ECCLESIASTES
246
ECCLESIASTES
29, Heb.). Just as little does he contest the freedom
of God's decrees, for God is spoken of as the source of
all wisdom (ii, 2(3; v, 5). His views of life do not lead
Qoheleth to stoical indifference or to blind hatred; on
the contrary he shows the deepest sympathy with the
misery of the suffering and earnestly deprecates oppo-
sition against God. In contentment with one's lot, in
the quiet enjoyment of the blessings given by God, he
discerns the golden mean, by which man prevents the
vagaries of passion. Neither does he thereby recom-
mend a kind of epicurism. For the ever-recurring
phrase, " Eat and drink, for that is the best in this
life", evidently is only a tj^pical formula by which he
recalls man from all kinds of excesses. He recom-
mends not idle, but moderate enjoyment, accompa-
nied by incessant labour. Many persist in laying one
charge at Qoheleth's door, viz., that of pessimism.
He seems to call all man's efforts vain and empty, his
life aimless and futile, and his lot deplorable. It is
true that a sombre mood prevails in the book, that the
author chose as his theme the description of the sad
and serious sides of life: but is it pessimism to recog-
nize the evils of life and to be impressed with them?
Is it not rather the mark of a great and profound
mind to deplore bitterly the imperfection of what is
earthly, and, on the other hand, the peculiarity of the
frivolous to ignore the truth'? The colours with
which Qoheleth paints these evils are indeed glaring,
but they naturally flow from the poetical-oratorical
style of his book and from his inward agitation, which
likewise gives rise to the hyperbolical language in the
Book of Job and in certain psalms. However, Qohe-
leth, unlike the pessimists, does not inveigh against
God and the order of the universe, but only man.
Chap, vii, in which he inquires into the last cause
of evil, closes with the words, " Only this I have
foimd, that God made man right, and he hath en-
tangled himself with an infinity of questions [or phan-
tasms] ". His philosophy shows us also the way in
which man can find a modest happiness. While se-
verely condemning exceptional pleasures and luxury
(chap, ii), it counsels the enjojTnent of those pleasures
which God prepares for every man (viii, 15; ix, 7 sqq.;
xi, 9). It does not paralyze, but incites activity (ix,
10; X, 18 sq.; xi, 1 sq.). It stays him in his afflictions
(v, 7 sqq.; viii, 5; x, 4); it consoles him in death (iii,
17; xii, 7); it discovers at everj' step how necessary is
the fear of God. But Qoheleth's greatest trouble
seems to be his inability to find a direct, smooth an-
swer to life's riddles; hence he so frequently deplores
the insufficiency of his wisdom; on the other hand, be-
sides wisdom, commonly so called, i. e. the n-isdom re-
sulting from man's investigations, he knows another
kind of wisdom which soothes, and which he therefore
recommends again and again (vii, 12, 20; Heb. viii, 1;
Lx, 17; xii, 9-14). It is true, we feel how the author
wrestles with the difficulties which beset his inquiries
into the riddles of life; but he overcomes them and
offers us an effective consolation even in extraordinary
trials. Extraordinary also must have been the occa-
sion which led him to compose the book. He intro-
duces himself from the beginning and repeatedly as
Solomon, and this forcibly recalls Solomon shortly be-
fore the downfall of the empire; but we know from the
Scriptures that this had been prepared by various re-
bellions and had been foretold by the infallible word
of the prophet (see below). We must picture to our-
selves Solomon in these critical times, how he seeks to
strengthen himself and his subjects in this sore trial by
the true wisdom which is a relief at all times; submis-
sion to the immutable will of God, the true fear of the
Lord, undoubtedly must now appear to him the es-
sence of human wisdom.
As the inspired character of Ecclesiastes was not settled in the Fifth fKcumenical Council but only solemnly reaffirmed against Theodore of Mopsuestia, the faithful have always found edification and conso-
lation in this book. Already in the third century, St.
Gregory Thaumaturgus, in his metaphrase, then Cireg-
ory of Nyssa, in eight homilies, later Hugh of St. Vic-
tor, in nineteen homilies, set forth the wisdom of
Qoheleth as truly celestial and Divine. Every age
may learn from his teaching that man's true happiness
must not be looked for on earth, not m human wis-
dom, not in luxury, not in royal splendour; that many
afflictions await everybody, in consequence either of
the iniquity of others, or of his omi passions; that God
has shut him up within narrow limits, lest he become
overweening, but that He does not deny him a small
measure of happiness if he does not " seek things that
are above him" (vii, 1, Vulg.), if he enjoys what God
has bestowed on him, in the fear of the Lord and in
salutarj' labour. The hope of a better life to come
grows all the stronger the less this Ufe can satisfy man,
especially the man of high endeavour. Now Qoheleth
does not intend this doctrine for an individual or for
one people, but for mankind, and he does not prove it
from supernatural revelation, but from pure reason.
This is his cosmopolitan standpoint, which Kuenen
rightly recognized; unfortunately, this commentator
wished to conclude from this that the book originated
in Hellenistic times. Nowack refuted him, but the
universal application of the meditations contained
therein, to every man who is guided by reason, is un-
mistakable.
The Author of the Book. — Most modern commenta- tors are of the opinion that Qoheleth's style points not to Solomon, but to a later writer. About this the fol- lowing may be said : —
(1) .\s a matter of fact, the language of this book differs widely from the language of the Proverbs. Some think that they have discovered many Arama- isms in it. What can we say on this point? — It can- not be gainsaid that Solomon and a great, if not the greatest, part of his people understood Aramaic. (We take the word here as the common name of the dialects closely related to the Biblical Hebrew.) Abraham and Sara, as well as the wives of Isaac and Jacob, had come from Chaldea; it is therefore probable that the language of that country was preserved, beside the language of Palestine, in the family of the Patri- archs; at any rate, in Moses' time the people still use Aramaic expressions. They exclaim (Ex., xvi, 15) Nin )0. while Moses himself at once substitutes the He- brew XirrriD; the name of the miraculous food, how- ever, remained |t3, A large portion of David's and Solomon's empire was peopled by Arameans, so that Solomon reigned from the Euphrates to Gaza [I (III) K., v,4,Heb.; IlSam. (K.),x, 19; cf.Gen.,xv, IS]. Hewas conversant with the science of the "sons of the East" and exchanged with them his wisdom (I K., v, 10-14, Heb.). But, as Palestine lay along the commercial routes between the Euphrates and Phoenicia, the Israelites, at least in the north of the country, must have been well acquainted with Aramaic. At the time of King Eze- chias even the officials of Jerusalem understood Ara- maic (Is., xxxvi, 11; II K., xviii, 26, Heb.). Solomon could therefore assume, without hesitation, a some- what Aramaic speech, if reason or mere inclination moved him. As a skilful wTiter, he may have in- tended, especially in his old age, and in a book whose style is partly oratorical, partly philo.sophical, partly poetical, to enrich the language by new turns. Goethe's language in the second part of " Faust" differs greatly from the first, and introduces many neologisms. Now Solomon seems to have had a more important reason for it. As it lay in his very character to remove the barriers between pagans and Israelites, he may have had the conscious intention to address in this book, one of his last, not only the Israelites but his whole people; the Aramaic colouring of his language, then, served as a means to introduce himself to .-Vramaic readers, who, in their turn, understood Hebrew sufficiently. It is remarkable that the name of God, Jahveh, never oo-
