Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - Ecclesiastes 1:1 - 1:18
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
____________
TITLE:
WORDS OF THE PREACHER, SON OF DAVID, KING IN JERUSALEM
FIRST DISCOURSE
Of the vanity of the practical and the theoretical wisdom of men
Ecclesiastes 1, 2
A. The theoretical wisdom of men, directed to a knowledge of the things of this world, is vanity.
[Ecc_1:4.— ìְòåֹìָí . See the extended discussion on this and kindred words, p. 44 T. L.]
[Ecc_1:5.— æָøַç : Primary sense, irradiation, scattering, like æøç , and æøò , to sow—scatters its rays—spargit lucem. Part. beaming, glowing. See Metrical version. Compare Virgil, frequent, aurora spargebat lumine terras. ùֹׁàֵó Zöckler would give it here the sense of running, going swift. It is better to preserve the primary sense of panting It suits better the hidden metaphor, on which see note, p. 38. T. L.]
[Ecc_1:8.— äַãְּáָøִéí . Rendered things in E. G. So the Vulgate, cunctæ res. Best rendering is the more common and primary one of words: all words weary in expressing the vanity. Zöckler objects to this as making a tautology with ìְãַáֵּø , following. The argument is the other way; such seeming tautologies or verbal parallelisms are rather regarded by the Hebrews as an excellency of diction.—T. L.]
[Ecc_1:10.— ìְòֹìָîִéí . See extended note, p. 44.—T. L.]
[Ecc_1:14.— øְòåּú . There is no need of resorting to the Chaldaic for this word; neither has it any connection with øָöַä . It comes easily from the very common Hebrew øָòָä , primary sense, to feed (transitively or intransitively), pasture (not a verb of eating, like àëì ), then to provide, take care of, then to have the mind upon any thing as an object of care or anxiety. The order of ideas is exactly like that in the in Arabic ÑÚì or Greek íÝìù . The form, as also that of øַòְéåֹï Ecc_1:17, is purely Hebrew. We have the masculine form, Psa_139:2; Psa_139:17, applied to man, and used in a good sense, øֵòִé , my thought. “Thou knowest all my thought”—not in the sense of more speculative thinking, but all my cares. And so in that still more tender passage, Ecc_1:17, where it is applied to God anthropopathically îַäÎéָּ÷ְøåּ øֵòֶéêָ , “how precious are thy thoughts,” thy cares, or carings, for me. Compare 1Pe_5:7, “He careth for you.” In the connection with it, most of the modern commentators rendor øåç , wind—a caring or striving for the wind. It is, however, by no means certain that the older rendering, spirit, was not the right one—a striving (a vain striving or vexation) of the spirit. See a similar connection of øַòְéåֹï (procisely= øְòåּú ) with ìá , the heart, Ecc_2:22. In that place it is not easy to distinguish øַòְéåֹï ìִáּåֹ , anxiety of his heart, from øְòåּú øåּçַ in this.—T. L.]
[Ecc_1:17.— ùִׂëְìåּú — äֹìֵìåּú , abstract terms in åּú , on which some rely as proving a later language, and consequently, a later date to the book. They are, however, like others of the kind that occur in Koheleth, purely Hebrew in their derivation, whilst they have an abstract form, because the idea required here, though unusual elsewhere, demanded it. If there were but few literary compositions in the English language, it would be just as relational to object to one because it had several examples of words ending in ism, though precisely adapted to the meaning intended; and this because such a termination was not found in other books, having little or nothing of a speculative cast. These words, äֹììֵåּú åְùִׂëְìåּú , differ, as madness or frenzy, and fatuity.—T. L.]
2. The whole first discourse, which we, with Ewald, Vaiii., Keil, etc., extend to the end of chap. 2, treats of the principal theme, of the vanity of all earthly things in general; it is therefore of an introductory and fundamental character (comp. Introd. § 2). In harmony with Keil, we again divide them into two nearly equal parts, the first of which (Ecc_1:2-18) presents the vanity of the theoretical, and the second (Ecc_2:1-26) the vanity of the practical wisdom of men; or, of which, number one shows that the strivings of human wisdom after knowledge, and number two that the same efforts aiming at enjoyment and active control of reality, attain no genuine success. This division seems more simple and comprehensive than that of Ewald and Vaihinger, who lay down three main divisions, 1) Ecc_1:2; Ecc_1:11; Ecclesiastes 2) Ecc_1:12; Ecc_2:23; Ecclesiastes 3) Ecc_2:24-26, according to Ewald, and 1) Ecc_1:2-14; Ecclesiastes 2) Ecc_1:12; Ecc_2:19; Ecclesiastes 3) Ecc_2:20-26, according to Vaihinger, giving to the middle division a disproportioned length.—The first half is occupied in proving the vanity and want of success of the theoretical striving of men after wisdom, and is again divided into three divisions. For it shows, 1) by the continually recurring circle of nature and history, permitting no real progress, that the objects of human knowledge are subjected to the law of vanity (Ecc_1:2-11); and 2) then, that to this vanity of the objective reality, there corresponds a complete futility of effort at its comprehension on the part of the human subject, so far that even the wisest of all men must be convinced by experience of the emptiness of this effort (Ecc_1:12-18). Each of these divisions includes two strophes of three verses each, together with an introductory half strophe or proposition, so that the scheme of the whole section perfected is this: I. Division: The vanity of human knowledge in an objective point of view (Ecc_1:2-11). Proposition or general preliminary remark (half strophe); Ecc_1:2-3. First strophe: Ecc_1:4-7.—Second strophe: Ecc_1:8-11. II. Division: The vanity of human knowledge in a subjective point of view (Ecc_1:12-18). Proposition: Ecc_1:12.—First strophe, Ecc_1:13-15). Second strophe, Ecc_1:16-18.—We follow in this strophical division the plan of Vaihinger (also that of Keil and Hahn), which differs materially from that of Ewald. But the latter may therein be right, that from Ecc_1:9 the discourse approaches prose style, and only here and there, as in Ecc_1:15; Ecc_1:18, returns to loftier poetic diction. Vaihinger also acknowledges this, in so far as he considers the two rythmically constructed apothegms, Ecc_1:15; Ecc_1:18, as characteristic closing formulas of the two last strophes of the section (comp. Introd. § 2, p. 106).
3. The general preliminary observation, or, if preferred, the theme of the first discourse; Ecc_1:2-3.—Vanity of vanities, saith the preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity. This exclamation, containing the fundamental thought of the whole book, returns again at the close, Ecc_12:7, almost in the same words, after a previous examination has everywhere proved its truth. Nothing is wanting there but the repetition of äֲáֵì äֲáָìִéí , which gives a specially solemn impression to the sentence here at the head of the whole. As to the expression “vanity of vanities” being a paraphrase of the superlative idea “extremest vanity,” comp. the observation on ùִׁéø äַùִּׁéøִéí Son_1:1 (above, p. 1). For the punctuation äֲáֵì comp. àֲáֵì Psa_35:14, where the principal vowel is also pushed forward and lengthened to a tseri. äֶáֶì “breath, steam” (comp. Chald. äֲáַì to become warm, to steam) is a very proper expression to mark the inconstancy, unsubstantially, and emptiness that characterize all earthly things. To confine this predicate of nothingness to the actions of men (Hahn) is the less allowable since farther on, in verses 9 and 14, human action is expressly spoken of as participating in the emptiness of worldly things; and there is previously given a much more comprehensive description of this vanity, which clearly shows that the author would understand in the “all” that he declares as vanity, all earthly nature and the whole circle of temporal things, (in contrast to the eternal). It is also inadmissible to accept the double äáì äáìéí as subject of the sentence, instead of taking the independent, animated exclamation rather as a presupposed predicate to äַëֹּì , this pretended subject äַëֹּì would then have in the following äֶáֶì another predicate, whereby the whole expression would become awkward, and essentially lose in active force and emphasis, (against Rosenmueiler, Hahn).—As cases similar to the contents of Ecc_1:2, comp. the passages in Psa_90:3-10; Psa_102:25-28; also Psa_39:6-7; and also what the patriarchs were obliged to experience and confess regarding the vanity of temporal life: Gen_4:2; Gen_5:29; Gen_9:7; Gen_9:9, etc. Ecc_1:3. What profit hath a man of all his labor which he taketh under the sun?—(Ger., with which he fatigueth himself). Now for the first time the preacher more especially touches the vanity of human things, but means it in connection with the toil of men, as thereby declared unprofitable and unsuccessful ( òָîָì , difficulty, labor, exertion, comp. Ecc_2:22; Ecc_3:9; Ecc_5:14, etc.) not only his actions, but at the same time also his spiritual strivings and searchings, of which in the Sequel he principally treats; he consequently mainly means the substance of his interests and efforts, the subjective human in contrast to the objective reality of all earthly life, to which that äַëֹּì in Ecc_1:2 referred. Ecc_1:2-3 hold therefore, substantially, the same relation to each other as the two subsequent paragraphs in Ecc_1:4-11, and Ecc_1:12-18. éִúְøåֹï Synonymous with åֶúֶø Gen_49:3; Pro_17:7; Job_20:22, etc., is found only in this book, and indicates that which is left, what remains to one; hence profit, advantage, success, acquisition, ὅ ôéò åἰñãÜóáôï , 2Jn_1:8, not a superiority over others, which signification appears most fitting in Ecc_2:13.—The áְּ in áְּëָìÎòֲîָìåֹ , Hahn considers, according to Isa_5:25, equal to “notwithstanding, in spite of,” which however is unnecessary, as the usual signification “in” or “through” affords a sufficiently good sense.—For the expression “under the sun,” a characteristic and favorite form of the author, comp. Ecc_1:14; Ecc_2:11; Ecc_2:17; Ecc_2:20; Ecc_2:23; Ecc_3:16, etc. The synonymous expressions “under the heaven,” (Ecc_2:3; Ecc_3:1; Ecc_1:13;) and “upon the earth” (Ecc_8:14; Ecc_8:16; Ecc_11:2), are found elsewhere in the Old Testament. The preference of Koheleth for the form “under the sun,” is doubtless explained by the fact that it instructively and clearly points to the contrast “between the eternal regularity which the sun shows in its course, and the fluctuating, vacillating, changeable doings of men, which it illuminates with its ever equal light.”—(Elster).
4. First division, first strophe, verses 4–7. In an objective view, human knowledge shows itself futile, in considering the continual change of human generations on the earth, Ecc_1:4, and the steady course of the sun, the wind, and the water (Ecc_1:5-7).—One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh. äָìַêְ to go away, abire, as Ecc_5:15; Job_10:21; Psa_39:13. For this sentence comp. Sir_14:19 : ὥò öýëëïí èÜëëïí ἐðὶ äÝíäñïõ äÜóåïò ôὰ ìὲí êáôá âÜëëåé , ἄëëá äὲ öýåé , ïὔôùò ãåíὲá óáñêὸò êáὶ áἵìáôïò , ἡ ìὲí ôåëåõôᾶ , ἑôÝñá äὲ ãåííᾶôáé —a capital comparison, which reminds us of Isa_64:5.—But the earth abideth forever; (literal, “and the earth stands eternally”), ( òָîַã as in Ps. 29:19; Lev_13:5, is of lasting existence, stands still). The copula expresses the simultaneousness of the two circumstances placed in contrast with each other: whilst the earth stands forever, human generations come and go incessantly. In the abiding of the earth, the poet doubtless thinks of its foundation on pillars over the water, to which Psa_24:2; Psa_104:5; Job_38:6, and other poetical passages allude. But whether, at the same time, the earth is considered the arena of the curse and sinful misery brought in by men (Gen_3:17-19), as a vale of sorrow, and a place of misfortune, so that the thought were: men effect nothing lasting on earth, new races of men must ever begin where the old ones ceased, must ever repeat the same Sisyphus labor as their fathers (Hengstenberg, Hahn): this is doubtful on account of the expression ìְòåֹìָí . This certainly indicates not an endless eternity in the strictest sense of the word, but only “a future of unlimited length,” (Hengstenberg); but it shows the intention to bring out, as a principal thought, the character of the continual and everlasting in contrast with the appearance of continual change, and points thus to the inability of human investigation and knowledge to hold any firm position in the midst of such change everlasting as the duration of the earth.
Ecc_1:5. The sun ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to the place where he arose. The first half of this verse, is an exact parallel of the first clause of Ecc_1:4, the second corresponds in substance to the thought in the second clause of that verse. For, as in the former, the earth, the scene of the coming and going of the generations of men, so in the latter the “place” of the sun (i.e., its subterranean, heavenly dwelling-place, from which it daily enters upon its new course, comp. Psa_19:6), is contrasted as abiding in the presence of continual change. As the human race, with every change of its individuals, makes no advance, as its history presents no real progress, so is the motion of the sun apparently a continual circuit, without arrival at any fixed goal, or lasting place of rest. Contrary to the accents, the Septuagint, Vulgate, Chaldaic, Luther, Elster, Hitzig, Hahn, etc., connect åְàֶìÎîְ÷åֹîåֹ ùֹׁàֵó closely with the preceding; “and hastens to its place, and there ariseth again. But ùàó belongs clearly to what follows, and also does not mean running, hastening, but (as äֵôִéçַ in Habakkuk 2, 3) gasping after air, panting, longing”—a sense which strikingly delineates the movement of the sun, striving to reach the vault of heaven, although in it there lies a conception somewhat different from this: “and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race,” Psa_19:5. For Hengstenberg clearly brings into the text the joyous desire, the pretended image of “the vigorous courage of the new generation.” It rather points to the idea of the exhaustion of the sun on account of its ever restless motion, and this doubtless with the intention of directly showing the depressing influence produced by observing the ever recurring circuit of this body, and the discouragement in this endless uniformity, that presents itself to the comprehension of the human observer (comp. Elster on this passage). Ecc_1:6. It goeth to the South, and turneth to the North. (Literal of the Ger. text). The sun is naturally not the subject [Sept. Syriac, M. Geier, etc.), but the wind named in the second clause, for only of it can it be said, “it turneth to the north.” But south and north are here used with the wind, because the other cardinal points had been previously used with the sun, to prevent an unpleasant repetition. The author could scarcely have thought of anything like the law of the revolution of the winds (Wolfgang Menzel, in his Natural History conceived in the Christian spirit I. 270); for he had just asserted in Ecc_1:4, that the earth stands eternally still. The opinion of Hahn is also objectionable, that the poet was desirous of showing the continual change between warm and cold wind, and this change from warmth to cold was to depict the vicissitude of happiness and unhappiness in human life, as, in the preceding verse, that from night to day. Such an allegorizing of the passage is the less justifiable because the circuit of the waters described in Ecc_1:7 can only be considered a picture of the change from happiness to unhappiness by virtue of a forced and highly artificial interpretation. The more careful allegorical interpretation tried by Hengstenberg, according to which sun, wind, and water are all symbols of human existence moving in the circuit of vanity, is not indeed sufficiently justified by the context. The wind goeth ever whirling (Lit. Ger.). The twice repeated ñåֹáֵá expresses continual repetition, the everlasting, and the ever-returning change of the wind; comp. the reduplication of ideas with the same intent in Gen_14:10; Deu_2:27; Deu_14:22; Mar_6:39. This double ñåֹáֵá is subordinate to äåֹìֵêְ presenting the main idea, just as ùּׁåֹàֵó in Ecc_1:5 is to æֹøֵçַ .—And the wind returneth again according to his circuits.—That is, the circuits which it has already made, it ever makes again, it ever repeats the courses that it has previously described; for that is, properly speaking, the ñְáִéáåֹú , not circles (Sept. Vulg., Ewald, Knobel, etc). The translation “on its circuits or circles” (Ewald, Knobel, etc.) or also “according to its circuits” (Rosenmueller) is unnecessary; for that òַì , with verbs of motion, especially ùׁåּá , has the sense of to, until, (exactly synonymous, in such case, with òַã ) is proved by such passages as Pro_26:11; Psa_19:7; Psa_48:11; Job_37:3, and also by the circumstance that, in the later Chaldaic style, òַì is mostly synonymous with àֶì . [In the above passage Zöckler translates zu seinen Wendungen.—W.].
Ecc_1:7. All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full, i.e., it does not overflow notwithstanding the immense masses of water that it constantly receives; it does not overwhelm and swallow up the land. In äַéָí , the author doubtless refers to the ocean, not to the Dead Sea, as Hitzig arbitrarily supposes. The previous mention of the sun, the wind, and the four cardinal points, show conclusively that he deals with great cosmophysical ideas, and thus hardly thinks merely of the streams like the Jordan flowing into the Dead Sea, or indeed of the contracted relations of Palestine at all. Comp. also Aristophanes in his “Clouds,” v. 1294, et seq.:
áὕôç ìὲí ( ἡ èÜëáôôá ) ïὐäὲí ãßãíåôáé
ἐðéῤῥåüíôùí ôῶí ðïôáìῶí ðëåßùí , óὺ äὲ
æçôåῖò ðïéῆóáé ôáñãýñéïí ðëåῖïí ôὸ óüí
Unto the place from whence the rivers come, “thither they return again. Literal, thither are the rivers to go returning,” thither they always take their course again. For this construction examine 1Sa_20:19; Hos_5:11, etc; as in the English, (they are going), the participle here expresses the continuous character of the action. For the construct state before the relative clause (which is, as it were, regarded as a single noun) comp. passages such as Gen_40:3; Lev_4:24; (Ewald, Manual. § 322, c.).—As it is not absolutely necessary that äìêְ must express the “going whither,” but may also well express the going out, or the coming whence, as Ecc_1:6 shows, therefore, îְ÷åֹí ùֶׁäַðְּçָìִéí äֹìְëִéí does not mean the ocean as the common collecting-place of all river-water (Elster, Vaihinger, etc.), but rather as the occasional source and origin of the individual rivers. The return of the water from the ocean the author certainly thinks effected in a way corresponding to the natural course of things, namely, that of exhalations, and clouds, and falling mists, and not by means of secret subterraneous canals and passages, as Luther, Rosenmueller, et al., pretend. See Gen_2:6; Job_36:27-28.—Also Umbreit, Hitzig, and Hengstenberg on this passage.
5. First division, second strophe, Ecc_1:8-11. As the natural objects of human knowledge truly satisfy neither the eye nor the ear (Ecc_1:8), so there predominates in the history of mankind a restless flight of events, crowding and following each other in endless circuit, which necessarily destroy, in equal measure, both the interest in new acquirements, and the endeavor to remember the things that are past (Ecc_1:11).—All things are full of labor, man cannot utter it.—The words ëֹּìÎäַãְּáָøִéí éְâֵòִéí are understood by exegetists to mean either: “all words are troublesome, weary” (Sept., Ewald, Elster, Hitzig, Hengstenberg, Hahn, etc.), or: “all things fatigue, are full of burden and trouble” (Hieronymus, Luther, Rosenmueller, Vaihinger, etc.). The ruling signification in this book, as every where in the Old Testament of ãáø = ëüãïò , sermo, as well as the closely following remark, “man cannot utter it” ( éåּëַì ìְãַáֵּø ), seem to speak in favor of the former meaning. But the word ãáø , as meaning thing, is found also in Ecc_1:10; Ecc_6:12; Ecc_7:8; and it appears, in every view of the case, more appropriate that the quality of wearying, of producing discouragement and indifference, should be predicated of the things of the world, and the objects of human knowledge, than that the words relating to the naming and judging of these things, should be designated as feeble or exhausting. This first meaning would also produce a tautology of äַãְּáָøִéí with ìְãַáֵּø , which one could scarcely attribute to an author who, on the whole, expresses himself with such choice and delicacy. Thus the sense of the line remains in every case that which is accepted oven by most of the defenders of the first conception; namely, to recount all objects of human knowledge and experience is fatiguing in the extreme, and is indeed impracticable`; no speech can perfectly give the impression which is produced on our mind by the thought of physical endlessness, and of the never changing operations and life of the forces of nature (comp. Elster on this passage). For the active sense of éָâֵòַ , which elsewhere, as in Deu_25:18, 2Sa_17:2, expresses the passive thought, “faint,” “weary,” but here is clearly exhaustive, making weary, examine the similar significations of ðִîְøָõ , ðַçְìָä , àָðåּùׁ in Isa_17:11; Jer_30:12; Mic_2:10; and also the Latin tristis in the sense of making sad, depressing; and the German “betrübt” in phrases like: “es ist betrubt zu schen,” etc.—The eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing,—No remarkable quality is here affirmed of the eye or the ear; it is only intended to delineate more closely the relation held to the expression, “all things are wearying.” “If the eye should become satisfied, so that it would no longer see, then the narrating word must step in and be able in its turn also to master things. But the abundance of phenomena, which presses on eye, ear, and the remaining senses, is endless; there are always objects which the eye must see, does see, and brings to him who would gladly close his labors” (Hitzig). For parallel passages comp. Pro_27:20. For îִùְׁîֹòַ , lit. “away from hearing,” i.e., so that it may hear no longer, comp. Gen_27:1; Exo_14:5; 1Sa_8:7; Isa_24:10, etc.
Ecc_1:9. The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; or also; “what has happened, that will again happen, that will occur anew.” îַä ùֶׁäָéָä cannot be considered a question (LXX. ôß ôὸ ãåãïíüò Vulg. quid est quod fuit); for in this book îַäÎùֶּׁ is always equivalent to “that which,” or “whatever;” see Ecc_3:15; Ecc_6:10; Ecc_8:7; Ecc_10:14; and examine for the same Chaldaic style, Dan_2:25; Ezr_7:18.—And that which is done, is that which shall be done.—As the former refers to the objective course of natural laws and phenomena, so this parallel expression alludes to the subjective efforts and actions of men; and the progress to any thing really new is denied of both.—And there is no new thing under the sun.—Lit. there is not in existence any thing new, ( åְàֵéï ëָּìÎçָøָùׁ ). For the placing of this negation before ëָּì , to indicate the total non-existence of any thing, comp. Jdg_13:4; Psa_143:2; 2Ki_4:2; also similar Hebrew terms in the New Testament Greek, Mat_24:22; Rom_3:20; Gal_2:16, etc.—For this sentence comp. Seneca especially; Epist. Ecc 24: Nullius rei finis est, sed in orbem nexa sunt omnia. Omnia transeunt ut revertantur, nil novi video, nil novi facio; also Tacitus, Annal. III. Ecc 55: Rebus cunctis inest quidam velut orbis, ut quemadmodum temporum vices, ita morum versentur; and Marc. Aurel. Comment., ad se ipsum, VI. Ecc 31: ̀ ὁ ôὰ íῦí ὁñῶí ðÜíôá ἑþñáêåí , ὅóá ôὲ ἐî Üúäéüõ ἐãÝíåôï , êáé ὅóá åὶò ôὸ ἁ ̓ ðåéñïí ἔóôáé . ðÜíôá ãὰñ ὁìïãåíῆ êáὶ ὁìïåéäῆ ; Ibid. VII. Ecclesiastes 1 : ïὐäåí êáéíὸí . ðÜíôá êáὶ óõíÞèç êáὶ ὀëéã÷ñüíéá ; Ibid. VII. Ecc 26: ðᾶí ôὸ ãéíüìåíïí ïὕôùò ἀåὶ ἐãåíåôï êáὶ ãåíÞóåôáé êáὶ íῦí ðáíôá÷ïῦ ãßíåôáé .
Ecc_1:10. Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new ? it hath been already of old time which was before us.—The first half of this verse is a hypothetical preliminary clause, introduced by éֵùׁ ãָּáָø to which is added the after clause without a copula, for the sake of greater emphasis; comp. similarly formed conditional sentences in Ecc_1:18.— ëְּáַø , long ago, already long since (Sept. ἥäç ; Vulg. jam), is one of the characteristic Aramaic particles of the book, allied to ëִּáְøָä “greatness, length,” and the Arab. Kibar, great age; (comp. Introd. § 4, Obs. 2). The word ìְòìָֹîִéí , added as a more special definition, indicates that the meaning of “long ago” is to be understood in the sense of time of external length; or also that it continues in endless spaces of lime; for the preposition ìְ , in the sense of “within,” comp. Gen_7:4; Ezr_10:8, and Elster on this passage.—Instead of àֲùֶׁø äָéåּ there stands at the close àֲùֶׁø äָéָä îִìְּôָּðֵéðåּ because äָéָä is used impersonally, in the sense: “there have been” (comp. Gen_47:24; Exo_12:49); an enallage numeri, that could easily occur with a neuter plural like òìָֹîִéí . Ewald takes the words as subject of the sentence, and translates them thus: “what occurred before our eyes had already been long ago.” But this position of the subject at the end of the sentence would be harsh and without motive; and for îִìְּôָðֵéðåּ , which means according to Isa_41:26 simply “before us, earlier than we,” would necessarily stand ìְôָðֵéðåּ if the translation “before our eyes, in our presence,” were the correct one.
Ecc_1:11. There is no remembrance of former things.—Clearly an explanation of the thought of the preceding verse, which we need not (as Hitzig and Elster) connect with what precedes through the conception: “that our considering old things as new is because of the continual extinction of the remembrance of former things.” For the construct state æִëְøåֹï before a following noun with a preposition, comp. similar cases, as Ezekiel 13, 2Sa_1:21.— øִàùֹׁðִéíַ and àַäֲøֹðִéí signify every where the earlier and the later ones (Lev_26:45; Deu_19:14; Psa_79:8; Isa_61:4; also Ecc_4:16 of this book, consequently ancestry and posterity. The neuter idea, “the earlier,” would necessarily be expressed by the feminine øִàùֹׁðåֹú (Isa_42:9; Isa_46:9; Isa_48:3).—With those that shall come after.— ìָàַçֲøֹðåֹú in future, later. Comp. for the substantive àַäֲøֹðָä , Deu_13:9; 2Sa_2:26.
6. Second Division. Proposition and first strophe. Ecc_1:12-15. In a subjective view human knowledge proves futile and vain, in so far as all the desires and enterprises of men, to which it is directed, are empty and vain, and lead to nothing. I, the preacher, was King over Israel in Jerusalem.—Observe the preterit, äָéִéúִé , I was—a clear indication that a later personage than the historical Solomon says this. For even in his most advanced age Solomon, who, according to 1Ki_11:40-43, was reigning king until his death, could not have spoken of his kingdom as something belonging solely to the past. For the remaining allusions in this verse to a period later than the Solomonic, see above on Ecc_1:1 (No. 1), and the Introduction, § 4. And moreover the author, assuming the character of Solomon, indicates for his own person a condition in life which affords him a broad view, rich experience, and knowledge of men; comp. Sir_38:24 ff.
Ecc_1:13. And I gave my heart to seek and search out by wisdom.—That is, I gave it entirely to that seeking, exerted myself zealously on that account; comp. ùִׂéí ìֵá , Isa. 41:42; ùִׁéú ìֵá , Psa_48:14; and äֵëִéï ìֵá , Job_11:13. “To seek” ( ãָּøַùׁ ) and “to search” ( úּåּø ) are distinguished from one another—the former by being less thorough, and the latter by penetrating more deeply and searching after the hidden. áְּäָëְîָä is not “wisely” (Luther, comp. Vulgate, sapienter), but “with wisdom;” for wisdom was the instrument with which he made his investigations; (for the well-known old Hebrew sense, see the Introd. to the Solomonic books, Vol. XII. p. 3 of this work.)—Concerning all things that are done under heaven.—Thereby is clearly meant only the actions and lives of men, and not occurrences in the realm of nature, for which latter the verb ðòùä would be very unfittingly chosen. And what has happened in itself is not so much meant as its character, worth, aim and success as an object of seeking and searching; therefore, to search concerning all things that are done ( òַì ëָּì åâå ).—This sore travail, etc.—Human action itself is not designated here as òִðֲéï øָò , as sore travail or pain (Hitzig, Hahn), but the zealous searching, the critical endeavor of the wise observer of life, who every where meets only vanity and emptiness, and with all his theoretical and practical experimenting with life, reaches no lasting enjoyment and success (and thus with justice the most exegetists; see Elster on this passage).—God hath given to the sons of man to be exercised therewith.—This unsuccessful and vain striving after wisdom, to which man feels himself impelled by a natural necessity, is imparted to him by God himself; it is a part of the salutary and disciplinary curse that God has laid on human nature -since the fall, a “part of the whole system by which the Lord humbles fallen man, and therewith prepares the redemption” (Hengstenberg).
Ecc_1:14. I. have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and behold, all is vanity and vexation of spirit.—(Lit., “windy effort,” i.e., “an effort of the wind”) (Sept. ðñïáßñåóéò ðíåýìáôïò ) an effort without result, that effects no lasting good. Comp. Hos_12:2, which passage gives us at the same time the proper sense of the expression øְòåּú . For the formula øãó ÷ãéí there used parallel with øָòָä øåּçַ , “to consume wind,” really means to follow after the wind, to be in quest of it, a diligent striving after it (comp. øòä in passages like Pro_13:20; Pro_15:14; Isa_44:20). øְòåּú is consequently the bearing, the intension of one zealously aiming at, consequently striving, continuous direction of the will (thus also Ezra 5:7, 18), the same as øַòְéåֹï , which in Ecc_1:17; Ecc_4:16 is also found connected with øåּçַ . It is therefore erroneous to derive it from øòò = øöõ , to shatter, to break into pieces (thus the Vulg. “afflictio spiritus,” also Chald. Raschi et at).
Ecc_1:15. That which is crooked cannot be made straight, and that which is wanting cannot be numbered.—Clearly a proverbial sentence, which the author perhaps found ready made in the rich treasury of the proverbial wisdom of his people, and used here to strengthen what he had said in Ecc_1:14. The sense is, as the parallel passage, Ecc_7:13, shows, that human action and effort, in spite of all exertion, cannot alter that which has once been arranged and fixed by God. “Man cannot alter what is (apparently) unjust in God’s arrangement of the world, nor make or regard its failures perfect; hemmed in within the narrow limits of the world as it is constituted, he is not able to perform the most important thing that he above all things should be able to do” (Hitzig). This thought is not fatalistic (as Knobel. supposes); for, as numerous other passages of this book show (namely, Ecc_3:17; Ecc_7:20 ff.; Ecc_11:9; Ecc_12:14), the author knows very well that human sin is the cause of the incapacity here described in contrast with the unchangeable and divine order of the world, and considers this inability as one of self-guilt on the part of man.—“That which is wanting cannot be numbered,” i.e., not completed, not be brought to its full number; comp. the Lat. ad numeros suos redigi=perfici, and also our German proverbs: “Where there is nothing, nothing farther is to be counted;” or, “There the emperor has lost his right,” etc.
7. Second Division, second strophe. Ecc_1:16-18. Practically experiencing wisdom, striving after positive knowledge, is, as the critically observing, thoroughly futile, reaching no lasting result, because its acquirement is inseparably connected with pain and discouragement.—I communed with my own heart, saying, i.e., I entered inwardly into my own counsel; comp. the Lat. cogitare cum animo suo, and in the Hebrew similar phrases ãִּáֵּø áְּìִáּåֹ , Psa_15:2; ãּ àֶìÎìִáּåֹ , Gen_24:45; òַì ìִáּåֹ , 1Sa_1:13.—Lo, I am come to great estate, and have gotten more wisdom.—The word äִâְãַּìְúִé (comp. Isa_28:29) intimates that he possessed great wisdom before; the word äåֹñַôְúִּé , that during his life he continually increased it. Comp. 1Ki_5:9-11.—Than all they that have been before me in Jerusalem.—The first òַì is comparative, as in Gen_48:22; Psa_16:2. From the second òַì before éְøåּùָׁìָéִí it appears that with the here mentioned predecessors of Koheleth real kings are meant (comp. also Ecc_2:7). The allusion here can scarcely be to the old Canaanitish princes (Adoni-zedek, Jos_10:1; or, indeed, Melchisedec, Gen_15:18), but to the crowned heads of Israel, who alone were competent to the realization of çëîä . This passage contains, again, therefore, a reference to the difference between the author of this work and Solomon, but still not one of that kind that we are justified in reproaching him (with Hitzig) of ignorance of history. He rather commits this offence against actual history with the same absence of suspicion and purpose which permitted him to adapt his work only loosely and distantly to the personal and temporal relations x and every where to dispense with the strict carrying out of the historical fiction in question. (Comp. Introd. § 4).—Yea, my heart had great experience of Wisdom and knowledge.—Concerning ãַּòַú as synonym of çָëְîָä comp. Pro_1:2. “To see, to behold wisdom and knowledge,” is as much as acquiring it by experience, arriving at its possession and enjoyment. This beholding is attributed to the heart, because it is indeed the seat or instrument of aspiration after Wisdom , 9 see Ecc_1:13; Ecc_1:17.
Ecc_1:17. And I gave my heart to know wisdom and to know madness and folly—that is, I applied myself to learning not only the positive and normal contents of human knowledge, but also its counterpart, error and perversion in their various forms; according to the principle: contrariis contraria intelliguntur. äֹìֵìåּú = äåֹìֵìåּú , Ecc_10:13; comp. the similar formation çָëְîåּú , Pro_1:20; Pro_9:1, etc., and Ewald, Manual, § 165 c), and ùִׂëְìåּú , want of sense and folly are also thus placed together in Ecc_2:12 only, that the latter word is written ñִëְìåּú with more etymological exactness (comp. also Ecc_2:3; Ecc_2:13, etc.).—I perceived that this also is vexation of spirit. For øַòְéåֹï øåּçַ see Ecc_1:14; and comp. øַòְéåֹï ìִáּå the striving of his heart, Ecc_2:22, as well as the same word in the Chaldee of the Book of Daniel (Ecc_4:16; Ecc_5:6; Ecc_5:10; Ecc_7:28), where it signifies thought. æֶä äåּà , a pleonasm, of which there are many in the book. Ecc_1:18. For in much wisdom is much grief; and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.—Ger. Proverb: “Much wisdom causeth headache;” also Cicero, Tusc. III. Ecclesiastes 4 : “videtur mihi cadere in sapientem ægritudo,” and what Elster remarks on this passage: “Such an enlargement of the practical knowledge of human life destroys the natural ease and simplicity of the individual life, and by comparisons with others, awaking the consciousness of being variously affected in one’s own existence through influences operating from without, produces a feeling of insignificance and feebleness of each individual life as such; and by exciting man to many aspirations and desires which remain unfulfilled, and therefore leave painful impressions behind. It is still more important to think of the manifold disillusions which a deeper insight of the moral arena in a stricter sense produces, because it not only teaches how confidence in the strength and worth of individuals is often unjustifiable, but also shows how in the great and sacred institutions of humanity, which have originally a purely ethical aim, this ethical object is frequently lost, and that those only exist in reality through a linking of interests that are entirely foreign to their real nature.”— åְéåֹñִéó is an antecedent: “and if one gathers wisdom, if one makes much wisdom.” Ewald, Elster, et al., consider éåֹñִéó (here as well as in Isa_29:14; Isa_38:5) an active participle from the stem reverting from Hiphil, into Kal, with é —instead of—(Ewald, Manual, §127 b.; 169 a) while others find in it simply an impersonal future Hiphil, and compare it on account of the scriptio plena with äåֹñַôְúִּé Ecc_1:16.