanted the אשׁר of the older Heb. book-language. It is used in the Book of Koheleth quite in the same way as in the Mishna, but thus, that it stands first on the same line (rank) with אשׁר, and makes it doubtful whether this or that which occurs more frequently in the book (שׁ, according to Herzfeld, 68 times, and אשׁר 89 times) has the predominance (cf. e.g., Ecc 1:13., Ecc 8:14; Ecc 10:14, where both are used promiscue). The use of asher as a relative pronoun and relative conjunction is not different from the use of this in the older literature: 'ad asher lo, in the sense of “before,”  Ecc 12:1-2, Ecc 12:6, Mishnic עד שׁלא, is only a natural turn to the fundamental meaning “till that not” (2Sa 17:13; 1Ki 17:17); and mibeli asher lo = nisi quod non, Ecc 3:11 (cf. bilti, Dan 11:18), for which the Mishnic ובלבד שלא (e.g., Erubin i. 10), is only accidentally not further demonstrable. But how far the use of שׁ has extended, will be seen by the following survey, from which we exclude s, standing alone as a relative pronoun or relative conjunction:-

Beshekvar, Ecc 2:16. Beshel asher, eo quod, Ecc 8:17 (cf. Jon 1:7-8, Jon 1:12), corresponding to the Talm. בּדיל דּ. Kol שׁ, Ecc 2:7, Ecc 2:9, and Ecc 11:8. Kol-ummath שׁ, Ecc 5:15, corresponding to the Chald. kol-kavel דּי, Dan 2:40, etc. k¦sh, Ecc 5:14; Ecc 12:7, and in the sense of quum, Ecc 9:12; Ecc 10:3. mah-שׁ, Ecc 1:9; Ecc 3:15; Ecc 6:10; Ecc 7:24; Ecc 8:7; Ecc 10:14; meh שׁ, Ecc 3:22. משּׁ, Ecc 5:4. ‛Al-divrath shello, Ecc 7:14 (cf. Ecc 3:18; Ecc 8:2). Shěgam, Ecc 2:15; Ecc 8:14.

Shiddah and plur. Shiddoth, exclusively Ecc 2:8.

Shaharuth, exclusively Ecc 11:10, to be understood after Nedarim 3:8, “the black-headed,” opposed to בעלי השיבות, “the grey-haired.” שכח, Hithpa., only Ecc 8:10, the usual word in the Talm., e.g., Sanhedrin 13 b.

Shalat, Ecc 2:19; Ecc 8:9, besides only in Nehemiah and Esther (cf. Bechoroth, Est 7:6, etc.); Hiph. Ecc 5:18; Ecc 6:2, elsewhere only Psa 119:133.

Shilton, Ecc 8:4, Ecc 8:8, nowhere else in O.T. Heb., but in the Mishna, e.g., Kiddushin iii. 6.

Shallith, with ב, only Ecc 8:8 (cf. Eze 16:30); on the contrary, Ecc 7:19; Ecc 10:5, as Gen 42:6, in the political signification of a ruler. שׁמם, Hithpo., Ecc 7:16.

Shiphluth, Ecc 10:18, elsewhere only Targ. Jer 49:24.

Shithi, only Ecc 10:17.

Tahath hashshěměsh, Ecc 1:3, agreeing with the Greek ὑφ ̓ ἡλίῳ, ορ ὑπὸ τὸν ἥλιον.

Takkiph, in the O.T. Heb. only Ecc 6:10; elsewhere in the Chald., Targ., Talm.

Takan, Ecc 1:15; Pih. Ecc 7:13; Ecc 12:9, a Mishna-word used in the Pih. and Hiph., whence  tikkun (“putting right,” e.g., in the text-hist. terminus technicus, tikkun sopherim, and “arrangement,” e.g., Gittin iv. 2, “the ordering of the world”) and tikkānāh (e.g., Gittin iv. 6, “welfare,” frequently in the sense of “direction,” “arrangement”).

This survey of the forms peculiar to the Book of Koheleth, and only found in the most recent books of the O.T., partly only in the Chaldee portions of these, and in general use in the Aramaic, places it beyond all doubt that in this book we have a product of the post-exilian period, and, at the earliest, of the time of Ezra-Nehemiah. All that Wagenmann (Comm. 1856), von Essen (Der Predeger Salomo's, 1856), Böhl (De Aramaismis libri Coheleth, 1860), Hahn (Comm. 1860), Reusch (Tübinger Quartalschr. 1860), Warminski (Verfasser u. Abfassungszeit des B. Koheleth, 1867), Prof. Taylor Lewis (in the American ed. of Lange’s Bibelwerk, 1869), Schäfer (Neue Untersuchungen ü d. B. Koheleth, 1870), Vegni (L'Ecclesiaste secondo il testo Ebraico, Florenz 1871) have advanced to the contrary, rests on grounds that are altogether untenable. If we possessed the original work of Sirach, we should then see more distinctly than from fragmentsVid., the collection of the Heb. fragments of the Book of Ben-Sira in my Gesch. der jüd. Poesie, p. 204f. that the form of the language found in Koheleth, although older, is yet one that does not lie much further back; it is connected, yet loosely, with the old language, but at the same time it is in full accord with that new Heb. which we meet with in the Mishna and the Barajtha-Literature, which groups itself around it. To the modern aspects of the Heb. language the following forms belong: - 1. Verbs Lamed-Aleph, which from the first interchange their forms with those of verbs Lamed-He, are regularly treated in certain forms of inflexion in the Mishna as verbs Lamed-He; e.g., יצאהis not used, but יצתה.Vid., Geiger’s Lehrbuch der Mishna-Sprache, p. 46.

This interchange of forms found in the later language reveals itself here in יצא, Ecc 10:5, used instead of יצאת; and if, according to the Masora, חוטא (חטא) is to be always written like מוצא at Ecc 7:26 (except Ecc 7:26), the traditional text herein discloses a full and accurate knowledge of the linguistic character of the book. The Aram. ישׁנא for ישׁנה, at Ecc 8:1, is not thus to be accounted for. 2. The richness of the old language in mood-forms is here disappearing. The optative of the first person (the cohortative) is only represented by אחכּמה, Ecc 7:23. the form of the subjunctive (jussive) is found in the prohibitive clauses, such as Ecc 7:16-18; Ecc 10:4; but elsewhere the only certain examples found are שׁיּלך, quod auferat secum, Ecc 5:14, and וגּיד, Ecc 10:10. In Ecc 12:7, וישׁב may also be read, although וישׁב, under the influence of “ere ever” (Ecc 12:6), is also admissible. On the contrary, יהוּא, Ecc 11:3, is indic. after the Mishn. יהא, and so also is וינאץ (derived from נצץ, not נצץ), Ecc 12:5. Yet more characteristic, however, is the circumstance that the historic tense, the so-called fut. consecutivum, which has wholly disappeared from the Mishna-language, also here, notwithstanding the occasions for its frequent use, occurs only three times, twice in the unabbreviated form, Ecc 4:1, Ecc 4:7, and once in the form lengthened by the intentional ah, Ecc 1:17, which before its disappearance was in frequent use. It probably belonged more to the written than to the spoken language of the people (cf. the Sol 6:9). 3. The complexion of the language peculiar to the Book of Koheleth is distinguished also by this, that the designation of the person already contained in the verbal form is yet particularly expressed, and without there being a contrast occasioning this emphasis, by the personal pronoun being added to and placed after it, e.g., Ecc 1:16; Ecc 2:1, Ecc 2:11-13, Ecc 2:15, Ecc 2:18, Ecc 2:20; Ecc 3:17-18; Ecc 4:1, Ecc 4:4, Ecc 4:7; Ecc 5:17; Ecc 7:25; Ecc 8:15; Ecc 9:15. Among the more ancient authors, Hosea has the same peculiarity (cf. the Sol 5:5); but there the personal pronoun stands always before the verb, e.g., Ecc 8:13; Ecc 12:11. The same thing is found in Psa 39:11; Psa 82:6, etc. The inverse order of the words is found only at Ecc 2:14, after the scheme of Job 1:15, as also 2:15 follows the scheme of Gen 24:27. Mishna-forms of expressions such as מודרני, Nedarim i. 1, מקבּלני, Jebamoth xvi. 7, are not homogeneous with that manner of subordinating the personal pronoun (cf. Ecc 7:26; Ecc 4:2). Thus we have here before us a separation of the subject and the predicate, instead of which, in the language of the Mishna, the form אמר הייתי (אני) and the like (e.g., Berachoth i. 5) is used, which found for itself a place in the language of Koheleth, in so far as this book delights in the use of the participle to an extent scarcely met with in any other book of Scripture (vid., e.g., Ecc 1:6; Ecc 8:12; Ecc 10:19). 4. The use of the demonstrative pronoun זה bears also a Mishnic stamp. We lay no particular stress on the fact that the author uses it, as regularly as the Mishna, always without the article; but it is characteristic that he always, where he does not make use of the masculine form in a neuter sense (as Ecc 7:10, Ecc 7:18, Ecc 7:29; Ecc 8:9; Ecc 9:1; Ecc 11:6, keeping out of view cases determined by attraction), employs no other feminine form than זה, Mishnic זו, in this sense, Ecc 2:2; Ecc 5:15, Ecc 5:18; Ecc 7:23; Ecc 9:13. In other respects also the use of the pronouns approaches the Mishna language. In the use of the pronoun also in Ecc 1:10 and Ecc 5:18 there is an approach to the Mishnic זהוּ, nic est, and זהי, haec est. And the use of הוּא and המּה for the personal verb reaches in Ecc 3:18; Ecc 9:4 (vid., Comm.), the extreme.

The enumeration of linguistic peculiarities betokening a late origin is not yet exhausted; we shall meet with many such in the course of the Exposition. Not only the language, however, but also the style and the artistic form of the book, show that it is the most recent product of the Bibl. Chokma literature, and belongs to a degenerated period of art. From the fact that the so-called metrical accent system of the three books - Psalms, Job, and Proverbs - is not used in Ecclesiastes, it does not follow that it is not a poetical book in the fullest sense of the word; for the Song and Lamentations, these masterpieces of the שׁיר and קינה, the Minne-song and the Elegy, are also excluded from that more elevated, more richly expressive, and more melodious form of discourse, perhaps to preserve the spiritual character of the one, and not to weaken the elegiac character of the other, to which a certain melancholy monotone andante is suitable. So also, to apply that system of accentuation to the Book of Koheleth was not at all possible, for the symmetrical stichs to which it is appropriate is for the most part wanting in Koheleth, which is almost wholly written in eloquent prose: unfolding its instruction in the form of sentences without symmetrical stichs. - It is, so to speak, a philosophical treatise in which “I saw,” and the like, as the expression of the result of experience; “I said,” as the expression of reflection on what was observed; “I perceived,” as the expression of knowledge obtained as a conclusion from a process of reasoning; and “this also,” as the expression of the result, - repeat themselves nearly terminologically. The reasoning tone prevails, and where the writer passes into gnomic poetry he enters into it suddenly, e.g., Ecc 5:9, or holds himself ready to leave it quickly again, e.g., Ecc 5:12; Ecc 7:13. Always, indeed, where the Mashal note is struck, the discourse begins to form itself into members arranged in order; and then the author sometimes rises in language, and in the order of his words, into the true classic form of the proverb set forth in parallel members, e.g., Ecc 7:7, Ecc 7:9; Ecc 9:8. The symmetry of the members is faultless, Ecc 5:5; Ecc 8:8; Ecc 9:11; but in other places, as Ecc 5:1; Ecc 7:26; Ecc 11:9, it fails, and in the long run the book, altogether peculiar in its stylistic and artistic character, cannot conceal its late origin: in the elevated classical style there quickly again intermingles that which is peculiar to the author, as representing the age in which he lived, e.g., Ecc 7:19; Ecc 10:2, Ecc 10:6, Ecc 10:8-10, Ecc 10:16., Ecc 11:3, Ecc 11:6. That in the age of the Mishna they knew how to imitate classic masterpieces, is seen from the beautiful enigma, in the form of a heptastich, by Bar-Kappara, jer. Moëd katan iii. 1, and the elegy, in the form of a hexastich on the death of R. Abina, by Kar-Kippuk, b. Moëd katan 25b.Given and translated in Wissenschaft, Kunst, Judenthum (1838), p. 231f.

One would thus be in error if he regarded such occasional classical pieces in the Book of Koheleth as borrowed. The book, however fragmentary it may seem to be on a superficial examination, is yet the product of one author.Renan, in his Histoire des Langues Sémitiques, supposes that a work of so bold a scepticism as Ecclesiastes could not have originated in the post-exilian period of the severely legal rabbinical Judaism; it may be an old Solomonic work, but as it now lies before us, revised by a more recent hand-an untenable expedient for establishing an arbitrary supposition.

In its oratorical ground-form, and in the proverbs introduced into it, it is a side-piece to Prov 1-9. We have shown, in the introduction to the Book of Proverbs, that in these proverbial discourses which form the introduction to the older Solomonic Book of Proverbs, which was probably published in the time of Jehoshaphat, the Mashal appears already rhetorically decomposed. This decomposition is much further advanced in the Book of Ecclesiastes. To it is applicable in a higher degree what is there (Proverbs, p. 10f.) said of Prov 1-9. The distich is represented in the integral, Ecc 7:13, synonymous, Ecc 11:4, and synthetic, Ecc 7:1, and also, though rarely, in the antithetic form, Ecc 7:4; but of the emblematic form there is only one example, Ecc 10:1. The author never attempted the beautiful numerical and priamel forms; the proverbial form also, beyond the limits of the distich, loses the firmness of its outline. The tetrastich, Ecc 10:20, is, however, a beautiful exception to this. But splendour of form would not be appropriate to such a sombre work as this is. Its external form is truly in keeping with its spirit. In the checkered and yet uniform manner of the book is reflected the image of the author, who tried everything and yet was satisfied with nothing; who hastened from one thing to another because nothing was able to captivate him. His style is like the view he takes of the world, which in its course turned to him only its dark side. He holds fast to the fear of God, and hopes in a final judgment; but his sceptical world-sorrow remains unmitigated, and his forced eudaemonism remains without the right consecration: these two stars do not turn the night into day; the significance of the book, with reference to the history of redemption, consists in the actual proof that humanity, in order to its being set free from its unhappiness, needs to be illuminated by the sun of a new revelation. But although the manner of the author’s representation is the reflection of his own inner relation to the things represented, yet here and there he makes his representation, not without consciousness and art, the picture of his own manner of thought. Thus, e.g., the drawling tautologies in Ecc 8:14; Ecc 9:9, certainly do not escape from him against his will. And as was rightly remarked under Gen 2:1-3, that the discourse there is extended, and forms itself into a picture of rest after the work of the creation, so Koheleth, in Ecc 1:4-11 and Ecc 12:2-7, shows himself a master of eloquence; for in the former passage he imitates in his style the everlasting unity of the course of the world, and in the latter he paints the exhausted and finally shattered life of man.

Not only, however, by the character of its thought and language and manner of representation, but also by other characteristic features, the book openly acknowledges that it was not written by Solomon himself, but by a Jewish thinker of a much later age, who sought to conceive of himself as in Solomon’s position, and clothed his own life-experiences in the confessions of Solomon. The very title of the book does not leave us in doubt as to this. It is in these words: The words of Koheleth, the son of David, king in Jerusalem. The apposition, “king in Jerusalem,” appertains, like e.g., 2Ch 35:3, to the name of the speaker who is introduced; for nothing is here said as to the place in life held by David, but to that held by him who is thus figuratively named. The indeterminate “king” of itself would be untenable, as at Pro 31:1. As there the words “king of Massa” are to be taken together, so here “king” is determined by “in Jerusalem” added to it, so far that it is said what kind of king Koheleth was. That by this name Solomon is meant, follows, apart from Ecc 1:12., from this, that David had only one son who was king, viz., Solomon. The opinion of Krochmal, that a later David, perhaps a governor of Jerusalem during the Persian domination, is meant,Vid., Kerem chemed v. 89, and his More necobhe ha-seman (Director errnatium nostrae aetatis), edited by Zunz, 1851, 4. is one of the many superfluities of this learned author. Koheleth is Solomon, but he who calls him “king in Jerusalem” is not Solomon himself. Solomon is called “king of Israel,” e.g., 2Ki 23:13; and as in Ecc 1:12 he names himself “king over Israel,” so, Neh 13:26, he is called “king of Israel,” and along with this designation, “king over all Israel;” but the title, “king in Jerusalem,” nowhere else occurs. We read that Solomon “reigned in Jerusalem over all Israel,” 1Ki 11:42, cf. 1Ki 14:21; the title, “king in Jerusalem,” is quite peculiar to the title of the book before us. Eichhorn supposes that it corresponds to the time subsequent to the division of the kingdom, when there were two different royal residences; but against this view Bloch rightly remarks, that the contrasted “in Samaria” occurs only very rarely (as 2Ki 14:23). We think that in this expression, “king in Jerusalem,” there is revealed a time in which Israel had ceased to be an independent kingdom, in which Jerusalem was no more a royal city.

That the book was not composed immediately by Solomon, is indicated by the circumstance that he is not called Solomon, nor Jedidiah (2Sa 12:25), but is designated by a hitherto unheard of name, which, by its form, shows that it belongs, at earliest, to the Ezra-Nehemiah age, in which it was coined. We consider the name, first, without taking into account its feminine termination. In the Arab., ḳahal (cogn. ḳaḥal) signifies to be dry, hard, from the dryness and leather-like toughness of the skin of an old man; and, accordingly, Dindorf (Quomodo nomen Coheleth Salomoni tribuatur, (1791) and others understand Koheleth of an old man whose life is worn out; Coccejus and Schultens, with those of their school, understand it of the penitent who is dead to the world. But both views are opposed by this, that the form קהל (קהל, cf. כּהל) would be more appropriate; but above all by this, that קהל, in this meaning aridum, marcidum esse, is a verbal stem altogether foreign to the northern Semitic. The verb קהל signifies, in the Heb., Aram., and Assyr., to call (cf. the Syr. kahlonitho, a quarrelsome woman), and particularly to call together; whence קהל, of the same Sanscrit-Semit. root as the words εκ-κλη-σία and con-cil-ium,Vid., Friedr. Delitzsch’s Indogermanisch-Semitische Studien, p. 90.  - an extension of the root קל, which, on another side, is extended in the Arab. ḳalaḥ, Aethiop. kaleḥa, to cry. This derivation of the name Koheleth shows that it cannot mean συναθροιστής (Grotius, not Aquila), in the sense of collector sententiarum; the Arab. translation alajam'at (also van Dyk) is faultless, because jam' can signify, to collect men as well as things together; but קהל is not used in that sense of in unum redigere. In close correspondence with the Heb. word, the lxx translates, ὁ ἐκκλησιαστής; and the Graec. Venet., ἡ ἐκκλησιάστρια (Ecc 12:9 : ἡ ἐκκλησιἀζουσα). But in the nearest signification, “the collector,” this would not be a significant name for the king represented as speaking in this book. In Solomon’s reign there occurred an epoch-making assembly in Jerusalem, 1Ki 8:1; 2Ch 5:2 - viz for the purpose of consecrating the temple. The O.T. does not afford any other historical reference for the name; for although, in Pro 5:14; Pro 26:26, בּקהל signifies coram populo, publice, yet it does not occur directly of the public appearance of Wisdom; the expressions for this are different, Pro 1:20., Ecc 8:1-4; Ecc 9:3, though cognate. But on that great day of the consecration of the temple, Solomon not only called the people together, but he also preached to them - he preached indirectly, for he consecrated the temple by prayer; and directly, for he blessed the people, and exhorted them to faithfulness, 1Ki 8:55-61.

Thus Solomon appears not only as the assembler, but also as the preacher to those who were assembled; and in this sense of a teacher of the people (cf. Ecc 12:9), Koheleth is an appropriate name of the king who was famed for his wisdom and for his cultivation of the popular Mashal. It is known that in proper names the Kal is frequently used in the sense of the Hiph. thus Koheleth is not immediately what it may be etymologically = קרא, caller, proclaimer; but is = מקהלת, from הקהיל, to assemble, and to speak to the assembly, contionari; according to which Jerome, under Ecc 1:1, rightly explains: ἐκκλησιαστής, Graeco sermone appellatur qui coetum, id est ecclesiam congregat, quem nos nuncupare possumus contionatorem, eo quod loquatur ad populum et ejus sermo non specialiter ad unum, sed ad universos generaliter dirigatur. The interpretation: assembly = academy or collectivum, which Döderlein (Salomon’s Prediger u. Hoheslied, 1784) and Kaiser (Koheleth, Das Collectivum der Davidischen Könige in Jerusalem, 1823), published, lightly disregards the form of the n. agentis; and Spohn’s (Der Prediger Salomo, 1785) “O vanity of vanities, said the philosopher,” itself belongs to the vanities.

Knobel in his Comm. (1836) has spoken excellently regarding the feminine form of the name; but when, at the close, he says: “Thus Koheleth properly signifies preaching, the office and business of the public speaker, but is then = קהל, מקהיל, public speaker before an assembly,” he also, in an arbitrary manner, interchanges the n. agentis with the n. actionis. His remark, that “the rule that concreta, if they have a fem. termination, become abstraccta, must also hold for participia,” is a statement that cannot be confirmed. As חתמת signifies that which impresses (a seal), and כּתרת that which twines about (chapiter), so also חברת, Exo 26:10, that which joins together (the coupling); one can translate such fem. particip., when used as substantives, as abstracta, e.g., כּלה (from כּלה), destruction, utter ruin; but they are abstracta in themselves as little as the neutra in τὸ ταὐτόν, which may be translated by “identity,” or in immensum altitudinis, by immensity (in height). Also Arab names of men with fem. forms are concreta. To the participial form Koheleth correspond, for the most part, such names as (Arab.) rawiyaton, narrator of tradition (fem. of rawyn); but essentially cogn. also are such words as 'allamat, greatly learned man; also khalyfaton, which is by no means an inf. noun, like the Heb. חליפה, but is the fem. of the verbal adj. khalyf, successor, representative. The Arabic grammarians say that the fem. termination gives to the idea, if possible, a collective signification, e.g., jarrar, the puller, i.e., the drawer of a ship (Helciarius), and jarrarat, the multitude drawing, the company (taife) drawing the boat up the stream; or it also serves “as an exhaustive designation of the properties of the genus;” so that, e.g., ‛allamat means one who unites in himself that which is peculiar to the very learned, and represents in his own person a plurality of very learned men. They also say that the fem. termination serves in such cases to strengthen the idea. But how can this strengthening result from a change in the gender? Without doubt the fem. in such cases discharges the function of a neut.; and since doctissimus is heightened to doctissimum, it is thereby implied that such an one is a pattern of a learned man-the reality of the idea, or the realized ideal of such an one.

From these Arab. analogues respecting the import of the name Koheleth, it follows that the fem. is not to be referred to Chokma in such a way as that Solomon might be thereby designated as the representative, and, as it were, the incarnation of wisdom (Ewald, Hitzig, etc.), - an idea which the book by no means supports; for it the author had designed, in conformity with that signification of the name, to let Wisdom herself speak through Solomon’s mouth, he would have let him speak as the author of Prov 1-9 speaks when he addresses the reader by the title, “my son,” he would not have put expressions in his mouth such as Pro 1:16-18; Pro 7:23. One should not appeal to Ecc 7:27; for there, where the subject is the dangers of the love of women, Koheleth, in the sense of Wisdom preaching, is as little appropriate as elsewhere; just here as the masculine gender of the speaker to be accented, and Amrah Koheleth is thus an incorrect reading for Amar HakKoheleth (Ecc 12:8). The name Koheleth, without Chokma being supplied, is a man’s name, of such recent formation as Sophereth, Neh 7:5, for which Ezr 2:55, Hassophereth; cf. also Ezr 2:57, 'פּך הץ. The Mishna goes yet further in the coining of such names for men generis fem. As it generally prefers to use the part. passivi in an active sense, e.g., סבוּר, thinking; רכוּב, riding; שׁתוּי, having drunk; so also it forms fem. plurals with a masculine signification, - as Hadruchoth, press-treaders, Terumoth iii. 4; Hammeshuhhoth, surveyors, Erubin iv. 11; Halleuzoth, speakers in a foreign tongue, Megilla ii. 1, - and construes these with mas. predicates.Vid., Geiger, Lehrbuch, xvi. 6, and cf. Weiss’ Studien, p. 90, who arbitrarily explains away this linguistic usage. Duke, in his Sprache der Mishna, p. 75, avoids the difficulty by the supposition of inadmissible ellipses.

In these there can be nowhere anything said of a heightening of the idea effected by the transition to fem. forms. But the persons acting, although they are men, are thought of as neut.; and they appear, separated from the determination of their gender, as the representatives of the activity spoken of. According to this, Koheleth is, without regard to the gender, a preaching person. The Book of Koheleth thus bears, in its second word, as on its very forehead, the stamp of the Ezra-Nehemiah era to which it belongs.

As the woman of Endor, when she raised Samuel out of Hades at the request of Saul, sees “gods ascending out of the earth” (1Sa 28:13), so it is not the veritable Solomon who speaks in this book, but his spirit, for which this neut. name Koheleth is appropriate. When he says, Ecc 1:12, “I, Koheleth, have been king over Israel in Jerusalem,” he recognises himself not as the reigning monarch, but as having been king. The Talmudic Aggada has joined to this הייתי, the fable that Solomon was compelled to descend from the throne on account of his transgression of the law, which was then occupied by an angel in his stead, but externally bearing his likeness; and that he now went about begging, saying: “I, Koheleth, have been king over Israel in Jerusalem;” but that they struck him with a stick, and set before him a plate of groats; for they said to him: “How canst thou speak thus? There the king sits in his palace on this throne.”Jer. Sanhedrin ii. 6 goes further into the story; b. Gittin 68 b, where the angel is designated by the Persian name Ashmodee, cf. Jellinek’s Sammlung kleiner Midrashim 2. xxvi.

In this fiction there is at least grammatical intelligence. For it is a vain delusion for one to persuade himself that Solomon in his advanced age could say, with reference to the period of his life as ruler, “I have been king,” fui rex - he was certainly always so during the forty years of his reign, and on to the last moment of his life. Or can the words מלך הייתי means sum rex? The case is as follows: הייתי is never the expression of the abstract present, or of existence without regard to time; “I am king” is expressed in this sense by the substantival clause ani mělěk. In every case where one can translate הייתי by “I am,” e.g., Psa 88:5, the present being is thought of as the result of an historical past (sum = factus sum). But at the most, הייתי, when it looks from the present back upon the past, out of which it arose, signifies “I have become,” Gen 32:11; Psa 30:8; Jer 20:7; or when it looks back into the past as such, “I have been,” Jos 1:5; Jdg 12:2; Psa 37:25. Whether this word, in the former sense, corresponds to the Greek perfect, and in the latter to the Greek aorist, is determined only by the situation and connection. Thus in Exo 2:22 it signifies, “I have become a stranger” (γέγονα = εἰμί); while, on the other hand, in Deu 23:8, “thou hast been a stranger” (ἐγένου, fuisti). That where the future is spoken of, הייתי can, by virtue of the consecutio temporum, also acquire the meaning of “I shall become, I shall be,” e.g., 1Ki 1:21, cf. 1Ch 19:12, is of no importance to us here. In the more modern language the more delicate syntax, as well as that idea of “becoming,” primarily inherent in the verb היה, is disappearing, and הייתי signifies either the past purely, “I have been,” Neh 13:6, or, though not so frequently, the past along with the present, “I was,” e.g., Neh 1:11. Accordingly, Solomon while still living would be able to say מלך הייתי only in the sense of “I have become (and still am) king;” but that does not accord with the following retrospective perfects.If ואתּן followed, then הייתי (as Reusch and Hengstenberg interpret) might be a circumstantial perfect; vid., under Gen 1:2.

This also does not harmonize with the more modern linguistic usage which is followed by Koheleth, e.g., Ecc 1:9, מה־שׁ, id quod fuit; Ecc 1:10, היה כבד, pridem fuit. In conformity with this, the lxx translates הייתי by ἐγενόμην, and the Graec. Venet. by ὑπῆρξα. But “I have been king,” Solomon, yet living, cannot say, only Salomo redivivus here introduced, as the preacher can use such an expression.

The epilogue, Ecc 12:9., also furnishes an argument in favour of the late composition of this book, on the supposition that it is an appendix, not by another hand, but by the author himself. But that it is from the author’s own hand, and does not, as Grätz supposes, belong to the period in which the school of Hillel had established the canonicity of the book, follows from this, that it is composed in a style of Hebrew approaching that used in the Mishna, yet of an earlier date than the Mishna; for in the Talmuds it is, clause by clause, a subject of uncertain interpretation, - the language used is plainly, for the Talmudic authorities, one that is antiquated, the expressions of which, because not immediately and unambiguously clear, need, in order to their explanation, to be translated into the language then in use. The author of the book makes it thus manifest that here in the epilogue, as in the book itself, Solomon is intentionally called Koheleth; and that the manner of expression, as well as of the formation of the sentences in this epilogue, can in all particulars be supported from the book itself. In “fear God,” Ecc 12:13, the saying in Ecc 5:6, which is similarly formed, is repeated; and “this is the whole of man,” Ecc 12:13, a thought written as it were more in cipher than in extenso, is in the same style as Ecc 6:10. The word יותר (“moreover”), frequently used by the author and בעל, used in the formation of attributive names, Ecc 10:11, Ecc 10:20; Ecc 5:10, Ecc 5:12; Ecc 8:8, we meet with also here. And as at Ecc 12:9-11 a third idea connected ἀσυνδέτως follows two ideas connected by vav, so also at Ecc 1:7; Ecc 6:5. But if this epilogue is the product of the author’s own hand, then, in meaning and aim, it presents itself as its sequel. The author says that the Koheleth who appears in this book as “wise” is the same who composed the beautiful people's-book Mishle; that he sought out not only words of a pleasing form, but also all words of truth; that the words of the wise are like goads and nails which stand in collected rows and numbers - they are given from one Shepherd. The author of the book thereby denotes that the sentences therein collected, even though they are not wholly, as they lie before us, the words of Solomon, yet that, with the Proverbs of Solomon, and of the wise men generally, they go back to one giver and original author. The epilogue thus, by its historic reference to Solomon, recognises the fiction, and gives the reader to understand that the book loses nothing in its value from its not having been immediately composed by Solomon.

Of untruthfulness, of a so-called pia fraus, we cannot therefore speak. From early times, within the sphere of the most ancient Israelitish authorship, it was regarded as a justifiable undertaking for an author to reproduce in a rhetorical or poetical form the thoughts and feelings of memorable personages on special occasions. The Psalter contains not a few psalms bearing the superscription le-David, which were composed not by David himself, but by unknown poets, placing themselves, as it were, in David’s position, and representing him, such e.g., as 144, which in the lxx excellently bears the superscription pro’s to'n Golia'd. The chronicler, when he seeks to give the reader an idea of the music at the festival of the consecration of the tabernacle and then of the completed temple, allows himself so great freedom, that he puts into the mouth of David the Beracha of the fourth book of the Psalms (Psa 106:48), along with the preceding verse of Ps 106 (1Ch 16:35.), and into Solomon’s mouth verses of Ps 132 (2Ch 6:41.). And the prophetical discourses communicated in the O.T. historical books are certainly partly of this sort, that they either may be regarded as original, as e.g., 1Sa 2:27., or must be so regarded, as 2 Kings 18-20; but not merely where the utterances of the prophets are in general terms reproduced, as at Jdg 6:8-10; 2Ki 17:13; 2Ki 21:10-15, but also elsewhere in most of the prophetic discourses which we read in the Books of Kings and Chronicles, the style of the historian makes itself perceptible. Consequently (as also Caspari in his work on the Syro-Ephraimite War, 1849, finds) the discourses in the Chronicles, apart from those which are common to them, bear an altogether different homogeneous character from those of the Book of Kings. It is the same as with the speeches, for instance, which are recorded in Thucydides, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Livy, and other Greek and Roman historians. Classen may be right in the opinion, that the speeches in Thucydides are not mere inventions, but that, nevertheless, as they lie before us, they are the work of the historian; even the letters that passed between Pausanias and Xerxes bear his stamp, although he composed them on the ground of the verbal reports of the Spartans. It is thus also in the speeches found in Tacitus. They are more Ciceronian than his own style is, and the discourses of Germans have less elaborated periods than those of the Romans; but so greatly was the writing of history by the ancients influenced by this custom of free reproduction, that even a speech of the Emperor Claudius, which is found engraven on brass, is given by Tacitus not in this its original, but in another and freer form, assimilated to his own manner of representation. So also sacred history, which in this respect follows the general ancient custom, depends not on the identity of the words, but of the spirit: it does not feign what it represents the historical person as saying, it follows traditions; but yet it is the power of its own subjectivity which thus recalls the past in all that was essential to it in actual life. The aim is not artistically to represent the imitation which is made as if it were genuine. The arts by which it is sought to impart to that which is introduced into a more recent period the appearance of genuineness, were unknown to antiquity. No pseudonymous work of antiquity shows any such imitation of an ancient style as, e.g., does Meinhold’s Bernsteinhexe, or such a forgery as Wagenfeld’s Sanchuniathon. The historians reproduce always in their own individual way, without impressing on the speeches of different persons any distinct individual character. They abstain from every art aimed at the concealment of the actual facts of the case. It is thus also with the author of the Book of Koheleth. As the author of the “Wisdom of Solomon” openly gives himself out to be an Alexandrian, who makes Solomon his organ, so the author of the Book of Koheleth is so little concerned purposely to veil the fiction of the Solomon-discourse, in which he clothes his own peculiar life-experiences, that he rather in diverse ways discovers himself as one and the same person with the Salomo redivivus here presenting himself.

We do not reckon along with these such proverbs as have for their object the mutual relationship between the king and his subjects, Ecc 8:3-5; Ecc 10:4, Ecc 10:16., 20, cf. Ecc 5:8; these do not betray in the speaker one who is an observer of rulers and not a ruler himself; for the two collections of “Proverbs of Solomon” in the Book of Proverbs contain a multitude of proverbs of the king, Pro 16:10, Pro 16:12-15; Pro 19:12; Pro 20:2, Pro 20:8, Pro 20:26, Pro 20:28; Pro 25:2-4., 6f., which, although objectively speaking of the king, may quite well be looked on as old Solomonic-for is there not a whole princely literature regarding princely government, as e.g., Friedrich II's Anti-Machiavel? But in the complaints against unrighteous judgment, Ecc 3:16; Ecc 4:1; Ecc 5:7, one is to be seen who suffers under it, or who is compelled to witness it without the power to change it; they are not appropriate in the mouth of the ruler, who should prevent injustice. It is the author himself who here puts his complaints into the mouth of Solomon; it is he who has to record life-experiences such as Ecc 10:5-7. The time in which he lived was one of public misgovernment and of dynastic oppression, in contrast with which the past shone out in a light so much the rosier, Ecc 7:10, and it threw long dark shadows across his mind when he looked out into the world, and mediately also upon the confessions of his Koheleth. This Koheleth is not the historical Solomon, but an abstraction of the historical; he is not the theocratic king, but the king among the wise men; the actual Solomon could not speak, Ecc 2:18, of the heir to his throne as of “the man that shall be after him,” - and he who has led astray by his wives into idolatry, and thus became an apostate (1Ki 11:4), must have sounded an altogether different note of penitential contrition from that which we read at Ecc 7:26-28. This Solomon who tasted all, and in the midst of his enjoyment maintained the position of a wise man (Ecc 2:9), is described by the author of this book from history and from sayings, just as he needs him, so as to make him an organ of himself; and so little does he think of making the fiction an illusion difficult to be seen through, that he represents Koheleth, Ecc 1:16; Ecc 2:7, Ecc 2:9, as speaking as if he had behind him a long line of kings over the whole of Israel and Judah, while yet not he, but the author of the book, who conceals himself behind Salomo redivivus, could look back on such a series of kings in Jerusalem.

When did this anonymous author, who speaks instead of his Solomon, live and write? Let us first of all see what conclusion may be gathered regarding the book from the literary references it contains. In its thoughts, and in the form of its thoughts, it is an extremely original work. It even borrows nothing from the Solomonic Book of Proverbs, which in itself contains so many repetitions; proverbs such as Pro 7:16-18 and Pro 3:7 are somewhat like, but only accidentally. On the contrary, between Ecc 5:14 and Job 1:21, as well as between Job 7:14 and Job 2:10, there undoubtedly exists some kind of connection; here there lie before us thoughts which the author of the Book of Koheleth may have read in the Book of Job, and have quoted them from thence - also the mention of an untimely birth, Ecc 6:3, cf. Job 3:16, and the expression “one among a thousand,” Ecc 7:28, cf. Job 9:3; Job 33:23, may perhaps be reminiscences from the Book of Job occurring unconsciously to the author. This is not of any consequence as to the determination of the time of the composition of the Book of Koheleth, for the Book of Job is in any case much older. Dependence on the Book of Jeremiah would be of greater importance, but references such as Jer 7:2, cf. Jer 16:8; Jer 9:11, cf. Jer 9:22, are doubtful, and guide to no definite conclusion. And who might venture, with Hitzig, to derive the golden lamp, Ecc 12:10, from the vision of Zec 4:2, especially since the figure in the one place has an altogether different signification from what it has in the other? But we gain a more certain terminus a quo by comparing Ecc 5:5 with Mal 2:7. Malachi there designates the priests as messengers (delegated) of Jahve of hosts, along with which also there is the designation of the prophets as God’s messengers, Ecc 3:1; Hag 1:13. With the author of the Book of Koheleth “the messenger” is already, without any name of God being added, a priestly title not to be misunderstood; מלאך (messenger)Vid., my dissertation: Die Discussion der Amtsfrage im Mishna u. Gemara, in the Luth. Zeitschrift 1854, pp. 446-449. denotes the priest as vicarius Dei, the delegate of God, שׁלוח דרחמנא, according to the later title (Kiddushin 23b). And a terminus ad quem, beyond which the reckoning of the time of its composition cannot extend, is furnished by the “Wisdom of Solomon,” which is not a translation, but a work written originally in Alexandrine Greek; for that this book is older than the Book of Koheleth, as Hitzig maintains, is not only in itself improbable, since the latter shows not a trace of Greek influence, but in the light of the history of doctrine is altogether impossible, since it represents, in the history of the development of the doctrine of wisdom and the last things, the stage immediately preceding the last b.c., as Philo does the last; it is not earlier than the beginning of the persecution of the Jews by the Egyptians under Ptolemy VII, Physkon (Joseph. c. Ap. ii. 5), and at all events was written before Philo, since the combination of the Sophia and the Logos is here as yet incomplete. This Book of Wisdom must stand in some kind of historical relation to the Book of Koheleth. The fact that both authors make King Solomon the organ of their own peculiar view of the world, shows a connection that is not accidental. Accident is altogether excluded by the circumstance that the Alexandrian author stands in the same relation to the Palestinian that James stands in to the Pauline letters. As James directs himself not so much against Paul as against a Paulinism misleading to fatal consequences, so that Book of Wisdom is certainly not directly a work in opposition to the Book of Koheleth, as is assumed by J. E. Ch. Schmidt (Salomo’s Prediger, 1794), Kelle (Die salom. Schriften, 1815), and others; but, as Knobel and Grimm assert, against a one-sided extreme interpretation of views and principles as set forth by Koheleth, not without an acquaintance with this book. The lovers of pleasure, who speak in Wisd. 2:1-9, could support that saying by expressions from the Book of Koheleth, and the concluding words there sound like an appropriation of the words of Koheleth Ecc 3:22; Ecc 5:17 (cf. lxx); it is true they break off the point of the Book of Koheleth, for the exhortation to the fear of God, the Judge of the world, is not echoed; but to break off this point did not lie remote, since the old Chokma watchword, “fear God,” hovered over the contents of the book rather than penetrated them. It is as if the author of the Book of Wisdom, 1-5, wished to show to what danger of abuse in the sense of a pure materialistic eudaemonism the wisdom presented in the Book of Koheleth is exposed. But he also opposes the pessimistic thoughts of Koheleth in the decided assertions of the contrary: (1) Koheleth says: “There is one event to the righteous and to the wicked,” Ecc 9:2; but he says: there is a difference between them wide as the heavens, Wisd. 3:2f., 4:7; 5:15f.; (2) Koheleth says: “He that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow,” 1:18; but he says: wisdom bringeth not sorrow, but pure joy with it, Wisd. 8:16; (3) Koheleth says that wisdom bringeth neither respect nor favour, Ecc 9:11; but he says: it brings fame and honour, Wisd. 8:10; (4) Koheleth says: “There is no remembrance of the wise more than of the fool for ever,” Ecc 2:16; but he says of wisdom in contrast to folly: “I shall obtain by it a deathless name, and shall leave to my descendants an everlasting remembrance,” Wisd. 8:13.

The main distinction between the two books lies in this, that the comfortless view of Hades running through the Book of Koheleth is thoroughly surmounted by a wonderful rising above the O.T. standpoint by the author of the Book of Wisdom, and that hence there is in it an incomparably more satisfying Theodicee (cf. Wisd. 12:2-18 with Ecc 7:15; Ecc 8:14), and a more spiritual relation to this present time (cf. Wisd. 8:21; 9:17, with Ecc 2:24; Ecc 3:13, etc.). The “Wisdom of Solomon” has indeed the appearance of an anti-Ecclesiastes, a side-piece to the Book of Koheleth, which aims partly at confuting it, partly at going beyond it; for it represents, in opposition to Koheleth not rising above earthly enjoyment with the But of the fear of God, a more ideal, more spiritual Solomon. If Koheleth says that God “hath made everything beautiful in his time,” Ecc 3:11, and hath made mad upright, Ecc 7:29; so, on the other hand, Solomon says that He hath made all things εἰς τὸ εἶναι, Wisd. 1:14, and hath made man ἐπ ̓ ἀφθαρσίᾳ, 2:23. There are many such parallels, e.g., Ecc 5:9, cf. Koh. Ecc 8:13, Ecc 8:5, cf. Koh. Ecc 7:12; Ecc 9:13-16, cf. Koh. Ecc 3:10., but particularly Solomon’s confession, 7:1-21, with that of Koheleth, Ecc 1:12-18. Here, wisdom appears as a human acquisition; there (which agrees with 1Ki 3:11-13), as a gracious gift obtained in answer to prayer, which brings with it all that can make happy. If one keeps in his eye this mutual relation between the two books, there can be no doubt as to which is the older and which the younger. In the Book of Koheleth the Old Covenant digs for itself its own grave. It is also a “school-master to Christ,” in so far as it awakens a longing after a better Covenant than the first.Vid., Oehler’s Theol. des A.T., II, p. 324.

But the Book of Wisdom is a precursor of this better covenant. The composition of the Book of Koheleth falls between the time of Malachi, who lived in the time of Nehemiah’s second arrival at Jerusalem, probably under Darius Nothus (423-405 b.c.), and the Book of Wisdom, which at the earliest was written under Ptolemy Physkon (145-117), when the O.T. was already for the most part translated into the Greek language.Cf. Wisd 2:12 a with Isa 3:10, lxx, and Wisd 15:10 a with Isa 44:20, lxx.

Hitzig does not venture to place the Book of Koheleth so far back into the period of the Ptolemies; he reaches with his chain of evidence only the year 204, that in which Ptolemy Epiphanes (204-181), gained, under the guardianship of the Romans, the throne of his father, - he must be the minor whom the author has in his eye, Rom 10:16. But the first link of his chain of proof is a falsum. For it is not true that Ptolemy Lagus was the first ruler who exacted from the Jews the “oath of God,” Ecc 8:2, i.e., the oath of fidelity; for Josephus (Antt. xii. 1. 1) says directly, that Ptolemy Lagus did this with reference to the fidelity with which the Jews had kept to Alexander the Macedonian the oath of allegiance they had sworn to Darius, which he particularly describes, Antt. xi. 8. 3; besides, the covenant, e.g., 2Sa 5:3, concluded in the presence of Jahve with their own native kings included in it the oath of allegiance, and the oath of vassalage which, e.g., Zedekiah swore to Nebuchadnezzar, 2Ch 36:13, cf. Eze 17:13-19, had at the same time binding force on the citizens of the state that was in subjection. Also that “the oath of God” must mean the oath of allegiance sworn to a foreign ruler, and not that sworn to a native ruler, which would rather be called “the oath of Jahve,” does not stand the test: the author of the Book of Koheleth drives the cosmopolitism of the Chokma so far, that he does not at all make use of the national name of God connected with the history of redemption, and Nehemiah also, Neh 13:25, uses an oath “of God” where one would have expected an oath “of Jahve.” The first link of Hitzig’s chain of proof, then, shows itself on all sides to be worthless. The author says, Ecc 8:2, substantially the same as Paul, Rom 13:5, that one ought to be subject to the king, not only from fear of punishment, but for conscience' sake.

Thus, then, Ecc 8:10 will also stand without reference to the carrying away of the Jews captive by Ptolemy Lagus, especially since the subject there is by no means that of a mass-deportation; and, besides, those who were carried into Egypt by Lagus were partly from the regions round about Jerusalem, and partly from the holy city itself (Joseph. Antt. 12. 1. 1). And the old better times, Ecc 7:10, were not those of the first three Ptolemies, especially since there are always men, and even in the best and most prosperous times, who praise the old times at the expense of the new. And also women who were a misfortune to their husbands or lovers there have always been, so that in Ecc 7:26 one does not need to think of that Agathoclea who ruled over Ptolemy Philopator, and even had in her hands the power of life and death.

Passages such as Ecc 7:10 and Ecc 7:26 afford no help in reference to the chronology. On the other hand, the author in Ecc 9:13-16 relates, to all appearance, what he himself experienced. But the little city is certainly not the fortified town of Dora, on the sea-coast to the west of Carmel, which was besieged by Antiochus the Great (Polybius, v. 66) in the year 218, as at a later period, in the year 138, it was by Antiochus VII, Sidetes (Joseph. Bell. i. 2. 2); for this Dora was not then saved by a poor wise man within it, - of whom Polybius knows nothing, - but “by the strength of the place, and the help of those with Nicholaus.” A definite historical event is also certainly found in Ecc 4:13-16. Hitzig sees in the old foolish king the spiritually contracted, but so much the more covetous, high priest Onias, under Ptolemy Euergetes; and in the poor but wise youth, Joseph (the son of Tobias), who robbed Onias of his place in the state, and raised himself to the office of general farmer of taxes. But here nothing agrees but that Onias was old and foolish, and that Joseph was then a young wise man (Joseph. Antt. xii. 4. 2); of the poverty of the latter nothing is heard-he was the nephew of Onias. And besides, he did not come out of the house “of prisoners” (הסוּרים); this word is pointed by Hitzig so as to mean, out of the house “of fugitives” (הסּוּרים), perhaps, as he supposes, an allusion to the district Φιχόλα, which the author thus interprets as if it were derived from φεύγειν. Historical investigation has here degenerated into the boldest subjectivism. The Heb. tongue has never called “fugitives” הסורים; and to whom could the Heb. word פיקולה (cf. Berachoth 28b) suggest - as Φύγελα did to Pliny and Mela - the Greek φεύγειν!

We have thus, in determining the time of the authorship of this book, to confine ourselves to the period subsequent to the Diadochs. It may be regarded as beyond a doubt that it was written under the Persian domination. Kleinert (Der Prediger Salomo, 1864) is in general right in saying that the political condition of the people which the book presupposes, is that in which they are placed under Satraps; the unrighteous judgment, Ecc 3:16; and the despotic oppression, Ecc 4:1; Ecc 8:9; Ecc 5:7; the riotous court-life, Ecc 10:16-19; the raising of mean men to the highest places of honour, Ecc 10:5-7; the inexorable severity of the law of war-service, Ecc 8:8;Vid., Herod. iv. 84, vii. 38f. the prudence required by the organized system of espionageVid., Duncker’s Gesch. des Alterthums, Bd. 2 (1867), p. 894. existing at such a time, - all these things were characteristic of this period. But if the Book of Koheleth is not at all older than Malachi, then it was written somewhere within the last century of the Persian kingdom, between Artaxerxes I, Longimanus (464-424), and Darius Codomannus (335-332): the better days for the Jewish people, of the Persian supremacy under the first five Achaemenides, were past (Ecc 7:10).

Indeed, in Ecc 6:3 there appear to be reminiscences of Artaxerxes II, Mnemon (died about 360), who was 94 years old, and, according to Justin (x. 1), had 115 sons, and of Artaxerxes III, Ochus his successor, who was poisoned by the chief eunuch Bagoas, who, according to Aelian, Var. Hist. vi. 8, threw his (Ochus') body to the cats, and caused sword-handles to be made from his bones. The book altogether contains many examples to which concrete instances in the Persian history correspond, from which they might be abstracted, in which strict harmony on all sides with historical fact is not to be required, since it did not concern the author. The event recorded Ecc 4:13. refers to Cyrus rising to the supremacy of world-ruler (after dispossessing the old Median King Astyages), who leftAccording to Nicolaus of Damascus (Müller’s Fragm. hist. Graec. III 398), Cyrus was the child of poor parents; by “prison-house” (Ecc 4:14), reference is made to his confinement in Persia, where access to him was prevented by guards (Herod. i. 123). Justin, i. 5: “A letter could not be openly brought to him, since the guards appointed by the king kept possession of all approaches to him.” nothing but misery to posterity. Such a rich man as is described in Ecc 6:2, who had to leave all his treasures to a stranger, was Croesus, to whom Solon, as Ecc 7:8 (cf. Herod. i. 32, 86), said that no one ought to be praised before his end. A case analogous at least to Ecc 9:14-16, was the deliverance of Athens by the counsel of Themistocles (Justin, ii. 12), who finally, driven from Athens, was compelled to seek the protection of the Persian king, and ended his life in despair.Vid., Spiegel’s Erânische Alterthumskunde, II pp. 409, 413. Bernstein suggests the deliverance of Potidea (Herod. viii. 128) or Tripolis (Diodor. xvi. 41); but neither of these cities owed its deliverance to the counsel of a wise man. Burger (Comm. in Ecclesiasten, 1864) thinks, with greater probability, of Themistocles, who was celebrated among the Persians (Thucyd. i. 138), which Ewald also finds most suitable, provided the author had a definite fact before his eye.

If we were not confined, for the history of the Persian kingdom and its provinces, from Artaxerxes I to the appearance of Alexander of Macedon, to only a few and scanty sources of information (we know no Jewish events of this period, except the desecration of the temple by Bagoses, described by Josephus, Antt. xi. 7), we might probably be better able to understand many of the historical references of the Book of Koheleth. We should then be able to say to whom the author refers by the expression, “Woe to thy land when thy king is a child,” Ecc 10:16; for Artaxerxes I, who, although only as yet a boy at the time of the murder of his father Xerxes (Justin, iii. 1), soon thereafter appeared manly enough, cannot be thought of. We should then, perhaps, be also in possession of the historical key to Ecc 8:10; for with the reference to the deportation of many thousands of Jewish prisoners (Josephus, c. Ap. i. 22) - which, according to Syncellus and Orosius, must have occurred under Artaxerxes III, Ochus - the interpretation of that passage does not accord.Vid., Bernstein’s Quaestiones Kohelethanae, p. 66.

We should then also, perhaps, know to what political arrangement the author points when he says, Ecc 7:19, that wisdom is a stronger protection to a city than “ten mighty men;” Grätz refers this to the decuriones of the Roman municipal cities and colonies; but probably it refers to the dynastiesVid., Duncker’s Gesch. des Alterthums, II p. 910. (cf. Assyr. salat, governor) placed by the Persian kings over the cities of conquered countries. And generally, the oppressed spirit pervading the book would be so much clearer if we knew more of the sacrifices which the Jewish people in the later time of the Persians had to make, than merely that the Phoenicians, at the same time with “The Syrians in Palestine,” had to contribute (Herod. vii. 87) to Xerxes for his Grecian expedition three hundred triremes; and also that the people who “dwelt in the Solymean mountains” had to render him assistance in his expedition against Greece (Joseph. c. Ap. i. 22).

The author was without doubt a Palestinian. In Eccl 4:17 he speaks of himself as dwelling where the temple was, and also in the holy city, Ecc 8:10; he lived, if not actually in it, at least in its near neighbourhood, Ecc 10:15; although, as Kleinert remarks, he appears, Ecc 11:1, to make use of a similitude taken from the corn trade of a seaport town. From Ecc 4:8 the supposition is natural that he was alone in the land, without children or brothers or sisters; but from the contents and spirit of the whole book, it appears more certain that, like his Koheleth, he was advanced in years, and had behind him a long checkered life. The symptoms of approaching death presenting themselves in old age, which he describes to the young, Ecc 12:2., he probably borrowed from his own experience. The whole book bears the marks of age, - a production of the Old Covenant which was stricken in age, and fading away.

The literature, down to 1860, of commentaries and monographs on the Book of Koheleth is very fully set forth in the English Commentary of Ginsburg, and from that time to 1867, in Zöckler’s Commentary, which forms a part of Lange’s Bibelwerk. Keil’s Einleitung, 3rd ed. 1873, contains a supplement to these, among which, however, the Bonner Theolog. Literaturblatt, 1874, Nr. 7, misses Pusey’s and Reusch’s (cf. the Tübingen Theol. Quartalschrift, 1860, pp. 430-469). It is not possible for any man to compass this literature. Aedner’s Catalogue of the Hebrew books in the Library of the British Museum, 1867, contains a number of Jewish commentaries omitted by Ginsburg and Zöckler, but far from all. For example, the Commentary of Ahron B. Josef (for the first time printed at Eupatoria, 1834) now lies before me, with those of Moses Frankel (Dessau, 1809), and of Samuel David Luzzatto, in the journal, Ozar Nechmad 1864. Regarding the literature of English interpretation, see the American translation, by Tayler Lewis (1870), of Zöckler’s Commentary. The catalogue there also is incomplete, for in 1873 a Commentary by Thomas Pelham Dale appeared; and a Monograph on Ecc 12:1-14, under the title of The Dirge of Coheleth, by the Orientalist C. Taylor, appeared in 1874. The fourth volume of the Speaker’s Commentary contains a Commentary on the Song by Kingsbury, and on Ecclesiastes by W. T. Bullock, who strenuously maintains its Solomonic authorship. The opinion that the book represents the conflict of two voices, the voice of true wisdom and that of pretended wisdom, has lately found advocates not only in a Hebrew Commentary by Ephraim Hirsch (Warsaw, 1871), but also in the article “Koheleth” by Schenkel in his Bibellexikon (vol. III, 1871). For the history and refutation of this attempt to represent the book in the form of a dialogue, we might refer to Zöckler’s Introd. to his Commentary.

The old translations have been referred to at length by Ginsburg. Frederick Field, in his Hexapla (Poet. vol. 1867), has collected together the fragments of the Greek translations. Ge. Janichs, in his Animadversiones criticae (Breslau, 1871), has examined the Peshito of Koheleth and Ruth; vid., with reference thereto, Nöldeke’s Anzeige in the Liter. Centralblatt 1871, Nr. 49, and cf. Middeldorpf’s Symbolae exegetico-criticae ad librum Ecclesiastis, 1811. The text of the Graecus Venetus lies before us now in a more accurate form than that by Villoison (1784), in Gebhardt’s careful edition of certain Venetian manuscripts (Leipzig, Brockhaus 1874), containing this translation of the O.T. books.

Ecc 1:1

The title, Ecc 1:1, The words of Koheleth, son of David, king in Jerusalem, has been already explained in the Introduction. The verse, which does not admit of being properly halved, is rightly divided by “son of David” by the accent Zakef; for the apposition, “king in Jerusalem,” does not belong to “David,” but to “Koheleth.” In several similar cases, such as Eze 1:3, the accentuation leaves the designation of the oppositional genitive undefined; in Gen 10:21 it proceeds on an erroneous supposition; it is rightly defined in Amo 1:1, for example, as in the passage before us. That “king” is without the article, is explained from this, that it is determined by “in Jerusalem,” as elsewhere by “of Israel” (“Judah”). The expression (cf. 2Ki 14:23) is singular.

Ecc 1:2

The book begins artistically with an opening section of the nature of a preamble. The ground-tone of the whole book at once sounds in Ecc 1:2, which commences this section, “O vanity of vanities, saith Koheleth, O vanity of vanities! All is vain.” As at Isa 40:1 (vid., l.c.) it is a question whether by “saith” is meant a future or a present utterance of God, so here and at Ecc 12:8 whether “saith” designates the expression of Koheleth as belonging to history or as presently given forth. The language admits both interpretations, as e.g., “saith,” with God as the subject, 2Sa 23:3, is meant historically, and in Isa 49:5 of the present time. We understand “saith” here, as e.g., Isa 36:4, “Thus saith ... the king of Assyria,” of something said now, not of something said previously, since it is those presently living to whom the Solomon redivivus, and through him the author of this book, preaches the vanity of all earthly things. The old translators take “vanity of vanities” in the nominative, as if it were the predicate; but the repetition of the expression shows that it is an exclamation = O vanitatem vanitatum. The abbreviated connecting form of הבל is here not punctuated הבל, after the form חדר (חדר) and the like, but הבל, after the manner of the Aram. ground-form עבד; cf. Ewald, §32 b. Jerome read differently: In Hebraeo pro vanitate vanitatum ABAL ABALIM scriptum est, quod exceptis lxx interpretibus omnes similiter transtulerunt ἀτμὸς ἀτμἰδων sive ἀτμῶν. Hěvěl primarily signifies a breath, and still bears this meaning in post-bibl. Heb., e.g., Schabbath 119 b: “The world exists merely for the sake of the breath of school-children” (who are the hope of the future). Breath, as the contrast of that which is firm and enduring, is the figure of that which has no support, no continuance. Regarding the superlative expression, “Vanity of vanities,” vid., the Sol 1:1. “Vanity of vanities” is the non plus ultra of vanity, - vanity in the highest degree. The double exclamation is followed by a statement which shows it to be the result of experience. “All is vain” - the whole (of the things, namely, which present themselves to us here below for our consideration and use) is vanity.

Ecc 1:3

With this verse commences the proof for this exclamation and statement: “What profit hath a man of all his labour which he laboureth in under the sun?!” An interrogative exclamation, which leads to the conclusion that never anything right, i.e., real, enduring, satisfying, comes of it.יתרון, profit, synon. with Mothar, Ecc 3:19, is peculiar to this book (= Aram. יוּתרן). A primary form, יתרון, is unknown. The punctator Simson (Cod. 102a of the Leipzig University Lib.f. 5a) rightly blames those who use ויתּרון, in a liturgical hymn, of the Day of Atonement. The word signifies that which remains over, either, as here, clear gain, profit, or that which has the pre-eminence, i.e., superiority, precedence, or is the foremost. “Under the sun” is the designation of the earth peculiar to this book, - the world of men, which we are wont to call the sublunary world. שׁ has not the force of an accusative of manner, but of the obj. The author uses the expression, “Labour wherein I have laboured,” Ecc 2:19-20; Ecc 5:17, as Euripides, similarly, μοχθεῖν μόχθον. He now proceeds to justify the negative contained in the question, “What profit?”

Ecc 1:4 “One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: and the earth remaineth for ev.” The meaning is not that the earth remains standing, and thus (Hitz.) approaches no limit (for what limit for it could be had in view?); it is by this very immoveable condition that it fulfils, according to the ancient notion, its destiny, Psa 119:90. The author rather intends to say that in this sphere nothing remains permanent as the fixed point around which all circles; generations pass away, others appear, and the earth is only the firm territory, the standing scene, of this ceaseless change. In reality, both things may be said of the earth: that it stands for ever without losing its place in the universe, and that it does not stand for ever, for it will be changed and become something else. But the latter thought, which appertains to the history of redemption, Psa 102:26., is remote from the Preacher; the stability of the earth appears to him only as the foil of the growth and decay everlastingly repeating themselves. Elster, in this fact, that the generations of men pass away, and that, on the contrary, the insensate earth under their feet remains, rightly sees something tragic, as Jerome had already done: Quid hac vanius vanitate, quam terram manere, quae hominum causa facta est, et hominem ipsum, terrae dominum, tam repente in pulverem dissolvi? The sun supplies the author with another figure. This, which he thinks of in contrast with the earth, is to him a second example of ceaseless change with perpetual sameness. As the generations of men come and go, so also does the sun.

Ecc 1:5 “And the sun ariseth, the sun goeth down, and it hasteth (back) to its place, there to rise again.” It rises and sets again, but its setting is not a coming to rest; for from its place of resting in the west it must rise again in the morning in the east, hastening to fulfil its course. Thus Hitzig rightly, for he takes “there to rise again” as a relative clause; the words may be thus translated, but strictly taken, both participles stand on the same level; שׁואף (panting, hastening) is like בּא in Ecc 1:4, the expression of the present, and זו that of the fut. instans: ibi (rursus) oriturus; the accentuation also treats the two partic. as co-ordinate, for Tiphcha separates more than Tebir; but it is inappropriate that it gives to ואל־ם the greater disjunctive Zakef Quaton (with Kadma going before). Ewald adopts this sequence of the accents, for he explains: the sun goes down, and that to its own place, viz., hastening back to it just by its going down, where, panting, it again ascends. But that the sun goes down to the place of its ascending, is a distorted thought. If “to its place” belongs to “goeth,” then it can refer only to the place of the going down, as e.g., Benjamin el-Nahawendi (Neubauer, Aus der Petersb. Bibl. p. 108) explains: “and that to its place,” viz., the place of the going down appointed for it by the Creator, with reference to Psa 104:19, “the sun knoweth his going down.” But the שׁם, which refers back to “its place,” opposes this interpretation; and the phrase שׁו cannot mean “panting, rising,” since שאף in itself does not signify to pant, but to snatch at, to long eagerly after anything, thus to strive, panting after it (cf. Job 7:2; Psa 119:131), which accords with the words “to its place,” but not with the act of rising. And how unnatural to think of the rising sun, which gives the impression of renewed youth, as panting! No, the panting is said of the sun that has set, which, during the night, and thus without rest by day and night, must turn itself back again to the east (Psa 19:7), there anew to commence its daily course. Thus also Rashi, the lxx, Syr., Targ., Jerome, Venet., and Luther. Instead of שׁו, Grätz would read שׁב אף, redit (atque)etiam; but שׁו is as characteristic of the Preacher’s manner of viewing the world as סובב וגו, Ecc 1:6, and ין, Ecc 1:8. Thus much regarding the sun. Many old interpreters, recently Grätz, and among translators certainly the lxx, refer also Ecc 1:6 to the sun. The Targ. paraphrases the whole verse of the state of the sun by day and night, and at the spring and autumn equinox, according to which Rashi translates הרוּח, la volonté (du soleil). But along with the sun, the wind is also referred to as a third example of restless motion always renewing itself. The division of the verses is correct; Ecc 1:6 used of the sun would overload the figure, and the whole of Ecc 1:6 therefore refers to the wind.

Ecc 1:6 “It goeth to the south, and turneth to the north; the wind goeth ever circling, and the wind returneth again on its circuits.” Thus designedly the verse is long-drawn and monotonous. It gives the impression of weariness. שׁב may be 3rd pret. with the force of an abstract present, but the relation is here different from that in 5 a, where the rising, setting, and returning stand together, and the two former lie backwards indeed against the latter; here, on the contrary, the circling motion and the return to a new beginning stand together on the same line; שׁב is thus a part., as the Syr. translates it. The participles represent continuance in motion. In Ecc 1:4 the subjects stand foremost, because the ever anew beginning motion belongs to the subject; in Ecc 1:5 and Ecc 1:6, on the contrary, the pred. stands foremost, and the subject in Ecc 1:6 is therefore placed thus far back, because the first two pred. were not sufficient, but required a third for their completion. That the wind goes from the south (דּרום, R. דר, the region of the most intense light) to the north (צפון, R. צפן, the region of darkness), is not so exclusively true of it as it is of the sun that it goes from the east to the west; this expression requires the generalization “circling, circling goes the wind,” i.e., turning in all directions here and there; for the repetition denotes that the circling movement exhausts all possibilities. The near defining part. which is subordinated to “goeth,” elsewhere is annexed by “and,” e.g., Jon 1:11; cf. 2Sa 15:30; here סבב סובב , in the sense of סביב  סביב, Eze 37:2 (both times with Pasek between the words), precedes. סביבה is here the n. actionis of סבב. And “on its circuits” is not to be taken adverbially: it turns back on its circuits, i.e., it turns back on the same paths (Knobel and others), but על and שׁב are connected, as Pro 26:11; cf. Psa 19:7 : the wind returns back to its circling movements to begin them anew (Hitzig). “The wind” is repeated (cf. Ecc 2:10; Ecc 4:1) according to the figure Epanaphora or Palindrome (vid., the Introd. to Isaiah, c. 40-66). To all regions of the heavens, to all directions of the compass, its movement is ceaseless, ever repeating itself anew; there is nothing permanent but the fluctuation, and nothing new but that the old always repeats itself. The examples are thoughtfully chosen and arranged. From the currents of air, the author now passes to streams of water.

Ecc 1:7 “All rivers run into the sea, and the sea becomes not full; to the place whence the rivers came, thither they always return again.” Instead of nehhárim, nehhalim was preferred, because it is the more general name for flowing waters, brooks, and rivers; נחל (from נחל, cavare), אפיק (from אפק, continere), and (Arab.) wadin (from the root-idea of stretching, extending), all three denote the channel or bed, and then the water flowing in it. The sentence, “all rivers run into the sea,” is consistent with fact. Manifestly the author does not mean that they all immediately flow thither; and by “the sea” he does not mean this or that sea; nor does he think, as the Targ. explains, of the earth as a ring (גּוּשׁפּנקא, Pers. angusht-bâne, properly “finger-guard”) surrounding the ocean: but the sea in general is meant, perhaps including also the ocean that is hidden. If we include this internal ocean, then the rivers which lose themselves in hollows, deserts, or inland lakes, which have no visible outlet, form no exception. But the expression refers first of all to the visible sea-basins, which gain no apparent increase by these masses of water being emptied into them: “the sea, it becomes not full;” איננּוּ (Mishn. אינו) has the reflex. pron., as at Exo 3:2; Lev 13:34, and elsewhere. If the sea became full, then there would be a real change; but this sea, which, as Aristophanes says (Clouds, 1294f.), οὐδὲν γίγνεται ἐπιῤῥηεόντων τῶν ποταμῶν πλείων, represents also the eternal sameness. In Lev 13:7, Symm., Jer., Luther, and also Zöckler, translate שׁ in the sense of “from whence;” others, as Ginsburg, venture to take שׁם in the sense of משּׁם; both interpretations are linguistically inadmissible.

Generally the author does not mean to say that the rivers return to their sources, since the sea replenishes the fountains, but that where they once flow, they always for ever flow without changing their course, viz., into the all-devouring sea (Elst.); for the water rising out of the sea in vapour, and collecting itself in rain-clouds, fills the course anew, and the rivers flow on anew, for the old repeats itself in the same direction to the same end. מקום is followed by what is a virtual genitive (Psa 104:8); the accentuation rightly extends this only to הלכים; for אשׁר, according to its relation, signifies in itself ubi, Gen 39:20, and quo, Num 13:27; 1Ki 12:2 (never unde). שׁם, however, has after verbs of motion, as e.g., Jer 22:27 after שׁוב, and 1Sa 9:6 after הלך, frequently the sense of שׁמּה. And שׁוּב with ל and the infin. signifies to do something again, Hos 11:9; Job 7:7, thus: to the place whither the rivers flow, thither they flow again, eo rursus eunt. The author here purposely uses only participles, because although there is constant change, yet that which renews itself is ever the same. He now proceeds, after this brief but comprehensive induction of particulars, to that which is general.

Ecc 1:8 “All things are in activity; no man can utter it; the eye is not satisfied with seeing, and the ear is not full with hearing.” All translators and interpreters who understand devarim here of words (lxx, Syr., and Targ.) go astray; for if the author meant to say that no words can describe this everlasting sameness with perpetual change, then he would have expressed himself otherwise than by “all words weary” (Ew., Elst., Hengst., and others); he ought at least to have said לריק יג. But also “all things are wearisome” (Knob., Hitz.), or “full of labour” (Zöck.), i.e., it is wearisome to relate them all, cannot be the meaning of the sentence; for יגע does not denote that which causes weariness, but that which suffers weariness (Deu 25:18; 2Sa 7:2); and to refer the affection, instead of to the narrator, to that which is to be narrated, would be even for a poet too affected a quid pro quo. Rosenmüller essentially correctly: omnes res fatigantur h. e. in perpetua versantur vicissitudine, qua fatigantur quasi. But יגעים is not appropriately rendered by fatigantur; the word means, becoming wearied, or perfectly feeble, or also: wearying oneself (cf. Ecc 10:15; Ecc 12:12), working with a strain on one’s strength, fatiguing oneself (cf.יגיע, that which is gained by labour, work). This is just what these four examples are meant to show, viz., that a restless activity reaching no visible conclusion and end, always beginning again anew, pervades the whole world-all things, he says, summarizing, are in labour, i.e., are restless, hastening on, giving the impression of fatigue.

Thus also in strict sequence of thought that which follows: this unrest in the outer world reflects itself in man, when he contemplates that which is done around him; human language cannot exhaust this coming and going, this growth and decay in constant circle, and the quodlibet is so great, that the eye cannot be satisfied with seeing, nor the ear with hearing; to the unrest of things without corresponds the unrest of the mind, which through this course, in these ever repeated variations, always bringing back the old again to view, is kept in ceaseless activity. The object to dǎbbēr is the totality of things. No words can comprehend this, no sensible perception exhaust it. That which is properly aimed at here is not the unsatisfiedness of the eyes (Pro 27:20), and generally of the mind, thus not the ever-new attractive power which appertains to the eye and the ear of him who observes, but the force with which the restless activity which surrounds us lays hold of and communicates itself to us, so that we also find no rest and contentment. With שׂבע, to be satisfied, of the eye, there is appropriately interchanged נמלא, used of the funnel-shaped ear, to be filled, i.e., to be satisfied (as at Ecc 6:7). The min connected with this latter word is explained by Zöck. after Hitz., “away from hearing,” i.e., so that it may hear no more. This is not necessary. As saava' with its min may signify to be satisfied with anything, e.g., Ecc 6:3, Job 19:22; Psa 104:13; cf. Kal, Isa 2:6, Pih. Jer 51:34; Psa 127:5. Thus mishshemoa' is understood by all the old translators (e.g., Targ. מלּמשׁמע), and thus also, perhaps, the author meant it: the eye is not satisfied with seeing, and the ear is not filled (satisfied) with hearing; or yet more in accordance with the Heb. expression: there is not an eye, i.e., no eye is satisfied, etc., restlessly hastening, giving him who looks no rest, the world goes on in its circling course without revealing anything that is in reality new.

Ecc 1:9 “That which hath been is that which shall be, and that which is done is that which shall be done; and there is nothing new under the sun.” - The older form of the language uses only אשׁר instead of מה־שּׁ, in the sense of id quod, and in the sense of quid-quid, אשׁר כל (Ecc 6:10; Ecc 7:24); but mǎh is also used by it with the extinct force of an interrogative, in the sense of quodcunque, Job 13:13, aliquid (quidquam), Gen 39:8; Pro 9:13; and mi or mi asher, in the sense of quisquis, Exo 24:14; Exo 32:33. In שׁ הוא (cf. Gen 42:14) are combined the meanings id (est)quod and idem (est)quod; hu is often the expression of the equality of two things, Job 3:19, or of self-sameness, Psa 102:28. The double clause, quod fuit ... quod factum est, comprehends that which is done in the world of nature and of men-the natural and the historical. The bold clause, neque est quidquam novi sub sole, challenges contradiction; the author feels this, as the next verse shows.

Ecc 1:10 “Is there anything whereof it may be said: See, this is new? - it was long ago through the ages (aeons) which have been before us.” The Semit. substantive verb ישׁ (Assyr. isu) has here the force of a hypothetical antecedent: supposing that there is a thing of which one might say, etc. The זה, with Makkeph, belongs as subject, as at Ecc 7:27, Ecc 7:29 as object, to that which follows. כּבר (vid., List, p. 193) properly denotes length or greatness of time (as כּברה, length of way). The ל of לע is that of measure: this “long ago” measured (Hitz.) after infinitely long periods of time. מלּ, ante nos, follows the usage of מלּף, Isa 41:26, and l|paa', Jdg 1:10, etc.; the past time is spoken of as that which was before, for it is thought of as the beginning of the succession of time (vid., Orelli, Synon. der Zeit u. Ewigkeit, p. 14f.). The singular היה may also be viewed as pred. of a plur. inhumanus in order; but in connection, Ecc 2:7, Ecc 2:9 (Gesen. §147, An. 2), it is more probable that it is taken as a neut. verb. That which newly appears has already been, but had been forgotten; for generations come and generations go, and the one forgets the other.

Ecc 1:11 “There is no remembrance of ancestors; and also of the later ones who shall come into existence, there will be no remembrance for them with those who shall come into existence after them.” With זכּרון (with Kametz) there is also זכרון, the more common form by our author, in accordance with the usage of his age; Gesen., Elst., and others regard it here and at Ecc 2:16 as constr., and thus לרא as virtually object-gen. (Jerome, non est priorum memoria); but such refinements of the old syntaxis ornata are not to be expected in our author: he changes (according to the traditional punctuation) here the initial sound, as at Ecc 1:17 the final sound, to oth and uth. אין ל is the contrast of היה ל: to attribute to one, to become partaker of. The use of the expression, “for them,” gives emphasis to the statement. “With those who shall come after,” points from the generation that is future to a remoter future, cf. Gen 33:2. The Kametz of the prep. is that of the recompens. art.; cf. Num 2:31, where it denotes “the last” among the four hosts; for there הא is meant of the last in order, as here it is meant of the remotely future time.

Ecc 1:12 “I, Koheleth, have been king over Israel in Jerusalem.” That of the two possible interpretations of הייתי, “I have become” and “I have been,” not the former (Grätz), but the latter, is to be here adopted, has been already shown. We translate better by “I have been” - for the verb here used is a pure perfect - than by “I was” (Ew., Elst., Hengst., Zöck.), with which Bullock (Speaker’s Comm., vol. IV, 1873) compares the expression Quand j'étois roi ! which was often used by Louis XIV towards the end of his life. But here the expression is not a cry of complaint, like the “fuimus Troes,” but a simple historical statement, by which the Preacher of the vanity of all earthly things here introduces himself, - it is Solomon, resuscitated by the author of the book, who here looks back on his life as king. “Israel” is the whole of Israel, and points to a period before the division of the kingdom; a king over Judah alone would not so describe himself. Instead of “king על (over) Israel,” the old form of the language uses frequently simply “king of Israel,” although also the former expression is sometimes found; cf. 1Sa 15:26; 2Sa 19:23; 1Ki 11:37. He has been king, - king over a great, peaceful, united people; king in Jerusalem, the celebrated, populous, highly-cultivated city, - and thus placed on an elevation having the widest survey, and having at his disposal whatever can make a man happy; endowed, in particular, with all the means of gaining knowledge, which accorded with the disposition of his heart searching after wisdom (cf. 1Ki 3:9-11; 1Ki 5:9).

But in his search after worldly knowledge he found no satisfaction.

Ecc 1:13 “And I gave my heart to seek and to hold survey with wisdom over all that is done under the sun: a sore trouble it is which God has given to the children of men to be exercised therewith.” The synonyms דּרשׁ(to seek) and תּוּר (to hold survey over) do not represent a lower and a higher degree of search (Zöck.), but two kinds of searching: one penetrating in depth, the other going out in extent; for the former of these verbs (from the root-idea of grinding, testing) signifies to investigate an object which one already has in hand, to penetrate into it, to search into it thoroughly; and the latter verb (from the root-idea of moving round about)Vid., the investigation of these roots (Assyr. utîr, he brought back) in Ethé’s Schlafgemach der Phantasie, pp. 86-89. signifies to hold a survey, - look round in order to bring that which is unknown, or not comprehensively known, within the sphere of knowledge, and thus has the meaning of bǎkkēsh, one going the rounds. It is the usual word for the exploring of a country, i.e., the acquiring personal knowledge of its as yet unknown condition; the passing over to an intellectual search is peculiar to the Book of Koheleth, as it has the phrase ל לב נתן, animum advertere, or applicare ad aliquid, in common only with Dan 10:12. The beth of bahhochemah is that of the instrument; wisdom must be the means (organon) of knowledge in this searching and inquiry. With על is introduced the sphere into which it extends. Grotius paraphrases: Historiam animalium et satorum diligentissime inquisivi. But נעשׂה does not refer to the world of nature, but to the world of men; only within this can anything be said of actions, only this has a proper history. But that which offers itself for research and observation there, brings neither joy nor contentment. Hitzig refers הוּא to human activity; but it relates to the research which has this activity as its object, and is here, on that account, called “a sore trouble,” because the attainment and result gained by the laborious effort are of so unsatisfactory a nature. Regarding ענין, which here goes back to ענה ב, to fatigue oneself, to trouble oneself with anything, and then to be engaged with it. The words ענין רע would mean trouble of an evil nature (vid., at Psa 78:49; Pro 6:24); but better attested is the reading ענין רע “a sore trouble.” הוּא is the subj., as at Ecc 2:1 and elsewhere; the author uses it also in expressions where it is pred. And as frequently as he uses asher and שׁ, so also, when form and matter commend it, he uses the scheme of the attributive clause (elliptical relative clause), as here (cf. Ecc 3:16), where certainly, in conformity with the old style, נתנו was to be used.

Ecc 1:14

He adduces proof of the wearisomeness of this work of research: “I saw all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and striving after the wind.” The point of the sentence lies in והנּה = וארא וה, so that thus raïthi is the expression of the parallel fact (circumst. perfect). The result of his seeing, and that, as he has said Ecc 1:13, of a by no means superficial and limited seeing, was a discovery of the fleeting, unsubstantial, fruitless nature of all human actions and endeavours. They had, as hevel expresses, not reality in them; and also, as denoted by reuth ruahh (the lxx render well by προαίρεσις πνεύματος), they had no actual consequences, no real issue. Hos 12:1 also says: “Ephraim feedeth on wind,” i.e., follows after, as the result of effort obtains, the wind, roěh ruahh; but only in the Book of Koheleth is this sentence transformed into an abstract terminus technicus (vid., under Reth).

Ecc 1:15

The judgment contained in the words, “vanity and a striving after the wind,” is confirmed: “That which is crooked cannot become straight; and a deficit cannot be numerable,” i.e., cannot be taken into account (thus Theod., after the Syro-Hex.), as if as much were present as is actually wanting; for, according to the proverb, “Where there is nothing, nothing further is to be counted.” Hitzig thinks, by that which is crooked and wanting, according to Ecc 7:13, of the divine order of the world: that which is unjust in it, man cannot alter; its wants he cannot complete. But the preceding statement refers only to labour under the sun, and to philosophical research and observation directed thereto. This places before the eyes of the observer irregularities and wants, brings such irregularities and wants to his consciousness, - which are certainly partly brought about and destined by God, but for the most part are due to the transgressions of man himself, - and what avails the observer the discovery and investigation? - he has only lamentation over it, for with all his wisdom he can bring no help. Instead of לתקן (vid., under תקן), לתקן was to be expected. However, the old language also formed intransitive infinitives with transitive modification of the final vowels, e.g., יבשׁ, etc. (cf. ישׁון, Ecc 5:11).

Having now gained such a result in his investigation and research by means of wisdom, he reaches the conclusion that wisdom itself is nothing.

Ecc 1:16-18 “I have communed with mine own heart, saying: Lo, I have gained great and always greater wisdom above all who were before me over Jerusalem; and my heart hath seen wisdom and knowledge in fulness. And I gave my heart to know what was in wisdom and knowledge, madness and folly - I have perceived that this also is a grasping after the wind.” The evidence in which he bears witness to himself that striving after wisdom and knowledge brings with it no true satisfaction, reaches down to the close of Ecc 1:17; ידעתּי is the conclusion which is aimed at. The manner of expression is certainly so far involved, as he speaks of his heart to his heart what it had experienced, and to what he had purposely directed it. The אני leads us to think that a king speaks, for whom it is appropriate to write a capital I, or to multiply it into we; vid., regarding this “I,” more pleonastic than emphatic, subordinated to its verb.

It is a question whether עם־לבּי, after the phrase (את) עם דּבּר, is meant of speaking with any one, colloqui, or of the place of speaking, as in “thou shalt consider in thine heart,” Deu 8:5, it is used of the place of consciousness; cf. Job 15:9, (עמּדי) עמּי היה = σύνοιδα ἐμαυτῷ, and what is said in my Psychol. p. 134, regarding συνείδησις, consciousness, and συμμαρτυρεῖν. בּלבּי, interchanging with עם־לבּי, Ecc 2:1, Ecc 2:15, commends the latter meaning: in my heart (lxx, Targ., Jerome, Luther); but the cogn. expressions, medabběrěth ǎl-libbah, 1Sa 1:13, and ledabbēr ěl-libbi, Gen 24:45, suggest as more natural the former rendering, viz., as of a dialogue, which is expressed by the Gr. Venet. (more distinctly than by Aquila, Symm., and Syr.): διείλεγμαι ἐγὼ ξὺν τῇ καρδίᾳ μου. Also לאמר, occurring only here in the Book of Koheleth, brings it near that the following oratio directa is directed to the heart, as it also directly assumes the form of an address, Ecc 2:1, after בלבי. The expression, הג הך, “to make one’s wisdom great,” i.e., “to gain great wisdom,” is without a parallel; for the words, הג תו, Isa 28:29, quoted by Hitzig, signify to show and attest truly useful (beneficial) knowledge in a noble way. The annexed והו refers to the continued increase made to the great treasure already possessed (cf. Ecc 2:9 and 1Ki 10:7). The al connected therewith signifies, “above” (Gen 49:26) all those who were over Jerusalem before me. This is like the sarrâni âlik maḥrija, “the kings who were my predecessors,” which was frequently used by the Assyrian kings. The Targumist seeks to accommodate the words to the actual Solomon by thus distorting them: “above all the wise men who have been in Jerusalem before me,” as if the word in the text were בירושלם,In F. the following note is added: “Several Codd. have, erroneously, birushalam instead of al-jerushalam.” Kennicott counts about 60 such Codd. It stands thus also in J; and at first it thus stood in H, but was afterwards corrected to al-yerushalam. Cf. Elias Levita’s Masoreth hamasoreth, II 8, at the end. as it is indeed found in several Codd., and according to which also the lxx, Syr., Jerome, and the Venet. translate. Rather than think of the wise (הכּימיּא), we are led to think of all those who from of old stood at the head of the Israelitish community. But there must have been well-known great men with whom Solomon measures himself, and these could not be such dissimilarly great men as the Canaanitish kings to the time of Melchizedek; and since the Jebusites, even under Saul, were in possession of Zion, and Jerusalem was for the first time completely subdued by David (2Sa 5:7, cf. Jos 15:63), it is evident that only one predecessor of Solomon in the office of ruler over Jerusalem can be spoken of, and that here an anachronism lies before us, occasioned by the circumstance that the Salomo revivivus, who has behind him the long list of kings whom in truth he had before him, here speaks.

Regarding היה אשׁר, qu'il y uet, for היו אשׁר, qui furent, vid., at Ecc 1:10. The seeing here ascribed to the heart (here = νοῦς, Psychol. p. 249) is meant of intellectual observation and apprehension; for “all perception, whether it be mediated by the organs of sense or not (as prophetic observing and contemplating), comprehends all, from mental discernment down to suffering, which veils itself in unconsciousness, and the Scripture designates it as a seeing” (Psychol. 234); the Book of Koheleth also uses the word ראה of every kind of human experience, bodily or mental, Ecc 2:24; Ecc 5:17; Ecc 6:6; Ecc 9:9. It is commonly translated: “My heart saw much wisdom and knowledge” (thus e.g., Ewald); but that is contrary to the gram. structure of the sentence (Ew. §287 c). The adject. harbēhRegarding the form הרבה, which occurs once (Jer 42:2), vid., Ew. §240c. is always, and by Koheleth also, Ecc 2:7; Ecc 5:6, Ecc 5:16; Ecc 6:11; Ecc 9:18; Ecc 11:8; Ecc 12:9, Ecc 12:12, placed after its subst.; thus it is here adv., as at Ecc 5:19; Ecc 7:16. Rightly the Venet.: ἡ καρδία μου τεθέαται κατὰ πολὺ σοφίαν καί γνῶσιν Chokma signifies, properly, solidity, compactness; and then, like πυκνότης, mental ability, secular wisdom; and, generally, solid knowledge of the true and the right. Dǎǎth is connected with chokma here and at Isa 33:6, as at Rom 11:33, γνῶσις is with σοφία. Baumggarten-Crusius there remarks that σοφία refers to the general ordering of things, γνῶσις to the determination of individual things; and Harless, that σοφία is knowledge which proposes the right aim, and γνῶσις that which finds the right means thereto. In general, we may say that chokma is the fact of a powerful knowledge of the true and the right, and the property which arises out of this intellectual possession; but dǎǎth is knowledge penetrating into the depth of the essence of things, by which wisdom is acquired and in which wisdom establishes itself.

Ecclesiastes

We are still among Solomon's happy men, his happy servants, that stood continually before him to hear his wisdom; and they are the choicest of all the dictates of his wisdom, such as were more immediately given by divine inspiration, that are here transmitted to us, not to be heard, as by them, but once, and then liable to be mistaken or forgotten, and by repetition to lose their beauty, but to be read, reviewed, revolved, and had in everlasting remembrance. The account we have of Solomon's apostasy from God, in the latter end of his reign (1 Kings xi. 1), is the tragical part of his story; we may suppose that he spoke his Proverbs in the prime of his time, while he kept his integrity, but delivered his Ecclesiastes when he had grown old (for of the burdens and decays of age he speaks feelingly ch. xii.), and was, by the grace of God, recovered from his backslidings. There he dictated his observations; here he wrote his own experiences; this is what days speak, and wisdom which the multitude of years teaches. The title of the book and the penman we shall meet with in the

I. That it is a sermon, a sermon in print; the text is (ch. i. 2), Vanity of vanities, all is vanity; that is the doctrine too; it is proved at large by many arguments and an induction of particulars, and divers objections are answered, and in the close we have the use and application of all, by way of exhortation, to remember our Creator, to fear him, and to keep his commandments. There are indeed many things in this book which are dark and hard to be understood, and some things which men of corrupt minds wrest to their own destruction, for want of distinguishing between Solomon's arguments and the objections of atheists and epicures; but there is enough easy and plain to convince us (if we will admit the conviction) of the vanity of the world, and its utter insufficiency to make us happy, the vileness of sin, and its certain tendency to make us miserable, and of the wisdom of being religious, and the solid comfort and satisfaction that are to be had in doing our duty both to God and man. This should be intended in every sermon, and that is a good sermon by which these points are in any measure gained. II. That it is a penitential sermon, as some of David's psalms are penitential psalms; it is a recantation-sermon, in which the preacher sadly laments his own folly and mistake, in promising himself satisfaction in the things of this world, and even in the forbidden pleasures of sense, which now he finds more bitter than death. His fall is a proof of the weakness of man's nature: Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, nor say, "I shall never be such a fool as to do so and so," when Solomon himself, the wisest of men, played the fool so egregiously; nor let the rich man glory in his riches, since Solomon's wealth was so great a snare to him, and did him a great deal more hurt than Job's poverty did him. His recovery is a proof of the power of God's grace, in bringing one back to God that has gone so far from him; it is a proof too of the riches of God's mercy in accepting him notwithstanding the many aggravations of his sin, pursuant to the promise made to David, that if his children should commit iniquity they should be corrected, but not abandoned and disinherited, 2 Sam. vii. 14, 15. Let him therefore that thinks he stands take heed lest he fall; and let him that has fallen make haste to get up again, and not despair either of assistance or acceptance therein. III. That it is a practical profitable sermon. Solomon, being brought to repentance, resolves, like his father, to teach transgressors God's way (Ps. li. 13) and to give warning to all to take heed of splitting upon those rocks which had been fatal to him; and these were fruits meet for repentance. The fundamental error of the children of men, and that which is at the bottom of all their departures from God, is the same with that of our first parents, hoping to be as gods by entertaining themselves with that which seems good for food, pleasant to the eyes, and desirable to make one wise. Now the scope of this book is to show that this is a great mistake, that our happiness consists not in being as gods to ourselves, to have what we will and do what we will, but in having him that made us to be a God to us. The moral philosophers disputed much about man's felicity, or chief good. Various opinions they had about it; but Solomon, in this book, determines the question, and assures us that to fear God and to keep his commandments is the whole of man. He tried what satisfaction might be found in the wealth of the world and the pleasures of sense, and at last pronounced all vanity and vexation; yet multitudes will not take his word, but will make the same dangerous experiment, and it proves fatal to them. He, 1. Shows the vanity of those things in which men commonly look for happiness, as human learning and policy, sensual delight, honour and power, riches and great possessions. And then, 2. He prescribes remedies against the vexation of spirit that attends them. Though we cannot cure them of their vanity, we may prevent the trouble they give us, by sitting loose to them, enjoying them comfortable, but laying our expectations low from them, and acquiescing in the will of God concerning us in every event, especially by remembering God in the days of our youth, and continuing in his fear and service all our days, with an eye to the judgment to come.

In this chapter we have, I. The inscription, or title of the book, ver. 1. II. The general doctrine of the vanity of the creature laid down (ver. 2) and explained, ver. 3. III. The proof of this doctrine, taken, 1. From the shortness of human life and the multitude of births and burials in this life, ver. 4. 2. From the inconstant nature, and constant revolutions, of all the creatures, and the perpetual flux and reflux they are in, the sun, wind, and water, ver. 5-7. 3. From the abundant toil man has about them and the little satisfaction he has in them, ver. 8. 4. From the return of the same things again, which shows the end of all perfection, and that the stock is exhausted, ver. 9, 10. 5. From the oblivion to which all things are condemned, ver. 11. IV. The first instance of the vanity of man's knowledge, and all the parts of learning, especially natural philosophy and politics. Observe, 1. The trial Solomon made of these, ver. 12, 13, 16, 17. 2. His judgment of them, that all is vanity, ver. 14. For, (1.) There is labour in getting knowledge, ver. 13. (2.) There is little good to be done with it, ver. 15. (3.) There is no satisfaction in it, ver. 18. And, if this is vanity and vexation, all other things in this world, being much inferior to it in dignity and worth, must needs be so too. A great scholar cannot be happy unless he be a true saint.

The Vanity of the World.

1 The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem. 2 Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity. 3 What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun?

Here is, I. An account of the penman of this book; it was Solomon, for no other son of David was king of Jerusalem; but he conceals his name Solomon, peaceable, because by his sin he had brought trouble upon himself and his kingdom, had broken his peace with God and lost the peace of his conscience, and therefore was no more worthy of that name. Call me not Solomon, call me Marah, for, behold, for peace I had great bitterness. But he calls himself,

1. The preacher, which intimates his present character. He is Koheleth, which comes from a word which signifies to gather; but it is of a feminine termination, by which perhaps Solomon intends to upbraid himself with his effeminacy, which contributed more than any thing to his apostasy; for it was to please his wives that he set up idols, Neh. xiii. 26. Or the word soul must be understood, and so Koheleth is,

(1.) A penitent soul, or one gathered, one that had rambled and gone astray like a lost sheep, but was now reduced, gathered in from his wanderings, gathered home to his duty, and come at length to himself. The spirit that was dissipated after a thousand vanities is now collected and made to centre in God. Divine grace can make great sinners great converts, and renew even those to repentance who, after they had known the way of righteousness, turned aside from it, and heal their backslidings, though it is a difficult case. It is only the penitent soul that God will accept, the heart that is broken, not the head that is bowed down like a bulrush only for a day, David's repentance, not Ahab's. And it is only the gathered soul that is the penitent soul, that comes back from its by-paths, that no longer scatters its way to the strangers (Jer. iii. 13), but is united to fear God's name. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth will speak, and therefore we have here the words of the penitent, and those published. If eminent professors of religion fall into gross sin, they are concerned, for the honour of God and the repairing of the damage they have done to his kingdom, openly to testify their repentance, that the antidote may be administered as extensively as the poison.

(2.) A preaching soul, or one gathering. Being himself gathered to the congregation of saints, out of which he had by his sin thrown himself, and being reconciled to the church, he endeavours to gather others to it that had gone astray like him, and perhaps were led astray by his example. He that has done any thing to seduce his brother ought to do all he can to restore him. Perhaps Solomon called together a congregation of his people, as he had done at the dedication of the temple (1 Kings viii. 2), so now at the rededicating of himself. In that assembly he presided as the people's mouth to God in prayer (v. 12); in this as God's mouth to them in preaching. God by his Spirit made him a preacher, in token of his being reconciled to him; a commission is a tacit pardon. Christ sufficiently testifies his forgiving Peter by committing his lambs and sheep to his trust. Observe, Penitents should be preachers; those that have taken warning themselves to turn and live should give warning to others not to go on and die. When thou art converted strengthen thy brethren. Preachers must be preaching souls, for that only is likely to reach to the heart that comes from the heart. Paul served God with his spirit in the gospel of his Son, Rom. i. 9.

2. The son of David. His taking this title intimates, (1.) That he looked upon it as a great honour to be the son of so good a man, and valued himself very much upon it. (2.) That he also looked upon it as a great aggravation of his sin that he had such a father, who had given him a good education and put up many a good prayer for him; it cuts him to the heart to think that he should be a blemish and disgrace to the name and family of such a one as David. It aggravated the sin of Jehoiakim that he was the son of Josiah, Jer. xxii. 15-17. (3.) That his being the son of David encouraged him to repent and hope for mercy, for David had fallen into sin, by which he should have been warned not to sin, but was not; but David repented, and therein he took example from him and found mercy as he did. Yet this was not all; he was that son of David concerning whom God had said that though he would chasten his transgression with the rod, yet he would not break his covenant with him, Ps. lxxxix. 34. Christ, the great preacher, was the Son of David.

3. King of Jerusalem. This he mentions, (1.) As that which was a very great aggravation of his sin. He was a king. God had done much for him, in raising him to the throne, and yet he had so ill requited him; his dignity made the bad example and influence of his sin the more dangerous, and many would follow his pernicious ways; especially as he was king of Jerusalem, the holy city, where God's temple was, and of his own building too, where the priests, the Lord's ministers, were, and his prophets who had taught him better things. (2.) As that which might give some advantage to what he wrote, for where the word of a king is there is power. He thought it no disparagement to him, as a king, to be a preacher; but the people would regard him the more as a preacher because he was a king. If men of honour would lay out themselves to do good, what a great deal of good might they do! Solomon looked as great in the pulpit, preaching the vanity of the world, as in his throne of ivory, judging.

The Chaldee-paraphrase (which, in this book, makes very large additions to the text, or comments upon it, all along) gives this account of Solomon's writing this book, That by the spirit of prophecy he foresaw the revolt of the ten tribes from his son, and, in process of time, the destruction of Jerusalem and the house of the sanctuary, and the captivity of the people, in the foresight of which he said, Vanity of vanities, all is vanity; and to that he applies many passages in this book.

II. The general scope and design of the book. What is it that this royal preacher has to say? That which he aims at is, for the making of us truly religious, to take down our esteem of and expectation from the things of this world. In order to this, he shows,

1. That they are all vanity, v. 2. This is the proposition he lays down and undertakes to prove: Vanity of vanities, all is vanity. It was no new text; his father David had more than once spoken to the same purport. The truth itself here asserted is, that all is vanity, all besides God and considered as abstract from him, the all of this world, all worldly employments and enjoyments, the all that is in the world (1 John ii. 16), all that which is agreeable to our senses and to our fancies in this present state, which gains pleasure to ourselves or reputation with others. It is all vanity, not only in the abuse of it, when it is perverted by the sin of man, but even in the use of it. Man, considered with reference to these things, is vanity (Ps. xxxix. 5, 6), and, if there were not another life after this, were made in vain (Ps. lxxxix. 47); and those things, considered in reference to man (whatever they are in themselves), are vanity. They are impertinent to the soul, foreign, and add nothing to it; they do not answer the end, nor yield any true satisfaction; they are uncertain in their continuance, are fading, and perishing, and passing away, and will certainly deceive and disappoint those that put a confidence in them. Let us not therefore love vanity (Ps. iv. 2), nor lift up our souls to it (Ps. xxiv. 4), for we shall but weary ourselves for it, Heb. ii. 13. It is expressed here very emphatically; not only, All is vain, but in the abstract, All is vanity; as if vanity were the proprium quarto modo—property in the fourth mode, of the things of this world, that which enters into the nature of them. The are not only vanity, but vanity of vanities, the vainest vanity, vanity in the highest degree, nothing but vanity, such a vanity as is the cause of a great deal of vanity. And this is redoubled, because the thing is certain and past dispute, it is vanity of vanities. This intimates that the wise man had his own heart fully convinced of and much affected with this truth, and that he was very desirous that others should be convinced of it and affected with it, as he was, but that he found the generality of men very loth to believe it and consider it (Job xxxiii. 14); it intimates likewise that we cannot comprehend and express the vanity of this world. But who is it that speaks thus slightly of the world? Is it one that will stand to what he says? Yes, he puts his name to it—saith the preacher. Is it one that was a competent judge? Yes, as much as ever any man was. Many speak contemptuously of the world because they are hermits, and know it not, or beggars, and have it not; but Solomon knew it. He had dived into nature's depths (1 Kings iv. 33), and he had it, more of it perhaps than ever any man had, his head filled with its notions and his belly with its hidden treasures (Ps. xvii. 14), and he passes this judgment on it. But did he speak as one having authority? Yes, not only that of a king, but that of a prophet, a preacher; he spoke in God's name, and was divinely inspired to say it. But did he not say it in his haste, or in a passion, upon occasion of some particular disappointment? No; he said it deliberately, said it and proved it, laid it down as a fundamental principle, on which he grounded the necessity of being religious. And, as some think, one main thing he designed was to show that the everlasting throne and kingdom which God had by Nathan promised to David and his seed must be of another world; for all things in this world are subject to vanity, and therefore have not in them sufficient to answer the extent of that promise. If Solomon find all to be vanity, then the kingdom of the Messiah must come, in which we shall inherit substance.

2. That they are insufficient to make us happy. And for this he appeals to men's consciences: What profit has a man of all the pains he takes? v. 3. Observe here, (1.) The business of this world described. It is labour; the word signifies both care and toil. It is work that wearies men. There is a constant fatigue in worldly business. It is labour under the sun; that is a phrase peculiar to this book, where we meet with it twenty-eight times. There is a world above the sun, a world which needs not the sun, for the glory of God is its light, where there is work without labour and with great profit, the work of angels; but he speaks of the work under the sun, the pains of which are great and the gains little. It is under the sun, under the influence of the sun, by its light and in its heat; as we have the benefit of the light of the day, so we have sometimes the burden and heat of the day (Matt. xx. 12), and therefore in the sweat of our face we eat bread. In the dark and cold grave the weary are at rest. (2.) The benefit of that business enquired into: What profit has a man of all that labour? Solomon says (Prov. xiv. 23), In all labour there is profit; and yet here he denies that there is any profit. As to our present condition in the world, it is true that by labour we get that which we call profit; we eat the labour of our hands; but as the wealth of the world is commonly called substance, and yet it is that which is not (Prov. xxii. 5), so it is called profit, but the question is whether it be really so or no. And here he determines that it is not, that it is not a real benefit, that it is not a remaining benefit. In short, the wealth and pleasure of this world, if we had ever so much of them, are not sufficient to make us happy, nor will they be a portion for us. [1.] As to the body, and the life that now is, What profit has a man of all his labour? A man's life consists not in an abundance, Luke xii. 15. As goods are increased care about them is increased, and those are increased that eat of them, and a little thing will embitter all the comfort of them; and then what profit has a man of all his labour? Early up, and never the nearer. [2.] As to the soul, and the life that is to come, we may much more truly say, What profit has a man of all his labour? All he gets by it will not supply the wants of the soul, nor satisfy its desires, will not atone for the sin of the soul, nor cure its diseases, nor contervail the loss of it; what profit will they be of to the soul in death, in judgment, or in the everlasting state? The fruit of our labour in heavenly things is meat that endures to eternal life, but the fruit of our labour for the world is only meat that perishes.

The Vanity of the World.

4 One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever. 5 The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose. 6 The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits. 7 All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again. 8 All things are full of labour; man cannot utter it: the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing.

To prove the vanity of all things under the sun, and their insufficiency to make us happy, Solomon here shows, 1. That the time of our enjoyment of these things is very short, and only while we accomplish as a hireling his day. We continue in the world but for one generation, which is continually passing away to make room for another, and we are passing with it. Our worldly possessions we very lately had from others, and must very shortly leave to others, and therefore to us they are vanity; they can be no more substantial than that life which is the substratum of them, and that is but a vapour, which appears for a little while and then vanishes away. While the stream of mankind is continually flowing, how little enjoyment has one drop of that stream of the pleasant banks between which it glides! We may give God the glory of that constant succession of generations, in which the world has hitherto had its existence, and will have to the end of time, admitting his patience in continuing that sinful species and his power in continuing that dying species. We may be also quickened to do the work of our generation diligently, and serve it faithfully, because it will be over shortly; and, in concern for mankind in general, we should consult the welfare of succeeding generations; but as to our own happiness, let us not expect it within such narrow limits, but in an eternal rest and consistency. 2. That when we leave this world we leave the earth behind us, that abides for ever where it is, and therefore the things of the earth can stand us in no stead in the future state. It is well for mankind in general that the earth endures to the end of time, when it and all the works in it shall be burnt up; but what is that to particular persons, when they remove to the world of spirits? 3. That the condition of man is, in this respect, worse than that even of the inferior creatures: The earth abides for ever, but man abides upon the earth but a little while. The sun sets indeed every night, yet it rises again in the morning, as bright and fresh as ever; the winds, though they shift their point, yet in some point or other still they are; the waters that go to the sea above ground come from it again under ground. But man lies down and rises not, Job xiv. 7, 12. 4. That all things in this world are movable and mutable, and subject to a continual toil and agitation, constant in nothing but inconstancy, still going, never resting; it was but once that the sun stood still; when it is risen it is hastening to set, and, when it is set, hastening to rise again (v. 5); the winds are ever and anon shifting (v. 6), and the waters in a continual circulation (v. 7), it would be of as bad consequence for them to stagnate as for the blood in the body to do so. And can we expect rest in a world where all things are thus full of labour (v. 8), on a sea that is always ebbing and flowing, and her waves continually working and rolling? 5. That though all things are still in motion, yet they are still where they were; The sun parts (as it is in the margin), but it is to the same place; the wind turns till it comes to the same place, and so the waters return to the place whence they came. Thus man, after all the pains he takes to find satisfaction and happiness in the creature, is but where he was, still as far to seek as ever. Man's mind is as restless in its pursuits as the sun, and wind, and rivers, but never satisfied, never contented; the more it has of the world the more it would have; and it would be no sooner filled with the streams of outward prosperity, the brooks of honey and butter (Job xx. 17), than the sea is with all the rivers that run into it; it is still as it was, a troubled sea that cannot rest. 6. That all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation, 2 Pet. iii. 4. The earth is where it was; the sun, and winds, and rivers, keep the same course that ever they did; and therefore, if they have never yet been sufficient to make a happiness for man, they are never likely to be so, for they can but yield the same comfort that they have yielded. We must therefore look above the sun for satisfaction, and for a new world. 7. That this world is, at the best, a weary land: All is vanity, for all is full of labour. The whole creation is made subject to this vanity ever since man was sentenced to eat bread in the sweat of his brows. If we survey the whole creation, we shall see all busy; all have enough to do to mind their own business; none will be a portion or happiness for man; all labour to serve him, but none prove a help-meet for him. Man cannot express how full of labour all things are, can neither number the laborious nor measure the labours. 8. That our senses are unsatisfied, and the objects of them unsatisfying. He specifies those senses that perform their office with least toil, and are most capable of being pleased: The eye is not satisfied with seeing, but is weary of seeing always the same sight, and covets novelty and variety. The ear is fond, at first, of a pleasant song or tune, but soon nauseates it, and must have another; both are surfeited, but neither satiated, and what was most grateful becomes ungrateful. Curiosity is still inquisitive, because still unsatisfied, and the more it is humoured the more nice and peevish it grows, crying, Give, give.

Change without Novelty.

9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. 10 Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us. 11 There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after.

Two things we are apt to take a great deal of pleasure and satisfaction in, and value ourselves upon, with reference to our business and enjoyments in the world, as if they helped to save them from vanity. Solomon shows us our mistake in both.

1. The novelty of the invention, that it is such as was never known before. How grateful is it to think that none ever made such advances in knowledge, and such discoveries by it, as we, that none ever made such improvements of an estate or trade, and had the art of enjoying the gains of it, as we have. Their contrivances and compositions are all despised and run down, and we boast of new fashions, new hypotheses, new methods, new expressions, which jostle out the old, and put them down. But this is all a mistake: The thing that is, and shall be, is the same with that which has been, and that which shall be done will be but the same with that which is done, for there is no new thing under the sun, v. 9. It is repeated (v. 10) by way of question, is there any thing of which it may be said, with wonder, See, this is new; there never was the like? It is an appeal to observing men, and a challenge to those that cry up modern learning above that of the ancients. Let them name any thing which they take to be new, and though perhaps we cannot make it to appear, for want of the records of former times, yet we have reason to conclude that it has been already of old time, which was before us. What is there in the kingdom of nature of which we may say, This is new? The works were finished from the foundation of the world (Heb. iv. 3); things which appear new to us, as they do to children, are not so in themselves. The heavens were of old; the earth abides for ever; the powers of nature and the links of natural causes are still the same that ever they were. In the kingdom of Providence, though the course and method of it have not such known and certain rules as that of nature, nor does it go always in the same track, yet, in the general, it is still the same thing over and over again. Men's hearts, and the corruptions of them, are still the same; their desires, and pursuits, and complaints, are still the same; and what God does in his dealings with men is according to the scripture, according to the manner, so that it is all repetition. What is surprising to us needs not be so, for there has been the like, the like strange advancements and disappointments, the like strange revolutions and sudden turns, sudden turns of affairs; the miseries of human life have always been much the same, and mankind tread a perpetual round, and, as the sun and wind, are but where they were. Now the design of this is, (1.) To show the folly of the children of men in affecting things that are new, in imagining that they have discovered such things, and in pleasing and priding themselves in them. We are apt to nauseate old things, and to grow weary of what we have been long used to, as Israel of the manna, and covet, with the Athenians, still to tell and hear of some new thing, and admire this and the other as new, whereas it is all what has been. Tatianus the Assyrian, showing the Grecians how all the arts which they valued themselves upon owed their original to those nations which they counted barbarous, thus reasons with them: "For shame, do not call those things eureseis—inventions, which are but mimeseis—imitations." (2.) To take us off from expecting happiness or satisfaction in the creature. Why should we look for it there, where never any yet have found it? What reason have we to think that the world should be any kinder to us than it has been to those that have gone before us, since there is nothing in it that is new, and our predecessors have made as much of it as could be made? Your fathers did eat manna, and yet they are dead. See John viii. 8, 9; vi. 49. (3.) To quicken us to secure spiritual and eternal blessings. If we would be entertained with new things, we must acquaint ourselves with the things of God, get a new nature; then old things pass away, and all things become new, 2 Cor. v. 17. The gospel puts a new song into our mouths. In heaven all is new (Rev. xxi. 5), all new at first, wholly unlike the present state of things, a new world indeed (Luke xx. 35), and all new to eternity, always fresh, always flourishing. This consideration should make us willing to die, That in this world there is nothing but the same over and over again, and we can expect nothing from it more or better than we have had.

2. The memorableness of the achievement, that it is such as will be known and talked of hereafter. Many think they have found satisfaction enough in this, that their names shall be perpetuated, that posterity will celebrate the actions they have performed, the honours they have won, and the estates they have raised, that their houses shall continue for ever (Ps. xlix. 11); but herein they deceive themselves. How many former things and persons were there, which in their day looked very great and made a mighty figure, and yet there is no remembrance of them; they are buried in oblivion. Here and there one person or action that was remarkable met with a kind historian, and had the good hap to be recorded, when at the same time there were others, no less remarkable, that were dropped: and therefore we may conclude that neither shall there be any remembrance of things to come, but that which we hope to be remembered by will be either lost or slighted.

Vanity of Human Wisdom.

12 I the Preacher was king over Israel in Jerusalem. 13 And I gave my heart to seek and search out by wisdom concerning all things that are done under heaven: this sore travail hath God given to the sons of man to be exercised therewith. 14 I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and vexation of spirit. 15 That which is crooked cannot be made straight: and that which is wanting cannot be numbered. 16 I communed with mine own heart, saying, Lo, I am come to great estate, and have gotten more wisdom than all they that have been before me in Jerusalem: yea, my heart had great experience of wisdom and knowledge. 17 And I gave my heart to know wisdom, and to know madness and folly: I perceived that this also is vexation of spirit. 18 For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.

Solomon, having asserted in general that all is vanity, and having given some general proofs of it, now takes the most effectual method to evince the truth of it, 1. By his own experience; he tried them all, and found them vanity. 2. By an induction of particulars; and here he begins with that which bids fairest of all to be the happiness of a reasonable creature, and that is knowledge and learning; if this be vanity, every thing else must needs be so. Now as to this,

I. Solomon tells us here what trial he had made of it, and that with such advantages that, if true satisfaction could have been found in it, he would have found it. 1. His high station gave him an opportunity of improving himself in all parts of learning, and particularly in politics and the conduct of human affairs, v. 12. He that is the preacher of this doctrine was king over Israel, whom all their neighbours admired as a wise and understanding people, Deut. iv. 6. He had his royal seat in Jerusalem, which then deserved, better than Athens ever did, to be called the eye of the world. The heart of a king is unsearchable; he has reaches of his own, and a divine sentence is often in his lips. It is his honour, it is his business, to search out every matter. Solomon's great wealth and honour put him into a capacity of making his court the centre of learning and the rendezvous of learned men, of furnishing himself with the best of books, and either conversing or corresponding with all the wise and knowing part of mankind then in being, who made application to him to learn of him, by which he could not but improve himself; for it is in knowledge as it is in trade, all the profit is by barter and exchange; if we have that to say which will instruct others, they will have that to say which will instruct us. Some observe how slightly Solomon speaks of his dignity and honour. He does not say, I the preacher am king, but I was king, no matter what I am. He speaks of it as a thing past, because worldly honours are transitory. 2. He applied himself to the improvement of these advantages, and the opportunities he had of getting wisdom, which, though ever so great, will not make a man wise unless he give his mind to it. Solomon gave his heart to seek and search out all things to be known by wisdom, v. 13. He made it his business to acquaint himself with all the things that are done under the sun, that are done by the providence of God or by the art and prudence of man. He set himself to get all the insight he could into philosophy and mathematics, into husbandry and trade, merchandise and mechanics, into the history of former ages and the present state of other kingdoms, their laws, customs, and policies, into men's different tempers, capacities, and projects, and the methods of managing them; he set himself not only to seek, but to search, to pry into, that which is most intricate, and which requires the closes application of mind and the most vigorous and constant prosecution. Though he was a prince, he made himself a drudge to learning, was not discouraged by its knots, nor took up short of its depths. And this he did, not merely to gratify his own genius, but to qualify himself for the service of God, and his generation, and to make an experiment how far the enlargement of the knowledge would go towards the settlement and repose of the mind. 3. He made a very great progress in his studies, wonderfully improved all the parts of learning, and carried his discoveries much further than any that had been before him. He did not condemn learning, as many do, because they cannot conquer it and will not be at the pains to make themselves masters of it; no, what he aimed at he compassed; he saw all the works that were done under the sun (v. 14), works of nature in the upper and lower world, all within this vortex (to use the modern gibberish) which has the sun for its centre, works of art, the product of men's wit, in a personal or social capacity. He had as much satisfaction in the success of his searches as ever any man had; he communed with his own heart concerning his attainments in knowledge, with as much pleasure as ever any rich merchant had in taking account of his stock. He could say, "Lo, I have magnified and increased wisdom, have not only gotten more of it myself, but have done more to propagate it and bring it into reputation, than any, than all that have been before me in Jerusalem." Note, It becomes great men to be studious, and delight themselves most in intellectual pleasures. Where God gives great advantages of getting knowledge he expects improvements accordingly. It is happy with a people when their princes and noblemen study to excel others as much in wisdom and useful knowledge as they do in honour and estate; and they may do that service to the commonwealth of learning by applying themselves to the studies that are proper for them which meaner persons cannot do. Solomon must be acknowledged as competent judge of this matter, for he had not only got his head full of notions, but his heart had great experience of wisdom and knowledge, of the power and benefit of knowledge, as well as the amusement and entertainment of it; what he knew he had digested, and knew how to make use of. Wisdom entered into his heart, and so became pleasant to his soul, Prov. ii. 10, 11; xxii. 18. 4. He applied his studies especially to that part of learning which is most serviceable to the conduct of human life, and consequently is the most valuable (v. 17): "I gave my heart to know the rules and dictates of wisdom, and how I might obtain it; and to know madness and folly, how I might prevent and cure it, to know the snares and insinuations of it, that I might avoid them, and guard against them, and discover its fallacies." So industrious was Solomon to improve himself in knowledge that he gained instruction both by the wisdom of prudent men and by the madness of foolish men, by the field of the slothful, as well as of the diligent.

II. He tells us what was the result of this trial, to confirm what he had said, that all is vanity.

1. He found that his searches after knowledge were very toilsome, and a weariness not only to the flesh, but to the mind (v. 13): This sore travail, this difficulty that there is in searching after truth and finding it, God has given to the sons of men to be afflicted therewith, as a punishment for our first parents' coveting forbidden knowledge. As bread for the body, so that for the soul, must be got and eaten in the sweat of our face, whereas both would have been had with out labour if Adam had not sinned.

2. He found that the more he saw of the works done under the sun the more he saw of their vanity; nay, and the sight often occasioned him vexation of spirit (v. 14): "I have seen all the works of a world full of business, have observed what the children of men are doing; and behold, whatever men think of their own works, I see all is vanity and vexation of spirit." He had before pronounced all vanity (v. 2), needless and unprofitable, and that which does us no good; here he adds, It is all vexation of spirit, troublesome and prejudicial, and that which does us hurt. It is feeding upon wind; so some read it, Hos. xii. 1. (1.) The works themselves which we see done are vanity and vexation to those that are employed in them. There is so much care in the contrivance of our worldly business, so much toil in the prosecution of it, and so much trouble in the disappointments we meet with in it, that we may well say, It is vexation of spirit. (2.) The sight of them is vanity and vexation of spirit to the wise observer of them. The more we see of the world the more we see to make us uneasy, and, with Heraclitus, to look upon all with weeping eyes. Solomon especially perceived that the knowledge of wisdom and folly was vexation of spirit, v. 17. It vexed him to see many that had wisdom not use it, and many that had folly not strive against it. It vexed him when he knew wisdom to see how far off it stood from the children of men, and, when he saw folly, to see how fast it was bound in their hearts.

3. He found that when he had got some knowledge he could neither gain that satisfaction to himself nor do that good to others with it which he expected, v. 15. It would not avail, (1.) To redress the many grievances of human life: "After all, I find that that which is crooked will be crooked still and cannot be made straight." Our knowledge is itself intricate and perplexed; we must go far about and fetch a great compass to come at it. Solomon thought to find out a nearer way to it, but he could not. The paths of learning are as much a labyrinth as ever they were. The minds and manners of men are crooked and perverse. Solomon thought, with his wisdom and power together, thoroughly to reform his kingdom, and make that straight which he found crooked; but he was disappointed. All the philosophy and politics in the world will not restore the corrupt nature of man to its primitive rectitude; we find the insufficiency of them both in others and in ourselves. Learning will not alter men's natural tempers, nor cure them of their sinful distempers; nor will it change the constitution of things in this world; a vale of tears it is and so it will be when all is done. (2.) To make up the many deficiencies in the comfort of human life: That which is wanting there cannot be numbered, or counted out to us from the treasures of human learning, but what is wanting will still be so. All our enjoyments here, when we have done our utmost to bring them to perfection, are still lame and defective, and it cannot be helped; as they are, so they are likely to be. That which is wanting in our knowledge is so much that it cannot be numbered. The more we know the more we see of our own ignorance. Who can understand his errors, his defects?

4. Upon the whole, therefore, he concluded that great scholars do but make themselves great mourners; for in much wisdom is much grief, v. 18. There must be a great deal of pains taken to get it, and a great deal of care not to forget it; the more we know the more we see there is to be known, and consequently we perceive with greater clearness that our work is without end, and the more we see of our former mistakes and blunders, which occasions much grief. The more we see of men's different sentiments and opinions (and it is that which a great deal of our learning is conversant about) the more at a loss we are, it may be, which is in the right. Those that increase knowledge have so much the more quick and sensible perception of the calamities of this world, and for one discovery they make that is pleasing, perhaps, they make ten that are displeasing, and so they increase sorrow. Let us not therefore be driven off from the pursuit of any useful knowledge, but put on patience to break through the sorrow of it; but let us despair of finding true happiness in this knowledge, and expect it only in the knowledge of God and the careful discharge of our duty to him. He that increases in heavenly wisdom, and in an experimental acquaintance with the principles, powers, and pleasures of the spiritual and divine life, increases joy, such as will shortly be consummated in everlasting joy.

CHAP. I. Verſ. 1.

THE Words] Golden words, weighty and worthy of all acceptation, grave and gracious Apophthegmes, or rather Oracles, meet to be well remembred: Solomon's Sapiential Sermon of the Soveraign good, and how to attain to it; Solomons Soliloquie, ſo ſome ſtile it; others, his ſacred Retractations; others, his Ethicks, or Tractate de Summo bono, of the chiefeſt good,Serranus. compiled and compoſed with ſuch a picked frame of words, with ſuch pithy ſtrength of ſentences, with ſuch a thick ſeries of demonſtrative arguments, that the ſharp wit of all the Philoſophers compared with this Divine diſcourſe, ſeems to be utterly cold, and of ſmall account; [non-Latin text not transcribed]. Ariſt. Experientia optima magiſtra. their elaborate Treatiſes of Happineſs to be learned dotages, and laborious loſſe of time. How many ſeveral opinions there were amongſt them concerning the Chief Good in Solomon's days, is uncertain: divers of them hee confuteth in this book, and that from his own experience, the beſt School-dame. But Varro (the learned'ſt of the Romans) reckoneth up 280 in his time; and no wonder, conſidering mans natural blindneſs, not unlike that of the Syrians at Dothan, Aug. de civ. Dei lib. 18. or that of the Sodomites at Lots door. What is an eye without the optick ſpirit, but a dead member? and what is all humane wiſdom without divine illumination, but wickedneſs of folly, yea fooliſhneſs of madneſs, as our Preacher not without good cauſe calleth it? A ſpirit there is in man, ſaith Elihu (viz. the light of reaſon, and thus far the Animal-man goes, and there hee makes an halt, Eccleſ. 7.15. hee cannot tranſcend his orb) but the inſpiration of the Almighty giveth them underſtanding, Job. 32.8. God had given Solomon wiſdom above any man; Abulenſis ſaith, above Adam in his innocency (which I believe not:) He was [non-Latin text not transcribed] (as Macarius was called) a man at twelve years old.Niceph. His Father had taught him, Prov. 4.4. His Mother had leſſoned him, Prov. 31.1. The Prophet Nathan had had the breeding of him. But beſides, as he was Jedidiah, loved of God, ſo he was [non-Latin text not transcribed], taught of God. And being now, when hee penned this Penitential Sermon, grown an old man, he had experimented all this that hee here affirmeth. So that hee might better begin his ſpeech to his ſcholars, than once Auguſtus Caeſar did to his ſouldiers, Audite ſenem juvenes, quem juvenem ſenes audierunt, Young men, hearken to mee an old man, whom old men hearkened unto when I was yet but young. Have not I written for you excellent things in counſels and knowledge? Prov. 22.20. Or, Have I not written three books for thee, (ſo ſome read thoſe words) Proverbial, Penitential, Nuptial? See the Note there.

—Neſcis temerarie, neſcis Ovid. Metam.Quem fugias, ideoque fugis.

Job. 4. Eſay. 55.Surely if thou kneweſt the gift of God, and who it is that ſpeaketh unto thee, thou wouldſt encline thine ear and hear, thou wouldſt liſten, as for life it ſelf. Knoweſt thou not that I am a Preacher, a Prince, Son of David, King in Jeruſalem, 2 Cor. 3.1. Regis epiſtolis acceptis, quo calamo ſcriptae ſint, ridiculum eſt quaerere. Greg. Luke 13.28. Bellarminus Solomonem inter reprobos numerat. and ſo do come multis nominibus tibi commendatiſſimus, much commended to thee in many reſpects? But need I, as ſome others, epiſtles of commendation to my Readers, or Letters of commendation from them? Is it not ſufficient to know, that this book of mine, (both for matter and words) is the very work of the Holy Ghoſt ſpeaking in mee, and writing by mee? For Prophecy comes not by the will of man, but holy men of God ſpeak it as they are moved by the holy Ghoſt, 2 Pet. 1.21. And albeit this be proof good enough of my true (though late) repentance, whereof ſome have doubted, ſome denied it, yet take another.

Of the Preacher] Or, of a preaching Soul, (for the Hebrew word Koheleth, is of the feminine gender, and hath Nepheſh, Soul, underſtood) or of a perſon re-united and reconciled to the Church,Anima congregata, & cum Eccleſia ſe colligens. Cartw. and in token of reconciliation to God, re-admitted by him to this Office in his Church; like as Chriſt ſealed up his love to Peter after his ſhameful fall, by bidding him feed his lambs; and to the reſt of the Apoſtles that had baſely forſaken him, by ſaying to them after his reſurrection, Peace be unto you: As my Father hath ſent mee, even ſo ſend I you, Receive yee the holy Ghoſt, John 20.21. See the like mercy ſhewed to St. Paul, 1 Tim. 1.12. Howbeit ſome learned men here obſerve, that it is no new thing in the Hebrew tongue, to put feminine names upon men, as Ezra is called Sophereth, deſcriptrix, a Shee-ſcribe, in the very ſame form as Solomon is here called Koheleth, a Preachereſs; and the Goſpel-preachers Mebaſeroth, Pſal. 68.11. with Eſay 52.7. either to ſet forth the excellency and elegancy of the buſineſs, or elſe to teach Miniſters to keep themſelves pure as Virgins; whence they are alſo called Wiſdomes Maids, Prov. 9.3. and Chriſts Paranymphs, John 3.29. to preſent the Church as a chaſte Virgin to Chriſt, 2 Cor. 11.2.

The Son of David] So Chriſt alſo is ſaid to be, Mat. 1.1. as if David had been his immediate father. The glory of children are their fathers, Prov. 17.6. to wit, if they be godly and pious. The Jews made great boaſts that they were the ſeed of Abraham, Mat. 3.9. John 8.33. And that caitiff Elymas the Sorcerer, Act. 13.6. had ſurnamed himſelf Barjeſus, or the ſon of Jeſus, as if hee had been of neereſt alliance to our Saviour, of whom all the families of heaven and earth are called. Eph. 3. What an honour is it now accounted to be of the poſterity of Latimer, Bradford, Ridley, &c? How much more of David, that man of renown, the Father of our princely Preacher, who himſelf took alſo not ſcorn to teach and do the office of a Preacher, Pſal. 32.9. and 34.11. though he were the Governour of Gods people, Pſal. 78.71. and head of many Heathen, Pſal. 18.43? The like may be ſaid of Joſeph of Arimathea, who of a Counſellor of State became a preacher of the Goſpel: ſo did Chryſoſtome a noble Antiochian, Ambroſe Lieutenant and Conſul of Millain, George Prince of Anhalt, Earl Martinengus, John a Laſco a noble Polonian, and ſundry others of like quality and condition: Pſal. 138.4, 5. and 119.72. the Pſalmiſt ſhews by prophecying, that they that have taſted of the joys of a crown, ſhall leave the throne and palace, to ſing with the Saints, and to publiſh the excelling glory of God and godlineſs.

King in Jeruſalem] and of Jeruſalem. The Pope will allow the Duke of Millain to be King in Tuſcany, but not King of Tuſcany: Solomon was both, Prov. 1.1. See the Note there.Spec. Europ. Hither came the Queen of Sheba from the utmoſt parts of the earth to hear him: here hee wrote this excellent book, theſe words of delight, which he had learned from that one Shepheard, the Lord Chriſt, ch. 12.10, 11. and hath left them faithfully ſet down for the uſe of the Church; ſo honouring learning with his own labours, as Sylverius ſaid of Caeſar. Here laſtly it was that he ſoveraigned over Gods own peculiar, the people of his purchaſe, Iſrael, Gods firſt-born, and in that reſpect higher than the Kings of the earth, Pſal. 89.37. So that if Maximilian the Emperour of Germany could ſay, Rex hominum Hiſpanus, aſinorum Gallus, regum ego, Joh. Mant. The Spaniard is King of Men, the French is King of Aſſes, and I am King of Kings; how much better might Solomon have ſaid ſo!

Verſ. 2. Vanity of Vanities] Or, moſt vain vanity: therefore no happineſs here to be had but in the reverential fear of God, chap. 12.13. and this is the ſum of the whole Sermon, the reſult of the Diſcourſe, the impartial verdict brought in by one that could beſt tell; and hee tells it over and over, that men might the ſooner believe him, without putting themſelves to the fruitleſs pains of trying any further concluſions. Sinne hath hurled confuſion over the world, and brought a vanity on the creature. This our firſt parents found, and therefore named their ſecond ſon Abel, or Vanity. David comes after, and confirms it, Pſal. 144.4. Adam is as Abel, or, Man is like to Vanity; Adam is Abels mate. Omnis Adam eſt totus Abel. Nitſub, fundatus, conſtitutus. there is an alluſion in the Original to their two names: yea, All-Adam is all-Abel, when hee is beſt underlaid, (ſo the Hebrew hath it) every man at his beſt eſtate, when he is ſettled upon his beſt bottome, is altogether vanity: Surely, Selah, 'Tis ſo, 'Tis ſo, you may ſeal to it, Pſal. 39.5. But who (alas) hath beleeved our report? Theſe outward things are ſo near to us, and ſo natural to us, that although we can ſay (nay ſwear) with the Preacher, Vanity of Vanities, a heap, a neſt of vanities, It is naught, it is naught, ſaith the buyer, yet, when gone apart, wee cloſe with them,Fulg. triumphes Romanos ludoſve cum ſpectarit appellavit vanitatem. Author vitae apud Sur. Procop. lib. 2. de bello Vand. albeit wee know they are naught, and will come to naught, 1 Cor. 2.6. Neither will it ever bee otherwiſe with us, till with Fulgentius we have found, after much trial, the vanity of all earthly triumphs: till with Gilimer King of Vandalls led in triumph by Belliſarius, wee cry out, as here, Vanity of Vanities, all is vanity: till with Charles the fifth Emperour of Germany, (whom of all men the world judged moſt happy,) wee cry out with deteſtation to all our honours, pleaſures, trophees, riches,Philip. Morn. Abite hinc, abite longe, Get you hence, let me hear no more of you.

Verſ. 3. What profit hath a man] What durable profit? Quid reſidui? what overplus, what more than will ſerve to ſatisfie back and belly? Iſa. 57.10. Our life is called the life of our hands, becauſe it is maintained by the labour of our hands. Si ventri bene, ſi lateri, as hee in Horace ſaith, If the belly may be filled, the back fitted, that's all that can here be had, and that moſt men care to have: Which if they have (ſome have but Priſoners pittance, ſo much as will keep life and ſoul together) yet Quid amplius, as the Vulgar renders this text, what have they more to pay them for their pains? Surely when all the account is ſubducted (ſuch a labouring mans happineſs reſolved into its final iſſue and concluſion) there reſteth nothing but ciphers. This ſhould make us more moderate in our deſires and indeavours after earthly things: ſith we do but labour in the very fire, and weary our ſelves for very vanity, Hab. 2.13. They that ſeek after the Philoſophers ſtone, they muſt uſe ſo much gold, and ſpend ſo much gold: and then they can turn as much into gold by it, as they have ſpent in making of it: and ſo they have their labour for their pains: Quid emolumenti? What profit hath a man? Do we not ſee many take a great deal of pains to go to hell? whereinto at length they are turned as a Sumpterhorſe is at night, after all his hard travell, with his back full of galls and bruiſes.

Verſ. 4. One generation paſſeth away, &c.] Therefore no happineſs here, becauſe no aſſurance of life or long continuance.

Omnia ſunt hominum tenui pendentia filo: Et ſubito caſu, quae valuere ruunt.

Xerxes, looking upon his huge Army, wept, to think that within leſs than an hundred years, not one of thoſe many ſhould be left alive. Mortality is the ſtage of mutability: Meer man is but the dream of a dream, but the generation of a fancy, but an empty vanity, but the curious picture of nothing, a poor feeble, unable dying flaſh. How then can he here work out unto himſelf an happineſs worth having? Hab. 2.6. Why ſhould he lay up and load himſelf with thick clay, as if his life were rivetted upon eternity?

But the Earth endureth for ever] As a ſtage, whereon the ſeveral Generations act their parts, and go off: as the center of the world, and ſeat of living creatures, it ſtands firm and unmoveable.

That was an od conceit of Platoes, that the earth was a kind of living creature, having ſtones for bones, rivers for veins, trees for hairs, &c. And that was worſe of Ariſtotle, teaching the worlds eternity: which ſome ſmatterers in Philoſophy fondly ſtrive to maintain out of this text; not rightly underſtanding the force of the Hebrew phraſe, For ever, which oft-times and here ſignifies a periodical perpetuity, a long indefinite time, not an infinite: See 2 Pet. 1.3, 10. The whole Engine ſhall be changed. By ever then is meant, till the end of all things.

Plutarch. [non-Latin text not transcribed]. Pauſ. Pſal. 19.3.Verſ. 5. The Sun alſo ariſeth] That ſweet and ſwift creature, (the Perſians deified it:) So ſweet, that Eudoxus Profeſſed himſelf willing to bee burnt up by the Sun preſently, ſo hee might bee admitted to come ſo near it, as to learn the nature of it. So ſwift, that the Perſians dedicated an horſe to their God the Sun, as the ſwifteſt on earth to the ſwifteſt in heaven. He courſeth about the world with incredible ſpeed, and rejoyceth as a Gyant to run a race. Hee exceedeth the Eagles flight, more than it goes beyond the ſlow motion of a ſnail. Whether it run nearer the earth now by 9976 German miles, than it did in Ptolomies days (as ſome Mathematicians affirm) I know not. But that, being of a fiery nature,Hóm. 8. ad pop. Antioch. it ſhould, contrary to the nature of fire, (which is to fly upward) ſend down its beams, its heat, light, and influence, this I admire with Chryſoſtome, as a gracious work of God, in making this great Servant of the world, [non-Latin text not transcribed]. (as his name in Hebrew ſignifies) ſo ſweetly ſerviceable.

And haſteth to the place] Heb. panteth, as if tired and even breathleſs. A figurative ſpeech, like that Dan. 9.21. where the Angel Gabriel is ſaid to fly ſwiftly, or with wearineſs of flight, to inform Daniel. For uſe hereof, hear the Poet.

Soles ucidere & redire poſſunt, Nobis cum ſemēl occidit brevis lux, Nox eſt perpetua una d[illegible: 1 letter]rmienda. Catull. The Sunne doth ſet and riſe, But wee contrariwiſe. Sleep after one ſhort light, An everlaſting night.

Verſ. 6. The wind goeth toward the South, &c.] It is a very ſmall thing at firſt, a little vapour riſing out of the earth; but by circuiting and whirling about, it gathers ſtrength, now ruſhing toward the South, and anon toward the North,Virg. Aneid. &c. the Original is very lively in expreſſing the manner of it. Ʋna Euruſque Notuſque ruunt, &c. The reſtleſneſs of theſe inſenſible creatures, and diligence in doing their duties, as it taxeth our dulneſs and diſ-affection, ſo it re-minds us of the inſtability of our ſtates, and that we ſhould ſeek and ſet up ou[illegible: 1 letter] reſt in God alone. All earthly things are to the ſoul, but as the air to the ſtone; can give it no ſtay, till it come to God the center.

Verſ. 7. All the Rivers run into the Sea] And the nearer they come to the Sea, the ſooner are they met by the tide; ſent out, as it were, to take their tribute, due to the Sea, that ſeat and ſource of waters. Surely as the Rivers lead a man to the Sea, ſo doe all theſe Creatures carry him to God by their circular motion. A circle (we ſay) is the perfecteſt figure, becauſe it begins and ends; the points doe meet together, the laſt point meets in the firſt from whence it came; ſo ſhall we never come to perfection or ſatisfaction, till our ſouls come to God; till he make the circle meet. A wiſe Philoſopher could ſay, that man is the end of all things in a ſemicircle; that is, All things in the World are made for him, and he is made for God; to whom he muſt therefore haſten.

Unto the place from whence the Rivers come] Sc. from the Sea, through the pores and paſſages of the earth, where they leave their ſaltneſs. This is Solomons opinion (as it was likewiſe the opinion of the ancient Philoſophers) which yet Ariſtotle findes fault with, and aſſigns another cauſe of the perennity of rivers, of their beginning, and original,Hinc Poetae flugunt Inachum fluvium ex Oceano genitum. viz. that the air thickned in the earth by reaſon of cold, doth reſolve and turn into water, &c. This agrees not with that which Solomon here ſaith by the inſtinct of the Holy Ghoſt. And therefore Averroes is by no means to be hearkned unto in that exceſſive commendation he gives Ariſtotle, viz. That there was no errour in his writings,Alſted. Chronol. p. 460. that his doctrin was the chiefeſt truthes, and that his underſtanding was the utmoſt that was by any one attainable, himſelf the rule and pattern that Nature invented to ſhew her moſt perfect skill, &c.

Verſ. 8. All things are full of labour] Labor eſt etiam ipſa voluptas. Chiron, cum ob juſtitiam Dii permitterent ut perpetuo viver[illegible: 1 letter]t, maluis mori, quod offenderetur taedio rerum ſemper eodem tenure recurrentium. Moleſtation and miſery meet us at every turn: The whole world is a Sea of glaſſe (for its vanity;) mingled with fire (for its vexation) Rev. 4.6. Vota etiam poſt uſum, faſtidio ſunt, All things are ſweeter in the ambition, than in the fruition. There is a ſingular vanity in this ſplendid miſery. One well compares it to a beautiful Picture, drawn with white and red colours in ſackcloth: which afarre off is very lovely; but near by, it is like the filthy matter of a ſore or wound, purulent rottenneſſe, or the back of a galled horſe. No man ever yet found any conſtant contentation in any ſtate: yet may his outward appearance deceive others, and anothers him.

Man cannot utter it] If Solomon cannot, no man can: for what can the man doe that cometh after the King? chap. 2.12.

The eye is not ſatisfied with ſeeing] Though theſe be the two learned ſenſes, (as Ariſtotle calls them) whereby Learning is let into the ſoul: yet no man knows ſo much, but he would know more. Herillius therefore, and thoſe other Philoſophers that placed the happineſs of a man in the knowledge of Natural cauſes and events, were not in the right. There is a curſe of unſatisfiableneſs lies upon the creature. The ſoul, that acts in and by the outward ſenſes, flickers up and down, as Noahs Dove did, but finds no firm footing; ſharks and ſhifts from one thing to another for content, as the Bee doth from flower to flower for hony, and deſires ſtill more things in number, and new things for manner. Hence the particles in the Hebrew that ſignifie And and Or, [non-Latin text not transcribed] & [non-Latin text not transcribed] of [non-Latin text not transcribed] come of a word that ſignifieth to deſire: becauſe the deſires of Man would have this, and that, and that, and another: and doth alſo tire it ſelf, not knowing whether to have this or that, or that or tother, ſo reſtleſſe it is, after utmoſt endeavours of plenary ſatisfaction; which this life affords not.

Verſ. 9. The thing that hath been it is that which ſhall be] Hiſtory therefore muſt needs be of noble and neceſſary uſe: becauſe, by ſetting before us what hath been, it premoniſheth us of what will be again:Plato in Cratylo. Macrob. Joſeph. Plin. ſith the ſelf-ſame fable is acted over again in the world, the perſons only are altered that act it. Plato will therefore have Hiſtory to have its name, [non-Latin text not transcribed] of ſtopping the flux of endleſs errours, and reſtleſſe uncertainties. His conceit of a general revolution of all things after thirty thouſand years expired, is worthily exploded, and learnedly confuted by St. Auſtin. De Civ. Dei, lib. 12. cap. 13. but in no wiſe confirmed by this text, as ſome would have it, and Origen among the reſt. Plato might haply hint at the general Reſurrection, called the Regeneration by our Saviour, Mat. 19.28. See the Note.

Verſ. 10. Is there any thing whereof it may be ſaid, See, this is new?] Hoc ego primus vidi, ſaith Zabarel. But how could he tell that? Many men have been ſo befooled. Wee look upon Guns and Printing as new inventions; the former found out by Birchtoldin the Monk, Anno Dom. 1380. the other by Frier Fauſtus, Anno 1446. But the Chineſes are ſaid to have had the uſe of both theſe long before. Should we then ſo eagerly hunt after Novelties, thoſe meer New-nothings, till we loſe our ſelves in the chaſe? Nil admirari prope res eſt una Numici. Get ſpiritual eyes rather to behold the beauty of the New Creature, (all other things are but nine dayes wonderment) the bravery of the new Jeruſalem: Yea get this natural itch after novelties kild by the practice of mortification: and get into Chriſt, that thou mayſt be a new creature. So ſhalt thou have a new name upon thee, Iſa. 62.2. A new Spirit within thee, Ezek. 36.27. New alliance, Epheſ. 2.14. New attendance, Pſal. 91.11. New wages, new work, Iſa. 62.11. A new Commandement, 1 Joh. 2.8. A new Covenant, Jer. 31.33. A new way to Heaven, Heb. 10.20. And a new Manſion in Heaven, Joh. 14.2. 2 Cor. 5.8.

Verſ. 11. There is no remembrance of former things] None, to ſpeak of. How many memorable matters were never recorded? How many ancient records long ſince periſhed? How many fragments of very good Authors are come bleeding to our hands; that live (as many of our Caſtles doe) but only by their ruines? God hath by a Miracle preſerved the holy Bible from the injury of times and Tyrants, who have ſought to aboliſh it. There wee have a true remembrance of former things, done in the Church by Abraham and his off-ſpring: when the Grandees of the Earth; Ninus, Belus, &c. lye wrapt up in the ſheet of ſhame, or buried in the grave of utter oblivion. Diodorus Siculus confeſſeth, that all Heathen antiquities, before the Theban and Trojan Warres, are either fabulous relations, or little better. Ezra (that wrote one of the laſt in the Old Teſtament) lived afore any Chronicles of the world now extant in the world.

Neither ſhall there be any remembrance] Unleſs tranſmitted to poſterity by Books and Writings, which may preſerve and keep alive their memory, and teſtifie for their Authors, that ſuch have one day lived. — Quis noſſet Eraſmum, Chilias aeternum ſi latuiſſet opus? Niniveh that great City is nothing elſe but a ſepulture of her ſelf: no more ſhall Rome be ere long. Time ſhall triumph over it, when it ſhall but then live by fame (if at all) as others now doe.

Verſ. 12. I the Preacher was King over Iſrael] And ſo had all the helps that heart could wiſh: the benefit of the beſt Books and Records, that men or mony could bring me in; the happineſſe of holy conference, beſide mine own plentiful experience, and therefore you may well give credit to my verdict. Mr. Fox had a large Commiſſion under the Great Seal to ſearch for all ſuch Monuments, Manuſcripts, Regiſters, Legier-books, as might make for his purpoſe in ſetting forth that worthy Work, the Acts and Monuments of the Church of England. And the like had Polydor Virgil for the framing of his Hiſtory: though with unlike ſucceſſe: for he had the ill hap to write nothing well, ſaith one,Peacham. ſave the life of Henry the ſeventh, wherein he had reaſon to take a little more pains than ordinary, the Book being dedicated to Henry the eighth his Son. See the note on verſ. 1.

Verſ. 13. And I gave my heart to ſeek and ſearch out by wiſdome] God had given Solomon a large heart, and great ſtore of wiſdome: and this made him not more idle, but more induſtrious, more ſedulous and ſerious in ſeeking and ſearching out by wiſdome] i. e. by the beſt skill that hee had, maturely and methodically, the cauſes, properties, and effects, with the reaſon of all things that are, and are done under heaven. Neither did he this in pride and curioſity, (as Hugo de Sancto Victore here ſharply cenſureth him) but ſoberly and modeſtly, ſetting down his diſquiſitions and obſervations of things Political and Natural for the uſe of poſterity. And foraſmuch as theſe are now loſt (becauſe haply too much admired and truſted to,1 King. 4.3[illegible: 1 letter] by thoſe that had the uſe of them under the firſt Temple, in and with the which ſome Jewes ſay they were burnt) what an high price ſhould we all ſet upon this and the other two Books of Solomon, the wiſeſt of men, as (not Apollo, but) the true God of Heaven hath called him, and commended him unto us? Surely, as in the Revelation, Heaven never opened but ſome great Myſtery was revealed, ſome Divine Oracle uttered: So we may be confident, that the Holy Ghoſt never ſets any Pen-man of Scripture a work, but for excellent purpoſe. And if we diſ-regard it, he will complain of us, as once,Hoſ. 8.12. I have written for them the great things of my Law; but they were counted as a ſtrange thing. As for thoſe other worthy Works of Solomon (the fruits of this privie ſearch into the natures of the Creatures here mentioned) that the injury of time hath bereft us of; how much better may we ſay of them,Rolloc. de vocatione, p. 130. than a godly and learned man once did of Origens Octapla? Hujus operis jacturam deplorare poſſumus, compenſare non poſſumus, This great loſſe we may well bewayl, but cannot help.

Verſ. 14. I have ſeen all the works that are done,] I have ſeen them, and ſet down mine obſervations of them, 1 King. 4.33. Pliny did ſomewhat like unto this in his Natural Hiſtory; which work of his ſaith Eraſmus, Non minus varium eſt quam ipſa rerum natura: imo non opus, ſed the ſaurus, ſed vere mundus rerum cognitu digniſſimarum, it hath as much variety in it as Nature her ſelf hath. To ſpeak truth, it is not a Work but a Treaſury, nay a world of things moſt worthy to be known of all men.

And behold all is vanity and vexation of ſpirit] Nothing in themſelves, and yet of ſufficient activity to inflict vengeance and vexation upon the ſpirit of a man: ſo farre are they from making him truly happy. They doe but feed the ſoul with wind (as the text may be rendred) wind gotten into the veins is a ſore vexation.

Verſ. 15. That which is crooked cannot bee made ſtreight] Moſt men are ſo wedded and wedged to their wicked wayes, that they cannot bee rectified but by an extraordinary touch from the hand of Heaven: [non-Latin text not transcribed]. Heſ. Heſiod ſpeaking of God ſaith, that he can eaſily ſet crooked things ſtreight, and only hee. Holy Melanchthon being himſelf newly converted, thought it impoſſible for his Hearers to withſtand the evidence of the Goſpel. But after he had been a Preacher a while, he complained, that old Adam was too hard for young Melanchthon; and yet beſides the ſingular skil and learning that God had given him (for the which he merited to be called the Phoenix of Germany) Ad cum modum in hoc vitae theatro verſatum Philippum Melanchthonem apparet, ſaith a friend and Scholar of his, i. e. It well appeareth, that Melanchthon was (Solomon-like) on this wiſe buſied upon the Theatre of his life, that ſeeing and obſerving all he could, he made profit of every thing; and ſtored his heart (as the Bee doth her Hive) out of all ſorts of flowers, for the common benefit. Howbeit he met with much croſneſs and crookedneſs that wr[illegible: 1 letter]ng many tears from him (as it did likewiſe from St. Paul, Phil. 3.18.) not in open enemies only, as Eccius, and other Papiſts, but in profeſſed friends, as, Flaccius, Oſiander, Melch. Adam in vita. Mel Melanchthon mortuus tantum, non ut blaſphemus in Deum cruci affigitur. Zanch. Miſcel. ep. ded. &c. who not only vexed him grievouſly whiles alive, but alſo fell foul upon him when he was dead, as Zanchius complaineth. Of all Fowl we moſt hate and deteſt the Crowes, and of all Beaſts the Jackalls (a kind of Foxes in Barbary) becauſe the one diggs up the graves and devours the fleſh, the other picks out the eyes of the dead. But (to return to the text) ſinful men grow aged and crooked with good opinions of themſelves, and can ſeldome or never be ſet ſtreight again. The Phariſee ſets up his Counter for a thouſand pound, I am not as other men, ſaith he, nor as this Publican, hee ſtands upon his compariſons, nay upon his diſpariſons, and although he turn aſide unto his crooked ways (as Sampſon did to his Dalilah) yet he thinks much to bee led forth with the workers of iniquity, Pſal. 125.5. Hab. 2. Luk. 13.11. but cryes, Peace ſhall bee upon Iſrael. How many are there, that having laden themſelves with thick clay are bowed together, as he in the Goſpel was, and can in no wiſe lift up themſelves? They neither can not will (O curvae in terras animae, &c.) but are frample and fooliſh.

[non-Latin text not transcribed].The Greek word for crooked, comes of an Hebrew word that ſignifies a fool, and every fool is conceited; he will not part with his bable for the Tower of London: Try to ſtreighten theſe crooked peeces, and they will ſooner break than bend, venture all than mend any thing. Plato went thrice to Sicily to convert Dionyſius, and could not doe it. A wiſer than Plato complains of a perverſe and crooked generation, Deut. 32.5. See Acts 2.40. Phil. 2.15. It is the work of Gods Spirit only, by his corrective and directive power, to ſet all to rights, Luk. 3.5. Philoſophy can abſcondere vitia, non abſcindere, chain up corrupt nature, but not change it.

And that which is wanting cannot be numbred] & ſtultorum infinitus eſt numerus, ſo the Vulgar renders it, there is a numberleſſe number of fools, ſuch as are wanting with a witneſſe; witleſſe, ſapleſſe fellows, ſuch as have principium laeſum, their brains crackt by the firſt fall, and are not cured of their Spiritual phrenzie, by being re-united to the ſecond Adam. Of ſuch fools there are not a few; [non-Latin text not transcribed]. Deteriorum magna eſt natio, boni ſingulares. Cic. ad Attic. all places are full of them, and ſo is Hell too; the earth is burdned, the air darkned with the number of them, as the Land of Aegypt was with the Flies that there ſwarmed. Bias the Philoſopher could ſay, that the moſt were the worſt; and Cicero, that there was a great Nation of bad people, but a few good. Rari quippe boni, ſaith Juvenal: there is a great paucity of good people. And thoſe few that are, find not a few wants and weakneſſes in themſelves, quae tamen non nocent, ſi non placent, theſe hurt us not, if they pleaſe us not; for God conſiders whereof we are made, and will caſt out condemnation for ever,Lud. de Dieu. Euphor. Amama. Pſal. 19. as one renders that place, Matth. 12.10. Triſte mortalitatis privilegium eſt, [illegible: 1 letter]icere aliquando peccare. Our lives are fuller of ſins than the Firmament is of ſtarres, or the Furnace of ſparks. Nimis auguſta res eſt nuſpiam errare. David ſaw ſuch volumes of infirmities, and ſo many Erratas in all that he did, that hee cries out, Who can underſtand his errours? O cleanſe thou mee from ſecret ſins.

Verſ. 19. I communed with mine own heart, ſaying, &c.] Here Hugo de Sancto Victore proceeds to cenſure Solomon (as hee had done before, verſ. 13. See the note there) of pride and vain-glory, but with greater pride. For Puerilis jactantiae eſt accuſando illustres viros ſuo nomini famam quaerere. It is a childiſh vanity to ſeek for fame by aſperſing better men.Hicronym. Solomon might without boaſting ſay of himſelf, as here he doth, Loe, I am come to great eſtate; or, I have greatned and added wiſdome above all that have been before me. Doth not God ſay as much of him, 2 King. 3. & 4. & 5. & 10? And had hee not good reaſon to praiſe himſelf in this ſort? For whereas ſome might here object, that the cauſe that men get not happineſſe by the knowledge of Natural Philoſophy is, becauſe they underſtand it not: That cannot be, ſaith the Wiſe-man, for I have out-gone all that went before me in wiſdome and perſpicacity; and yet I can doe no good on't: try you another while, if you think you can out-doe mee. I think a man may break his neck before his faſt of theſe ſublunary felicities.

Verſ. 17. And to know madneſſe and folly] That by comparing of contraries, I might the ſooner finde and fiſh out what I ſought for. Sed fruſtra fui, but I diſquieted my ſelf in vain. Philoſophandum igitur, ſed paucis; there is a deceit in Philoſophy, Col. 2.8. and hee who chooſeth to hold faſt this lying vanity, doth by his own election forſake mercy, Jon. 2.8.

Verſ. 18. For in much wiſdome is much grief] And herein children and fools have the advantage; as they want wit, ſo they want woe; as little is given to them, ſo little is required of them. Nihil ſcire vita jucundiſſimae, [non-Latin text not transcribed]. Soph. To know nothing is the braveſt life, as the Greek Proverb hath it. But this muſt be taken with a grain of ſalt; and wee muſt know, that heavenly wiſdome hath infinite pleaſure; and ſo farre, as all other Arts and Sciences are ſubſervient to it, and regulated by it, they afford to the mind an incredible delight and ſweetneſſe.