Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.comKeil and Delitzsch Commentary - Ecclesiastes 12:10 - 12:10
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
It is further said of Koheleth, that he put forth efforts not only to find words of a pleasant form, but, above all, of exact truth: “Koheleth strove to find words of pleasantness, and, written in sincerity, words of truth.” The unconnected beginning biqqesh Koheleth is like dibbarti ani, Ecc 1:16, etc., in the book itself. Three objects follow limtso. But Hitz. reads the inf. absol. וְכָתוֹב instead of וְכָתוּב, and translates: to find pleasing words, and correctly to write words of truth. Such a continuance of the inf. const. by the inf. absol. is possible; 1Sa 25:26, 1Sa 25:31. But why should וְכָתוֹב not be the continuance of the finite (Aq., Syr.), as e.g., at Ecc 8:9, and that in the nearest adverbial sense: et scribendo quidem sincere verba veritatis, i.e., he strove, according to his best knowledge and conscience, to write true words, at the same time also to find out pleasing words; thus sought to connect truth as to the matter with beauty as to the manner? Vechathuv needs no modification in its form. But it is not to be translated: and that which was right was written by him; for the ellipsis is inadmissible, and כתוב מִן is not correct Heb. Rightly the lxx, καὶ γεγραμμένον εὐθύτητος. כָּתוּב signifies “written,” and may also, as the name of the Hagiographa כְּתוּבִים shows, signify “a writing;” kakathuvah, 2Ch 30:5, is = “in accordance with the writing;” and belo kǎkathuv, 2Ch 30:18, “contrary to the writing;” in the post-bibl. the phrase אֹמֵר הַכָּתוּב = ἡ γραφὴ λέγει, is used. The objection made by Ginsburg, that kathuv never means, as kethav does, “a writing,” is thus nugatory. However, we do not at all here need this subst. meaning, וכתוב is neut. particip., and יֹשֶׁר certainly not the genit., as the lxx renders (reading וּכְתוּב), but also not the nom. of the subj. (Hoelem.), but, since יֹשֶׁר is the designation of a mode of thought and of a relation, the accus. of manner, like veyashar, Psa 119:18; emeth, Psa 132:11; emunah, Psa 119:75. Regarding the common use of such an accus. of the nearer definition in the passive part., vid., Ewald, §284c. The asyndeton vechathuv yosher divre emeth is like that at Ecc 10:1, mehhochmah michvod. That which follows limtso we interpret as its threefold object. Thus it is said that Koheleth directed his effort towards an attractive form (cf. avne-hephets, Isa 54:12); but, before all, towards the truth, both subjectively (יֹשֶׁר) and objectively (אֱמֶת), of that which was formulated and expressed in writing.