Online Encyclopedia
Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.
ECCLESIASTES (Heb. n5np, Kohelet, "Ko...
Online EncyclopediaEncyclopedia Home :: DRO-ECG
del.icio.us it!
|
See also:ECCLESIASTES (Heb. n5np, Kohelet, "Koheleth "; See also:Sept. EKKarlveamrils; See also:Jerome concionator) , one of the See also:Wisdom Books of the Old Testament (see WISDOM LITERATURE). The See also:book, as it stands, is a collection of the discourses, observations and aphorisms of a See also:sage called Koheleth, a See also:term the precise meaning of which is not certain. The See also:Greek ecclesiastes means one who takes See also:part in the deliberations of an See also:assembly (See also:ecclesia), a debater or See also:speaker in an assembly (See also:Plato, See also:Gorgias, 452 E), and this is the See also:general sense of the See also:Hebrew word. Its See also:form (singular feminine) has been supposed to be the See also:adoption or See also:imitation of the Arabic employment of a fem. sing. as the designation of a high See also:official See also:person, as is the See also:case in the See also:title See also:caliph (whence the rendering in the margin of the Revised Version, " See also:Great orator "); but the adoption of an Arabic See also:idiom is not probable. This usage is not Hebrew; it is not found either in the Old Testament or in the later (Mishnaic) Hebrew. The form may have been suggested by that of the Hebrew word for " wisdom." Koheleth, however, is employed in the book not as a title of wisdom (for " wisdom " is never the speaker), but as the See also:independent name of the sage. It is intended to represent him as a member of an assembly (Kahal)--not the Jewish See also:congregation, but a See also:body of students or inquirers, such as is referred to in xii. 9-11, a sort of collegium, of which he was the See also:head; and as instructor of this body he gives his See also:criticism of See also:life. The author begins, indeed, with identifying his sage with See also: The rendering " preacher " has a misleading See also:connotation. In the See also:hook as we have it there is no orderly exposition of a theory; it rather has the See also:appearance of a collection of remarks jotted down by a See also:pupil (somewhat after the manner of Xenoohon's Memorabilia), or of extracts from a sage's notebook. Itis, however, characterized throughout (except in some scribal additions) by a definite thought, and pervaded by a definite See also:tone of feeling. The keynote is given in the classic phrase with which the discussion opens and with which it closes: " Vanity of vanities (i.e. See also:absolute vanity), all' is vanity 1 " Life, says the author, has nothing of permanent value to offer. His attitude is one not of bitterness but of See also:calm hopelessness, with an occasional tinge of disgust or contempt. He fancies that he has tried or observed everything in human experience, and his deliberate conclusion is that nothing is See also:worth doing. He believes in an all-powerful but indifferent See also:God, and is himself an observer of society, See also:standing aloof from its passions and ambitions, and interested only in pointing out their emptiness. This general view is set forth in a number of particular observations. I. His fundamental proposition is that there is a fixed, unchangeable See also:order in the See also:world, a reign of inflexible See also:law (i. 4-11, 111. 1-11, 14, 15, vii. 13, viii. 5-9): natural phenomena, such as sunrise and sunset, recur regularly; for everything in human experience a See also:time has been set; See also:birth and See also:death, See also:building up and destroying, laughing and weeping, silence and speech, love and hate, See also:war and See also:peace, are to be regarded not as utterances of a living, self-directing world, but as incidents in the See also:work of a vast See also:machine that rolls on for ever; there is an endless repetition —nothing is new, nothing is lost; if one thinks he has found something new, inquiry shows that it. was in existence See also:long ago; God, the author of all, seeks out the past in order to make it once more See also:present; it is impossible to add to or take from the content of the world, impossible to See also:change the nature of things, to effect any See also:radical See also:betterment of life; the result is unspeakable weariness—a depressing See also:series of See also:sights and sounds. No See also:goal or purpose is discoverable in this eternal See also:round; if the See also:sun rises and goes on his See also:journey through the See also:sky, it is merely to come back to the See also:place where he See also:rose; See also:rivers flow for ever into the See also:sea without filling it. To what end was the world created ? It is impossible to say. Such is Koheleth's view of life, and it is obvious that such a conception of an aimless cosmos is thoroughly non-Jewish, if we may See also:judge Jewish thought by the great body of the extant literature. 2. Further, says Koheleth, See also:man is impelled to study the world, but under the See also:condition that he shall never comprehend it (iii. 1r, vii. 23, 24, viii. 16, 17). As to the meaning of the Hebrew term olam in iii. 1I, there are various opinions, but " world " appears to be the rendering favoured by the connexion: " God has made everything beautiful in its time, and has put the olam into men's minds, yet so that they cannot under-stand His work ": the olam, the sum of phenomena, is God's work. The word is not found in this sense elsewhere in the Old Testament, but it so occurs in the Mishna (Pirke Aboth, iv. 7), and the vocabulary of Ecclesiastes is admittedly similar to that of the Mishna. Only here in the Old Testament does it stand as a See also:simple isolated noun; elsewhere it is the See also:definition of a noun (in " See also:everlasting See also:covenant," &c.), or it is preceded by a preposition, in the phrases " for ever," " of old," or it stands alone (sing. or plur.) in the same adverbial sense, " for ever." The word means first a remote point in past or future, then a future point without limit of time, then a See also:period of See also:history, and finally the world considered as a See also:mass of human experiences (cf. atwv). The renderings " eternity " and " future " in the present passage are unsatisfactory; the former has an inappropriate metaphysical connotation, and yields no distinct sense; the latter does not suit the connexion, though there is reference to the future elsewhere (ix. I). God, the See also:text here declares, has made the world an See also:object of man's thought, yet so that man can never find out the work that God has done (iii. II). The reference seems to be not so much to the variety and complexity of phenomena as to the impossibility of construing them rationally or in such a way that man may foresee and provide for his future. Man is in the clutches of See also:fate (ix. 11, 12): there is no observable relation between exertion and result in life: the See also:race is not to the See also:swift nor the See also:battle to the strong; 1 The Hebrew has the definite See also:article, " the whole," See also:ea ,See also:ray. success does not attend wisdom, knowledge and skill; men are like See also:fish taken in a See also:net or birds caught in a snare. 3. Human life, Koheleth declares, is unsatisfying. He inquired, he says, into everything that is done by men under the sun (i. I2-16): God has inflicted on men a restless See also:desire for See also:movement and work,' yet life is but a See also:catalogue of fruitless struggles. He gives a number of illustrations. In his See also:character of king he tried all the bodily pleasures of life (ii. 1-11): he had houses, vineyards, gardens, parks, ponds, forests, servants, flocks and herds, treasures of See also:gold and See also:silver, singers, wives; all these he set himself to enjoy in a rational way—indeed, he found a certain See also:pleasure in carrying out his designs, but, when all was done, he surveyed it only to see that it was weary and unprofitable. Dropping the role of Solomon and speaking as an observer of life, the author declares (iv. 4) that the struggle for success is the result of rivalry among men, which has no worthy outcome. The securing of riches is a fallacious achievement, for often See also:wealth perishes by some See also:accident (v. 13 f.), or its possessor is unable to enjoy it (vi. x-3a), or he has no one to whom to leave it, and he cannot keep it—naked man comes into the world, naked he goes out. He does not consider the possibility of deriving enjoyment from wealth by helping the poor or encouraging learning (this latter, indeed, he looks on as vanity), and in general he recognizes no See also:obligation on the part of a man to his See also:fellows. A noteworthy survival of an old belief is found in vi. 3: though a man have the great See also:good See also:fortune to live long and to have many See also:children, yet, if he have not "proper See also:burial the See also:blank darkness of an untimely birth is better than he: this latter is merely the negation of existence; the former, it appears to be held, is See also:positive misfortune, the loss of a desirable place in Sheol, though elsewhere (ix. 5) existence in Sheol is represented as the negation of real life. It is not necessary to suppose that the writer has here any particular case in mind. If wealth be thus a vain thing, yet a sage might be supposed to find See also:satisfaction in wisdom, that is, See also:practical good sense and sagacity; but this also the author puts aside as bringing no lasting See also:advantage, since a See also:wise man must finally give up the See also:fruit of his wisdom to someone else, who may be a See also:fool, and in any case the final result for both See also:fools and wise men is the same both are forgotten (ii. 12-23). A particular instance is mentioned (Ix. 13-15) of a beleagured See also:city saved by a wise man; but the man happened to be poor, and no one remembered him. The whole constitution of society, in fact, seems to the sage a lament-able thing: the poor are oppressed, the See also:earth is full of their cries, and there is no helper (iv. I); See also:strange social upheavals may be seen: the poor2 set in high places, the See also:rich See also:cast down, slaves on horseback, princes on See also:foot (x. 5-7). He permits himself a sweeping generalization (vii. 25-28): human beings as a See also:rule are See also:bad: one may occasionally find a good man, never a good woman—woman is a snare and a curse. He (or an editor) adds (vii. 29) that this condition of things is due to social development: man was created upright (Gen. i. 27; See also:Enoch lxix. II), but in the course of history has introduced corrupting complications into life. 4. The natural outcome of these experiences of the author is that he cannot recognize a moral See also:government of the world. He finds, like See also:Job, that there are good men who See also:die prematurely notwithstanding their goodness, and bad men who live long notwithstanding their badness (vii. 15), though long life, it is assumed, is one of the great blessings of man's See also:lot; and in general there is no moral discrimination in the fortunes of men (viii. 14, ix. 2). 5. There is no sacredness or dignity in man or in human life: man has no pre-See also:eminence over beasts, seeing that he and they have the same final fate, die and pass into the dust, and no one knows what becomes of the spirit, whether in man's case it goes up to See also:heaven, and in the case of beasts goes down into Sheol , In fact, he suggests, a curse, as in Gen. iii. 17-19, though with a wider sweep than that passage has in mind. 2 The text has " folly," but the See also:parallelism and v. 7 point to social, not intellectual, conditions, and a slight change (See also:pin for 'non) gives the sense " poor."death is practically the end-all; and so poor a thing is life that the dead are to be considered more fortunate than the living, and more to be envied than either class is he who never came into existence (iv. 2, 3). It is a See also:special grievance that the wicked when they die are buried with pomp and ceremony, while men who have acted well are forgotten3 in the city (viii. Io). 6. That the author does not believe in a happy or active future life appears in the passage (iv. 2, 3) quoted above. The old Hebrew view of the future excluded from Sheol the See also:common activities of life and also the See also:worship of the See also:national god (Isa. xxxviii. 18); he goes even beyond this in his conception of the blankness of existence in the underworld. The living, he says, at least know that they shall die, but the dead know nothing—the memory of them, their love, hate and envy, perishes, they have no See also:reward, no part in earthly life (ix. 5, 6); there is absolutely no knowledge and no work in Sheol (ix. to). His conclusion is that men should do now with all their might what they have to do; the future of man's vital part, the spirit, is wholly uncertain. 7. His conception of God is in See also:accord with these views. God for him is the creator and ruler of the world, but hardly more; he is the See also:master of a vast machine that grinds out human destinies without sympathy with man and without visible regard for what man See also:deems justice—a being to be acknowledged as See also:lord, not one to be loved. There can thus be no social contact between man and God, no communion of soul, no See also:enthusiasm of service. Moral conduct is to be regulated not by divine law (of this nothing is said) but by human experience. The author's See also:theism is See also:cold, spiritless, without See also:influence on life. If now the question be asked what purpose or aim a man can have, seeing that there is nothing of permanent value in human work, an See also:answer is given which recurs, like a refrain, from the beginning to the end of the book, and appears to be from the See also:hand of the See also:original author: after every description of the vanity of things comes the See also:injunction to enjoy such pleasures as may fall to one's lot (ii. 24, 25, iii. I2, 13, 22, V. 18, 19, viii. 15, ix. 7-10, xi. 7-xii. 7). Elsewhere (ii.), it is true, it is said that there is no lasting satisfaction in pleasure; but the sage may mean to point out that, though there is no permanent outcome to life, it is the part of common-sense to enjoy what one has. The opportunity and the See also:power to enjoy are represented as being the See also:gift of God; but this statement is not out of accord with the author's general position, which is distinctly theistic. All the passages just cited, except the last (xi. 7-xii. 7), are simple and See also:plain, but the bearing of the last is obscured by interpolations. Obviously the purpose of the See also:paragraph is to point out the wisdom of enjoying life in the time of youth while the See also:physical See also:powers are fresh and strong, and the impotency of old See also:age has not yet crept in. Omitting xi. 8c, 9b, lob, xii. la, the passage will read: " Life is pleasant in the See also:bright sunshine—however long a man may live, he must be cheerful always, only remembering that dark days will come. Let the See also:young man enjoy all the pleasures of youth, putting away everything painful, before the time comes when his bodily powers decay and he can enjoy nothing." To relieve the apparent Epicureanism of this passage, an editor has inserted reminders of the vanity of youthful pleasures, and admonitions to remember God and His See also:judgment. The author, however, does not recommend dissipation, and does not mean to introduce a religious motive—he offers simply a counsel of prudence. The exhortation to remember the Creator in the days of youth, though it is to be retained in the margin as a pious editorial addition, here interrupts the See also:line of thought. In xii. la some critics propose to substitute for " remember thy Creator " the expression of xi. 9, " let thy See also:heart cheer thee "; but the repetition is improbable. Others would read: " re-member thy cistern " (Bickell), or " thy well " (See also:Haupt), that is, thy wife. The wife is so called in Prov. v. 15-19 in an elaborate poetical figure (the wife as a source of bodily pleasure), in which the reference is clear from the context; but there is no authority, in the Old Testament or in other literature of this period, for
1 The See also:Septuagint has less well: " They (the wicked) are praised in the city."
taking the term as a simple See also:prose designation of a wife. Nor would this reference to the wife be appropriate in the connexion, since the writer's purpose is simply to urge men to enjoy life while they can. The paragraph (and the original book) concludes with a sustained and impressive figure; in which the failing body of the old man is compared to a See also:house falling into decay: first, the bodily See also:organs (xii. 3, 4a) : the keepers of the house (the arms and bands) tremble, the strong men (the legs and perhaps the backbone) are See also:bent, the grinding See also:women (the See also:teeth) cease to work, those that look out of the windows (the eyes) are darkened, the See also:street-doors are shut, the See also:sound of the See also: 4 may refer to the old man's inability to make or hear See also:music: in the house there is no sound of birds 1 or of singers, there are none of the See also:artistic delights of a well-to-do See also:household; further (v. 5a) the inmates of the house fear dangers from all powerful things and persons (the old man is afraid of everything), the See also:almond See also:tree blossoms (perhaps the See also:hair turns See also: 16, 17, X. 2, 3), though it is elsewhere denounced as worthless. It may be said that the author, while denying that wisdom (practical sagacity and level-headedness) can give permanent satisfaction, yet admits its practical value in the conduct of life. This may be so; but it would be strange if a writer who could say, " in much wisdom is much grief," should deliberately See also:laud wisdom. The question is not of great importance and may be See also:left undecided. It may be added that there are in the book a number of aphorisms about fools (v. 3[4], vii. 5, 6, x. I-3, 12-15) quite in the See also:style of the book of See also:Proverbs, some of them contrasting the wise man and the fool; these appear to be the insertions of an editor. Further, it may be concluded with reasonable certainty that the passages that affirm a moral government of the world are additions by pious editors who wished to bring the book into See also:harmony with the orthodox thought of the time. Such assertions as those of ii. 26 (God gives joy to him who pleases him, amd makes the sinner toil to See also:lay up for the latter), viii. 12 (it shall be well with those that fear God, but not with the wicked), xii. 13 f. (man's See also:duty is simply to obey the commands of God, for God will bring everything into judgment) are irreconcilable with the oft-repeated statement that there is no difference in the earthly lots of the righteous and the wicked, and no ethical life after death. Many practical admonitions and homely aphorisms are scattered through the book : iv. 5, quiet is a blessing ; iv. 9-12, two are better than one; iv. 17 (Eng. v. I), be reverent in visiting the house of God (the See also:temple and the connected buildings) The clause is obscure; literally " he (or, one) rises at (?) the See also:voice of the See also:bird," usually understood to refer to the old man's inability to See also:sleep in the See also:morning; but this is not a universal trait of old age, and besides, a reference to affairs in the house is to be expected; the Hebrew construction also is of doubtful correctness. A change of the Hebrew text seems necessary; possibly we should read Sip 'ma', " low is the voice," instead of 'op5 See also:alp,. "he rises up at the voice." 2 The second is perhaps to be read: " the See also:caper-See also:berry blooms " (white hair) ; usually " the caper-berry loses its appetizing power "; Eng. Auth. Vers. " desire shall fail." For the meaning of the word abyona (" caper-berry," not " desire " or " poverty "), see See also:art. by G. F. See also:Moore in Journ. of Bibl. Lit. x. 1 (See also:Boston, Mass., 1891).to listen (to the service of See also:song or the See also:reading of Scripture) is better than to offer a foolish (thoughtless) See also:sacrifice; v. 1 (2), be sparing of words in addressing God; v. 1-5 (2-6), pay your vows—do not say to the See also:priest's messenger that you made a See also:mistake; vii. 2-4, sorrow is better than mirth; vii. 16-18, be not over-righteous (over-attentive to details of See also:ritual and See also:convention) or over-wicked (flagrantly neglectful of established beliefs and customs); here "righteous " and " wicked " appear to be technical terms designating two parties in the Jewish world of the 2nd and 1st centuries B.C.', the observers and the non-observers of the Jewish ritual law; these parties represent. in a general way the See also:Pharisees and the See also:Sadducees; viii. 2-4, x. 20, it is well to obey See also:kings and to be cautious in speaking about them, for there are talebearers everywhere; vii. 20, no man is See also:free from See also:sin; vii. 21, do not listen to all that you may overhear, lest you hear yourself See also:ill spoken of; ix. 4, a living See also:dog is better than a dead See also:lion ; xi. 1-6, show prudence and decision in business; do not set all your goods on one venture; See also:act promptly and See also:hope for the best. At the See also:close of the book (xii. 9-12) there are two observations that appear to be editorial recommendations and cautions. First, Koheleth is endorsed as an industrious, discriminating and instructive writer. Possibly this is in reply to objections that had been made to what he had written. There follows an obscure passage (v. 11) which seems to be meant as a See also:commendation of the teaching of the sages in general: their words are said to be like goads (inciting to See also:action) and like nails driven in a building (giving firmness to character); they issue from masters of assemblies,3 heads of See also:academies (but not of the Sanhedrin). The succeeding clause " they are given from one shepherd " may refer to a collection or revision by one authoritative person, but its relevancy is not obvious. The " shepherd " cannot be God (Gen. xlix. 24; Ps. See also:xxiii. I); the poetical use of the word would not be appropriate here. The clause is possibly a See also:gloss, a comment on the preceding expression. A caution against certain books is added (v. 12), probably See also:works then considered harmful (perhaps philosophic See also:treatises), of which, however, nothing further is known. See also:Composition of the Book.—If the See also:analysis given above is correct, the book is not a unit; it contains passages mutually contradictory and not harmonizable. Various attempts have, been made to establish its unity. The See also:hypothesis of " two voices " is now generally abandoned; there is no indication of a debate, of affirmations and responses. A more plausible theory is that the author is an honest thinker, a keen observer and critic of life, who See also:sees that the world is full of miseries and unsolved problems, regards as futile the attempts of his time to demonstrate an ethically active future life, and, recognizing a divine author of all, holds that the only wise course for men is to abandon the See also:attempt to get full satisfaction out of the struggle for pleasure, riches and wisdom, and to content them-selves with making the best of what they have. This conception of him is largely true, as is pointed out above, but it does not harmonize the contradictions of the book, the discrepancies between the piety of some passages and the emotional indifference toward God shown in others. Other of the Biblical Wisdom books (Job, Proverbs) are compilations—why not this? It is not necessary to multiply authors, as is done, for example, by Siegfried, who supposes four See also:principal writers (a pessimistic philosopher, an Epicurean glossator, a sage who upholds the value of wisdom, and an orthodox editor) besides a number of annotators; it is sufficient to assume that several conservative See also:scribes have made See also:short additions to the original work. Nor is it worth while to attempt a logical or symmetrical arrangement of the material. It has been surmised (by Bickell) that the sheets of the original codex became disarranged and were rearranged incorrectly;' by other critics portions of the book are transferred $ This is the Talmudic understanding of the Hebrew expression (erus. Sanhed. to, 28a, cf. Sanhed. tut; see Ecclus. xxxix. 2). There is no good authority for the renderings " collectors of See also:maxims, " " collections of maxims.' 4 It is not certain that the codex form was in use in See also:Palestine-or in See also:Egypt as See also:early as the and or the 1st See also:century B. C. hither and thither; in all cases the critic is guided in these changes by what he conceives to have been the original form of the book. But it is more probable that we have it in the form in which it See also:grew up—a series of observations by the original author with interspersed editorial remarks; and it is better to preserve the existing form as giving a See also:record of the See also:process of growth. Date.—As to the date of the book, though there are still See also:differences of See also:opinion among scholars, there is a See also:gradual approach to a consensus. The Solomonic authorship has long since been given up: the See also:historical setting of the work and its atmosphere—the silent See also:assumption of monotheism and monogamy, the non-national tone, the attitude towards kings and See also:people, the picture of a complicated social life, the See also:strain of philosophic reflection—are wholly at variance with what is known of the loth century B.C. and with the Hebrew literature down to the 5th or 4th century B.C. The introduction of Solomon, the ideal of wisdom, is a literary device of the later time, and probably deceived nobody. The decisive considerations for the determination of the date are the See also:language, the historical background and the thought. The language belongs to the See also:post-classical period of Hebrew. The numerous Aramaisms point to a time certainly not earlier than the 4th century B.C., and probably (though the history of the penetration of Aramaic into Hebrew speech is not definitely known) not earlier than the 3rd century. More than this, there are many resemblances between the See also:dialect of Koheleth and that of Mishna. Not only are new words employed, and old words in new significations, but the grammatical structure has a See also:modern stamp—some phrases have the appearance of having been translated out of Aramaic into Hebrew. By about the beginning of our era the See also:Jews had given up Hebrew and wrote in Aramaic; the process of See also:expulsion had been going on, doubtless, for some time; but comparison with the later extant literature (See also:Chronicles, the Hebrew See also:Ecclesiasticus or See also:Ben-Sira, See also:Esther) makes it improbable that such Hebrew as that of Koheleth would have been written earlier than the 2nd century B.C. (for details see See also:Driver's Introduction). The general historical situation, also, presupposed or referred to, is that of the period from the See also:year 200 B.C. to the beginning of our era; in particular, the See also:familiar references to kings as a part of the social See also:system, and to social dislocations (servants and princes changing places, x. 7), suggest the troublous time of the later Greek and the Maccabean rulers, of which the history of See also:Josephus gives a good picture. The conception of the world and of human life as controlled by natural law, a naturalistic cosmos, is See also:alien not only to the prophetic and liturgical Hebrew literature but also to Hebrew thought in general. Whether borrowed or not, it must be See also:late; and its resemblance to Greek ideas suggests Greek influence. The supposition of such influence is favoured by some critics (See also:Tyler, See also:Plumptre, See also:Palm, Siegfried, See also:Cheyne in his Jewish Religious Life after the See also:Exile, and others), rejected by some (See also:Zeller, See also:Renan, Kleinert and others). This disagreement comes largely from the attempts made to find definitely expressed Greek philosophical dogmas in the book; such formulas it has not, but the general See also:air of Greek reflection seems unmistakable. The the See also:scepticism of Koheleth differs from that of Job in quality and See also:scope: it is deliberate and calm, not wrung out by See also:personal suffering; and it relates to the whole course and constitution of nature, not merely to the injustices of fortune. Such a conception has a Greek tinge, and would be found in Jewish circles, probably, not before the 2nd century B.C. A precise indication of date has been sought in certain supposed references or allusions to historical facts. The mention of persons who do not sacrifice or take oaths (ix. 2) is held by some to point to the See also:Essenes; if this be so, it is not chronologically precise, since we have not the means of determining the beginning of the movement of thought that issued in Essenism. So also the coincidences of thought with Ben-Sira (Ecclesiasticus) are not decisive: cf. iii. 14 with B.S. xviii. 6; v. 2-6 (3-7) with B.S. xxxiv. 1-7; vii. IQ with B.S. See also:xxxvii. 14; X. 8 with B.S. See also:xxvii. a6a; xi. io with B.S. See also:xxx. 21; xii. Io, II with B.S. xxxix. 2 ff.;xii. 13 with B.S. xliii. 27; if there be borrowing in these passages, it is not clear on which See also:side it lies; and it is not certain that there is borrowing—the thoughts may have been taken independently by the two authors from the same source. In any case, since Ben-Sira belongs to about 18o B.C., the date of Koheleth, so far as these coincidences indicate it, would not be far from 200 B.C. The contrast made in x. 16 f. between a king who is a boy and one who is of See also:noble birth may allude to historical persons. The See also:antithesis is not exact; we expect either " boy and mature man " or " low-See also:born and high-born." The " See also:child " might be See also:Antiochus V. (164 B.C.), or See also:Ptolemy V., Epiphanes (204 B.C.), but the reference is too general to be decisive. The text of the obscure passage iv. 13-16 is in bad condition, and it is only by considerable changes that a clear meaning can be got from it. The two personages—the " old and foolish king " and the " poor and wise youth "—have been supposed (by. Winckler) to be Antiochus Epiphanes (175-164 B.C.) and See also:Demetrius (162-150 B.C.), or (by Haupt) Antiochus and the impostor See also: 25 simple prose, vii. contains a number of poetical aphorisms, and so on. Some of the verses are apparently from the author, some from editors. The fortunes of the book are not known in detail, but it is clear that its merciless criticism of life and its literary See also:charm made it popular, while its scepticism excited the apprehensions of pious conservatives. Possibly the Wisdom of Solomon (c. 50 B.C.) was written partly as a reply to it. The claim of sacredness made for it was warmly contested by some Jewish scholars. In spite of the See also:relief afforded by orthodox additions, it was urged that its Epicurean sentiments contradicted the Torah and favoured See also:heresy. Finally, by some process of reasoning not fully recorded, the difficulties were set aside and the book was received into the sacred See also:canon; Jerome (on Eccl. xii. 13, 14) declares that the decisive fact was the orthodox statement at the end of the book: the one important thing is to fear God and keep His commandments. The See also:probability is that the book had received the See also:stamp of popular approbation before the end of the 1st century of our era, and the leading men did not dare to reject it. It is not certain that it is quoted in the New Testament, but it appears to be included in Josephus' See also:list of sacred books. Encycl. Bibl.(by A. B. See also:Davidson) ; See also:Jew.Encycl. (by D. S. Margoliouth). Commentaries: F. See also:Hitzig (1847); C. D. See also:Ginsburg (1861) ; H. Gratz (1871); Tyler (1874); See also:Delitzsch (1875); E. H. Plumptre (1881); C. H. H. See also:Wright (1883); Nowack, revision of Hitzig (1883); Volck (in Strack u. Zdckler's Kurzgef. Komm., 1889) ; Wildeboer (in See also:Marti's Kurzer Hand-See also:Comm., 1898); C. Siegfried (in W. Nowack's Handkomm., 1898); Oort (in De Oude Test., 1899). Other works: C. See also: Renan, L'Ecclesiaste (1882); Bickell, Der Prediger (1884) and Kohel.-Untersuchungen (1886; Engl. by E. J. See also:Dillon, Sceptics of Old Test., 1895) ; Schiffer, Das See also:Buch Koh. nach d. Auffass. d. Weisen d. Talmuds, &c. (1884) ; A. Palm, Qoh. u. d. nach-aristotel. Philosophie (1885) and Die Qoh.-Lit. (1886); E. See also:Pfleiderer, Die Phil. d. Heraklit, &c. (1886); Cheyne, Job and Solomon (1887) and Jew. Relig. Life, &c. (1898); W. Euringer, Der Masorahtext d. Koh. (189o) ; W. T. See also:Davison, Wisdom-Lit. of Old Test. (1894); H. Winkler, in his Altorient. Forschungen (1898); J. F. Genung, Words of Koh. (Boston, Mass., 1904) ; P. Haupt, Ecclesiastes (See also:Baltimore, 1905). The rabbinical discussions of the book are mentioned in Shabbath, Sob; Megilla, 7a; Eduyoth, v. 3; Mishna Yadaim, iii. 5, iv. 6; Midrash Koheteth (on xi. 9), Aboth d' See also:Rab. Nathan, i. (C. H. Additional information and CommentsThere are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML. Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide. |
|
|
[back] ECCLESIA (Gr. EKKX ria, from Lc, out, and Ka)teiv, ... |
[next] ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONERS |