chapter i. 17), and =to pleasure= (or mirth), =What doth that do?= (as

this expects the answer No, it is very nearly equivalent to ‘It _does_ nothing.’) (The Syriac reads here (‡ Syriac), ‘What is the usefulness,’ ‘gratification,’ or ‘delight’? It seems then as if the translators of this version recognised a play upon the words ‎‏מה הולל, ‘what a folly,’ and מהולל, ‘befooled,’――this being one of those equivokes in which Koheleth delights. The LXX. render verbatim, as is their custom, τὶ τοῦτο ποῖεις; ‘why doest thou this?’ but possibly with the same intention.)

Koheleth next tries material enjoyment. The meaning of the following passage has been much disputed; we shall follow the rendering suggested by the LXX., which gives clear and intelligible sense.

3 I sought in mine heart │ I tried with my heart to ¹to give myself unto wine, yet │ allure as wine does one’s flesh acquainting mine heart with │ (that heart, however, being wisdom; and to lay hold on │ conducted with wisdom), and so folly, till I might see what │ get a hold over _false_ wisdom, _was_ that good for the sons │ so that I might see thereby of men, which they should do │ where lies the real good to under the heaven ²all the days │ the children of men, when they of their life. │ are working in _this_ world, as │ the tale of their daily lives. ¹ _Hebrew_ to draw my flesh │ [Accordingly] with wine. │ │ ² _Hebrew_ the number of the │ days of their life. │

(3.) =I investigated with my heart= (or _in_ my heart; but the former makes better sense. His heart was the medium through which the investigation was made. He wanted to see if material enjoyment would satisfy his heart, _i.e._ the emotional part of his nature) =in order to a drawing with wine= (the LXX. render ὡς οἶνον, ‘_as_ wine,’ but they probably did not read otherwise than our present text, for this _as_ represents the את which follows) =as to my flesh= (the meaning of the Hebrew is that he drew or enticed with wine with respect to his flesh, and that hence his object in using the wine was to entice the flesh. The rendering of the LXX. is _ad sensum_, preserving also a rendering of each word), =and my heart led= (_i.e._ as a man leads an animal, Psalm lxxx. 1, Isaiah xi. 6. As ‘heart’ is repeated, we have the meaning ‘that same heart’) =with wisdom= (because unless he enjoyed wisely he would not enjoy at all) =and= (repeated in the same clause, equal therefore to ‘and so’) =to lay hold of false wisdom= (סכלוּת, occurs chapters ii. 3, 12, 13, vii. 25, x. 1, 13, and is peculiar to this book. The LXX. render εὐφροσύνην ‘pleasure,’ which, however A² alters to ἀφροσύνη, ‘folly,’ the reason of which will appear presently. The meaning of the root סכל is to ‘play,’ or ‘act the fool,’ and in this respect differs from כסל, which has the idea of ‘stupidity,’ and in the hiphil form, ‘made stupid,’ or ‘befooled.’ In all the ten places in which the root סכל occurs in other parts of Scripture, we find the meaning of elaborateness and subtilty as well as folly; compare 1 Samuel xiii. 13, Saul’s burnt-offering in the absence of Samuel; 2 Samuel xxiv. 10; 1 Chronicles xxi. 8, David’s numbering the people; 2 Chronicles xvi. 9, Asa’s reliance on Syria; 2 Samuel xv. 31, Ahithophel’s counsel; similarly Isaiah xliv. 25, where knowledge is said to be misused; so also סָכָל, occurs Jeremiah iv. 22, v. 21, has evidently the same shade of meaning. It is hard to find a single word which will render it; ‘foolish wisdom’ or ‘clever follies’ are the best combinations that occur. It will be seen also, in referring to the lexicon, that the LXX., who translate by εὐφροσύνη, apparently use the word occasionally in a sinister aspect, see Proverbs xxx. 32, Sira xiii. 8. The Syriac here reads (‡ Syriac word) (see i. 17), ‘prudence,’ ‘intelligence,’ contrary to its interpretation in other places. On the whole, however, it is not difficult to see why the LXX. rendered as they did. That this pleasure was of a bad kind, or deceptive, the sequel shows, but it may be doubted whether their rendering preserved the meaning of סכ״, even if, which is not impossible, they themselves understood it). =Until I= should =see where= (in the sense of whereabouts, see 1 Samuel ix. 8) is =this good to the sons of Adam, which= (full relative, referring back to the whole idea, equivalent therefore to ‘what _good_ it is which’) =they do under the sun the number of the days of their lives= (this phrase occurs chapter ii. 3, v. 18 (17), vi. 12, as ‘the tale,’ or ‘account of the days,’ of their lives; an additional limitation to the words ‘under the sun’). In making this experiment he began to _work_ and _toil_ more than ever.

4 I made me great works; I │ I increased my works. builded me houses; I planted │ me vineyards: │ (1.) I built for _myself_ │ houses. │ │ (2.) I planted for _myself_ │ vineyards.

(4.) =I increased my work, I built for myself= (this emphatic ‘myself’ occurs eight times in the passage, and is therefore its key-word) =houses, I planted for myself vineyards.=

5 I made me gardens and │ (3.) I made for _myself_ orchards, and I planted trees │ gardens and parks, and planted in them of all _kind of_ │ in them fruit-trees of every fruits: │ kind.

(5.) =I made for myself gardens and parks, and planted in them trees of every kind of fruit.= It should have been mentioned that פרדס is also considered to afford an indication of late composition. It is said to be a Persian word; it occurs, however, Nehemiah ii. 8; Canticles iv. 10. The word admits of Semitic derivation, from פרד, ‘to divide,’ ‘cut off in portions,’ ‘lay out.’ If it be really an exotic, no date of introduction is more probable than that of Solomon. It is also to be noted that in the context it _follows_ the word ‘gardens,’ which is quite natural if it were intended to denote a foreign luxury recently introduced.

6 I made me pools of water, │ (4.) I made for _myself_ to water therewith the wood │ reservoirs with which to that bringeth forth trees: │ irrigate meadows and growing │ copses.

(6.) =I made for myself pools of water to irrigate from them the meadows shooting forth trees.= (This, which contains ‘for myself’ _four_ times, the first _half_ of the seven, consists of an enumeration of immoveable objects, or what the law calls real property, the others which follow are moveables or personal.)

7 I got _me_ servants and │ (5.) I purchased slaves and maidens, and had ¹servants │ maidens, and had for _myself_ born in my house; also I had │ home-born servants, besides great possessions of great and │ herds of great and small small cattle above all that │ cattle, more numerous than were in Jerusalem before me: │ any of my predecessors in │ Jerusalem. ¹ _Hebrew_ sons of my house. │

(7.) =I obtained slaves and maidens, and sons of my house= (home-born slaves, that is) =were= belonging to =myself, besides possessions of herd and flock; many= such were belonging =to myself; more than all who were before me in Jerusalem.=

8 I gathered me also silver │ (6.) I procured for _myself_ and gold, and the peculiar │ silver and gold and precious treasure of kings and of │ objects of every kingdom and the provinces: I gat me │ province. men-singers and women-singers, │ and the delights of the sons │ (7.) I obtained for _myself_ of men, _as_ ¹musical │ men-singers and women-singers, instruments, and that of all │ every delight that man can sorts. │ enjoy, to the very ecstasy of │ ravishment. ¹ _Hebrew_ musical │ instruments and │ instruments. │

(8.) =I gathered for myself, moreover, silver and gold, and the peculiar treasure of kings and the provinces. I made for myself= (_i.e. _ procured) =men-singers and women-singers, the delights of the sons of men, outpouring and outpourers.= (The different meanings given to these two last words, שדה ושדות, which occur here only, are various, scarcely a commentary or version agreeing. The LXX. translate a ‘butler’ and ‘female cup-bearers,’ the Vulgate ‘pitchers and vases,’ Ginsburg ‘a concubine and concubines’; but the most probable etymology seems to give the idea of ‘overflowing’ to the word in some sense or other. It is possible then to take the words generally, and interpret them as referring to the overflow, not only of the generous wines, but of all the delights of which wine is a type, as in the words ‘The feast of reason and the flow of soul,’ or like Milton’s――

‘Did ever mortal mixture of earth’s mould Breathe such divine enchanting ravishment?’

The arrangement of these different objects of pleasure is somewhat artificial, as will be seen on examining the grouping.)

9 So I was great, and │ So I was great and increased increased more than all that │ more than all that were ever were before me in Jerusalem: │ before me in Jerusalem, yet also my wisdom remained with │ notwithstanding my wisdom me. │ remained fast with _myself_,

(9.) =And I was great= (rightly the Authorized Version, ‘_so_,’ referring back to verse 4) =and increased more than all= (_all_ now becomes the key-word, which occurs seven times) =which was= (singular, giving the sense than ‘any was’) =before me in Jerusalem; also= (‎‏אף, affirms strongly, see Job iv. 19, ‘but beside,’ for without this provision of a wise enjoyment the experiment was necessarily a failure:) =my wisdom remained= (_i.e._ stood; it is usual to say that עמדה is feminine to agree with חכמה; perhaps it would be equally correct to say that it was an instance of two abstract ideas in apposition, giving the sense ‘was still a thing standing’) =with myself= (emphatic, and the eighth repetition of this word).

10 And whatsoever mine eyes │ and _all_ my eyes desired I desired I kept not from them, │ kept not from them, nor did I I withheld not my heart from │ deny my heart even one of _all_ any joy; for my heart rejoiced │ its joys: for this heart of in all my labour: and this was │ mine did rejoice in my toils, my portion of all my labour. │ and this was what I procured │ for _all_ my toil.

(10.) =And all which asked mine eyes I did not restrain= (or keep back; see Genesis xxvii. 36, Numbers xi. 17, for the meaning, the only other instances where it occurs in Kal.) =from them= (emphatic), =I did not deny my heart from all rejoicing, for my heart rejoiced from all my toil= (_i.e._ there was a certain kind of pleasure derived from doing all this), =and this was my portion= (‘lot’ or ‘inheritance’ from all my toil; equal to our ‘this was all I obtained for my pains’).

11 Then I looked on all │ So I turned to look on _all_ the works that my hands had │ my work my hand had wrought, wrought, and on the labour │ and _all_ my toil which I that I had laboured to do: │ had moiled and done, and lo! and, behold, all _was_ vanity │ that ALL was――evanescent, and and vexation of spirit, and │ vexation of spirit, and nothing _there was_ no profit under │ of profit in this hot work-day the sun. │ world.

(11.) =I turned myself= (פנה differs from סבב; the former is ‘to turn round in order to look,’ the latter is to ‘go round in order to do.’ The distinction is not without importance) =in all my works which worked my hands, and in my toil which I had toiled to work= (notice the occurrence of these words――work, work, toil, toil), =and behold= (a manifest and indisputable conclusion) =the whole was vanity and vexation of spirit, and there was nothing of profit= (_i.e._ over and above the slight amount of present pleasure which he obtained) =under the sun.= (It is especially worthy of remark that while Koheleth found some small pleasure _in_ work, he found none _from_ it. Take, oh men, to your curse kindly, but a curse it is!)

12 ¶ And I turned myself to │ Then I turned myself again behold wisdom, and madness, │ to perceive wisdom in regard and folly: for what _can_ the │ to [its power of detecting] man _do_ that cometh after the │ _false_ hopes and _false_ king? ¹_even_ that which hath │ prudence, for how is any man been already done. │ to enter upon the results of │ that plan which he may have ¹ _Or_, in those things │ made beforehand? which have been already │ done. │

(12.) =And I turned= (this coming immediately after a similar expression, verse 11, rises into emphasis; it equals our ‘again I turned’), =I myself= (emphatic, it was, as above, a personal experience), =to see wisdom and self-deceptions and also false successes= (the meaning of this passage most probably is, that Koheleth desired to see wisdom in conjunction with those two kinds of folly which he denotes respectively by הוללות, false expectations or hopes, see chapter i. 17, and סכלות, false wisdom, that kind of folly which is so either through ignorance or sin, but has to all appearance the semblance of wisdom, see chapter ii. 3. If he could succeed in accomplishing this, he might by his wisdom avoid the mistakes into which men fall). =For= (this must introduce a reason) =what?= (Genesis xx. 10, מָה, Genesis iv. 10, מֶה, both forms being similar in use) is =the man= (with the article; generic therefore, and equivalent to ‘what is the man?’) =who enters= (but as this is the contracted relative, it is equivalent to ‘that he should enter’) =after= (but the word is strictly speaking a noun plural in regimen, and means ‘that which comes after,’ ‘the sequel of’) =the king= (this the LXX. render by βουλῆς, the reasons of which we will discuss presently). =With respect to which= (for the את is emphatic, hence some of the recensions of the LXX. read σὺν τὰ ὅσα) =the present= (the present state of things, כבר in its usual meaning, which it has everywhere in Ecclesiastes, see chapter i. 10) =they make it= עשבהו, third person plural with the affix, which the LXX. refer back to המלך. The meaning of this passage has been much disputed, and our difficulties are not diminished by the very strange rendering of the LXX., which is usually dismissed by commentators as erroneous; an explanation, however, of this rendering will probably clear up the difficulty. We must first notice the corrupt state of the present text of the LXX. The Alexandrine reads ὅτι τίς ἄνθρωπος ἐπελεύσεται ὀπίσω τῆς βουλῆς τὰ ὅσα ἐποίησαν αὐτήν; E. X. read πάντα ὅσα; F. X. σὺν τὰ ὅσα; B. X. ἐποίησεν; and X. αὐτή; Aquila reads ὃς ἐπιλεύσεται ὀπίσω τοῦ βασιλέως; Symmachus, τί δὲ ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἵνα παρακολουθήση βουλῇ; Theodotion, ὃς ἐλεύσεται ὀπίσω τοῦ βασιλέως; but, as Field remarks (Hexapla, p. 384), it is doubtful whether the Syriac text reads (‡ Syriac word), ‘king,’ or (‡ Syriac word), ‘counsel.’ In the same way, Theodotion reads σὺν τὰ ὅσα ἐποίησαν αὐτήν.

We must observe that all these versions, without exception, omit to notice כבר, which everywhere else is noted by ἤδη, being content with τὰ ὅσα or σὺν τὰ ὅσα. The explanation of these difficulties seems to be that המלך was probably intended to be equivocal. It is, to say the least, not impossible that it had, even in Solomon’s time, the meaning of ‘counsel,’ which attaches to it as a usual signification in Aramaic; if so, המלך means _the_ counsel, and of course has the idea of rule as well. Castell gives as the meaning of (‡ Syriac word), ‘Intellectum, Consilium dedit,’ vel ‘inivit,’ ‘Consultavit,’ ‘Promisit,’ ‘Pollicitus est;’ thus we must understand it to mean, ‘plans formed and intended to be carried out.’ The question then which Koheleth asks is this, ‘Who is the man who will enter upon――as we say, _carry out_――his plans with respect to that which in the present moment he makes them or devises them;’ in other words, can he carry out what he now devises, and can _any_ man do this out of the number of human creatures who make these plans? This is the reason of the distributive plural which the best recensions of the LXX. preserve. The equivoke involved in the meaning ‘king’ is obvious. Koheleth himself is, of course, _the_ king: could any one do better than he? It must be allowed that this meaning makes excellent sense with the context, and violates no Hebrew grammar. If, however, I have failed in giving a real interpretation of this most difficult passage, I may be excused a conjecture which is as plausible as many that have been advanced on this point. The corruptions of the old versions may be explained by the fact that the equivoke was lost so soon as readers ceased to have the Hebrew text before them, and hence the attempt to better their text. This most obscure passage may perhaps receive some light from a further discussion of the word כבר and other forms derived from the same root. The feminine or abstract occurs Genesis xxxv. 16, xlviii. 7, and 2 Kings v. 19, joined with ארץ, rendered in the Authorized Version a ‘little’ way. The verb occurs in hiphil, Job xxxv. 16, xxxvi. 31, translated ‘multiplied,’ ‘in abundance;’ and in the hiphil form, with the characteristic _jud̄_ inserted――Job viii. 2, xv. 10, etc.; Isaiah x. 13, xvii. 12, etc.――in the sense of ‘full of years,’ ‘overflowing,’ and the like. A diligent comparison of these meanings shows that ‘fulness,’ in the sense of ‘completeness,’ must be the root-meaning; and hence, when applied to time, the LXX. render ἤδη, ‘already.’ With this meaning agree also the Arabic and Syriac, see Fuerst, Lexicon, _s. voc_. The meaning then of the word is, the ‘_complete_ present.’ With regard to the use of the root מלך in the sense of counsel, it occurs once in Hebrew, viz. Nehemiah v. 7, and once in biblical Chaldee, Daniel iv. 27 (24). This meaning is common, as remarked in the note, in Aramaic. The fair inference from this is, that the root-meaning of the Hebrew word is ‘to counsel,’ just as the root-meaning of the word Apostle is ‘one sent.’ These senses are just what the context requires. Koheleth turns round to see wisdom in comparison with, or contradistinction to, false hopes and false prudence, and asks how the man, that is, humanity, can tell the one from the other. His words are ‘what is,’ not ‘_who_ is the man,’ etc., equivalent to――‘in what way can humanity enter upon the results of the counsel,’ ‘or the king,’――the equivoke being, we believe, intentional, and the contracted relative giving a conditional turn to the sentence――‘with respect to that which at present he performs it.’ It would have been better if the word =with= had been printed in the notes with a small letter, as the division hardly amounts to a period, though the connexion is not close. The suffix of the verb refers back through the relative pronoun to counsel, and might be well rendered into English thus――‘In respect of which he at present takes that counsel.’ The LXX., contrary to their custom, omit ἤδη, because it is perhaps sufficiently included in ἐπελεύσεται, or because τὰ ὅσα ἤδη ἐποίησαν αὐτήν would not have been intelligible. It is evident this all squares with the context. Koheleth, as Solomon, discovered that with all his wisdom he could not practically discern the difference between this true wisdom and that false prudence which led him to accumulate only to be disappointed in his successor.

13 Then I saw ¹that wisdom │ Now, I have myself perceived excelleth folly, as far as │ that there must be a profit to light excelleth darkness. │ wisdom over false prudence as │ great as the profit of light ¹ _Hebrew_ that there is an │ over darkness. excellency in wisdom more │ than in folly, etc. │

(13.) =And I have seen, I= have (with the emphatic I again, as a personal experience) =that there is= (_i.e._ that there really is), =a profit to wisdom above folly= (these same _elaborate_ mistakes which look so like wisdom) =as the profit of the light above the darkness=. (Here profit is repeated, hence the meaning is ‘as great as the profit of light above darkness.’) =The wise, his eyes are in his head, but the fool= (_i.e._ the ‘deceived fool’――notice the hiphil form――equivalent to the befooled, but not necessarily by others――by himself also) =in darkness walks= (hence a wise man ought to be as much better off than a fool as a sighted man is better than one blind, but experience does not confirm this conclusion); =and I know also, I= (emphatic), =that the hap= (_i.e._ the result or what occurs) =is one happening= (present here as opposed to participial noun) =to all of them= (_i.e._ both wise and fools alike――equivalent in our idiom, ‘precisely the same result occurs to all’).

14 The wise man’s eyes _are_ │ The wise has eyes in his head, in his head; but the fool │ the befooled is wandering in walketh in darkness: and I │ the dark; yet I know, as the myself perceived also that one │ result of my own experience, event happeneth to them all. │ that the event to which both │ attain is just alike, so I 15 Then said I in my heart, │ reasoned with myself thus: As it happeneth to the fool, │ Exactly the same event as so it ¹happeneth even to me; │ happens to one befooled has and why was I then more wise? │ happened to me, and therefore Then I said in my heart, that │ why should I make myself wise? this also _is_ vanity. │ Then besides! Why, I said in my │ heart, even this is an instance ¹ _Hebrew_ happeneth to me, │ of evanescence, even to me. │

(14, 15.) =And I said, I did, in my heart= (it was not a right thing to say, but, as we have already noticed, this formula introduces a suggestion more specious than true), =Like the hap of the befooled, so have I happened me= (_i.e._ made my own hap or result), =and why did I make myself wise then in addition?= (The Masorets accent so as to make this the main division of the verse, and consider these three last words to belong to what precedes. The LXX., on the contrary――which adds a gloss after καρδίᾳ μοῦ (διότι ἄφρων ἐκ περισσεύματος λαλεῖ), ‘for the fool speaketh abundantly,’ which is an ancient one, for the Syriac has it also, and varies much in its different recensions――considers them to belong to the following verse. It is difficult on this account to come to a conclusion which is correct, the LXX. or the Masorets; the more that the Masorets themselves hesitate between יתר and יותר. On the whole, one would incline to the following explanation:――take יֶתֶר in its ordinary acceptation, ‘the rest,’ the meaning would thus be ‘then the rest,’ or ‘what results is;’ and suppose the pointing יֹתֵר, a conjecture subsequently strengthened by writing יותר); =and I said= (it was possibly this difficult ו, ‘and,’ which gave rise to the Masoretic conjecture――the LXX. take no notice of it; it is equivalent to ‘_why_ I said’) =that this= (the contracted relative with גם occurs only chapter i. 17, ii. 15, viii. 14, and has a tone of surprise and disappointment, giving the sense apparently that ‘even _this_ wisdom itself! is’) =a vanity= (or an instance of evanescence or transitoriness).

16 For _there is_ no │ because there is no remembrance remembrance of the wise more │ of the wise or the befooled than of the fool for ever; │ either, in the future; because seeing that which now _is_ in │ as time goes on the present the days to come shall all be │ will be forgotten, and fool and forgotten. And how dieth the │ wise will perish alike together. wise _man_? as the fool. │

(16.) =For= (an expansion of the above argument, and a corroboration of the conclusion) =there is nothing= of =remembrance to a wise= (person or thing indefinitely) =with the fool= (but the hiphil form is to be noted, as also the article, the befooled, generically, for a wise action perishes from remembrance amidst the class of fools) =to the age= (_i.e._ so far as the indefinite future is concerned) =by which present= (_i.e._ in the present of that future age or æon it will so happen that) during =the days, the going ones= (meaning, of course, the days as they are passing, or, as we say, ‘in the lapse of time’) =the whole= (the whole of these wise lives and works) =is forgotten= (niphal, ‘becomes a forgotten thing’) =and how then dies the wise? with the fool= (_i.e._ both perish together).

17 Therefore I hated life; │ I was even disgusted with because the work that is │ respect to life itself: for wrought under the sun _is_ │ an evil to _me_ is the work grievous unto me: for all _is_ │ at which I toil in this hot vanity and vexation of spirit. │ work-day world, since the whole │ is evanescent, and vexation of │ spirit.

(17.) =Then hated I, with respect to the lives= (an emphatic את, which the LXX. note by the adverbial σὺν, and meaning not exactly that he hated his own life, as that he felt a disgust with respect to life generally), =because an evil to me= (emphatic with על, giving the notion of pressing upon) =the work which I worked under the sun, because= (כי following in a sentence with כי at the commencement; this particle thus doubled I believe to be often nearly equivalent to our ‘for,’ ‘as,’) =the whole is vanity and vexation of spirit.=

18 ¶ Yea, I hated all my │ I for my part was disgusted labour which I had taken under │ with all my toil that I had the sun: because I should │ moiled at it, in this work-day leave it unto the man that │ world, because I shall leave it shall be after me. │ to the man that succeeds me,

(18.) =I hated then, I myself= (emphatic pronoun, because again we have Koheleth’s personal experience, as we should say, ‘I was disgusted’), =with respect to all my toil which I= (again strongly personal, meaning so far as it was _my_ toil) =had toiled at under the sun that I should leave it= (close relative qualifying the verb, and giving the idea that the grievance was that he would have to leave this work) =to a man= (_i.e._ some man as a human person) =which will be after me.=

19 And who knoweth whether │ and no one knows whether he he shall be a wise _man_ or a │ will be wise or foolishly fool? yet shall he have rule │ clever, and yet he will have over all my labour wherein I │ power over all my toil at which have laboured, and wherein I │ I have moiled, and done so have shewed myself wise under │ wisely in this hot work-day the sun. This _is_ also vanity.│ world: another instance this │ of evanescence.

(19.) =And who knows= (equivalent to ‘no-body does know’) whether =the wise= (with the article, meaning one who belongs to this class, and who will really act wisely) =or a fool?= (סכל――that is, a wisely-foolish person, one whose wisdom will prove a mistake according to the meaning of this word, see chapter ii. 3, references.; and will use this power provided to his hand either amiss, or so as to defeat the end the wise man had in view) =and he has power= (שלט, a favourite word of Koheleth’s; the exact meaning of this term may be found in Psalm cxix. 130) =in all my toil which I have toiled at, and which also I have made myself wise in= (_i.e._ spent my pains wisely in) =under the sun: besides this is vanity= (or, as we should say, ‘moreover this is another instance of vanity or evanescence’).

20 Therefore I went about to │ So then I came round to the cause my heart to despair of │ conclusion that I must bid all the labour which I took │ farewell to any hope of under the sun. │ satisfaction from anything I │ had toiled at in this work-day │ world;

(20.) =I turned round then, I myself, to cause to despair with respect to my heart= (יאש, occurs 1 Samuel xxvii. 1, where the word is used of Saul giving up the search for David in despair) =over the toil which I toiled at under the sun.=

21 For there is a man whose │ because it amounts to this: labour _is_ in wisdom, and │ man, even when he toils wisely, in knowledge, and in equity; │ prudently, and successfully, yet to a man that hath not │ does so for some individual laboured therein shall he │ who has not toiled at all, and leave it _for_ his portion. │ gives it to him to possess: an This also _is_ vanity and a │ instance of evanescence, and great evil. │ very evil.

(21.) =For it is= (this exists as the real state of the case) =man= (_i.e._ one specimen of humanity――this is what humanity is really doing) =which he toils= (= who _is_, or may be, labouring) =with wisdom, and with knowledge, and with success= (כשרון, occurs chapter ii. 21, iv. 4, v. 11, the root occurs Esther viii. 5, chapter xi. 6, x. 10; it is a technical word――a ‘successful issue’ is the meaning; compare the passages. The LXX. render by ἀνδρείᾳ, ‘bravery,’ which is not a bad rendering, since it appears from the above that this success was but temporary), =and to a man who= has =not= (emphatic; the contracted relative joined with the negative shows that his _not_ doing this is the point) =toiled= (_i.e._ taken any trouble) =in it= (emphatic, = ‘in that same’) =he will give it= as =his portion; also this is= a =vanity= and =an evil= which is =great=. (There is a strange sarcastic tone given by the affix in the verb following the emphatic pronoun, ‘to one who has not toiled in _it_ at all will he give that same.’)

22 For what hath man of │ For what comes to a man through all his labour, and of the │ all his toil and vexing his vexation of his heart, wherein │ heart, which he himself toils he hath laboured under the │ at within this work-day world? sun? │

(22.) =For what is there= (הוה, a peculiar form; but is it not possible that this word has been chosen for the sake of the equivoke? הַוָּה, ‘calamity,’ ‘perverseness,’ Job vi. 2, Micah vii. 3, and which makes most pungent and admirable sense) =to a man in all his toil, and in vexing= (רעיון, not רעות; compare chapter i. 18) =his heart which he= himself =toils= at =under the sun?=

23 For all his days _are_ │ Why, every day he spends is a sorrows, and his travail │ trouble, and disappointment the grief; yea, his heart taketh │ result of his anxiety, so that not rest in the night. This is │ even at night his heart gets also vanity. │ no rest. So then this is an │ instance of evanescence itself.

(23.) =For= (as כי is repeated, it becomes emphatic, ‘for now’) =all his days are causing him pain= (or painful――notice the force of the מ־) =and disappointment his anxiety=, (a pregnant sentence, denoting more than his anxiety disappoints, his anxiety is always painful and useless too) =also at night does not rest= (this clause is an additional proof that we have correctly determined the meaning of ♦ענין; it is anxiety which causes wakefulness) even =his heart. Moreover this a vanity it is= (emphatic; so the meaning is, ‘this then _is indeed_ an instance of evanescence’).

♦ “עגין” replaced with “ענין”

24 ¶ _There is_ nothing │ There is no real good then to better for a man, _than_ that │ man in eating or drinking, or he should eat and drink, and │ in supposing he will satisfy _that_ he should make his soul │ himself with his toil. Moreover, enjoy good in his labour. This │ I must make this observation, also I saw, that it _was_ from │ that these things are all in the hand of God. │ the hand of the Almighty,

(24.) The conclusion of this argument now follows, viz.:――This toil is useless, and the reasoning is set out at length. =There is nothing= of a =good= (not לא here, but אין, the former would be required if the meaning were ‘it is not good that’) =in a man= (_i.e._ as an instance of humanity, and the whole is equivalent to ‘It is not to humanity real good that’) =that he should eat and drink, and show his soul= (_i.e._ himself) =good= (repeated, ‘that good’) =in his toil. Moreover this= (pointed זהֹ, feminine or _neuter_, which the LXX. confirm, τοῦτο) =have I seen,= even =I, now from= the =hand= (but ‘the’ is not emphatic at all, which would have required a different construction) of =the Deity= (on the contrary, ‘the’ is emphatic here, and, as will appear, the use of the article is significant) =it is= (emphatic).

25 For who can eat, or who │ for who could eat or even drink else can hasten _hereunto_, │ apart from Him? more than I? │

(25.) =For= (repeated) =who eats or who= even =drinks= (because drinking is possible when eating is not) =apart from him?= (for we read with the LXX. חוץ ממנו, for clearly this makes good sense, and preserves the real meaning of חוץ, which has the signification of ‘without,’ ‘on the outside,’ Genesis vi. 14, Deuteronomy xxv. 5, references.) The phrase ומי יחוש חוץ ממני requires further elucidation. The reading ממנו, supported by the LXX., is also confirmed by Hebrew MSS. The literal rendering is――‘and who hastens outside him.’ This the LXX. translate καὶ τίς πιέται πάρεξ αὐτοῦ, ‘who drinks,’ etc. There is a reading of A², φείσεται, ‘spares.’ The former is supported by Peshito, Arabic, and Theodotion――the latter by Aquila, Symmachus, and Jerome. If the Greek text alone had to be considered, φείσεται would, as the harder reading, be entitled to the preference. It is readily seen, however, that it arose from a conjectural alteration of the Hebrew text into חוס, for which there is no authority; neither will the meaning to ‘spare’ make any sense in the context. As the root occurs frequently, we are driven to the conclusion that the rendering of the LXX. was by design. Schleusner’s conjecture that πίεται is used in the signification of ‘sensibus frui,’ is no doubt correct――compare Habakkuk i. 8, as also Isaiah xxviii. 16. Considered as _ad sensum_, this rendering gives the idea of the Hebrew text correctly.

26 For _God_ giveth to a man │ and so to man just as is right that _is_ good in his sight │ in His sight He gives wisdom wisdom, and knowledge, and │ and knowledge and gladness, but joy: but to the sinner he │ to the transgressor He gives giveth travail, to gather and │ the anxiety of accumulating to heap up, that he may give │ and collecting what is to be to _him that_ is good before │ granted to any, as also is good God. This also _is_ vanity and │ in the sight of God. So this is vexation of spirit. │ another instance of evanescence │ and vexation of spirit.

(26.) =For= (repeated again, so that this word becomes emphatic and prominent. Accordingly _four_ reasons follow, comprising as it were the whole cycle of the argument) =to a man= (still generic, as a specimen of the human race) =which is good before him= (not altogether with the meaning ‘a good man,’ but as ‘God thinks good’) =He gives wisdom,= and =knowledge, and joy; but to the sinner= (_i.e._ the _erring_ sinner) =he gives=, on the other hand, =anxious-travail to collect and to gather= (♦כנס, occurs chapter ii. 8, 26, iii. 5; the meaning is ‘to collect piece by piece;’ see also Psalm xxxiii. 7, 1 Chronicles xxii. 2), =to give it to the good= in =the sight of God= (_i.e._ as God sees fit it should be given); =so this also is vanity and vexation of spirit.=

♦ “כנם” replaced with “כנס”

Thus, then, the first part of the argument is completed. Man obtains nothing by his labour. It is the gift of a mysterious and inscrutable Providence which alone confers any happiness or gratification.