¦fsf,-

'ASM

m

,m.f( I

:i

.if).

I I,;
¦ 'J,'I. s

mk

1' ' '^ -'' (,'
" If

^'."iffe.

!f^*

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

BEING A TRANSLATION
OF THE
BOOK OF KOHELETH
COMMONLY KNOWN AS ECCLESIASTES
STRIPPED OF LATER ADDITIONS
ALSO
ITS ORIGIN, GROWTH AND
INTERPRETATION BY
MORRIS JASTROW, JR., PH.D., LL.D
Professor in the University of Pennsylvania

"Come, fill the Cup and in the fire of Spring
Your Winter-garment of Repentance fling;
The Bird of Time has but a little way
To flutter — and the Bird is on the Wing."
Omar Khayyam

PHILADELPHIA &f LONDON
J. B. LIPPINCOTT COMPANY
1919

COPYaiGHT. I919, BY J. B. LIPPINCOTT COMPANY

YAl-E

PRINTED BY J. B. LIPPINCOTT COMPANY
AT THE WASHINGTON SQUARE PRESS
PHILADELPHIA, U. S. A.

TO
GEORGE AARON BARTON
BRrN Mjttrs COLLEGE
ALBERT TOBIAS CLAY
rjLE VNIfERSITr AND
JAMES ALAN MONTGOMERY
UNiysRSlTr OF fENNSriyANlA

FOREWORD
^HIS work is an endeavor to place
before a general public, and in
popular form, the results of the
critical study of the Old Testa
ment as applied to a single
book in the collection. I have
chosen the book commonly
known as Ecclesiastes, because
of the intensely human interest attaching to this
specimen of the ancient literature of Palestine.
The designation "Ecclesiastes", to be taken in
the sense of one who addresses an Ecclesia i.e., an
assembly, is an attempt on the part of the Greek
translator of the book to render the Hebrew word
Koheleth (pronounced Ko-hay-leth), which is the
name assumed by the author of the book, and the
underlying stem of which means to "assemble."
Since the author, however, wanted us to regard
Koheleth as a proper name, why translate it at all ?
Ecclesiastes is a harsh and forbidding title for a
book that is marked by a singular lightness of touch,
and I have therefore retained throughout this work
the name Koheleth for the book, and have chosen
"A Gentle Cynic" as an appropriate designation
to describe both the character of the book and
the author, who has concealed his personality be
hind a nom de flume. ^
* See p. 65.

I

A GENTLE CTNIC
The book is not only intensely human, it is also
remarkably modem in its spirit. Koheleth belongs
to the small coterie of books that do not grow old.
It does not follow that such books are to be placed
among the great classics of world literature, though
in some instances they do enjoy this distinction, as
in the case of the Book of Job and the Quatrains
of Omar Khayyam, which are likewise remarkably
modern. Nor is the reverse proposition true that
all the great classics have a modern flavor. The
spirit of Homer is that of antiquity, whereas that
of Horace is modern. Moliere is intensely human,
but because he reflects so exclusively the foibles of
his days, he does not make the strong appeal to the
modern world as does Shakespeare, who is human
and modern. Of two authors who are contempor
aneous, one may remain modem and the other
not, though both may be reckoned among the
great. Witness Goethe and Schiller, the former
speaking to the present age in a way that the
latter does not.
Koheleth is modern, because with great literary
skill he deals with those aspects of human life which
are always the same. He is almost brutally frank
in holding the mirror up to life. For all that, he is
neither a scoffer nor a pessimist. He loves life and
has intense sympathy with the struggles and suffer
ings of humanity, but he smiles at the attempts of
zealous reformers to change human nature or to
improve a state of things, which (as he believes)
follows logically from the conditions under which

FOREWORD
mankind carves out its career. Koheleth is not a
cold and severely logical philosopher, intent
upon building up a system of thought, but an
easy-going dilettante who unfolds in a series of
charming, witty and loosely connected causeries
his view of life, as gained by a long and varied
experience. The defects of his attitude towards life are so^ /^^
apparent that they need hardly be pointed out. He
does not pose as a guide to be followed, nor does he
help us in solving the problems of life. He would
be willing to confess that he has no solution, because
— and this is perhaps his chief defect — he sees no
aim in life, no goal towards which mankind is ^
tending. Koheleth is serious in what he says,
though he always speaks with a slight ironical
smile on his lips, but he does not want us to take
him too seriously, just as he himself does not want
to take life too seriously. The human interest
of the book is all the more intense because of
its main conclusion, that life itself is a paradox.
Life is made to be enjoyed, and yet enjoyment
is "vanity." It is a strange book to have slipped into a sa
cred collection. This would never have happened
had the book been permitted to remain in the form
which the author originally gave it. Instead of
taking Koheleth as he was, the attempt was made
by those who did not approve of his tone and of
his attitude to twist his thought to conform to the
conventional views and beliefs of the age. How this

a/'-.

A GENTLE CTNIC
was done will be set forth in detail, in order to
justify my new rendering and to clear up the
various questions raised by the book. The bear
ings of the modifications to which the original book
of Koheleth was subjected on its character as a
sacred book will also be considered.
For the book in its present form is the result
of manipulation at various hands that have made
additions to it in the form of comments, insertions
and counter arguments with a two-fold purpose
in view, to make the utterances in the book con
form to the tradition of Solomon, to whom an
uncritical age ascribed the authorship, and to make
the teachings more palatable to the pious and con
servative, who were to read it as part of a sacred
collection. The result has been to produce an
entirely different book from the one which the
author intended. It is this modified Koheleth —
practically a second Koheleth by the side of the
first one — that has found a place in the sacred col
lection. If we wish to get back to the real Koheleth,
we must lop off all additions made to it, which addi
tions constitute over one-fourth of the present book.
I This I have done in the translation, with an indi
cation at each point of the extraneous material and
an explanation of its character and purpose.
The thought of the book as it stands in our
Bible translations cannot possibly be clear to the
general reader. Those who manipulated the text
of the original Koheleth in order to convert an
unorthodox production into an unobjectionable

FOREWORD
one succeeded in their aim, but at the cost of intro
ducing contradictions and inconsistencies of which
this new Koheleth is full. If we can imagine Homer
or Virgil published with the scholia of later com
mentators put into the body of the text, or the
Quatrains of Omar Khayyam with the comments
and pious reflections of orthodox Mohamme
dans added, as though forming part of the
original, in order to counteract unorthodox senti
ments about "wine, woman and song," one will be
able to form an impression of the text as finally"
fixed and as it now stands in our Bible. At the
same time, while recognizing what commentators
in the interests of orthodoxy have made of Kohe
leth, we must not fall into the error of charging
such commentators with any intention to practice
a wilful deceit. We must always bear in mind that
every production in an age which had not as yet
developed the sense of individual authorship was
subject to constant modification. Such modifica
tion was in part an index of the interest that a
new production had aroused. An ancient book
never received a final form, so long as its message
retained its vitality. The modifications which a
piece of writing underwent might be made by
those who agreed with it, or by those who were
not in sympathy with it. The manipulators of
Koheleth were opposed to its tone and thought,
but they were not conscious of any wrong in
furnishing through additions their answers to
Koheleth's arguments and conclusions, any more

A GENTLE CTNIC
than a modem editor in republishing some philo
sophical or theological treatise would be con
scious of guilt in adding notes to controvert the
position taken by the author whom he is rein
troducing to the public. The separation of an
editor's observations from the body of the text,
as against an incorporation of comments and
super-comments in the text is just the difference
between literary production in an age in which
^ authorship is anonymous or collective, and one
in which authorship has become personal and
distinctive. In my restoration of the original text on the
basis of my own researches, I have also availed
myself of the work of the many scholars, who have
during the past century devoted themselves to
the study of the book with the application of the
critical and historical method that has now become
the universally recognized conditio sine qua non
for an intelligent appreciation of both the Old and
the New Testament. Those who are interested in
questions of technical detail, may be referred to
^Professor George A. Barton's "Critical and Ex-
egetical Commentary on the Book of Ecclesiastes "
(New York, 1908), and to A. H. McNeile's "Intro
duction to Ecclesiastes" (Cambridge, 1904), two
excellent and comprehensive works.
I should like also to mention especially the
valuable textual and critical notes to Koheleth by
Amold B. Ehrlich, many of whose corrections and
interpretations I have adopted. These notes will

FOREWORD
be found in a monumental work, indispensable to
the specialist, under the title "Randglossen zur
Hebraischen Bibel" (Leipzig, 1908-14), in seven
volumes, covering all the books of the Old Testa
ment and embodying the results of a life-long
study of the Bible by this remarkably keen scholar.
My own book being intended for the general reader,
I have avoided technical discussions and unnec
essary references.
With those who are still able to approach the
Bible with a nai've faith in its literal inspiration I
have no quarrel, but for those who are unable to do
so — and they constitute the bulk of the educated
public — ^the books of the Bible need to be rein
terpreted in the light of modem researches, which,
it should be made clear affect our beliefs about the
Bible, but not belief in the Bible. The primary
motive which impels me to make the effort to so
reinterpret one of the most striking and one of the
most charming books in the collection is the desire
to make a contribution — however modest — to
wards securing for the general public the positive
gains of the new epoch for Biblical studies which
set in with the discovery, made by a French phy
sician, Jean Astruc,^ that the Pentateuch, until
then accepted by tradition as the work in toto of
one author — ^Moses — consisted of several docu
ments, each of independent origin, which had been
pieced together. The discovery seemed quite inno-
2 The title of Astruc's work is "Conjectures sur les memoires originaux
dont il paralt que Moyse s'est servi pour composer le livre de la Genfese."
(Brussels, 1753.) 13

A GENTLE CTNIC
cent on the surface, particularly as Astruc made
the concession to a time-honored belief by still
assuming Moses to have been the one who welded
the documents into a literary unity. But the
change from Moses as the one to whom the entire
Pentateuch had been revealed, to Moses as a mere
compiler of documents that had been produced by
others — and by human hands at that — aimed a
blow at tradition, the fatal character of which
could not be concealed by any appearance of com
promise. Cest le premier pas qui coute. A new method
of approach to the study of the sacred collection
had been inaugurated. This method, modified and
perfected by successive generations of scholars,
chiefly in Germany, France, Holland and England
and applied to all the books of the Old and New
Testament, led inevitably to the substitution of
historical criticism in place of a naive and uncritical
tradition that had in the course of time grown up
around the Bible. The result has been to give
a historical setting to the unfolding of religious
thought among the Hebrews from primitive be
liefs which at one time they shared with their
fellow Semites, to the advanced conception of a
spiritual Power of universal scope as the single
source of all phenomena in nature and as control-
ing the destinies of the human race. In keeping
with this, the religious, social and political institu
tions of the Hebrews have been shown to follow
an order of development that carried us still fur-
14

FOREWORD
tradition that grew up around the Bible, and that
protected their great-grandfathers and great-
grandmothers from seeing the difficulties which
the modem reader encounters. From whatever
point of view we regard the Bible — ^whether from
the angle of religion or of literature or of history —
the collection is too valuable to be exposed to the
risk of being either lost or misunderstood; and un
less the books of the Bible are understood, they
are practically lost to readers imbued with the
modem spirit.
In presenting Koheleth in a new garb, minus
the trimmings which were attached to the original
composition, it is my hope to make a remarkable
literary production more intelligible than is possible
by reading it in any of our present-day translations
of the Old Testament, which are all modeled on
the classic "authorized" version of 1611, and which
all assume the book to be a literary unit in its
present form. In other words, I have tried to give
the reader the book of Koheleth in its original form,
as nearly as that is at present possible; and it is
only fair to add that, in order to do so, it has been
necessary to correct the text in places where in the
course of being copied by one scribe after the other
it has manifestly become corrupt. The total number
of such corrections, however, is not excessively
large. In the translation, I have disregarded the
ordinary division into chapters which is very late
and not found in ancient manuscripts of Biblical
2 17

A GENTLE CTNIC
books, and, instead, have divided the "Words of
Koheleth," as the attached title reads, into twenty-
four sections, each dealing with some phase of the
general problem with which the author is concerned.
For the sake of convenience, I have added
on the margin the corresponding chapter and
verses in our ordinary Bibles, so that those who
so desire may compare my rendering with the "au
thorized" version and its successors. I have felt
entirely free to choose my own wording, with no
sense of being bound by the "authorized" version,
which as a classic of English literature will, of
course, always retain its place, but which, as a
translation of a text better understood after a lapse
of three hundred years, can be improved upon on
almost every page. Where I deviate in more than a
mere choice of words from the generally accepted
rendering of a passage, I have tried to justify my
view in the brief notes attached to the translation.
Slight and obviously necessary textual changes I
have passed over in silence; more radical ones
I have briefly commented on in the notes. These
notes are not in any sense technical, and have
therefore been made as brief and as simple as pos
sible, just enough to enable the reader to follow
the interpretation of the book according to my
understanding of it. All the additions to the text
will also be found in these notes; and for further
convenience I have grouped all the additions in
the Appendix under three divisions. In this way
the reader, with the further assistance of the dis-
iS

FOREWORD
cussion preceding the translation, will be able to
see for himself just how the book was manipulated,
the nature and purpose of the additions made,
how its original thought was obscured or given a
different turn, and how it gradually grew until it
received the shape that it has in the usual trans
lations of the Bible.
I feel that no apology is needed for the length
of this discussion, which is, as already suggested,
an attempt to give to the general public some of
the positive gains of the critical study of the Old
Testament, as carried on by many scholars in many
lands during the past century. The recognition of
these gains will, I firmly believe, help to remove
the misunderstandings still current regarding the
nature and purpose of the historical, literary and
critical study of the Bible. I beg to call special at
tention to the sections* in which I have discussed
some of the aspects of the relation of criticism
to tradition, and where I have tried to show that in
rejecting traditional views about the Biblical books
— affecting their origin, date and manner of com
position — there is more than a compensating gain
in bringing us nearer to an intelligent appreciation
of the contents of these books and — I venture
to add — of their real value. The religious truths
embodied in the Biblical books are independent
of questions of text, origin and composition, with
which alone historical and literary criticism is
concerned. < XIII to XVI. 19

A GENTLE CTNIC
Those who take the trouble of reading the
results of my investigations will, I venture to think,
find all the other important questions raised by the
book, its thought and its aim, and its relationship
to the beliefs of the age in which it was written, to
Greek ideas and to Jewish orthodoxy, fully covered,
and in such a way as to illuminate the "Words of
Koheleth" as a human document. In order to un
derstand an ancient book, we must make the attempt
to get a picture in our minds of the time and the
conditions under which it was written. That aim
has been before me above all else, and I shall be
happy if I shall have succeeded in making Koheleth
a living book to the modern reader. It is my hope
and intention to treat in the same way two other
Biblical books, the Book of Job and the Song of
Songs, which, like Koheleth, need to be reinter
preted, by means of a utilization of the results of a
critical study of them, in order that they may make
their appeal to our age.
In committing my interpretation of the "Gen
tle Cynic" to the tender mercies of (I hope) an
equally gentle reader, I feel assured that he will
become as fondly attached to Koheleth — even
though, perhaps, not approving of all his teachings
and utterances — as I have grown. It remains for
me to express my obligations, as in the case of all
my writings, to my wife for the help received from
her in the form of suggested improvements in the
presentation of my results and in the translation
itself. She has also, as usual, read a proof. To her

FOREWORD
direct aid as well as to her sympathy with all my
work and to her encouragement to carry it on, I
owe any merits that I may have achieved in the
course of my life. It is both a pleasure and a privi
lege to combine on the dedication page the names of
three dear colleagues who are associated in my
mind together, to whose firm friendship and stim
ulating companionship, I owe much — very much.
MORRIS JASTROW, Jr.
University of Pennsylvania
January, 1919

CONTENTS
Foreword  7
The Origin, Growth and Interpretation of the
Words of Koheleth:
A Strange Book in a Sacred Canon  27
Before the Days of "Authorship"  31
Beginnings of Literary Compilation among the
Hebrews  42
A New Religion and Its Reflex in Literature  45
The First Genuine "Authors"  48
Traditional "Authorship"  52
The Growth of the Sacred Collection  56
Koheleth as a Nom de Plume  62
The Additions to Koheleth  71
The Proverbs Appended to Koheleth  76
The Popularity of Koheleth  86
Apologizing for Koheleth  94
Two Questions Regarding Koheleth  loi
Belief in the Bible Not Affected by Historical and
Literary Criticism  108
The Old Testament Canon as a Mirror of Various
Aspects of Life  113
The Original versus the Modified Koheleth  116
, Koheleth and His "Philosophy of Life"  120
Ancient and Later Beliefs Regarding the Dead. ... 129
^A Gentle Cynic  138
Koheleth and Greek Thought  147
Koheleth's Attitude towards the Cult  152
Koheleth on "Reform," Royalty, and Woman  156

CONTENTS
"Work and Play"  164
Joy that Is Sane  171
Koheleth and the Conventional Beliefs of His
Age  178
The Omar Khayyam of the Bible  186
The Words of Koheleth in Their Original Form,
Stripped of Subsequent Interpolations,
Sayings and Comments  199
Appendix, Containing the Additions to the Book. 245

A GENTLE CYNIC
THE ORIGIN, GROWTH AND
INTERPRETATION OF THE
WORDS OF KOHELETH

a (Bmtlt Cynic
I
A STRANGE BOOK IN A SACRED CANON
|T the close of the Book of
Koheleth some reader or com
mentator has added the warn
ing, "Beware, my son, of the
writing of many books without
end," as though to caution us
against taking too seriously
the teachings of a book, which
seemed dangerous from the point of view of con
ventional morality. The warning sounds a chal
lenge to every writer to justify himself in adding
another to the more than three million books that
have been produced since the literary impulse —
Koheleth would call it "a sorry business" — first
seized hold of man on this little planet of ours.
Koheleth himself would, no doubt, echo the sug
gestion contained in the warning that books fol
low one another in endless succession, because it
is a part of the "nature of the beast." Man
writes because he cannot help it. The point is not
what man writes, but that he writes and that he goes
on writing as naturally as he goes on living, though
Koheleth well knows that both man's life and his
book will come to an end.
There is no final book on any subject — no
27

A GENTLE CTNIC
last word. Why, then, add another to share the
fate of gathering' dust on the shelves of libraries
or of being ground to pulp to form the material
for some successor? Why write if a book is to be
produced, only to be offered up as a sacrifice to
bring into existence the next one, a process which
gives to bookmaking some of the aspects of canni
balism? But the warning against the making of
endless books comes with special force, if the book
in question is to be a new translation of an ancient
one. Why present a book written over 2100 years
ago, in a new garb? Is not Koheleth included
in every translation of the Old Testament that has
appeared since the days of Wycliffe and Luther?
Are there not enough commentaries on this book
in every modem language?^ The justification is to
be found in the fact that Koheleth was admitted
by a strange fate into a collection of sacred writ
ings. The author had been dead for several cen
turies before his production was thus canonized,
or he would first have smiled at finding himself in
company with prophets and psalmists, and then
after a closer inspection, upon seeing how his
work had been altered in order to adapt it to a
group to which it did not belong, he might have
grown indignant. At all events, he would have had
difficulty in recognizing his offspring.
^ A long list of commentaries and monographs on Ecclesiastes will be
found in Professor G. A. Barton's "Critical and Exegetical Commentary"
on the "Book of Ecclesiastes" (N. Y., 1908) pp. 18-31, in McNeile's "Intro
duction to Ecclesiastes" (Cambridge, 1904) p. 55, and in Ludwig Levy's
,"Das Buch Qoheleth" (Leipzig, 1912) pp. 65-67.
28

A GENTLE CTNIC
The privilege of being included in a sacred
collection tumed out to be a misfortune for the
book, for it led to its being totally misunderstood,
or, rather, intentionally modified so as to conceal
its real purport. Koheleth is in reality, as we shall
see, a most unorthodox production. Its teachings
run counter to the conventional beliefs of the times
in which it was composed. It offended the pious
by its bold skepticism and displeased those who
believed in a Creator who stamped his handiwork
with the verdict "And behold it was good," by
its undisguised, albeit gentle cynicism. Critical
scholarship, as the result of the combined activity
of many scholars of many lands during the past
century, now recognizes that the book, as it stands
in our Bible, consists of a kernel to which liberal
additions have been made. These additions which
were introduced, as we shall see, for the express
purpose of counteracting the effect of Koheleth's
unconventional views and to give a more orthodox
turn to his thought are to be found in each one of
the twelve chapters into which the book was arbi
trarily divided.* In some chapters, the additions-
consist merely of a phrase or of a sentence skill
fully inserted here and there at a critical point in
the discussion; in others, as in the eighth chapter,
the additions are almost equal to the original sec-
' It must be borne in mind that the division into chapters in our Bible
is late and does not occur in ancient manuscripts of the Hebrew text. In my
translation (see the foreword, page 17), I have discarded these divisions, and
instead have divided the book into 24 sections, each one dealing with some
aspect of the general theme. 29

A GENTLE CTNIC
tion, while again in some, as in the seventh and
tenth chapters, the supplementary material is in
excess of the original portion of the chapter.^
Besides these conspicuous additions, amounting in
all to more than one-fourth of the book, there are
little glosses and comments of a miscellaneous
character, Hkewise interspersed throughout, which
correspond to our foot-notes to a text. Now it is
manifestly impossible to obtain a view of what
the book was in its original form, unless in a trans
lation we lop off all additions and insertions, as
well as the glosses and little comments. To trans
late the book as it stands, as has hitherto been
done, precludes the possibility of grasping the
character that the author intended to give to his
production. The acceptance of Koheleth into the Canon
was a gradual process. We know that as late as the
first century before this era it was not generally
regarded as on a par with the books of the collec
tion of ancient Hebrew literature, which had to be
handled with special reverence. Even then it
would never have been admitted among sacred
writings by the council of learned and pious Jews,
,who at Jamnia in Palestine fixed the Canon at the
end of the first century of our era, had it not been
for the additions which toned down the skeptical
tenor of its teachings and controverted its bold
defiance of accepted beliefs. The circumstance that
the authorship was attributed to Solomon was a
' See for details below pp. 71-86, and in the comments to the translations.
30

A GENTLE CTNIC
vital factor In leading to its inclusion In the Canon,
but even this would not have secured its admission
without the additions which constitute such a
considerable part of the work in its present form,
and which made it practically a different kind of
a book. The question arises, how were these
additions made, or, rather, first of all, how was it
possible for anyone to conceive of making them?
II
BEFORE THE DAYS OF "AUTHORSHIP"
To us who are accustomed to think of a book
as the work of a single individual, brought out
with the seal of authenticity attached to It under
the name of its author, it must indeed seem strange
that the original form of a piece of writing should
be altered by subsequent additions; but author
ship In the modem sense was unknown In antiq
uity until we reach the flourishing period of Greek
literature. Up to that time, authorship was largely
anonymous. A book might pass through many
hands before receiving Its final form; and In this
form, two features which we naturally associate
with a book, an author and a title, are conspicuous
by their absence. Book writing was in the literal
sense of the word corn-position, that is, a putting to
gether of documents whi'ch might date from various
periods. A book involved a process of compilation
in which various persons might take part. As a con
sequence, we have collective instead of individual
authorship. A writer in the days of anonymous
31

A GENTLE CTNIC
authorship laid no claim to special ownership to
what he wrote — could lay no such claim. Every
one who could do so felt free to add to a manuscript
that came into his hands. The person who wrote
was of minor significance as against what he wrote,
and if a piece of writing became popular by being cir
culated within a certain circle, itwas destined to con
tinual enlargement and modification. Indeed, this
steady modification was an index of the popularity
of a book. A book that had become definite in its
form and that was no longer subject to change, was
a dead book. The living book, which conveyed a
message of real Import to those who became
acquainted with it, was one which had not yet
become static. What we should regard as taking
an unwarranted liberty with an author by changing
what he had written, was from the ancient point of
view not only perfectly legitimate but a real compli
ment to a book, an indication that it was a breath
ing organism and not a lifeless corpse. A book,
moreover, continued to grow as long as it aroused
sufficient interest to be added to and to be other
wise modified. From the modem point of view, a
book is finished when the author puts his Unis to it.
The finished book begins its life — short or long —
when it is issued from the press. From the ancient
point of view the publication of a book in its final
and definite form spelled its death — ^the end of the
era which led to its production.
As for a title, in the days when writing was
merely com-position, there was no occasion to give a
32

A GENTLE CTNIC
name to a production which, as essentially a com
pilation, lacked any individualistic character. A
title goes with individual authorship. A writer,
having a definite subject In mind, will hit upon the
idea, after having developed his subject systemat
ically from beginning to end, of giving his produc
tion a name, just as an artist will be led to label a
picture representing the execution of a plan formed
and carried out; but when there is no author in
this sense, no single individual who plans a book
as a whole and gives it its final shape, there is no
unity to a literary work thus produced. Hence in
ancient days books had no title, because they
lacked the unity which would suggest the desira
bility of giving to a literary product a distinctive
designation. In Babylonia and Assyria, for example,
where books were written on clay tablets, the tab
lets were numbered In succession and distinguished
merely as "Tablet i," "Tablet 2," etc., of a series
described by the word or phrase with which the
first tablet began. As a trace of this ancient custom.
Papal Bulls are still known from the opening words
of the document. Similarly, in the first division of
the Old Testament, consisting of the five books
forming the Pentateuch, the Individual books have
in Hebrew no title and are merely described by the
opening word. So, for example. Genesis, which is
the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bereshith,
"Beginning," with which the book opens. In
English usage we call the second book of the Pen
tateuch, "Exodus" which is a title descriptive of
3 33

A GENTLE CTNIC
the contents of the book, but this title was given
to it by the Greek translator. In Hebrew the book
is designated as Shemoth, meaning " Names, " which
happens to be the opening word of the book.* The
remaining three books are likewise known in He
brew merely by the opening word; and even a
book like Lamentations, written in the Post-Exilic
period, is In Hebrew designated as Echah, meaning
"Alas!", because it begins with that word.
If in the Hebrew text other books of the Old
Testament, as the historical ones belonging to the
second division. Judges, Kings, and Samuel, bear dis
tinctive names, and if names like Psalms and Pro
verbs in the third division describe the contents of
these books, it is because such designations are a re
flex of the later period when the idea of authorship
was beginning to make its way into the life of the
Hebrews. With this advance comes the thought
of giving a more definite designation to a literary
production. In the early period, however, the author was
a negligible quantity, and necessarily so in an age
which had not yet developed a sense of personal
proprietorship In the written word. What a man
said at that early period had far greater Import
and authority than what he wrote. Verbal utter
ances were scrupulously handed down in ancient
times by oral tradition. The decisions of a judge.

' Strictly speaking it is the second word, the first being the demon
strative particle "These," which was not distinctive enough to serve as a
designation. 34

A GENTLE CTNIC
the declarations of a political or military leader,
the instructions of a teacher, the warnings of a
prophet, the prayers of a religious poet, were trans
mitted by word of mouth with punctilious regard
to their authenticity, but when an individual sank
to the grade of a mere writer, his product became
common property to be bandied about freely
and without any concem for the vanity of the
author who, in fact, was not recognized as having
any prerogatives at all. A book was not a man's
child to be guarded and petted by him as his
very ov\m, but a stray waif belonging to no one
In particular. All ancient languages have a word
(or several terms) for speaker, orator, teacher, but
many have no distinctive expression, correspond
ing to our term "author. " In Hebrew e.g. there is
no such term; there Is merely a word for writer
(sofer), and the writer is primarily a scribe. The
'sofer writes, but whether what he writes is a copy
from some model or something dictated to him, or
some composition of his own Is immaterial. He is
merely a medium and no more important than the
stylus with which he writes, or the clay, skin or
leaf upon which he writes.
Authorship under these circumstances was
necessarily and logically anonymous; and it is not
accidental that the most ancient literary produc
tions in all lands have come down to us without
the authentic preservation of the names of their
authors. The entire Babylonian literature Is anon
ymous. There are plenty of names of copyists and
35

A GENTLE CTNIC
scribes mentioned on the clay tablets, but no
author; and If In Egyptian literature we occasion
ally come across the name of a person who writes
an account of his travels, it Is due to the accidental
personal form which what he writes takes on. No
one would think of him for that reason as an
author. The hymns of the Rig Veda — the oldest of
theliteraryproductlonsof India — are all anonymous.
Folk tales and folk songs. Incantations, as well as
prayers and hymns forming part of a ritual were In
ancient times always anonymous. Even long after
authorship had been definitely established as a
factor In the literary life of a people, aye centuries
thereafter, collections of fables and the entire
field of story-telling in the East — witness the
Arabian Nights — were anonymous productions.
In Western literature the Miracle and Moral
ity plays are instances of collective and anonymous
authorship, surviving to the Middle Ages and
beyond. The "Passion Play" of Oberammergau,
which still has the power to attract tens of thou
sands from all parts ofthe world whenever it Is pro
duced in the charming Tyrolean surroundings,
falls in the same category. It has no author and
belongs to the age of "collective" literary pro
duction, as do the various "Kasperl" plays which
In the form of "Punch and Judy" shows still
amuse the children of the present age. The drama.
In fact, as late as the days of Shakespeare had not
entirely emerged from this period of collective
authorship; for Shakespeare begins his career by
36

A GENTLE CTNIC
reshaping old plays to which his name becomes
attached, although he is not in any individualistic
sense their author, and it is impossible even for
specialists in the study of the great dramatist to
differentiate with certainty the older portions of
such a play as, for example, "King Henry VI"
and the parts which are due to Shakespeare. One
is tempted to suggest that the persistence of the
"tradition" of collective authorship in the drama
may be a factor in accounting for tbe strange phe
nomenon that In the case of Shakespeare, living In
the full daylight of history, a doubt as to the au
thenticity of his productions should have arisen —
absurd though both the theories and. the methods
of the "Baconians" are.
As a survival of past conditions we have even
in our days a good deal of anonymous authorship
or, as we might also put it, collective authorship.
Every proverb must have originated with some
Individual, but except in the case of quotations
from some published work, collections of proverbs
pass down the ages as anonymous. A modern
newspaper furnishes a good illustration of the
manner of book-making in antiquity. It is the
work of many hands and It is issued anonymously.
Editors and managers are not the authors, but
merely the mediums of publication, just like the
ancient scribes. The reporter when he puts his
items into shape sinks his personality Into the
general anonymity that marks a newspaper; his
work Is modified by the city editor, precisely as a
37

A GENTLE CTNIC
production In ancient times underwent modifica
tion by other hands than the one which gave it
its original form. Even writers of editorials. In
which it might be supposed the personal touch
was essential, consciously or unconsciously fall
into the general tone adopted by the newspaper
In question, so that after the lapse of some time
the members of an editorial board are unable to
differentiate between one another's productions.^
An almanac Is another form of anonymous author
ship, which furnishes perhaps a still closer analogy
to the ancient method of book writing, so largely
a matter of compilation and so essentially a gradual
growth. Among the Greeks who may be said to have
invented the idea of authorship, literary produc
tion was at first likewise anonymous and non-
Individualistic. The Homeric poems are the work
of many hands. Their composition is a gradual
growth, and even If it be admitted that their final
shape was due to the genius of a Greek rhapsodlst
who stood out preeminent among his fellows and
whose name was Homer, that would not yet con
stitute Homer the author in the same sense In
which Sophocles, .^schylus and Euripides are the
authors of the plays that pass under their names.
In the case of the Homeric poems, the personality
(if there was one) is sunk In the work, whereas
In the case of the dramatists of Greece, the pro
duction is dominated by the personality of the
° I have this on the authority of my friend Dr. Talcott Williams.
38

A GENTLE CTNIC
author. At all events, the Greeks appear to have
been the first among the peoples of antiquity to
have brought the author into the foreground. The
Greeks created the author. In accord with the
pronounced spirit of individualism, which Is one
of the distinguishing marks of Greek culture that
manifests itself in art as well as in literature, the
Greeks passed from anonymity in literary produc
tion to individualistic authorship. When we reach
the golden period of Greek literature, an author's
work is indelibly stamped with his personality. The
result is a more marked differentiation between
the productions of various authors, and this is
particularly striking when we find the same theme
treated by different authors, as in the case of the
CEdlpus story, which engages the genius of both
Sophocles and .^schylus. The author becomes a
figure of growing importance in public life, and
from the domain of literature this importance Is
extended to the field of philosophical thought and
physical science. Moreover, the written word
comes to be viewed with the same reverence that
was always attached to the spoken one. Oral tra
dition is supplemented by an Increasing regard for
written tradition until the latter comes to be looked
upon as more authentic than the former; and since
this depends upon the accuracy with which the
productions of an author are transmitted through
copyists, we have, instead of the former liberties
taken with a literary product, growing punctilious
ness to preserve a text in the form which the author
39

A GENTLE CTNIC
gave It. The book becomes Indissolubly associated
with the author. So important does the author
become that books which have come down anon
ymously are ascribed to authors by a tradition or
by an inference that generally tums out to be un
trustworthy. Instead of anonymity we now have
pseudepigraphy, that is, trading on the name of
an author In order to secure for a production the
weight of his authority.
Whether in running this gamut from the
extreme of utter indifference to authorship to the
exaltation of the author to the point of borrowing
or stealing his name to secure recognition for a
literary work. Is a gain — Is another question. It
no doubt stimulated literary production by hold
ing out popularity and fame as an attractive bait,
as well as pecuniary rewards for the successful
author, but It also promoted the vanity which goes
with authorship. It aroused the temptation to
court popularity even at the cost of sincerity,
and led to writing for writing's sake, creating
precisely the evil "of writing many books without
end" against which the commentator to Koheleth
warns us. The ancient writer who could lay no
claim to proprietorship in his productions wrote
because he had something to say; the author whose
career Is bound up with literary production lives
under the temptation of writing because he wishes
to be known as saying something. The warnings
against books without end suggests that the seri
ousness of writing diminishes in proportion to the
40

A GENTLE CTNIC
amount. The ready writer may become the vol
uminous writer, and as our commentator adds
"much discussion is a weariness of the flesh." If
Koheleth wrote just for the pleasure of writing,
the caution not to take him too seriously, with the
implication that "the writing of many books with
out end" is to be added to the list of human'
vanities, is decidedly In place.
We in our days of overwhelming literary pro
duction, over and above the more than 100,000
newspapers that are printed daily throughout the
world, are tempted to make such a fetish of the
written word that we regard something as more
apt to be true because we have seen it In print. As a
matter of fact, written lies far outnumber spoken
untruths. It Is a far simpler matter to print a
wrong statement than to make one verbally.
Writing cannot be said to have Increased mankind's
regard for the truth. Literature Is not an ethical
force comparable to the Influence exerted by the
spoken word. The greatest figures In history, the
world's greatest teachers as Moses, Buddha, Jesus
and Mohammed did not write, as little as did
the great generals (with some exceptions like Csesar),
and yet they shaped the course of human events
to a far larger extent than writers have ever done.
Perhaps the most distinctive achievement of
authorship will some day be recognized to be the
creation of a new punctuation mark — the quota
tion sign — and a new crime — plagiarism. In the
days of anonymous writing, plagiarism belongs to
41

A GENTLE CTNIC
the virtues. It was an endorsement of a writer to
use what he had written, an Indication that his
production had vitality, and was capable of being
modified and elaborated, but woe to him who in /
the period of authorship fails to make acknowl- /
edgement for anything, be it merely an expressiv^'
phrase which he owes to a fellow craftsman. He
is hurled into obloquy and assigned to a special
purgatory. The author, however great his merits
otherwise may be. Is shorn of his reputation If he
touches so much as a hair of the child that repre
sents the mental offspring of a colleague.
Ill
BEGINNINGS OF LITERARY COMPILATION
AMONG THE HEBREWS
This apparent digression has direct bearings
on the strange fate that the Book of Koheleth
encountered after it had been written by some
unknown philosopher who lived In Palestine about
^the close of the third century before our era, and
who aimed to set before us his attitude towards life,
gained as a result of wide and varied experiences.
The period of the Babylonian Exile which set
in with the capture and destruction of Jerusalem
in 586 B.C. through the Babylonian ruler Nebu
chadnezzar II. marks a turning-point in the literary
history of the Hebrews, as well as In their politi
cal life and their religious development. Up to
that time what literary production there was con
tinued to be anonymous. The written word had
42

A GENTLE CTNIC
not yet acquired the significance attaching to the
spoken one. The popular traditions regarding the
beginnings of things had been collected, as well as
the folk-tales recounting the early experiences of
the tribes and the adventures of the heroes and
striking figures of the past. These collections in
written form, but without authorship, existed in
at least two forms, (i) a series of documents that
originated in the Southern Hebrew Kingdom,^"
known from the preference for the name Yahweh
as the designation of the national deity as the
Yahwist documents, (2) the other series produced
In the northern kingdom and known as the Elohist
documents, because of the use of the more general
designation Elohim, equivalent to our term "God"
or Deity, In place of Yahweh, which is a specific
name like Zeus or Thor. Several codes for the
regulation of the government and of the ritual
had been compiled, representing enlargements of
the simple legislation In the form of oral decisions,
that may be traced back to the beginnings of the
national life of the Hebrews under a great leader
whom tradition called Moses. These codes like the
Yahwist and Elohist documents were anonymous,
as were likewise the brief annals Interspersed with
the more detailed exploits of favorite leaders like
Eli and Samuel, and of the more prominent rulers
"• The split between the northern and southern tribes of the confederacy
of the Hebrews occurred after the death of Solomon c. 950 B.C. The North
ern Kingdom came to an end in 722 B.C. when Samaria, the capital, was
taken by Sargon the King of Assyria. The Southern Kingdom survived
about 140 years. 43

A GENTLE CTNIC
Hke Saul, David, Solomon and Ahab, which began
to be compiled during the two or three centuries
preceding the extinction of national independence.
It Is possible also that about this same time little
collections of war songs and folk ditties began to
be made, likewise anonymous In their authorship,
which even after they had been committed to
writing continued chiefly to circulate orally.
In the eighth century before this era, however,
a movement sets in, beginning in the north and
spreading to the south, which was destined to
give the history of the Hebrew groups of tribes an
entirely new turn. Itinerant preachers arose who,
instead of flattering the rulers and pleasing the
people by comforting assurances of the protec
tion of the national deity, denounce rulers and
people alike for political ambitions and for social
abuses. They set up as a new standard of fidelity
to Yahweh, obedience to moral precepts as against
mere ritual observances — sacrifices and expiatory
offerings — as a means of securing divine favor.
They announce the revolutionary doctrine that
Yahweh, in distinction from other gods, searches
the heart, Is Indifferent to sacrifice and Invocation,
"aye, rejects both unless those who approach Him
have clean hands and a clear conscience. These
preachers are known as nebi'tm "prophets," but
they give a new turn to the old designation, for
their prophecies are threats of Impending national
disaster, instead of prognostications of the future
secured through an oracle or through some tradl-
44

A GENTLE CTNIC
tional method of divination, in connection with
sacrifices as a bribe to make the deity well-disposed
towards those who call upon him. Under the in
fluence of these religious teachers, who continue
to arise after the overthrow of the northern king
dom and who survive the fall of Jerusalem, the
conception of the national deity Yahweh under
goes a profound change. Instead of the old con
ception of a willful and arbitrary deity, who favors
his own people and who aids them in vanquishing
their enemies, provided only rulers, priests and
people combine in cajoling and flattering him,
Yahweh is now viewed as a Power making for
righteousness, who has set up certain standards of
conduct and who rules by self-imposed laws of un
bending justice. The upshot is the transformation
of Yahwism into Judaism. Though at first the
scope of this stern and just Deity was regarded as
limited to his own people. It was a logical corollary
that led in time to the conception of this new
Yahweh as the single divine Power behind the
manifestations of the universe, and controling the
destinies of mankind In general. IV
A NEW RELIGION AND ITS REFLEX IN
LITERATURE
It is significant that this movement which
ushers in a new religion arises at a time when the
political decay of both kingdoms had begun to set
in, through the perpetual menace of being swal-
4S

A GENTLE CTNIC
lowed up by one or the other of the two great powers
of antiquity — Babylonia or Assyria on one side,
and Egypt on the other. Judaism Is not brought
to fruition till the exhausted national life comes to
a seemingly permanent close through the enforced
exile of important elements of the Hebrew commu
nity to Babylonia after the capture of Jerusalem.
Nebuchadnezzar, In thus following the policy
inaugurated by Assyria, aimed to prevent a re
crudescence of the national spirit. He succeeded,
but his success was a factor in divorcing religion
from nationality among the Hebrews, and led
directly to the greatest contribution of the He
brews to civilization — ^the creation of a spiritual
form of religion with the conception of a just and
righteous Creator of the universe as its central
dogma, and with ethics as the test and as the main
expression of the religious spirit. Judaism is the
butterfly that bursts forth out of the chrysalis of
Hebrew nationality.
A rehgious movement of large Import is al
ways accompanied by an intellectual stimulus,
and we accordingly witness, as a result of such
a stimulus given by the religious teachings of the
prophets, a period of literary activity setting in
during the sojourn of the best elements of the He
brew people in Babylonia. The Yahwist and Elohist
(and probably other) documents are combined
with the codes that had been compiled and with
the annals and records of the period of the loose
confederacy — known as the days of the Judges —
46

A GENTLE CTNIC
and of the more closely knit union in the days of
the two kingdoms, to form a continuous history
from the creation of the world to the destruction
of the southern kingdom." What Is more significant,
the early myths and traditions as well as the genu
ine history are Interpreted in the spirit of the'
prophets. Obedience to the ethical standards set
up by the prophets in the name of Yahweh, now
fast changing into the universal Jehovah, be
comes the touchstone according to which the tra
ditions and events of the past are judged. Those
who stand the test, like the patriarchs, albeit
purely fanciful creations of popular tradition, are
held up as the models for all times. Disobedience
is followed by punishment, and all the misfortunes
of rulers and of the people, including visitations
of disease and famine, defeats In battle and the
final extinction of the national life, are regarded
as the inevitable result of running counter to the
high ethical standards set up by the prophets. In
this endeavor, history is often distorted, and con
tradictions also result. Able rulers like Ahab are
held up to scorn, because not answering to the
ethical test. By the side of the historical and real
David, a purely fictitious pious king arises to
whom as a "sweet singer of Israel" religious com
positions are ascribed, breathing a religious spirit
that is quite foreign to the real David, and embody
ing sentiments far in advance of the age in which
" Forming the first division of the Old Testament, from Genesis to
Kings. 47

A GENTLE CTNIC
he lived. The David to whom the Psalms are as
cribed by an uncritical age is a figure irreconcilable
with the David who Is to be judged by the acts of
his life and by his political poHcy. The traditions
of the age of Solomon, marking a signal advance
in the political and social growth of the united
nation, undergo complete transformation with a
view of making this most notable figure of the past
conform to the teachings of the prophets. Solomon
becomes a paragon of wisdom and, what is more, a
pious devotee of Yahweh, Impelled by his fine
religious spirit to build a glorious temple in the
„ capital city. He dedicates the edifice with a prayer
li that breathes the very essence of a highly spir-
'I itualized ethical faith In a God of universal scope.
The real Solomon crops out In stories "^^ which the
compilers of historical documents were either
unwilling to suppress, or which they retained
because they did not recognize the contradiction
which such tales presented to the wise and good
king to whom were ascribed books in the O. T.
collection, reflecting wisdom and a philosophical
attitude towards life, like Proverbs and Koheleth.
V
THE FIRST GENUINE "AUTHORS"
A further and direct result of this literary
activity was to bring the conception of authorship
more Into the foreground. The first genuine au-
'^ As e.g. of his harem and of his worshipping foreign deities (I Kings
xi.) and of his heavy imposts on his people (chapter xii),
48

A GENTLE CTNIC
thors among the Hebrews were the prophets; not
as yet in the Greek sense of claiming proprietor
ship in the written word, but In stamping their
personality Indelibly on the spoken one. For these
religious guides and exhorters in the pre-exllic
period were still speaking and not yet writing
prophets. It is doubtful whether any of the group
represented In the O. T. collection by the books of
Amos, Hosea, Isaiah and Micah, wrote a single
word of the prophecies ascribed to them. They
spoke to the rulers and to the people as the oppor
tunity presented Itself. It may be that some of
their utterances were taken down at the time,
or shortly thereafter, by Interested scribes, but for
the greater part the preservation of such remains
as we have of the warnings and instructions and
denunciations of the pre-exllic prophets must have
been due .to the profound Impression that they
made on those who heard them. At a time when
oral tradition was the chief means of preserving
the recollection of events and utterances (as well
as judicial decisions and the regulations of the
cult), the human memory was strong and reliable;
and this applies more particularly to what we may
call the collective memory which forms the basis of
oral tradition. At all events, the striking person
ality of the prophet, as the source of the Impres
sion made by him, leads him to be closely associated
with what he says. The two — ^the prophet and his
utterance — become bound up in each other. In
the case of a judicial decision or an oracle, the
4 49

/

A GENTLE CTNIC
judge and the diviner are merely mediums. They
derive their authority from their supposed direct
relationship to the deity as whose representatives
they act. The collectors of traditions and the
annalists do not project their personality into
what they write down, but the prophet, though
speaking In the name of Yahweh and because
he is impelled by a hidden force to speak out
even at the risk of danger to himself, yet gives to
what he says a personal aspect which is, as already
suggested, the keynote to his Influence.
The speaking prophet, thus, in a very perti
nent sense represents the beginning of authorship
among the Hebrews — by virtue of this identifica
tion of his utterances with his personality.
Jeremiah, surviving the destruction of Jeru-
' salem, marks the transition to the writing prophet,
for the tradition which represents him as dictating
his utterances to a scribe, though subsequent to
their delivery, appears to be entirely reliable."
He writes letters"^^* to the captives In Babylonia.
When we come to Ezekiel, the great prophet of
the captivity, the transformation from the speak
ing to the writing prophet is complete. Indeed,
it is doubtful whether Ezekiel spoke at all. His
chief activity consisted In writing his exhortations
and instructions, and in circulating them through
written copies;" while the orations of the later
" Jeremiah, xxxvi. " Chapter xxix.
''Note particularly the last nine chapters of the Book of Ezekiel
chapters xl-xlviii), detailing the plan for the rebuilding of the temple and
of the reorganization of the cult, which clearly were intended to be read.
SO

A GENTLE CTNIC
prophets, carrying us down into the third century,
B.C., have all the earmarks of artistic literary com
positions, written to be read rather than to be
heard. The author, concerned for the form as
much as for the matter, steps on the boards — and
he has come to stay.
More than this, in the course of the further
development of the written literature, the author
becomes as important as what he writes, with the
result of associating with the author the authority
for the written document. When that stage has
been reached, the tendency arises to ascribe the
literary remains of the past to certain authors.
Anonymity became unsatisfactory; it seemed to
lack authority. Unless it was known who said
something, how could one be sure of its value or
its authenticity? Such was the profound change,
superinduced through the emphasis laid upon
authorship In the case of any composition, that \
anonymity which was formerly a source of strength /^^
now became a symptom of weakness. A book witl
out an author appeared to be a body without
a head, or rather a lifeless form which needed the
spirit of the author to be breathed into it in ordei
to awaken it to real life. The written word lost, as
It were, its raison d'etre, unless one knew who was
behind the document. Cherchez I'auteur became an
obligation resting upon those who wished to secure
for the anonymous productions of the past the
authority needed to preserve them as precious
legacies. And so the search for authors began.
51

A GENTLE CTNIC
Authors had to be invented, In order to secure a
sanction for what was to be found In documents
that had been handed down from past ages. The
name of the author became the trademark without
which a literary product would not be recognized
as genuine. VI
TRADITIONAL "AUTHORSHIP"
It Is a direct consequence of this change In the
attitude towards the written word that led to the
tradition which ascribed the Pentateuch in Its
completed form, as also the Book of Job, to Moses ;
Joshua and Samuel to the two leaders whose names
their books bore; Kings and the Book of Lamenta
tions to Jeremiah. In further development of this
process, which was a gradual one stretching over a
considerable period. Psalms were ascribed to David,
and Proverbs, Koheleth and the Song of Songs to
Solomon. The uncritical and unhistorical character
of such a gradually evolving tradition need hardly
be emphasized. In most cases we can follow the
association of Ideas which thus led to distributing
the books of the sacred collection among a group
of prominent figures of the past. Because the
Pentateuch which became technically known as the
"Five Books of the Law" was chiefly looked upon
as a collection of laws, despite the fact that the
greater part of it Is taken up with narratives. It
was attributed to Moses, he having become in tra
dition the law-giver par excellence. The tradition
thus rested upon some semblance of historical jus-
S2

A GENTLE CTNIC
tlficatlon, for there is no reason to question that
Moses gave certain laws for the government of the
nomadic tribes whom he molded into some kind
of a political unit. These laws were in the forms of
decisions. No doubt some of the provisions In the
oldest code^^ represent In written form these early
decisions, but it was, of course, an entirely uncriti
cal procedure to ascribe all laws to Moses, and
then to pass beyond this and make Moses the
author of a series of books (containing among other
things the description of his death), in which the
codes were embodied.
The codes were originally separate from the
narratives among which they are now Interspersed,
and themselves represent a gradual growth extend
ing over many centuries. The longest and most
important of these codes^' cannot be earlier than
440 B.C. — about eight hundred years after Moses!
To Moses was also ascribed the authorship of the
Book of Job, merely because the prose story of
Job (chapter i, II), preceding the series of speeches
by Job and his three visitors, appears to describe
conditions that seemed to fit In with the patriar
chal days which Moses Is supposed to have de
scribed In the narratives in Genesis. Even more
baseless Is the view which made Joshua the author
of the Book of Joshua and ascribed to Samuel
"This is the so-called Book of the Covenant (Exod. xx-xxiii, 19),
dating from about the ninth century.
" The so-called Priestly Code, covering Leviticus and a large part of
Numbers. The Deuteronomic Code (chapters xii-xxvi), now encased in a series
of introductory and concluding addresses ascribed to Moses, with some his
torical or rather traditional data, dates from the seventh century.
S3

A GENTLE CTNIC
the books of Samuel, merely because in the books
In question Joshua and Samuel appear as the
prominent figures. To David the Psalms are
ascribed because the tradition about David made
him a poet as well as a soldier. Poetic gifts and
warlike qualities are not unusual companions.
The warrior in the ancient East, free from conven
tional restraint, is apt to be a romantic character.
The narratives of David emphasize this trait, and
there Is nothing improbable in the supposition
that he also composed poems, but these poems, we
may be sure, recited his own exploits and those of
his ancestors. They were martial In character, not
rehgious. The lament over Jonathan, embodied
in the narrative of Saul and Davld^* m,ay have been
written by David, at least in part, but to picture
David as a composer of hymns, embodying the
highest religious sentiments, and expressing the
longings and aspirations of a finely attuned relig
ious soul, wrapped up In a semi-mystic attachment
to a God conceived in the spirit of the prophets,
shows the length to which an uncritical tradition
could go in the endeavor to relieve compositions
of anonymity. In the case of Proverbs there is at least a log
ical link between the worldly wisdom underlying
many of the sayings of the collection, and the rep
utation for wisdom and sound judgment which
Solomon acquired. There Is no reason to question
the authenticity of this view of Solomon, even
1' II Samuel i. 19-27. S4

A GENTLE CTNIC
though the stories told In the Book of Kings" in
illustration of the king's fine sense of justice and
his skill in reaching a decision may be the fanciful
inventions of a later age. But many of the Prov
erbs again convey religious and ethical ideals far
in advance of the age of Solomon, and show that
the tradition ascribing the collection to him is pri
marily due again to the desire to hit upon some
individual who seemed appropriate as the probable
or possible author. For the Song of Songs — a
collection of love ditties of purely secular origin,
which, through an artificial exegesis, under the
form of an allegorical interpretation were invested
with a religious purport^" — it seemed sufficient
ground for a nai've tradition to name Solomon as
the author, because the Bridegroom Is likened to a
king'" — and Solomon was the king par excellence.
Similarly, because Koheleth, the writer of Eccles
iastes, calls himself "a king in Jerusalem," tradi
tion fixed upon Solomon as the author. The author
indeed meant to represent himself as Solomon, and
with this in view chose a thin disguise in order
not to fall under the charge of deliberately practi
cing a deception on his readers. Jeremiah, the
" e.g. I Kings iii. i6-28^the judgment of Solomon in the dispute over
the child claimed by two women.
'^ The lover was pictured as Yahweh and the beloved as Israel, or, in
the Christian exegesis, the Bridegroom became Christ, and the Bride the
church. ^' The real significance of the comparison lies in the custom still found
among the village inhabitants of Palestine to hail the groom and bride as
king and queen. The wedding festivities, lasting for a week, take on the form
of an homage, by means of processions, dances and jollification, in honor
of the couple, masquerading as king and queen.
SS

A GENTLE CTNIC
prophet of gloom, who bewails the destruction of
his people, even while announcing the downfall
of the Southern Kingdom as inevitable, is naturally
selected as the author of the book of Lamentations,
as he seemed to be also an appropriate figure to
whom to attach the compilation of the Book of
Kings. ^ VII
THE GROWTH OF THE SACRED COLLECTION
It has already been suggested that this process
of assigning authors to the books comprising a
sacred collection was one of gradual growth, as the
formation of the collection Itself was the result of a
long process that did not reach its termination till
the end of the first century of our era. We cannot
say exactly when the process began. We know that
Ezra brought a code back with him from Babylo
nia about 440 B.C. and read it to the assembled
people at Jerusalem. It was represented as being
the law which Moses had given his people at
Yahweh's command, but there Is no indication as
yet that the entire Pentateuch was already In
existence In its present form, or if It were that it
was ascribed to Moses as the single author. The
tradition attributing the Pentateuch as a whole to
Moses, therefore, does not date further back In
any case than the fourth century b.c. and probably
did not take definite shape till a century or so
later. Moses Is not named as the author in the
Pentateuch Itself, any more than an author is
named In the Books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel or
s6

A GENTLE C2NIC
Kings. The headings or titles In the case of Psalms
are all later than the compositions themselves.
Many of them have no headlines at all,^^ while
quite a number mention other names than David
as the author^' — a proof that the tradition ascrib
ing them all to David was not yet definite in the
first century before this era, which Is the earliest
date which we can fix for the final reduction of the
five books of Psalms in their present form. This
conclusion as to the lateness of the rise of tra
dition ascribing authors to Biblical books Is con
firmed by Proverbs — compiled not earlier than
the middle of the third century b.c. — since some
of the chapters, according to the headings, are
distinctly ascribed to others than to Solo mon. ^^
For Koheleth and the Song of Songs we have
merely the late titles as the indication of author
ship. Since the composition of these two books,
likewise, belongs to a late period, all the evidence
obliges us to pass close to the beginning of our
era for the completion of the process which estab
lished a definite authorship for all the books of
the sacred collection.
Bearing In mind that, as has been pointed out,
genuine authorship arises among the Hebrews with
the great prophets of the eighth and succeeding
centuries, and becomes definite with the transi-
" So, e.g.. Psalms i, ii, x, xxxiii, xliii, Ixxi, iciii-xcvii, civ-cvii, etc.
^ So, e.g., Psalms xiii, xliv, xlvi-xlix, Ixxxiv-lxiiv, are ascribed to the
sons of Korah; 1 and Ixxiii-lxxxiii to Asaph; Ixxii to Solomon; xc to Moses,
etc. Others mention no author in the headline, e.g.. Psalms Ixvi-lxvii.
"Chapter xxv to the "Men of Hezekiah"; Chapter xxx to Agur;
Chapter xxi to Lemuel. S7

A GENTLE CTNIC
tion from the speaking to the writing prophet, we
should expect a more reliable tradition to have
arisen in connection with that portion of the Old
Testament which embodies the utterance of the
prophets of pre-exllic, exilic and post-exilic times.
That In considerable measure is actually the case,
but It Is interesting to note that precisely In this
part of the collection we come across the first in
stances of pseudepigraphy, that is to say, literary
compositions in the style of a prophet and issued
under the authority of his name. The Book of
Isaiah furnishes the most conspicuous example.
It represents a collection of carefully worked out
orations covering a period of at least three hundred
years, all placed under the name of Isaiah, who
fiourished during the last quarter of the eighth
century B.C. The genuine Isaiah stands out pre
eminent for his eloquence and his power. It was,
therefore, a name to conjure with; and hence under
Isaiah were grouped. In addition to the genuine
utterances of the pre-exillc teacher — constituting
hardly more than a fifth of the present compass
of the book^^ — compositions of high literary merit
but which bear the earmarks of the exIKc and
post-exilic period to which they belong. They
were clearly written for the consolation and en-
^* The genuine Isaiahanic portions are to be found in the first half of
the book; they are chiefly chapters i-xii (though with later insertions); xx
and portions of xvii, xviii, xxii and xxviii-xxxii. Chapters xHxvi are
entirely exilic and post-exilic, consisting of several collections that once
existed independently and were then combined and added to the first part
of Isaiah. See for a brief summary of the present state of the problem,
Gray, "Critical Introduction to the Old Testament," pp. 178-188.
S8

A GENTLE CTNIC
couragement of the pious community and aimed
to give expression to the religious Ideals of the
prophets and to regulate the life of the community
according to these standards. They were not the
fiery denunciations of the prophet directly address
ing his hearers, impelled to speak out the thoughts
that burned within him and to voice the desires
and hopes which consumed his being. Even when
these later compositions struck the note of despair
and of uncompromising criticism of the policy of
political or religious leaders, the mark of the
written composition was unmistakable. What was
thus composed in the spirit of Isaiah, what echoed
his hopes and reflected his ideals, even what con
sciously imitated his style was looked upon as
worthy of finding a place with the genuine utter
ances. It is not only indicative of the absence of
the historical sense which thus led compilers to
ascribe to Isaiah productions that arose genera
tions and centuries after he had passed away, but
also of the still inchoate conception of author
ship. The author had made his appearance, but
his position remained for a time somewhat uncer
tain. The impression of the personality had begun
to predominate, but as a survival of the earlier age
when what was said was considered more Important
than who said it, what might have been said by
some striking personality was without much hesi
tation placed In the class with what a more or less
reliable tradition regarded as having actually been
said by him. 59

A GENTLE CTNIC
There Is not a single book In that portion of the
Old Testament devoted to the collections of the
utterances and orations of the prophets which
does not contain considerable additions. Even In
such short books as that of Jonah, consisting of
four chapters, and of Obadiah, consisting of only
one "vision" — the technical term for a prophetic
utterance — there are Insertions, while in longer
books like Amos, Hosea and Micah for the pre-
exilic period and Nahum, Joel, Zephaniah and
Zechariah for the post-exilic age, the additions are
considerable. The last of the prophets In the
present order, strangely enough, writes under a
nom de plume, Malachl.^^ All these books are still
essentially compilations. In which It was considered
entirely proper to Include utterances, irrespective
of their origin, which seemed to be appropriate.
The book of Ezekiel shows more unity than
any other of the prophetical books, though this
book also Includes portions that do not belong to
Ezekiel, while In the case of the Book of Jeremiah
— a combination of orations with a historical nar
rative — the extraneous parts are again consider
able. We can thus trace In the editing process
itself which gradually through the labors of vari
ous editors produced the prophetical books, the
further evolution of literary production through
the stage of pseudepigraphy after the conception
of the author had arisen.
''¦^ Malachi means "My Messenger." The name is taken from Chapter
iii. I, "Behold, I send my messenger." The three chapters bearing this
name date from about the middle of the fifth century b.c.
60

A GENTLE CTNIC
In a certain sense the final stage of this process
marked by a scrupulous regard for handing down
in authentic form the exact words of an author
was never reached. The historical sense was lacking
even in the first century of our era when the canon
of the Old Testament was finally fixed by leamed
but entirely uncritical Rabbis, who looked upon
tradition as the final court of appeal. The rise of this
tradition, which we have seen, led to ascribing the
authorship of many of the books of the sacred col
lections to certain figures of the past through Inci
dental association of Ideas with these men; or, on
even more baseless grounds, is In itself a proof that
these Rabbis were as yet not far removed from the
age which considered itself justified in editing the
literary remains of ancient prophets by inserting
verses, sections, chapters and entire groups of
chapters that belonged to a period other than the
one In which the prophet flourished. Without a
critical and historical sense, such as the Greeks
alone among the peoples of antiquity possessed In
so striking a degree, a complete sense of the sig
nificance of authorship could not arise. If we ac
cept the other alternative, and assume that those
who fixed the canon had such a sense, we should be
forced to accuse them of willful deception, aye, of
literary forgery when, for example, they claimed
for Moses the authorship of the Pentateuch, and
for David the authorship of the Psalms; or for
Solomon the authorship of Proverbs, Song of
Songs and Koheleth; and so on through the list.
6i

A GENTLE CTNIC
They are saved from this serious charge by their
naivete in accepting unreliable traditions. We may
feel quite sure that if Johanan ben Zakkai, the most
distinguished of the group that settled at Jamnia
(or Jabneh), where the canon was fixed at the end
of the first century a.d., could be brought out of
his grave and the question put to him whether he
really meant that Moses wrote the Pentateuch,
(including the description of his own death)^^ and
that Solomon wrote the Proverbs, that everything
in the book of Isaiah was written by Isaiah, he
would be amazed at a query that would appear
unintelligible to him, because involving a concep
tion of authorship that had not yet been reached
in the uncritical age to which he belonged, and
which also lacked the true historical sense.
VIII
KOHELETH AS A NOM DE PLUME
Having thus sketched the growth of literary
production among the Hebrews from anonymity
to the rise of the conception of authorship, and
through this to the stage of naive pseudepigraphy
and to the formation of an uncritical and unhistor
ical tradition regarding the authors of the books of
a sacred collection, we are prepared to assign the
Book of Koheleth to its proper place, and we are also
ready to make the attempt of separating the orig
inal portions of the book from the additions and
"To explain this strange detail, the Rabbis assumed that Joshua
added the last eight verses of Deuteronomy. 62

I

A GENTLE CTNIC
modifications to which, In common with all of the
books of the sacred collection, it was exposed.
The first thing that strikes us in the book is
that the author speaks of himself. "I, Koheleth,
was king over Israel in Jerusalem" (i. 12). This
notice does not occur at the beginning, but In the
body of the book. It is all the more reliable because
it Is not a heading, for the headings to all the books
of the O. T. are later additions, as are the titles of
the Psalms and the headlines to the chapters In the
collections of the prophets. These headings and
titles are, therefore, of no value In determining the
period to which a book belongs or of the circum
stances under which it was written. A reference,
however, to an author within a book is a valuable
index; and its value is increased when we find such
a reference to be unique. That is in fact the case.
Most of the books of the O. T. — as the Penta
teuch and all the historical books, as well as Job,
Esther, Daniel and Ruth — have not even headings.''*
The book of Koheleth Is the only one In which an
author speaks of himself by name or in the first
person. The closest analogy Is in the case of the
prophets who use the first person when describing
a vision,''' or In connection with the divine message
which they receive,'" but they never speak of them
selves by name. The introduction of the name is
an Indication that we have passed the period of
^ The headings are found only in the case of Psalms, Proverbs, Song
of Songs, Koheleth and Nehemiah and in the collections of the prophets.
^' e.g., Isaiah vi.
^^ So constantly, Ezekiel. 63

V

A GENTLE CTNIC
anonymity and have reached the point when it
became customary, though not as yet essential, to
associate a literary production with some individ
ual. The book is no longer common property,
and this leads us to the period subsequent to the
appearance of the great prophets in the eighth
century with whom, as we have seen,'^ authorship
In any real sense begins among the Hebrews.
We may further conclude that Koheleth be
longs to a transition period. The process leading
from anonymity in literary production to a defi
nite sense of authorship Is not yet complete.
This follows from the fact that Koheleth Is not a
genuine name but a disguise for the real author. It
Is not until about i8o b.c that we come across a
book with an author among the Jews, as we should
call the people after the exilic period in contradis
tinction to "Hebrews," which is the proper desig
nation In the pre-exilic age. About that year a
certain Jesus Ben Sira issued under his name a
collection of sayings which was translated Into
Greek by his grandson about fifty years later and
became known as Ecclesiasticus, though the more
proper designation Is "The Wisdom of Ben Slra."'^
This book was not included In the sacred canon
but found a place in the supplementary collection
known as the "Apocrypha. " That the work of Ben
" Above, p. 49 et seq.
'' Until quite recently the Hebrew original was lost. Large portions
of it were discovered by the late Solomon Schechter and were embodied
in a special work, "Fragments of the Hebrew Original of the Wisdom of
Ben Sira," by S. Schechter and C. Taylor (Cambridge, 1899).
64

A GENTLE CTNIC
Sira was not regarded as worthy of a place in the
sacred collection was due in part to Its late date
(though the Book of Daniel and many of the Psalms
are of still later origin) but in larger part to the
very fact that It appeared with the name of its
author attached. Had Ben Sira issued it anony
mously or had he conveyed the Impression that it
was the work of Solomon, It would have stood a
good chance of forming a second book of Proverbs,
for the spirit is much the same as in these books, and
some of the. sayings are just as fine and as striking
as the earlier collection to which tradition had
attached the name of the famous and wise king.
Koheleth lived at a time when the author
had begun to be a factor in the intellectual and
social life, but still could hide himself under a
nom de plume and reap an advantage from so
doing. For Koheleth is a disguise and It Is reason
able to suppose that in describing himself as a
king over Jerusalem, who had amassed wealth,
who possessed great power and who was also
"wiser than all who were before me in Jerusalem "
(i. i6),Jie. aimed to identify himself with Solomon
whose name must, therefore, have already become
at the time when Koheleth wrote a synonym for
wisdom, glory and power. The device was suc
cessful. An uncritical tradition, accepting the Im
plication in the disguise, attributed the book to
Solomon. The magic of this name went a large way
towards overcoming the objections that later arose
against its inclusion in the canon because of Its
s 6s

A GENTLE CTNIC
heterodox spirit and contents. The name Kohe
leth thus furnishes an Instance of real pseude
pigraphy among the Jews. We may acquit the
author of any desire to deceive his readers, and he
certainly did not look forward to having his book
Included In a sacred collection, but apart from the
hope which may have tickled his vanity of increas
ing both the popularity and the influence of his
book by creating the impression that he was speak
ing in the name of the wise and glorious king, he
may have been actuated in adopting a nom, de
plume by the fear of risking a personal unpopularity
through his identification with the teachings which
he set forth In such bold fashion. The author may
not have been of the stuff of which martyrs are
made. Authors rarely are. He would, at all events,
have been condemned by the pious and the ortho
dox, and his book after creating a mild sensation
would probably have been consigned to oblivion.
Instead of being included In a sacred collection, it
might have been placed on an Index Librorum
prohibitorum and the world would have been the
poorer for the loss. We should, therefore, be grate
ful for the device which he adopted as well as for
its complete success. Indicated by the heading at
the beginning of the book, which was subsequently
added, and in which the words "son of David"
were included so as to remove all doubt of the
Identification of Koheleth with the famous king.
But how can we be so certain of the name
Koheleth having been chosen as a disguise? In
66

A GENTLE CTNIC
the first place, we know that there was no Hebrew
king of that name, just as there was no "King
Lemuel" who appears as the author of the last
chapter of Proverbs, and whose name is likewise a
disguise; and secondly, Koheleth does not repre
sent a formation In Hebrew, which could be used
as the name of an Individual. The word is com
posed of four consonants, KHLT,^' the last of
which Is the indication of a feminine noun.
This of Itself forbids us to regard the word as
the name of a man. Hebrew proper names, as proper
names in other Semitic languages, are composed of
a verb with the name of a deity as the subject —
expressed or Implied — to which a noun may be
attached as an object. Thus Nathaniel, meaning
"God has given, " originally had a noun like "son"
attached to it; and such a name was further ab
breviated to Nathan, by the omission of the
name of the deity. David, meaning "Beloved"
was originally "Beloved of Yah."'^ Jerubbaal,
meaning "Baal has added" was originally "Baal
has added a son." Joseph, meaning "he adds," Is
abbreviated from the fuller name, which may have
been "God adds a son." Now a form like Koheleth
from an underlying stem KHL meaning "to
gather," and with an ending T attached, would
have abstract or collective force as "gathering"
or "assembly." This was the meaning taken by
^ Only the consonants are written in the Hebrew script. The vowel
signs were subsequently added, and in Hebrew manuscripts do not appear.
'* A form of the name "Yahweh." 67

A GENTLE CTNIC
the one who translated the book into Greek,'^ and
with the book also the name of the author —
Ecclesiastes, which can hardly be rendered other
wise than "an assembly man" or as we might put
it "assembly [or church] speaker." The Greek
translator appears to have followed Jewish tra
dition, which likewise explained the term as
"preacher." The term however might also be
be rendered as "assembler" or "collector." Less
plausible are other suggestions proposed for the
name as "academy," "narrator," "member of an
assembly" and the llke.^® Whichever of these
explanations we adopt, it is evident that Koheleth
is not the genuine name of an Individual, but an
artificial designation.
Ernest Renan suggested'^ that each of the
four letters represented the beginning of a word,
so that the name would be the abbreviation of a
sentence, but since it is Impossible to determine
what the words were, the conjecture does not carry
us very far. If, as seems certain, the author intended
to have us believe that Koheleth was Solomon,
then In some way the four letters K H L T ought
to be a disguise for ShLMH which are the four
consonants of the name Solomon in its Hebrew
form. The common manner In which words are
disguised In Hebrew is to substitute, for the correct
'^ Hardly earlier than the close of the first century of our era.
'*See the discussion of the name in Renan's "L'Eccl^siaste" (Paris,
1890), pp. II rf seq. and Barton's "Commentary to the Book of Ecclesiastes,"
pp. 67-68. " In the Introduction to his French translation of Koheleth,
"L'Eccl6siaste " (Paris, 1890), p. 6. 68

A GENTLE CTNIC
consonants, others chosen according to some sys
tem as, for example, to take In place of the first
consonant in the alphabetical order the last, in
place of the second the one before the last, and so
on. But neither this system nor any other cipher
leads to any satisfactory result. A name may,
however, also be disguised by starting from the
meaning of the underlying stem, and replacing
that stem by another that Is synonymous. The
stem ShLM which underlies Solomon signifies
"to be complete," "to be whole," and this comes
close to "gather" and "assemble" which we have
seen Is the meaning of the stem KHL. Both
ShLMH and KHLT, moreover, have the feminine
ending which In Hebrew is either H or T. It may
be, therefore, that this association of Ideas led the
author to the disguise chosen by him.
More Important, however, than the explana
tion of the name, pleasant though it would be to
find an entirely satisfactory one. Is the fact that
the author chose a nom de plume. This suggests
that the age in which he wrote stands midway
between the beginning of authorship among the
Hebrews and the completion of the process, rep
resented by Jesus Ben Sira who, as we have seen.
Is the first actually to issue a book under his name.
Koheleth belongs, therefore, to a time when names
were associated with literary productions, but
before the period when this had become the conven
tional practice on the part of authors. This nar
rows the range of the possible date of composition
69

/

A GENTLE CTNIC
of the book to the three centuries between the end
of the exilic period and the time of Jesus Ben
. Sira. That the age of Ben Sira (<r.i8o b.c) Is the
terminus ad quem for the composition of Ecclesi
astes is now definitely established through the
^ discovery of large parts of the Hebrew original of
his "sayings," which reveal his dependence upon
Koheleth both in thought and In language.'* The
relationship Is at times so close as to amount vir
tually to a quotation from Koheleth on the part of
Ben Sira, and the evidence is complete that Ben
Sira utilizes Koheleth and not vice versa.
We are led to the post-exilic period, i.e., after
500 B.C., for the composition of the book by the
further consideration of the successful device of the
author In having his book ascribed to Solomon, for
the Solomon of tradition, who becomes an author,
rests upon the growth of legend around that illus
trious figure, which transformed him from a very
worldly figure to a type of wisdom and piety. This
transformation belongs to the post-exilic age. To
be sure, even in the post-exilic Book of Kings
in which the monarch is Idealized, his fondness for
women and his introduction of foreign cults are
not entirely suppressed, but they are glossed over
as due to the weaknesses of his old age.'' The apol
ogetic aim is evident, as Is the further contradic
tion between the real and the traditional Solomon
^' The reader will find the proof succinctly set forth in Barton's "Com
mentary" pp. S3-S6, and also in McNeile's "Introduction to Ecclesiastes"
PP- 34-39-^, '' I Kings XI. 70

A GENTLE CTNIC
in the scene between his successor Rehoboam and
the representatives of the people who ask to be
relieved of the taxations and hard service which
Solomon had put upon them^". This picture 111
accords with the policy of a virtuous and god
fearing ruler. It is evident that it is not the histor
ical figure but the idealized, unhistorical Solomon
of the post-exilic period who comes to be regarded
as the author to whom Proverbs, Song of Songs
and Koheleth are attributed. The necessity for
making Solomon, as the supposed author of these
books, accord with the figure of tradition, led in
the case of the Song of Songs to an allegorical in
terpretation so as to disguise the secular and indeed
sensual character of these charming love ditties.
In the case of Koheleth, it led to large additions in
order to tone down the main two features of the
book, namely, the reflection that life is vanity,
and the advice to enjoy the material pleasures
of life as the best way of spending one's days.
IX
THE ADDITIONS TO KOHELETH
The character of these additions is unmistak
able. Let us take up a few illustrations. Koheleth,
In accord with the idealized figure of Solomon,
represents himself as having acquired "wisdom
and knowledge" greater than any of his prede
cessors." He then resolves to make a test of

<" Chapter xii.
" Chapter i. i6. The picture is clearly based on I Kings v. 9-11.

71

A GENTLE CTNIC
frivolity and foolishness "^^ ^s the direct opposite
of wisdom and knowledge, only to find out that
this was futile, "chasing after wind" as the plc-
' turesque phrase runs. Now, It would not be consis
tent with the dignity of a wise king to represent him
as dehberately following foolish pursuits. So, in
order to save his reputation, the word "wisdom" Is
inserted to suggest that by virtue of his pursuing
also wisdom, he ascertained the emptiness of
"frivolity and foolishness." Similarly, when Kohe
leth in the course of his career also decides to make
a test of riotous living (ii. 3), the commentator
adds "my mind acting with wisdom," to indicate
that the wise and pious Solomon did not throw
himself madly into sensual delights, but solely as
a test. Still more striking are the additions consist
ently introduced after the conclusion is reached to
"eat, drink, and be merry." Koheleth argues*'
why spend one's life in hard work when at the end
of it all one must leave one's wealth to someone
who has not labored for it ? Is not life vain if spent
In days of toil and nights of worry? Therefore —
enjoy thyself, and look upon this as the aim of life,
approved by God. This Is strange advice. Indeed,
to be offered by the wise and pious Solomon; and,
accordingly, a commentator adds that the capacity
for the enjoyment of life is "a gift of God" be
stowed only on the virtuous, whereas the sinner is

" Chapter i. 17.
*^ Chapter ii. 20-25.

72

A GENTLE CTNIC
punished by being obliged to toil and to leave enjoy
ment to the virtuous (ii. 26). The contradiction
to the trend of Koheleth's thought Is as manifest
as Is the sophistry in the implication that only the
good can enjoy life, and that the virtuous are not
apt to fall heir to tainted money.
When again Koheleth contends that, since
things cannot be changed in this world from the
manner In which God made them, one should en
joy what there is (HI. 12-14), th^ commentator
adds that "God has so made [the world] that man
wHl fear Him" (HI. 14^) — thus rather skiUfully
giving a reverent turn to Koheleth's cynical reflec
tion. Again, when towards the end of the book
Koheleth once more reaches the conclusion that life
without enjoyment is vain, that one should follow
one's inchnations and satisfy all one's desires, the
antidote to such teachings is given in the added
warning, "But know that for all these things God
will bring thee Into judgment" (xi. 9) — a reflection
which Is as far removed from Koheleth's point of
view as heaven Is from earth.
Our commentator pursues his double purpose
to the bitter end; (i) to make the picture of Sol
omon accord with the traditional figure of the wise
and God-fearing king and (2) to lend the weight of
Solomon's name to counteract the objectionable
and dangerous conclusions reached by Koheleth.
Accordingly, when Koheleth closes his book by
the assertion "all is vanity" (xu. 8) the pious
commentator adds "Fear God and observe his
73

A GENTLE CTNIC
commandments, for this [applies to] every man"
(xH. 13).
These Illustrations will suffice to enable us
to detect such additions whenever they occur.
They meet us at every turn.** For the most part
they are brief as when. In the midst of an argument
that the purpose of God In making the world is
past finding out, the commentator to counteract
such irreverent pessimism Insists "God has made
everything beautiful in Its season" (Hi. 11^), or
when Koheleth in a cynical spirit urges us to put no
confidence In dreams, the opportunity is seized upon
to give the advice, "Fear God" (v. 6). To coun
teract the gloomy reflection that "the day of death
is better than the day of birth," the saying is
Inserted "better is a [good] name than fine oil"
(vii. i). When Koheleth, consistent with his point
of view, advises against being either too bad or too
good, for either will bring one into trouble, the
commentator in his optimistic spirit adds that "he
who fears God will steer clear of everything" i.e.,
will avoid all difficulties (vii. iS*"). Not Infre
quently, however, the additions are more elaborate.
To furnish the answer to Koheleth's contention,
based upon his experience, that in this topsy-turvy
world the wicked are buried amidst pomp, whereas
the righteous are forgotten, the pious commentator
enters upon an elaborate argument (viii. 11-13), to
show that even if justice Is not always promptly
^ In the brief comments to the translation I have indicated them,
and, in order to give a general view of their character, I have put them
together in the Appendix. 74

A GENTLE CTNIC
meted out, "it shall not be well for the wicked"
and that virtue will find its reward — which Is per-
clsely the contrary of what Koheleth asserts, not
only In this place but elsewhere.
Of special Interest are additions in which the
style of Koheleth is deliberately Imitated, so as to
make the conformity to the traditional Solomon
more plausible. Koheleth has just declared*^ that
justice Is often perverted in this world and
that the wicked are enthroned In the seat of the
righteous. Such a sentiment is entirely out of place
In the mouth of a king famed for his righteous
judgment, and so the traditional Solomon is made
to add, "But I refiected that God will judge both
the righteous and the wicked, for there Is an ap
pointed time for every occurrence and for every act"
(Hi. 17). This sentiment, the close of which is
reminiscent of HI. i. Is put precisely in the manner
of Koheleth and with conscious intent, as Is also the
addition at the close of the seventh chapter, where
after Koheleth has given voice to a particularly
striking bit of cynicism that whereas one might dis
cover a genuine man In a crowd of a thousand, one
will not find a decent woman, the pious commenta
tor tries to tone down the thought by making Kohe
leth say, "Besides, however, I have found this, that
God has made man straight, but they have devised
many contrivances" (vii. 29) by which the original
fine nature of man is perverted. In this way God
is at least reheved from the initial responsibility for
** Chapter iii. i6. 7S

A GENTLE CTNIC
the worthlessness of most men and of all women.
The addition Is In keeping with the conventional
view of man's fall from grace by sin, as Illustrated
In the third chapter of Genesis. X
THE PROVERBS APPENDED TO KOHELETH
But besides these additions— made in the in
terest of maintaining intact the figure of Solomon._
as the type of the virtuous and God-fearing king,
after he had become associated with the book of
Koheleth as its author, and to offer the antidote
to the poisonous teachings of the real Koheleth —
there are also scattered throughout the book say
ings and maxims, generally in praise of the advan
tages of wisdom and of the qualities of the wise
man, which are Introduced again with a double
aim, to strengthen the plausibility of Solomon,
the supposed compiler of the Book of Proverbs,
being also the author of Koheleth, and to further
counteract some of the heretical teachings and,
more particularly, the skeptical and cynical spirit
pervading the entire book. These additions, of
which there are considerably more*^ than of the
class just discussed, are entirely In the style of the
Book of Proverbs and might Indeed have been In
cluded in that collection. Where do they come
from? Evidently the collection of sayings In our
*' They cover about 40 verses or about one-sixth of the entire book
which consists of 222 verses, as against about 25 verses covered by the addi
tions of the pious commentator. They are indicated in every instance in the
comments to the translation, and are also put together in the appendix.
76

A GENTLE CTNIC
Book of Proverbs did not exhaust the extant liter
ature of this character. The collection represents
rathex a selection of what were considered the
best sayings, worthy of being ascribed to a king
typifying wisdom. From the statement In the
Book of Kings that Solomon "spoke three thousand
proverbs, and his songs were a thousand and five, "*'
which already assumes the existence of the tra
dition that ascribed Proverbs and the Song of
Songs to the king, we may be permitted to con
clude that there were other literary productions
extant in the post-exilic period of a gnomic and
lyrical character. Because some such compositions
came to be ascribed to Solomon, it was concluded
with the naivete characteristic of an entirely un
critical age that all such literature was the work of
Solomon. Not satisfied with this, some glossater
to the Book of Kings went his predecessors one
better and asserted ad majorem gloriam regis that
the extant animal and tree fables were also of
Solomonic origin.** The passage In the Book of
Kings Is manifestly later than the period when a
collection of Proverbs existed which was ascribed
to Solomon. That collection was not necessarily the
one in our present Book of Proverbs, which would
bring us down into the third century, b.c, but was
at all events a portion of It. We must assume the
*' I Kings V. 12.
** I Kings V. 13. "He spoke of trees from the cedar of Lebanon to the
hyssop springing from the wall; also of beasts, fowl, creeping things and fishes."
The passage is interesting as pointing at that time to the spread of such animal
and tree fables from their probable birthplace in distant India.
77

A' GENTLE CTNIC
existence of such a collection ascribed to Solomon,
prior to the Insertion of sayings and maxims of the
same general character In another book of which
likewise Solomon was reputed to be the author.
These considerations lead us to the period
after the compilation of the Book of Proverbs for
the addition of such sayings to the Book of Kohe
leth. It does not necessarily follow that the original
Book of Koheleth Is also later than Proverbs, but
the probabilities are strongly in favor of this conclu
sion, which is confirmed from other considerations.
At all events, before these maxims and sayings
were Inserted, the tradition had been established
'that Koheleth was Solomon, as had also the belief
that Solomon as the wise king was associated
with the writing of proverbs to such an extent that
all proverbial sayings were looked upon as Solo
monic, In the same sense that all laws came to be
regarded as Mosaic. So close was the association
between Solomon and the Inditing of maxims,
.. especially such as Illustrated wisdom from various
I angles, that It not only seemed perfectly natural
t to add maxims to a book ascribed to the wise king,
but such additions fumished to a later but still
uncritical age a further proof of the Solomonic
authorship of the book into which they were
Inserted. The "vicious circle" which Is part and
parcel of an uncritical age is thus made complete.
Now, how can we be sure that the maxims
scattered through the book of Ecclesiastes actually
represent later additions, made to strengthen the
78

A GENTLE CTNIC
authenticity of the Solomonic authorship and to ^
make the teachings of the book more palatable to
the orthodox believers In a good world created by
a power that rewards the virtuous and punishes
the evil-doer? What Is the criterion for separating
the original components of the book of Koheleth
from the elements subsequently added? In the
case of the insertions intended to make the picture
of Solomon conform to the type of the virtuous and
god-fearing king and, incidentally, also to coun
teract the heretical views and implications of the
book, the general criterion is the manifest incon- ^
sistency of the utterances of Koheleth with the
pious reflections that were added whenever Kohe
leth gave voice to some particularly striking or
shocking sentiment. The same author could not
rail against prevailing wickedness and Injustice,
and in the same breath declare that a just Provi
dence presides over the universe. The pessimist
. who sees black everywhere cannot be the same as
/ the one who finds everything good and beautiful.
The skeptic who asserts that all — ^the good and bad
alike — share a common fate (ix. 2) cannot be iden
tical with the pious believer who is confident thaf^
God will bring man to judgment for all his acts,
the hidden and the manifest (xi. 9 and xii. 14).
For the other class of Insertions, enlarging
upon the aspects and qualities of wisdom, and In
other ways elaborating and modifying Koheleth's
reasonings and conclusions, the test is to be found
chiefly In the interruption of the context or of the
79

A GENTLE CTNIC
argument, and secondly, in the form of the maxims
and sayings, which marks them off sharply from
the original text. So, for Instance, In the first chap
ter we have an example of a saying added after
the refrain that "aU is vanity and chasing after
wind." After the fourteenth verse we read
"The crooked cannot be straightened.
And the lacking cannot be supplied."
The maxim has no direct connection with the
thought expressed by Koheleth, who is arguing
that it Is foolish to investigate the mysteries of
the universe. The impulse to do so is a "sorry
business," for It merely leads one to see the vanity
of all things. To add that things cannot be changed
is a reflection to which Koheleth would probably
have assented, but it takes us away from his main
thought, to wit, that investigation by Itself shows
that all things in this world are empty bubbles.
When alittlefurtheron(ii. 1 3), Koheleth reaches
the conclusion that wisdom seems to be better than
foolishness, at least to the extent that light Is pref
erable tQ_ darkness, the insertion of a saying
y "The wise man has his eyes in his head.
But the fool walks in darkness,"
giving expression to the somewhat trite thought
that a wise man sees what he Is doing, whereas the
foolish one gropes about, furnishes an illustration
to the sentiment just expressed, but it interrupts
the context. The point which Koheleth urges is
that the advantage of wisdom over folly Is only
80

A GENTLE CTNIC
an apparent superiority, for the fool and the wise
man share the same fate. Both are forgotten and
the one dies just as does the other.
Almost in direct contradiction to the thought
of Koheleth is another insertion which we find in
the fourth chapter, where he concludes that the
endeavor of a man to outstrip his neighbor is like
wise "vanity and a chasing after wind." The
saying that follows (I v. 5)
"The fool folds his hands and consumes his own flesh"
Is entirely out of the picture, whereas the next
verse that "a handful of quiet is better than two
handfuls in toil and chasing after wind," is fully in
keeping with the context. The interruption of the
thought is no less apparent In the saying (vi. 7)
"All the toil of a man is for his mouth.
And yet the appetite is never satisfied,"
which has no connection with what precedes or
with what follows. Koheleth has been trying to
show that a large family and a long life offer no
compensation, unless one has enjoyed oneself during
the span of one's existence. The reflection that one
cannot get enough enjoyment is rather in the nature
of an antidote to the doctrine of pleasure as the
main thing in life, and shows that the commentator
who added this saying was in sympathy with the
point of view represented by the one (or by those)
who added the pious comments in order to give
an orthodox turn to Koheleth's teachings. Im
mediately after the inserted saying, the genuine
6 81

A GENTLE CTNIC
Koheleth once more appears with his question,
"What is the advantage of being wise?" (vi. 8.)
In many cases, the insertions betray them
selves as such by being manifestly suggested
through a purely incidental reference to wisdom
In contrast to foolishness. The commentator, who
had perhaps a collection of proverbs before him,
could not resist the temptation of selecting some
sayings in further illustration, though not Infre
quently the supposed "illustration" carries us
away from the thought that Koheleth had In mind.
So, e.g., Koheleth suggests in a pessimistic mood
that the end of life is better than the beginning
(vii. 8), and argues further that it is better to go
to a funeral than to a banquet, for in a house of
mourning you may hear some reasonable talk,
whereas in a house of mirth you encounter fools
(vii. 2 and 4). Our commentator. Intent upon
adding maxims In illustration or In supposed illus
tration of the text, steps in at this point (vii. 5-6)
"It is better to hear the rebuke of a wise man,
than to listen to the praise of fools.
For as the crackling of thorns under a pot,
so is the laughter of fools."
Koheleth has not been speaking of "rebuke" or
"praise," nor is he concerned at this point with
showing the foolishness of fools. He takes that for
granted. Entirely out of the picture is the next
insertion which follows (vii. 7)
"Extortion deprives a wise man of reason
and a bribe corrupts the mind,"
82

A GENTLE CTNIC
clearly superinduced because of the reference to
the wise man who may be found In a house of
mourning (vii. 4). Again, when Koheleth, con
tinuing his train of thought (vii. 8), declares that
the end of things is better than the beginning,
there is no connection whatsoever with the two
insertions (vii. 8*^-9)
(a) "Better patience than haughtiness"
(i) " Do not be prone to anger,
for anger endures [only] in the bosom of fools."
In the same chapter we find three further sayings
in proof of the superiority of wisdom, which inter
rupt the context. They have not the slightest con
nection with either Koheleth's arguments or with
his conclusions, and are suggested by purely inci
dental references to wisdom
"Wisdom is better*' than an inheritance,"
and an advantage to the living" (vii. 11).
"For the protection of wisdom is (as strong) as the protection
of silver,
And the advantage of knowledge ^^ is that it gives life to
those who possess it" (vii. 12).
"Wisdom makes a wise man stronger than the ten rulers of a
city" (vii. 19).
Again, at the beginning of the eighth chapter which
advises caution in one's attitude towards a king
who will always do what he likes, the "maxim"
commentator takes advantage of the advice, which
*' For this translation, see the comment to the passage.
'"A variant adds "wisdom." 83

A GENTLE CTNIC
Is offered in an ironical and somewhat cynical
spirit, to insert two sayings (viii. i)
(fl) "Who is like the wise man, and who knows
[as he does] the explanation of a matter?"
(j?) "The wisdom of a man illumines his face,
And the coarseness of his countenance is changed."
At the end of the ninth chapter, a series of such
sayings is inserted which carries us over into the
tenth chapter. They are suggested by Koheleth's
argument that wisdom is better than strength,
even though the wise man be poor and his words
be not heeded. The commentator cannot resist
the temptation to add (ix. 17-x, 3):
(a) "The words of the wise, though spoken quietly, are
better than the loud cry of an arch-fool. "
(&) "Better is wisdom than weapons."
(c) "A dead fly spoils the perfumer's precious oil."''
{d) "A little foolishness annuls wisdom."
{ji) "A wise man's mind is on his right side,
but a fool's mind is on his left."
(/) "When a fool struts in his senseless way,
he says of everyone else 'he is a fool.'"
In this same chapter, we encounter another
series of no less than nine sayings (x. 8-15), en
tirely In the style of the Book of Proverbs, some
dealing with wisdom, others with what one might
call practical advice of a somewhat phihstine
character.^^ The sayings so manifestly Intermpt

" To suggest that a fool can vitiate the constructive activity of a
wise man. '^ They will be found grouped together in the Appendix.
84

A GENTLE CTNIC
the context that, unless we remove them altogether,
we cannot follow the argument of Koheleth, which
is concerned with the vanity to be found in gover-
mental affairs. There is another insertion of the
same character at the end of the chapter (x. i8)
"Through neglect, the beamwork sinks.
And through idleness, the house leaks."
likewise in no connection with what precedes or
follows. In addition, someone, anxious to inculcate
moderation In feasting, incidental to the contrast
set forth by Koheleth between proper merriment
and riotous living adds :
"A feast is made for laughter.
With wine to enliven life,
and [sufficient] money to provide for everything." (x. 19.)
As a result, only seven of the twenty verses of this
chapter form part of the original text — an illustra
tion of the extent to which the book of Koheleth
was subject to enlargement and modification, in
the desire to make it conform to the traditional
picture and to the teachings of a virtuous and
wise king, who was supposed to be the author.
Once more we encounter practical advice in
the eleventh chapter (xi. 3-4)
(a) " If the clouds be filled with rain,
they will empty themselves on earth. "
(J) "If a tree falls to the south, or to the north, where the
tree falls, there it remains."
(c) "A wind observer does not sow,
And a cloud gazer does not harvest."
8s

A GENTLE CTNIC
The similarity of these sayings with those in the
tenth chapter (8-15 and 18) suggests that they are
extracts from one and the same collection, whereas
in chapters seven and eight and in the appendix
to the book (xii. 9-14) In which miscellaneous com
ments and reflections are introduced,^' the "max
im" commentator appears to draw from a collec
tion of sayings, dealing primarily with the aspects
of wisdom, and of which the last quotation :
"The words of the wise are as goads,
And collections are as nails driven with a mace" (xii. 11)
may represent either the introduction or the colo
phon. The maxims are thus of two kinds, vacillating
between practical advice and the praise of wisdom,
and extracted, perhaps, from two collections,
though there is no inherent reason why one col
lection should not have contained both kinds of
sayings. XI
THE POPULARITY OF KOHELETH
We have thus succeeded in separating from
the original text two distinct classes of additions,
one series in illustration of the traditional Solo
mon as the pious and God-fearing king, the other
showing Solomon as the wise king. Through these
two classes of insertions the picture of Solomon as
the reputed author of the book is made to conform
to that of the Solomon of tradition. What is of even
^ See the comments on these verses p. 240 et seq.
86

A GENTLE CTNIC
greater import, the effect of the teachings in the
genuine and original portions of the book Is coun
teracted by the pious reflections and by good or
thodox maxims inculcating wisdom, caution, the
exercise of practical judgment, of moderation and
the practice of other conservative and "safe"
virtues. The book of Koheleth was thus given the
stamp of orthodoxy, and with this stamp could
without risk be included In a sacred collection.
We have still to consider a pertinent question
that might be raised at this point. Why did pious
commentators and collectors of sayings occupy
themselves at all with the book? If Koheleth's
teachings were objectionable or heretical, why was
the book not suppressed or allowed to die a natural
death by being left severely alone? Why did its
opponents decide to advertise the book by attack
ing it? The answer is that Koheleth at the time of
its appearance must have aroused too much com
ment to be Ignored. It could not be suppressed
because it became too popular, just as the popular
traditions about Creation, about the Deluge, and
about the patriarchal days, circulating among the
people, could not be suppressed, and were therefore
embodied by pious writers, who gave to the tales
an interpretation in the spirit of the teachings of
, the Hebrew prophets.
The book of Koheleth belongs, as we have
I seen, to the age when an author was associated
Iwith a production, to the extent that a writer
j would be tempted to trade on the prominence
87

A GENTLE CTNIC
acquired by a figure of the past, embellished by
legend and tradition, so as to secure a wider hear
ing for what he had to say. The device of the author
of our book to pass himself off under the nom de
plume of Koheleth as Solomon must have created
for his production something that corresponded to
a "mild sensation" in our days. The device must
have had an effect to be compared to a "headliner"
in a modern newspaper, announcing to its readers :
"Discovery of a lost Work of King Solomon. Old
Wiseacre says that 'All is Vanity.' " Add to this
the novelty of the point of view from which Kohe
leth treated the activities and experiences of life,
its breezy and unconventional tone, its bold attack
upon the conventional beliefs of the day, its expos
ure of the foibles of men and of the evils of his
times, and we have a combination that gave to the
book an irresistible charm which must have affected
even those to whom the teachings were distasteful.
At all events, Koheleth aroused a popularity that
made it difficult if not impossible for those who
opposed the book to suppress its fascinating and
dangerous philosophy. Orthodox circles therefore,
finding it Impossible to kill the book, began to busy
themselves with the endeavor to give a different turn
to Koheleth's arguments by insertions that would
tone down the skeptical implications. Accordingly,
they proceeded to touch up the portrait of the king
here and there so as to make his features conform
to the Solomon of Jewish orthodoxy. With pious
comments, urging the fear of God, and by emphasiz-
88

A GENTLE CTNIC
ing the rewards that follow upon virtue and the pun
ishment for wrong doing, Koheleth was actually
transformed into a pious king, and by means of wise
saws, setting forth the advantages of wisdom and
offeringpractical and sober advice for the guidance of
life, the face of the wise Solomon was superimposed
on the now blurred features of the original Koheleth.
But even these two classes of additions, exten
sive as they are, and sufficient to conceal entirely
the true nature of the teachings of the book, do
not exhaust the modifications which Koheleth in
the course of time underwent. In order to make
the book still more palatable, the thought of
Koheleth was elaborated by shorter or longer addi
tions, and by explanatory comments, generally with
a further view of diverting attention from the real
Koheleth, whose conclusions, even when not specifi
cally stated, do not accord with these additions and
comments. Perhaps the most notable instance of
such an elaboration of Koheleth's thought, but
which also takes off its sharp edge, is to be found in
the third chapter where after the author has an
nounced that "Everything has its appointed time
and there is a time [determined] for every occurrence
under the sun" and has illustrated this by adding
"There is a time [appointed] to be born, and a time to die.
There is a time [appointed] for planting, and a time for
uprooting,"
someone has added a series of no less than twelve
other antitheses.^* Now, apart from the inartistic
"Given in fullin the commentary, p. 210, and in the Appendix, p. 249.
89

A GENTLE CTNIC
heaping up of Illustrations of which a skillful writer
like Koheleth would not be guilty, and apart from
the repetitions In the list itself,^* their extraneous
character Is revealed by their deviation from the
point which Koheleth wishes to impress upon us.
He is not interested In a trivial attempt to enumer
ate the contrasts presented by the experiences of
life, but In showing that everything is foreordained
to happen at the time fixed for it. This is made
evident by the question which Koheleth poses
(v. 9) — ^what is the use of all one's work, since
what is to happen is bound to happen and to take
place, moreover, at the very time that God has
determined for it? The time of birth is fixed, as is
the time of death. It is foreordained and not de
pendent upon man's will or pleasure when one
should plant, just as the uprooting, referring either
to the pulling up of the fruit that has ripened be
neath the soil, or perhaps to the destmction through
a storm or blight of what has been planted, is
determined by God. When, however, to these two
apt illustrations, emphasizing that the beginning
and the end of things — and by implication also
what lies between — are predetermined. Irrespective
of anything that man may do, there is added a long
series of antitheses that merely represent contrasts,
"A time to destroy, and a time to repair,
A time to break down, and a time to build up,
A time to weep and a time to laugh," etc., etc., ending with
"A time of war, and a time of peace,"
" See the comments to iii. 3-8. 90

A GENTLE CTNIC
the supplement gives an entirely different turn to
the chapter, as though Koheleth had intended to
suggest the commonplace notion of "everything
In its season," that there is a proper time to destroy
and an appropriate time to repair, a proper moment
for pulling a building down and a proper occasion
to rebuild it, a time when war should be declared
and a time when peace ought to be made, and th.g
like. What Koheleth has in mind is to set forth the
doctrine of predestination, which, though following
logically from the conception of a power in abso
lute control of the universe, was regarded as most
unorthodox, since It seemed to deprive man of
independent initiative, and left no place for the
exercise of Divine justice in punishing the evil
doers and in rewarding the virtuous. The com
mentator or the several hands that added the long
series of antitheses did so with the Intent of
removing from the chapter the implication that
the world is ruled by blind fate. So successful was
the device that most of the modem exegetes have
interpreted Koheleth's thought as showing that
everything has its proper time — thus missing the
entire point of the real argument, which leads
logically to the question (in verse 9) as to the fu
tility of all human effort.
Another addition of this nature, intended again
to take off the edge of Koheleth's gentle cynicism,
occurs in the fourth chapter, in which he argues
that toil without enjoyment is particularly foolish
when one is all alone, unmarried or without a
91

A GENTLE CTNIC
business partner to whom one might become at
tached. For whom under such circumstances,
asks Koheleth pertinently, does one work and de
prive oneself of the joy of life? (iv. 8.) It is an un
comfortable question to be put to a phihstine steeped
in the conventionalities of the world about him,
which proclaims with smug satisfaction that honest
toil is essential to the well-being of men; and so he
purposely misunderstands the kernel of Koheleth's'
philosophy and tries to make us believe that Kohe
leth was merely railing against single blessedness —
against existence without a partner in life or in
business. Our conventional moralist gives an en
tirely different turn to the question which Koheleth
puts by holding up in sober fashion (Iv. 9-12) the
advantages of partnership over the man who stands
alone, "Two are better than one,
for they secure a better return for their toil.
In case they fall, the one can lift his fellow up,
but if a single person falls there is none to lift him
up." (iv. 9-10.)
Very sound advice to the one who wishes to go
into mercantile life, that he should take a partner so
as to be able to do a larger amount of business, and
in case of failure to be in a better position to get on
his feet again — ^but, surely, that is not the kind of
practical wisdom which Koheleth had In mind. Our
moralist adds, with a suggestion of the advantages
of conjugal partnership,
"If two sleep together, they get warm,
but how can a single person get warm ? " (iv. 11.)
92

A GENTLE CTNIC
And in order to take us still further away from
Koheleth's question he urges that in case of an
attack, two have a better chance of standing
against one, and that in such a three-cornered
fight a draw is the worst that can happen.
" If some one attacks, there are two to withstand.
And a triple cord is not easily snapped." (iv. 12.)
Therefore, get married, so as to have someone to
work for, and take a business partner so as to
stimulate your toil, whereas what Koheleth wants
to impress on us is that a life of toil, even though
one has a hundred children (vi. 3), is foolish with
out enjoyment. Why work in order to leave one's ¦
fortune to someone who has not toiled for It (ii. 21) ?
We have already called attention to little
comments in which the style of Koheleth is con
sciously imitated,^* so as to strengthen the impres
sion that our author is really orthodox and only
appears to argue on the other side so as to make
the orthodox answer all the more effective. By the
side of such comments, we have others which are
Intended to give a serious turn to what was set
forth by Koheleth in an ironical spirit.
Koheleth tells us (viii. 2-3) to be careful In
dealing with a king. Do what he commands,
instead of rushing to him to complain, for a king
will always do what he pleases. No one can ask a
king "What art thou doing?" By means of a small
comment, "because of the oath of God" (inserted
'' e.g., iii. 17. See above, p. 75. 93

A GENTLE CTNIC
at the close of verse 2), the impression is conveyed
that Koheleth advises one to obey the king because
one has sworn allegiance to him in God's name.
Similarly, by adding to Koheleth's caution against
lodging a complaint with a king, because it is use
less, a small comment, "do not plead a bad cause"
(Inserted at the close of verse 3), the irony of the
advice is lost, and an entirely different impression
conveyed from the one which Koheleth had in mind.
XII
APOLOGIZING FOR KOHELETH
Despite all these additions, calculated to
amend the character of the book, to convert its
skepticism and cynicism into orthodoxy and con
ventional morality, to make it appear that the
author was virtuous and God-fearing and that,
appearances to the contrary, the entire aim of the
book was to put together a series of maxims for
the guidance of life of the same general character
as the Book of Proverbs — despite all this, a doubt
must have remained in the minds of the orthodox
manipulators whether they had wholly succeeded
in their aim, for at the close of the book a number
of statements are added the apologetic character of
some of which is unmistakable. We have already
considered two which are due to the "pious"
and "maxim" commentators.^^ Besides these,
there are three others the purpose of which is to
assure the reader that Koheleth aimed to be a
" See above, p. 73 and p. 86. 94

A GENTLE CTNIC
real teacher, and that if some things in the book
appeared strange and bold, one must remember
that he was frank and that after all books must
not be taken too seriously, for an author writes
because it gives him pleasure to do so. We must
assume that each of these additions was made
separately, and that taken together they represent
somewhat varying opinions about Koheleth, though
all are conceived in a more or less apologetic spirit.
The first addition (xii. 9), after stating that Kohe
leth made other collections of proverbs,^^ and thus
Implying the identity of Koheleth with Solomon,
as a compiler of proverbs, reads
"Furthermore, Koheleth was a wise man and in other ways
taught people, compiling and searching."
He is, therefore, a safe guide to follow. One must
not suspect his orthodoxy, but the very emphasis
placed on the assurance that he is "all right,"
shows that some persons continued to shake their
heads. A second hand found it necessary to dis
tinguish between what he wrote and the style In
which he wrote.
"Koheleth aimed at a pleasant style with straightforward
expression." (Verse 10.)
The phrase which conveys the Idea of Koheleth's
being frank is somewhat vague — and no doubt
intentionally so — and therefore someone, who

™In agreement with the Solomonic tradition, I Kings v. 12, and
which shows again incidentally that this addition to Koheleth was made
after the completion of our Book of Proverbs, to which it no doubt refers.
9S

A GENTLE CTNIC
perhaps did not approve of thus apologizing for
Koheleth and who felt that the book could stand
on its own merits, added "he spoke the truth."
It must remain, of course, an open question whether
the one who made this addition sympathized
with Koheleth in its original form, or whether he
felt sufficient confidence In the changes that had
been made to give the book a different character,
so as to assure the reader that one is perfectly safe
In looking upon the book as conveying "the tmth,"
without any attempt at merely fine writing. Most
interesting of all is the third addition, again in
conscious imitation of the style of Koheleth,^' so
as to strengthen the Impression of authenticity.
"Furthermore, my son, beware of the writing of many
books without end
And much discussion [.?] ^'' is a weariness of the flesh."
The purpose Is clearly to suggest to those who
might have some lingering doubts as to the ortho
doxy of Koheleth even in its final and entirely
modified form, that after all a_book is only a book.
The written word must not be'regarJed as having
the same value as the spoken one, for a man speaks
when he has something to say, whereas a man
may write because he Is anxious to say something.
There are so many books In the world, presenting
the same subject from different points of view, that
" As above, p. 75.
'•> The exact meaning of the term which occurs only in this passage
is not certain. It is generally rendered "study" or "devotion to study."
The parallelism with "writing" suggests rather the meaning "talk," or
"discussion." 96

A GENTLE CTNIC
they surely cannot all be right. Therefore — do
not take books too seriously, and be careful be
fore you decide to add another to the endless list.
If you find some things In Koheleth that still im
press you as novel and not in accord with the teach
ings of the old-time religion which was good enough
for your parents and ought to be good enough for
you, remember that Koheleth was only — an au
thor, impelled by the literary Impulse to do what
you should avoid doing, adding another book to
the many that already burden mankind. Also, do
not indulge in too much talk, for it leads nowhere
and merely wears one out. Koheleth, to be sure,
might have approved of such a sentiment, but
that would merely prove that the cynic and the
advocate of the status quo occasionally meet.
" Duo quum faciunt idem, non est idem. "
The reflection against the foolishness of too much
talk in Koheleth's mouth would have had the usual
touch of irony, whereas to the commentator who
added it it was a thought to be taken most seri
ously. If Koheleth had wished to give expression
to the sentiment he would have found a place for it
In the body of the book. Its position after the
final verdict," all Is vanity," which Is clearly the end
of the book, shows that it is an addition, as also
that it is to be taken in a serious spirit, as a fur
ther waming against attaching too much Impor
tance to mere writing and discussion. The thing to
do is, as the pious commentator tells us, "Fear
7 97

A GENTLE CTNIC
God and keep his commandments." Read Kohe
leth if you wHl, and If you are not fully convinced of
Koheleth'sorthodoxy, don't enter into further argu
ments, but followthe dictates of the established reli
gion. Castyour doubts to the wind and "fear God."
We are fortunate In having the actual proof
that despite all attempts to alter the tone and
character of the book, its orthodoxy continued to
be open to suspicion a century before the book was
admitted into the canon. The vast compilation of
discussions on the Jewish laws and ceremonialism
that took place In the schools of the Rabbis In
Babylonia and Palestine and known as the Talmud"
contains a discussion ^^ between the schools of HlUel
and Shammal — two Rabbis who flourished In the
generation before Jesus — In regard to the book of
Koheleth. The Shammal school objected to the
book as not sacred because in advocating (xi. 9)
that one should follow "the inclinations of one's
mind and the sight of one's eyes, " it contradicted
the caution expressed in Numbers xv. 39, " Seek
not after your heart and your eyes"; but the Hil-
lel school pointed to the frequent Injunction, e.g.,
V. 6 and xH. 13 to "fear God" as proof of the
piety of the author. It is interesting to note^
that those who opposed the canonization of the
book quoted genuine passages, whereas the proofs
for the other side rested upon the additions that
" See for a general view of the Talmud, the monographs by Emanuel j
Deutsch and ArsSne Darmesteter, published by the American Jewish Piib=-J
lication Society. '
»" Talmud Babli., Sabbath 30 a-b and Megillah 7 a.
98

A GENTLE CTNIC
were made with the very aim of counteracting the
objectionable teachings. The discussion in the
Talmud is of value to us In proving that, in the
century before this era, all the additions had been
made and that in this uncritical age the superim
posed parts were looked upon as genuine. The
book was regarded as a unit, every word of which
as it stands was supposed to have been written by
Solomon. The contradictions in the book, how
ever, were so glaring that even pious Rabbis could
not close their eyes to them, but It was regarded as
sufficient to counterbalance the unorthodox ut
terances by the pious reflections that had been
superimposed. Another indication that the con
sciences of the pious were not fully convinced of
the orthodox character of the book is to be found
in the attempts to give a symbolical interpreta
tion to Koheleth. The theological exegetes did not
go so far as in the case of the Song of Songs, the
secular character of which was too obvious to be
overlooked, and which could only be accepted as
sacred by being regarded as an allegory with
the Beloved viewed as Israel and the lover as
Yahweh — ^but in the Aramaic text of Koheleth,
which Is a paraphrase rather than a translation,
we find the tendency throughout to give to the
worldly advice of Koheleth a symbolical and
semi-mystical interpretation. "Eat, drink and be
merry," becomes a command to rejoice In the
law of God and to walk in his ways. The wine is
Interpreted as the mystic drink hidden in the
99

A GENTLE CTNIC
Garden of Eden of which man was deprived by his
disobedience. The food Is the charity to be given
to the poor. " Looking upon good, " which to Kohe
leth means "having a good time, " becomes an in
junction to show one's soul as good and pure before
men, to walk in the right path as the means of
securing a good reward for one's labors. In the
course of this transformation of the book into an
allegory, teaching obedience to God's commands,
all references to worldly pleasures become a dis
guise for spiritual joys, cynical reflections on the
vanity of life become invitations to seek the salva
tion of the soul, and even denunciations of injus
tice in the world are given a semi-mystical interpre
tation. The symbolism is carried through to the
last chapter which instead of being regarded as
an impressive and original description of the com
ing of old age is interpreted as an allegorical pic
ture of Israel's history." The days of youth
which Koheleth says are made for enjoyment are
the days of Israel's prosperity, while the evil days
by which Koheleth means old age and death
symbolize the period of the Babylonian Exile; and
so throughout the chapter. All this shows that
even after the canon of the Old Testament had
been fixed and the Book of Koheleth had been
accepted as sacred, a lingering doubt remained
as to its orthodoxy which could only be dispelled
" So in the Introduction to the Midrash (i.i*., the Rabbinical homily)
on the Book of Lamentations. This Midrash also records the attempt to
set the book aside because it contained utterances bordering on heresy.
("Midrash Koheleth" to i. 3 and to xi. 9.)

A GENTLE CTNIC
by the application of the allegorical method, such
as a writer like Philo, the Jewish philosopher of
Alexandria who flourished about the time of Jesus,
applied to the entire Old Testament. By such a
method, it was evident, all the strange teachings
of a supposedly sacred book could be given an
interpretation in accord with the strictest ortho
doxy. The book was thus saved for the Jewish
and Christian church but, as we have seen, at
the expense of a complete transformation of its.
real teachings. Every step that was taken in the
direction of making it worthy of a place in a
sacred collection of orthodox writings was also a ~
step away from the correct interpretation of
Koheleth's thought. For all that, we should be
grateful to the many hands which manipulated the
book in the interests of Jewish orthodoxy, as also for
the success of their efforts, for without this success
ful distortion of the book it would in all probability
have been entirely lost, as no doubt other produc
tions were lost, and the world would have been the
poorer for a piece of literature that it could ill afford
to spare. Koheleth is the most fascinating book in
the Old Testament, -4i_the^ook of Job is the most
profound, and the Song of Songs the most charming.
XIII
TWO QUESTIONS REGARDING KOHELETH
Two questions may be raised by readers, espe
cially by such as have been accustomed to look
upon the book of Koheleth as a unit, and to whom
lOI

•J,

A GENTLE CTNIC
this historical and critical manner of treating
books of a sacred collection may be somewhat
novel and possibly startling. These must now be
considered. Is it really necessary to assume that the
" additions " to the kernel of the book, as above set
forth, were made by someone other than the author,
and secondly, if we accept the Implications of the
critical method in studying Biblical books what
becomes of their supposedly sacred character?
How can Koheleth be regarded as part of a sacred
canon ?
There are critical scholars who, while recog
nizing that the book in its present form contains
contradictory statements and that it is loaded with
maxims not relevant to the main thought of the
author, yet maintain the unity of the book" on the
ground that the additions were made by Koheleth
himself for fear of arousing opposition to the book
and in order to conceal its real nature as much as
possible. Such an assumption would reflect little
credit on Koheleth's character. It would stamp
him as a hypocrite, In addition to being a coward.
The hypocrisy in this Instance would have been
quite superfluous, since the adoption of a nom
de plume would have been a sufficient safeguard
against any possible attacks of a personal charac
ter. It Is gratuitous to assume that Koheleth was
such a great coward as to surround himself with a
double rampart. Moreover, is it likely that a
" So, e.g.. Professor D. S. Margoliouth, of Oxford, in his introduction
to Ecclesiastes, in the "Temple Bible."

A GENTLE CTNIC
writer who speaks as frankly as Koheleth does,
would have conceived the Machiavellian device
of himself adding the antidote to the poison that
he Instils Into the minds of his readers? Hardly.
A man who Is frank is rarely subtle — certainly not
subtle enough to appear to be dishonest. Finally
in supposing that Koheleth wrote his book in such
a way as to disguise his real meaning, we are
projecting modem methods of book publication
into a period in which books were not published at
all in our sense of the word.
We must picture to ourselves Koheleth as a
member of a circle, interested in the problems with
which the book deals. He gives expressions to
certain views which he shares with others. What
he wrote was spread within a limited range of
readers, and If It attracted also the attention of
those whose viewpoint was totally different, it
was due to the circumstance that the circle to
which Koheleth belonged and of which he was in
a sense the mouthpiece had acquired sufficient
prominence to arouse the opposition of the ortho
dox and pious. In the third century before this
era — and even before that — the intellectual life
among the Jews was sufficiently advanced to have
produced varying shades of opinion on religious
matters, as on questions of religious practice.
We miss the whole point of Koheleth's philosophy
of life, unless we regard it as one outcome among
others of considerable independent speculation
within the intellectual circles of the period in which
103

A GENTLE CTNIC
Koheleth flourished. If, belonging to a circle which
raised the question as to the basis and sufficiency
of the current religious views, Koheleth felt Im
pelled to write at all, the impulse could only have
led him to express his point of view — not to con
ceal it by a clumsy as well as a dishonest trick.
But, It may further be argued, Koheleth may
have been a man of many moods. In one of his
moods, he may have been a pessimist, perhaps
under the influence of a spell of indigestion, in
another he may have been optimistically inclined,
perhaps because of some pleasant experience.
There are other Instances of writers who now ap
pear to be skeptics, while at another time what
they write bears the earmarks of a reverent be
liever. Consistency is a rare virtue — even among
modern thinkers. It is not easy to say exactly
what an elusive writer like Anatole France believes
or does not believe. Renan Is reported to have
said of himself that he did not feel entirely happy
unless he contradicted himself twice a day. Who is
so chameleon-like in his thought as Bemard Shaw?
Reading him is like playing a game of now you see
it, now you don't. And Bernard Shaw is a jewel of
consistency compared to Gilbert Chesterton whose
metier it is to be paradoxical, and of whom the only
thing certain is that he is uncertain. May not
Koheleth have been of this type ? Possibly, though
in granting this we are again in danger of project
ing a modern spirit into an ancient writer.
Now if Koheleth had written two books, we
104

A GENTLE CTNIC
might even grant jthe possibility that the one
might be orthodox, and the other heterodox, but
unfortunately he wrote only one, or at least only
one has come down to us; and It Is putting too
great a strain on one's credulity to ask us to be
lieve, in order to maintain the unity of the book
In its present form, that Koheleth was so moody —
or rather so silly — as to blow hot and cold at the
same time. A man of such mental caliber would
hardly have produced anything that could have
stood the test of time as Koheleth has done.
Is it reasonable to assume that even the most
capricious writer would spoil his own work — and
a short book at that — by representing himself as
his own opponent? Koheleth, as will be pointed
out, is not always consistent. He claims in one
paragraph to hate life (ii. 17) and yet elsewhere —
and indeed in general — he loves life for life's sake;
and though he believes that things In this world
are preordained, he does not carry this view to
Its logical conclusion to the denial of free initiative
on the part of man. This, however, is quite a differ
ent matter from complaining In one place (viii. 10)
that the wicked are honored in life and even after
death, and then adding (vHI. 11-13) that though
sentence may be deferred for evil-doers, yet "it
shall not be well with them " and that those who
fear God will be prosperous, although elsewhere his
plaint is that virtue is not rewarded (vii. 15 ; ix. 15).
The contradictions of which Koheleth In its present
form is full affect the main thesis of the entire book,
I OS

A GENTLE CTNIC
to wit, that because one cannot see the workings
of justice in this world, and man can neither un
derstand the present nor know what is going to
happen in a world which appears to be ruled by
blind chance, the only thing to do is to try to have
as good a time as possible. Life without joy is a
failure. That is the reflection which, like a refrain,
is constantly suggested as Koheleth unfolds his
picture of the world in which we live. A writer of
many moods might at different times present va
rious aspects of a situation, but It is inconceivable
that he should upset his entire theory of life,
just after he has scored a strong point in favor
of it. The contradictions in Koheleth are always
encountered at a critical point in the exposition of
the theme; they come after Koheleth has given
utterance to a point of view, particularly startling
and obnoxious to the pious and conventional
reader. By virtue of this, these contradictory
statements reveal themselves as additions made by
some opponent of Koheleth, who is bent upon
controverting him, and who Is anxious to set up
against Koheleth's unorthodox thoughts the posi
tion taken by the pious. Moreover, the style In
which most of the additions are written plainly
shows that we are dealing with a different writer.
Note as an example the prosy and didactic way in
which the attempt is made to show that the wicked
are punished and the good rewarded in the illus
tration above given (viii. 11-13), as against the
pithy, vigorous and picturesque manner in which
106

A GENTLE CTNIC
Koheleth sets forth his cynical position that the
wicked flourish and are praised after their death
in the very place In which they carried on their
wicked careers.
Koheleth advises the young to enjoy them
selves in every possible way, to follow their in
clinations and "put away all trouble from their
minds" (xi. lo). Is it conceivable that he would
follow this up immediately by advising the same
youth "to remove evil from thy flesh?" The one
piece of advice Is In accord with Koheleth's view of
life as unfolded In his book, the other is clearly the
waming of one who is concemed for man's spiritual
and moral welfare. Chasing away cares so as
to enjoy life to the full is the direct opposite of
keeping oneself free from sin. Such a contradiction
is fundamental and cannot be accounted for by
assuming that Koheleth was of a changeable mood.
Caprice cannot be carried to the point of illogical
absurdity; and this Is what we are led to by the
attempt to save the unity of the book on the as
sumption that Koheleth had no real message to
convey, and therefore acted the part of the literary
buffoon. Not only that, but after ruining his work
by making it unintelligible and nonsensical, he
proceeded to pad it with illustrations and with
maxims of all kinds that interrupt the context and
that have no direct bearing either on the author's
theme, or on the arguments Introduced by him in
defense of that theme. Many of these maxims are,
to be sure, striking and some are admirable — espe-
107

A GENTLE CTNIC
cially those introduced into Chapters vii, x and xi —
but they become much more attractive when put
together^^ and regarded as extracts from a collec
tion, than in their present Interspersed position In
Koheleth, where they are distinctly disturbing to
the sequence of the thought which Koheleth wishes
to convey to his readers. And again, the style of
these sayings differs from that of the body of the
book and thus reveals their character as supple
ments to the real Koheleth, added at some time
after the completion of the book. If We had only
a few of such sayings, we might assume that Kohe
leth is Introducing them as apt quotations, but
their large number precludes the reasonableness
of such an inartistic procedure on the part of a
skinful writer. XIV
BELIEF IN THE BIBLE NOT AFFECTED BY
HISTORICAL AND LITERARY CRITICISM
Turning now to the second question — what
becomes of the supposedly sacred character of
Koheleth and Indeed of all the books of the Old
and New Testaments, if we treat the books In the
manner proposed by the critics? The question Is
a pertinent one, but the implication that by ap
plying a historical and critical method to the
study of the Old and New Testaments, the charac
ter of the books as part of a sacred canon Is endan
gered, rests upon an erroneous assumption of the
nature of historical criticism. The new approach
"' As has been done in the Appendix p. 249 et seq.
108

A GENTLE CTNIC
towards the books of the Bible which has become a
commonplace in modern scholarship throughout
the world affects beliefs about the Bible, but not
belief in the Bible. Acceptance of the ascertained
results of modern Biblical study obliges us to
abandon traditional views held concerning the
origin and composition of the books of the Old and
New Testaments when these views are shown to be
in direct contradiction to facts ascertained as the
result of research. This does not mean that the
factor of tradition is to be rejected entirely in the
critical study. Far from It. A tradition is seldom
entirely astray.*^ It rests generally on a basis
which has some substantiality, though not neces
sarily the one assumed by the tradition itself.
Besides, it is part of the critical method even when
it rejects a tradition to account for its rise, and in
doing so criticism generally comes to recognize a
residuum of value in the tradition, albeit rejected
as a whole. So, e.g., modern study has shown that
there are several distinct codes of the Pentateuch,
that these codes date from various periods, and
that they received their present form as the result
of a process of compilation and editing stretching
over centuries and terminating not earlier than the
end of the fifth century B.C., that is to say, at least
seven centuries after the death of Moses to whom
tradition ascribed all the laws. While historical
•^ For a more detailed discussion of the relationship of Biblical tradition
to criticism, see the author's paper on "Constructive Elements in the
Critical Study of the Old Testament" (Presidential address, published in the
Journal oj Biblical Literature, volume 36, pp. 1-30).
109

A GENTLE CTNIC
criticism thus rejects the tradition of the Mosaic
origin of the Pentateuchal codes. It yet recognizes
the value of the tradition, which would not have
arisen had not Moses impressed himself upon his
age as a law-giver In the ancient sense of rendering
decisions In the name of a deity. Law everywhere
In antiquity Is carried back to a divine origin, and
the tradition which represents Moses as receiving
the law from Yahweh, though the form of this
tradition In the Pentateuch itself is late, rests upon
an early and widespread belief, which thus aims to
account for the sanctity attaching to the laws.
Furthermore, it Is of the essence of law codes to
embody very old elements by the side of later
decisions and of amendments to original and very
ancient decisions. In all the codes to be distin
guished In the Pentateuch we come across such old
elements; and when we find decisions and statutes
that correspond to the social and religious condi
tions prevailing In the days of Moses, we are jus
tified in attributing them to the great leader under
whose stimulus the tribes of Israel are welded into
some kind of a unity that marks the beginning of
the national life.
Now, It is evident that the critical method,
besides in this way utilizing the substantial basis
of a tradition which In its complete form It rejects,
does not affect the question as to the value of the
codes nor of the beliefs which are embodied in them.
The test of these behefs lies outside the scope of
historical criticism; It falls within the domain

A GENTLE CTNIC
of theology with which historical criticism Is in no
way concerned.
What applies to the codes of the Pentateuch
holds good also for the narratives within which
the codes are encased. Historical criticism differ
entiates these narratives into their component
parts. Some of them rest upon a foundation of
myth, others represent the outcome of early non-
mjrthlcal speculation on the mysteries of the uni
verse and of human life. Some of the tales in Gen
esis and Exodus are folk-tales, reflecting In part
conditions of life under patriarchal conditions,
and In part representing popular traditions with an
historical substratum. The religious value of these
narratives resides not In the stories themselves,
but in the manner In which the tales are utilized
by the compilers and editors to whose combined
labors the final form Is due, to illustrate certain
conceptions of God as the single Power behind and
above the universe, and certain ethical principles
bearing on the position of man In the universe, or
on his duties and obligations. In short, the attitude
towards life, illustrated by the codes and the nar
ratives, gives us the religious import of the Pen
tateuch; and the value and underlying truth of
this attitude are again entirely independent of the
postulates of historical criticism.
This being clearly grasped. It will not seem
unreasonable to claim that through the historical
background, gained by the appHcation of the crit
ical method to the study of the books of the Bible,

A GENTLE CTNIC
we reach a deeper and far keener appreciation of the
contents of these books. How much more does
the utterance of a prophet — spoken or written —
mean to us when we are able to reconstruct the
conditions under which the utterance was made?
And if, as a result of the new approach towards
the Bible, we are led to reject the tradition which
places an utterance in the mouth of Isaiah,
because it belongs to a period subsequent to that
prophet's day, is there not more than a correspond
ing gain to be recognized in placing the utterance
itself in its proper perspective ? Once more,
the warning is in place not to confuse the cir
cumstances under which a prophet spoke or wrote
with the beliefs upon which his utterances rest,
or which they embody. The test of these beliefs,
likewise, lies outside of the scope of historical
criticism. The same applies to the Psalms, as the
most perfect expression of faith in the guidance
of a Power conceived in the most sublime spiritual
terms. Clearly, the justification of this faith, as
well as the capability that the remarkable col
lection still possesses after the lapse of two mlUen-
iums of influencing human lives, is Independent
of the origin and method of their composition. On
the contrary, knowledge of their origin can only
help to deepen the impression that they make.
The rejection of the tradition about the Psalms
may be painful when it is first forced home upon
us, because in the course of time the tradition has
become so closely bound up with the compositions.

A GENTLE CTNIC
themselves, but a moment's reflection must also
make it clear that the value of the Psalms has
nothing to do with the tradition. What matters
it who wrote them or when they were written?
Their value is not affected by the answer to such
questions, any more than the value of the religious
truths and aspirations to which they give such
sublime expression. XV
THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON AS A MIRROR
OF VARIOUS ASPECTS OF LIFE
Coming back to the Book of Koheleth, it
should be borne in mind that the Old Testament
gives us the remains of the literature produced by
the ancient Hebrews during the eight or possibly
nine centuries before this era. Much more was
produced than has come down to us, and we know
the names at least of some compositions which
were lost, because they were not preserved as part
of a sacred canon. Now the literary life of a people
presents many aspects, and we should, therefore,
expect to find in the canon traces of all kinds of
currents and countercurrents crisscrossing through
the ages. Koheleth, the Book of Job, the Song of
Songs, Proverbs, Ruth, and Daniel represent some
of these currents, all bound up with the religious
and social interests of the people among whom
these books arise. These productions, of an entirely
different character from the laws, the early narra
tives, the historical books and the collections of
the prophets, touch life at many angles. Their
8 113

A GENTLE CTNIC
inclusion in the canon Is due to the impression
which they made and to the influence which they
must have exerted, although we are no longer able
to trace the course of this Influence In detail. The
anonymity of all these productions, the reasons
for which I have tried to set forth, was a factor In
making them the expression of currents and
countercurrents in the life of the people as a
whole, with far less regard for individual points of
view (which, to be sure, are also to be recognized
in them) than we are apt to associate with a mod
em literary product. Anonymity, leading by a
natural transition to collective authorship, gives
to such books more particularly, as Koheleth and
the Book of Job, the character of "Tracts of the
Times," voicing views held in certain circles. These
views formed a part of the intellectual life of the
people, as much as did the expression of religious
aspirations In the Psalms, and as the Song of
Songs, a collection of popular love ditties, reflects
another aspect of the life and emotions of the
people. It was proper, therefore, that in a collec
tion which aimed to preserve what was best in the
literary legacy of the past, and which had made
its way into the thought of the people, literary
productions less distinctively religious and bor
dering on the secular should have found a place,
by the side of books that were In a superlative
degree religious. Religion among ancient peoples
— and particularly among a people like the He
brews passing through such a remarkable religious
114

A GENTLE CTNIC
experience — touches life at so many points and
connects with so many avenues that themes dealing
with problems of life and popular customs that for
us would be purely secular take on a religious aspect.
The dividing line between religious and what we
should regard as secular literature is not so sharply
drawn under conditions prevailing in antiquity.
From the modern point of view such productions as
Koheleth, Book of Job, Proverbs, and Song of
Songs are distinctly secular, and in- order to be
grasped in their real meaning should so be regarded ;
but they all — and particularly the first three —
are branches of the main religious current, run
ning through the life of the ancient Hebrews.
This trait was recognized or Instinctively felt by
those who were instrumental in bringing together
the canon of the best literature of the past, and
therefore the books In question were included in a
category from which In a stricter sense, as not
being sacred In their contents, they should have
been excluded. The difference of degree in sacred
ness between these books and the first two divis
ions of the Old Testament — the Pentateuch with
the historical books Joshua, Samuel and Kings
and the Prophets — was admitted by the Jewish
Rabbis, but when after considerable discussion,
of which we have traces in the Talmud,*^ they
were placed in the third division known as "mis
cellaneous writings," It was all the more Impor-
" The question was raised whether these books "defile the hands" — a
peculiar phrase, meaning whether they had to be handled with special care
as was the case with the books of the first two divisions of the O. T.
"5

A GENTLE CTNIC
tant to emphasize the sacred character given to
them, in order to put them on a par with the books
of the other two divisions. This end was acom-
plished by additions to some of the books — as in
the case of Koheleth and Job — and by a religious-
allegorical interpretation given to others, as in the
case of the Song of Songs.'* XVI
THE ORIGINAL VERSUS THE MODIFIED
KOHELETH
Confining ourselves here to Koheleth, and
leaving the details with regard to Job and Song of
Songs for special treatment of these two important
and fascinating productions, it Is the book in its
present form, as finally accepted by the Rabbis
who fixed the canon, that is sacred — ^not the original
Koheleth which, in fact, was objectionable from
the narrower and more exclusive religious point of
view. It is not begging the question, but the state
ment of a fact which may be accepted as literal,
that there are two books of Koheleth, one expressive
of views regarding life held in certain circles,
which in an Independent spirit had cut loose from
the conventional views that had grown up under
the influeace of the prophets' conception of divine
government of the universe, the other book as
modified, to make it conform, so far as possible, to
the teachings prevalent in orthodox and conser
vative circles. It Is tEe~latter book which was
" See above, p. sS- ii6

A GENTLE CTNIC
admitted into the canon. The former not only would
have been rejected, it was rejected by virtue of the
additions to which it was subjected, and which
gave to the teachings of the real Koheleth an en
tirely different direction, so different that If the
author of the original book were to come back to
life, he would have considerable difficulty in rec
ognizing his offspring.
Will It seem to be going too far to claim that
we cannot understand the modified Koheleth,
without making the endeavor to get back to
the original and real Koheleth? I hold not, and
that on the contrary Koheleth dressed up in
orthodox garb, himself becomes more intelligible
to us if we recognize the manner in which he re
ceived his strange disguise. By separating the
original kernel from the subsequent additions, we
are placed in a position to follow the process which
resulted in giving us a new book, that could be
regarded as worthy of a place in a sacred coi
tion. Nor need we accuse those who thus changed
the entire character of the book of any attempt at
willful deception. Apart from the fact that, as we
have seen,*' it was perfectly natural and Indeed
inevitable before the days when the claims of in
dividual authorship were fully recognized for any
piece of writing which conveyed a vital message
to be subject to additions and to steady modifi
cation, pious commentators, as well as those who
supplemented Koheleth's pithy sayings by others
" See above, p. 32. 117

A GENTLE CTNIC
which to them seemed to be relevant, or which t
supplemented Koheleth without being relevant,
felt that they were rendering a service to the cause
of religion and of ethics by showing on the one
hand how the questions raised by Koheleth might
be answered, and on the other how maxims Intended
as a guidance for life could be supplemented by
I others. From the critical and modern point of
view we recognize the Intent of these additions to,
be two-fold, to make the figure of Solomon as thei
reputed author of the book conform to the Solo-I
mon of orthodox tradition, and to give to the bookl
the character of being a collection of sayings, \
edifying and suitable for general reading like the
Book of Proverbs. We may feel certain that
the manipulators of the original book, living in
an uncritical age which had not developed the
historical sense that to us has become a com
monplace, felt that they were improving the
book by furnishing the antidote to Koheleth's
teachings. To be sure, Koheleth himself was in part to
blame for the production of this new and modified
edition of his book. His device in choosing a nom
de plume, which was Intended to convey the im-
' pression that King Solomon was the author, fur
nished the opponents of the book wdth a good
excuse for making the contents of the book conform
to the picture of the idealized Solomon. The very
success of the device thus gave the opponents of
Koheleth a weapon which they used against the
ii8

A GENTLE CTNIC
author. If Koheleth was Solomon, there was every
reason why he should be made to think and write
as Solomon, and the only Solomon recognized by
an uncritical age was the one that had grown up
under the infiuence of the tradition which instinc
tively converted all the figures of the past Into
types of piety and wisdom.
The sacred book of Koheleth is therefore the
one that appears in our Bibles. That is the one
which supplies us with the answer to the doubts
raised by the author as to the evidence of a reign
of justice in this world. The book In its final form
is the one which supplies a goal to life — denied by
the original Koheleth. That goal is pithily set
forth in one of the supplements at the end of the
book and repeated at various places In the additions j
to the body of the book, "Fear God and keep |
his commandments." The modified Koheleth is '
the one who warns us that God will bring man to
judgment for his acts. It is Koheleth in an ortho
dox garb, who assures us that, appearances to the
contrary, wickedness is punished and that the
world is ruled by a just Providence.
Finally, be it emphasized once more that we
should be grateful to those who thus succeeded in
giving to Koheleth the form of a book that could
be used for religious edification, for without this
the book would probably have been lost, as so
many other productions which did not find a
place in the canon failed to be preserved. The
new Koheleth saved the old one.
119

A GENTLE CTNIC
XVII
KOHELETH AND HIS "PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE"
Having set forth the history of the book and
Its real character, together with the modifications
which resulted In producing what is virtually a
second Koheleth, converting a secular book into a
sacred one, we are now prepared to pass on to an
outline of the philosophy of life embodied In the
original portions of Koheleth. In doing so I have a
two-fold purpose In view, to show that the atti
tude of the author towards the problems of human
existence confirms the conclusion, reached from
other considerations, as to the late date of the
book, between the close of the third century and
the beginning of the second century B.C., and on
the other hand to assign to the book its proper
place in Palestinian literature, which will inci
dentally justify its Inclusion among the choice
productions of the human mind that have a mes
sage, not limited to any particular period or clime.
The basic thought of Koheleth, repeated
some twenty times, is that "all is vanity" in this
world in which we move and have our being. The
author proceeds to prove this by taking up one
phase of human activity after the other. In this
way he makes clear what he means by "vanity,"
and on what he bases his philosophy of life. His
main contention is that there is no real progress
in the world, despite continued and uninterrupted
activity. In the poetic introduction (i. 3-1 1) which

A GENTLE CTNIC
may be regarded as a summary of his philosophy,
probably added by the author after he had finished
hi^s work, he sets forth an idea which must have
seemed startling when first uttered, that nature
herself shows the absence of any real aim or
progress in the universe. There is merely endless
repetition. Things are In a state of constant flux,
but there is no advance in nature. The sun moves
from east to west and back again to the east. The
wind shifts from south to north and comes back to
the direction whence it started. The rivers seem to
be rushing towards a goal, but there is no goal, for
they continue forever to flow to the sea Into which
they empty their waters, but which is never full.
Nature herself seems to grow weary of this mono
tonous moving picture, always unwinding the
same reel, and it is natural, therefore, that human
life, which likewise proceeds In a never-ending
circle, should become wearisome. What profit has
man of all of his activity, seeing that one genera
tion after the other passes away, each doing the
same things, each always active and yet none
pushing towards a definite goal ? There is no goal
to human existence any more than to nature.
That is the true significance of the famous phrase, *¦
coined by Koheleth, that "There is nothing new
under the sun" (i. 9). If there were something
really new, it would be an indication of a real ad
vance towards some goal. The reason why some
things which happen in the world appear to be
new is because what has happened is forgotten.

A GENTLE CTNIC
The record is lost. It is interesting to note, as an
illustration of the "modernity" of Koheleth, that
this thought of endless repetition in nature, which
forms the introduction to his book, is encountered
among thinkers of our own days and for whom
it likewise forms the starting point of their philos
ophy. So Amiel In his "Journal Intime" (under
date of the 4th of August, 1880) speaks of "nature
being governed by continuity, the continuity of
repetition * * * profound monotony in universal
movement — there Is the simplest formula fur
nished by the spectacle of the world." Similarly
Prince Eugene Troubetzkoy, who holds a chair In
the University of Moscow, in an article in the
Hibbert JournalioT Ja.mia.Ty, 1918 (page 179), con
cludes, from the everlasting repetition in nature, as
does Koheleth, the absence of a purpose in life.
"Life," he says, "is always repeating the same
vicious circle." It would appear indeed that
Koheleth by his observation of the endless and
monotonous repetition in nature has hit upon the
real basis of pessimistic philosophy wherever we
encounter it — whether In India, or in the West, in
the Ideas of Schopenhauer, as in those of Nietzsche,
concerning the eternal cycle.
Koheleth is, of course, aware of the obvious
objection to all this, that whereas nature is con
stantly repeating herself, and the experiences of
life pass along In a circle of endless repetition, yet
the repetition is never precisely the same, neither
in nature nor in history. No two trees are exactly

A GENTLE CTNIC
alike, no human experiences are completely copies
of one another. The history of one people differs
considerably from that of another. New discover
ies are constantly being made that change the
aspects of existence. Koheleth's answer would be
that the variations In the repetition do not affect
essentials, either in nature or in life. In contrast to
Amiel who says that in order to avoid fastidium
through the eternal repetition of nature, we must
lay stress " upon the small differences which exist,
and then by learning to enjoy repetition," Kohe
leth would claim that such differences as, e.g., the
difference between the course of the sun in summer
and its course in winter is a negligible quantity.
The sun rises and sets in constant succession — that
is the essential fact; and so one generation succeeds
another and passes through the same general expe
riences. The general Is thc essential, which is not
affected by any specific variation, either In the
life of individuals or of peoples. Besides, what
guarantee have we that even the variations had
not occurred endless times in the remote and for
gotten past? The individual Is constantly forget
ting what he once knew. The acquisition of knowl
edge is counterbalanced by the accompanying
process of dropping the contents of one's memory;
and so the collective memory of mankind loses by
the wayside facts and experiences which later
crop up anew. Discovery Is rediscovery. Perhaps
nature herself shares in this weakness of having
forgotten what she did in the past.
123

A GENTLE CTNIC
Furthermore — and this Is the more serious side
of Koheleth's thought — the new does not repre
sent a genuine advance over the old. If the aspects
of life are changed by the different circumstances
under which life is passed, by inventions and by
so-called reforms and improvements, what is it,
Koheleth would interpose, except looking at life
through different pieces of colored glass? Life
appears to be different but in reality is not, be
cause there is no nearer approach to any goal. The
world Is no better than It was In the remote past.
Man Is not happier. Life continues to be a struggle.
Sorrow follows man as a shadow, precisely as it
did his forefathers. We see around us the same
evils as in the days of yore. We are beset by the
same temptations and fall a victim to them. Pas
sions continue to rule, the reign of injustice never
comes to an end and wrong remains triumphant.
Such are the implications in the general view of
the world set forth by Koheleth in the Introduc-
'*'tion, which like an overture announces the musical
theme that Is to be set forth in its many variations.
Perhaps the most serious defect In the book
from the point of view of literary art is the absence
of any system in the development of this theme.
The book Is more in the nature of a series of caus
eries, passing lightly from one phase of the subject
to the other without regard either to logical order
or strict consistency. There Is no gradual approach
to a climax as there Is in the unfolding of the
central theme in the far more systematically
124

A GENTLE CTNIC
constructed book of Job, with which Koheleth is
allied. In Job, each aspect of the perplexing and
apparently insoluble problem of the reason for
unjust suffering in a world supposed to be created
by a wise and just God is thoroughly exhausted
before another is taken up. When we reach the
end of the discussion between Job and his friends, '*
despite the imperfect character of the last series of
speeches, ^^ we feel that everything that could be
brought forward has been said. Not so Koheleth,
who Is suggestive rather than exhaustive, lighting
up his theme sporadically here and there, but not
illuminating all its angles. The attempts which
have been made by some modern scholars to ob
tain a better sequence in the unfolding of the
theme by a rearrangement of verses and sections,
on the assumption that in the course of trans
mission the correct order was lost," must be pro
nounced failures, because they substitute for the
gentle cynic, who with an ironical smile on his lips
exposes life's vagaries with a delicate touch peculiar
ly his own, a ratherforbidding and pedantic logician,
who mercilessly and in cold blood imposes on his
readers a gloomy system of pessimistic philosophy.
Koheleth Is a dilettante in philosophy. He
would refuse to subscribe to any school of thought.
™ At the end of Chapter xxxi, which, as the subscript "End of the
words of Job " shows, was originally the close of the book.
" Chapters xxii-xxxi.
" The late Professor Bickell, of Vienna, justified his rearrangement on
the view that the string connecting the single leaves of the manuscript which
formed.our text broke, witb a resultant confusion in the attempt to put the
leaves together again. I2S

A GENTLE CTNIC
He is a free lance and is in turn a pessimist and a
bon vivant, a sympathizer with human suffering
and a belittler of human ambition, but he is always
in good humor. He smiles at the world. He is
scintillating In his thought, rather than profound.
His style Is not ponderous, as is the language of
Job, but light. He is too full of good humor to be a
really great and serious philosopher. He belongs
to the type of thinkers whom Renan characterizes
as not being altogether happy unless they contra
dict themselves at least twice a day. Koheleth Is
not afraid of the charge of inconsistency, but he
would have his answer ready, "Why not — ^life itself
is full of inconsistencies." And so, literary artist
though he is by the very simplicity and pungency
of his style, he Is willing to be Inartistic when it
comes to the unfolding of his theme. He indulges in
repetitions, and jumps rapidly, without logical tran
sition, from one aspect of his subject to the other.
To the general refrain that all is vanity, he
frequently adds the corollary that life is a game
of "chasing after wind" — a most picturesque
phrase to illustrate the foohshness of ambition,
which is as unsatisfactory as the attempt to catch
the wind. Wisdom Is chosen as the first Illustra
tion to prove that life is an empty bubble. What
does one gain by being as wise as Solomon, by
acquiring knowledge in excess of anyone else?
The ambition itself is a mischievous impulse that
God has implanted In the human breast merely to
worry and torture man (I. 13), for the more one
126

A GENTLE CTNIC
knows, the unhappier one becomes on recognizing
through one's wisdom how unsatisfying are all the
fleeting pleasures of this world. When you come to
examine them, sport and mirth become synony
mous with folly and madness (Ii. 2). The thought
in Koheleth's mind seems to be that the man who
becomes wise and who attains to real knowledge
inevitably recognizes that the pursuit of happiness
must end In ennui. One grows tired of life, as na
ture becomes tired of everlastingly doing the same
things. Monotony in nature is paralleled by ennui
in human life.
Ah, but perhaps the reason why happiness
does not satisfy one is because one does not get
enough of it. On the contrary, says Koheleth, the
more one gets, the less does it satisfy; and, as an
illustration, he sets forth in detail all the possible
pleasures that a man could have. Almost reveal
ing his disguise for King Solomon, Koheleth gives
a picture of the reign of that king as embellished
by legend and extravagant tradition." Solomon
arrayed in all his glory Is brought before us — the
king of superior wisdom and unlimited power, able
to command whatever pleased his fancy. The test is
complete because, when one can obtain everything,
one is in a position to note the net result of satis
fying one's desires to the full. What does Koheleth
as king find after building palaces and laying out
parks and reservoirs, after surrounding himself
" The picture accords with the description of Solomon's wealth,
his large retinue and building activities as set forth in I Kings, Chapters ix
and X. 127

A GENTLE CTNIC
with an enormous household with plenty of ser
vants, and with singers and musicians to cater to
his pleasure to the full, and after Indulging his
taste In women? He grows weary. Life does not
satisfy him. The monotony of it all tires him, for
though every day may bring its own round of
pleasures and festivities and homage, the variety is
exhausted after a while, and the ever revolving
circle begins anew. The refrain "All Is vanity and
chasing after wind" introduced here (ii. ii) to
which Koheleth adds "nothing was worth while"
strikes home with special force, because of the
completeness of the test, for surely the experiment
of life could not be made under more favorable
circumstances. No one can get more out of life
than a king. The example enables us to specify
the vanity of existence as due to two causes, first
because there is no goal In all one's activities and
pleasures, and secondly because one necessarily
grows tired of both after some time. Without a
goal, without real progress, life must be empty —
and Koheleth Is frank enough to assert that It is
empty. However, he leaves us one consolation —
wisdom is better than folly, for through wisdom,
which gives light, one at least can see the vanity of
it all, whereas folly Is darkness. This reservation
is characteristic of Koheleth. It emphasizes the
gentleness of his cynicism. He retains his good
humor, and therefore warns us against the con
clusion which would be natural to a morose spirit,
that one might as well be foolish as be wise.
I2g

A GENTLE CTNIC
No, says Koheleth, do not be so foolish as to sup
pose that it is better to be mad than to be sane.
Keep your sanity so that you may go through life
with a clear vision. To be sure, you must not expect
any advantage from not being a fool, for the same
end meets both the wise and the one who is not
wise. Both will be forgotten and the one dies pre
cisely as does the other (ii. i6).
XVIII
ANCIENT AND LATER BELIEFS REGARDING
THE DEAD
This thought that there is a common fate in
store for all — oblivion — Is a corollary to the view .
which declares that life must end In ennui. There
is no goal to death any more than to life. If death
led to anything further, Koheleth's system, so
far as he has one, would fall to pieces. He dwells
upon this common end to all alike and goes so far
as to question (III. 19-21) whether man's spirit
has a destiny superior to that of the beast. Ac
cepting the point of view which is also orthodox
doctrine (Genesis iii. 19), that man is of the dust and
to dust returns, Koheleth sees no reason why this
does not also hold good of animals. So he concludes
of man as of beasts that "all go to one place" (IH.
20). Our author thus shares the belief which was
common to Semites, that the dead are gathered in
the earth. From many sources''* we know that this
gathering place was conceived of as a great cavern
"See Jastrow, "Hebrew and Babylonian Traditions" p. 197 et seq.
9 129

A GENTLE CTNIC
in which the dead lie huddled together — conscious
but Inactive. The contribution that Koheleth
makes to the time-honored conception lies In the
corollary that man's end is not superior to that In
store for the beast. And yet the question which he
poses (iii. 21) — "Who knows whether the spirit of
the children of men mounts up and the spirit of the
beast goes down" — is an indication that the author
lived in an age which had passed beyond the primi
tive conception and had advanced to an attempt to
differentiate between the fate in store for the dead.
The thought of a heavenly abode for at least some
human souls must have been current, or the
question would be an idle one. Such an imphed
differentiation between the fate of those favored of
God and that of those who do not secure favor is
inherent in the conception of a divine Providence,
as set forth by the great prophets of the eighth and
succeeding centuries. The essential feature of that
conception was, as we have seen, that the national
Yahweh differs from other tribal protectors, inas
much as He rules the world according to standards
of justice and, therefore, imposes upon those who
claim to be His adherents the obligation to regu
late their lives by these standards. It was a logical
corollary that a just God punishes wrong and
rewards virtue; and this in turn led to an extension
of the exercise of divine justice beyond the grave.
It was Inconceivable that a just God could be so
inconsistent as to consign the good and the bad
alike to the same fate. To be sure, as long as
130

A GENTLE CTNIC
Yahweh, though a just God, was tied to national
limitations. His concern was mainly for the group
and only Incidentally for the individual within the
group. The prophets of the pre-exilic period are
stirred up by the national situation, and have little
concern for individuals, except in so far as the dis
tressing political turmoils and the unsatisfactory
social conditions, entailing general suffering and
affecting all classes of the inhabitants, showed
themselves in the lives of individuals. But when,
through the lessons learned by the temporary
extinction of the national Hie, the conception of a
national Protector, punishing His own people, be
cause they did not measure up to the standards
Imposed by Him, was logically enlarged to that of
the single Power above and behind the phenomena
of the universe, the individual fell under the control
of a guiding and supervising Providence, equally
with the group.
This process of an equalization between the
relations of the individual and of the group to the
universal Jehovah was one of slow growth, and it
Is not until close to the threshold of our era that
we encounter the definite belief in a reward for the
virtuous after death, in contradistinction to the
punishment of the wicked. Such a solution offered
the only satisfactory answer to the perplexing
problem, arising out of the conception of a univer
sal Power of good creating a world for the exercise
of justice and the promotion of righteousness. It
was the only way in which one could explain the
131

A GENTLE CTNIC
injustice and unmerited suffering so manifest in
the world. In the Book of Job, this solution is
not brought forward, though suggested in a fa-
pious passage" that represents a subsequent
Insertion, and that has in addition been manipu
lated so as to accord more fully with the later
beliefs. By the time, however, that Koheleth was
written the logical sequence was drawn — at least
In some circles — that the Innocent suffering of the
pious in this world would be compensated by the
assurance of a blessed hereafter; and correspond
ingly that the wicked would meet their merited
punishment in another world. If they successfully
escaped their doom in this one. This consideration
of itself leads us to place Koheleth after Job ; he is
separated from Job by about a century.
There are some scholars who are inclined to
place the author of Koheleth among the Saddu-
cees,'* because this Jewish sect denied the doc
trine of a resurrection of the dead, in contrast to
the Pharisees who accepted the belief as a corollary
to be drawn from the conception of a just God In
control of the fate of mankind. We must not,
however, press Koheleth's Intimation that there is
no difference between the ultimate fate of man
and that in store for the beast (iii. 19) too hard,
certainly not to the point of making him an
" Job xix. 25-27. The verses as they stand — particularly v. 26 — fur
nish no sense. The proof of this is to be seen in the lack of agreement among
commentators, with each one proposing a solution of his own for the unin
telligible — because corrupt — text.
" So particularly Ludwig Levy, "Das Buch Qoheleth" (Leipzig, 1912).
132

A GENTLE CTNIC
adherent of a particular school of thought. He is
independent of any school. It is true, however,
as we know from other sources, that the Sadducees,
as the more conservative as well as the more
aristocratic party, clung to the traditional belief
in a general gathering place for the dead, whHe
the Pharisees, the sect of the people, were more
progressive in yielding to the further development
of both religion and practice along the new path
mapped out by the prophet's conception of divine
government. Personal piety as a means of securing
divine power was one of the consequences of the
new doctrine. Accordingly, we find the curious
contradiction in the Pharisaic party of being on
the one hand the advocates of detailed ceremonial
ism which was a by-product of personal piety, and,
on the other hand, more advanced in their reli
gious thought.^' This involved the acceptance of
a radically different view of life after death, making
not only a distinction between the fate of the good
and that of the wicked, but likewise leading to a
doctrine of rewards and punishments, and as a fur
ther and logical implication to the unfolding of a
doctrine of the resurrection of the dead. These
three aspects of life after death follow one another
in a natural sequence. The passage In Koheleth
Is proof that, at the time of the appearance of the
book, a special place for the dead in heaven. In con
trast to the subterranean cave, formed part of the
" For further details of the Pharisees and Sadducees, the reader is
referred to Schuerer, "History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus
Christ," ii, 2, pp. 10-43. 133

A GENTLE CTNIC
new belief, though again we must be warned against
pressing the language too hard.
Koheleth is averse to speculation as to the
fate of the dead. He realizes that the new doctrine
rests on the faith in a Creator who is bent upon the
execution of justice, but with his eyes directed
towards life as it presents itself in the world,
Koheleth is unwilling to pass beyond actual expe
rience into the realm of nebulous theological
speculation, albeit the doctrines derived from such
speculations may be reinforced by logical deduc
tions from certain premises. Koheleth is not for
that reason athelstlcally inclined. Far from it.
The word God occurs no less than nineteen times in
the genuine portions of this little book. He never
questions the existence of a supreme Power and
the fact that he uses the generic name for deity
(Elohim)^* and never the specific name (Yahweh)
of the national deity is a welcome indication that
he has passed beyond the stage of any narrow
nationalistic conception In his religious attitude.
God for him is a Power of universal scope, as in
general he has thrown off any particularistic view
which would single out one people as standing in a
specifically close relation to the Deity. He is a
Jew of the broadest type without a trace of sec
tarianism. Koheleth never speaks of a chosen
people, but always of the "children of men," that
Is, mankind as a whole. As a Sadducee, he would
have betrayed his particularism at some point or
" See the comment to i. 13 (p. 203).
134

A GENTLE CTNIC
the other. He is a thelst, because atheism would
have appeared to him to be an illogical assump
tion of a world coming into existence without
cause and ruled by a blind mechanism. The God
of Koheleth, however, is not endowed with any
moral attributes. He represents the Power that is
behind all phenomena, but a Power who, so far as
man is concerned. Is beyond knowledge, whose
ways are hidden from mankind and whom man
cannot by searching hope to know. Koheleth is
consistently averse to speculation either about
nature, life, man or God. He merely asks us to be
frank enough to look at life as it is. Everything
lying beyond the evidence of our senses and out
side of the realm of experience is unknown and
unknowable. God, he says (I. 13), has implanted
in us the desire to know things, He has given us
(Hi. 11) the capacity to grasp the world with our
intellect, but without the power to carry our
search to any satisfactory conclusion. Again
and again he impresses upon us the hopelessness
of fathoming the mysteries of existence. " Man can
not know "the work of God who makes all things."'"
Judging solely by the evidence of our senses, death
appears to be the end of man as of the beast. The
common experience teaches us that the future
Is hidden from us, and that through wisdom
we are not brought nearer to a penetration Into
God's work.

" Chapter iii. 1 1 ; vii. 14; viii. 17; ix. 12.
»° Chapter xi. j. 13s

A GENTLE CTNIC
Looking at life as it actually presents itself,
there are only two conclusions that can be safely
drawn, one that mere ambition Is useless, since
It brings neither happiness nor illumination, and
the other that life is made for enjoyment. Both
conclusions are set forth at the close of the
decisive test which Koheleth undertook, only to
find out that all achievements and all pleasures
end in ennui. Since, moreover, there is a common
fate to all — to the wise and the foolish alike —
(ii. i6; ix. 2) the more logical corollary would be
to regard life itself as useless. Koheleth actually
says so In one place (ii. 17), "I hated life, for all
that happened under the sun seemed evil to me,
since all was vanity and chasing after wind," but
It is the only passage in the book in which this
thought Is expressed. As a matter of fact, Kohe
leth loves life, and this Inconsistency, of which
there are other examples, adds to the charm of the
book. "As a living dog," runs a passage that
has become famous, "one is better off than a dead
lion" (Ix. 4). His reason for giving the preference
to the dog is, to be sure, not very comforting —
nor complimentary to the dog — "for the living"
— he adds — "at least know that they will die,
whereas the dead know absolutely nothing."
^His pessimism, however, is only skin deep and,
like most pessimists, he clings to life. Job, who
is not a pessimist, for a moment may think of
suicide as a means of putting an end to his suf
ferings. The suggestion is made to him by his
136

A GENTLE CTNIC
wife,*^ but he rejects It. Koheleth may talk about
hating life. He may praise the dead as better off
than those who are alive and add "better than
both is the one who has not yet been, who has not
seen the evil happenings under the sun" (iv. 3),
but he does not really think this. Pessimists talk
that way, but there are few instances of pessimists
deliberately shuffling off the mortal coil against
which they rail. They get rid of any suicidal ten
dencies by writing long disquisitions on the use
lessness of life. Schopenhauer, the most eminent
of modern pessimists, is a notable example of the .
care which pessimists take to preserve their health.**
In reality, the pessimist believes with Koheleth
(xi. 7) "Light is sweet and it Is pleasant for the
eyes to see the sun." The real Koheleth reveals
himself in this sentiment, as in the advice to "eat
drink, and be merry" which repeated half a dozen
times forms'^ the supplement to the constant
refrain, "All Is vanity and chasing after wind."
To hate all ambition, however, Is consistent
with the conclusion that finds In enjoyment the
solace for life's misery. Accordingly Koheleth
emphasizes the reason for "hating" all his toil
(II. 18). Why make work the aim and content of
life, since all that you obtain in return for your
trouble and vexation is the doubtful privilege of
leaving what you have acquired to someone who
wHl enjoy It without having worked for it (II. 19) ?
'• Chapter ii. 9 "Curse God and die" — an euphemism for "do away with
thyself." "It is well known that Schopenhauer had a horror of death.
"3 See note 84. 137

A GENTLE CTNIC
You may be wise, but the chances are that your
heir will be a fool; and at all events your days of
pain and nights of worry are all to no purpose.
Again (Hi. 1-2 and 9), since everything that hap
pens is foreordained to occur at the time proper
to It, why exert yourself since what is to happen
will take place, independently of any efforts on
your part. Man labors, Koheleth tells, either from
the ambition to outstrip his fellows (iv. 4), or to
amass wealth (v. 9). Both motives are "vanity
and chasing after wind." What possible satisfac
tion can there be in rivalry? Surely cooperation
is better than competition, for as the commentator
to the passage (Iv. 9-12) emphasizes, with a partner
instead of a rival your business will grow in amount
and you will be less liable to collapse in case of
business failure. It will be easier to get on your
feet again with the help of a partner. In the
struggle for life, two against one have a better
chance than one against two. As for wealth (v. 10),
the more you have, the greater the obligations
that are Imposed upon you. Your household
increases. Others live on your profits, and your
only satisfaction is to look at what you have
amassed — a melancholy reward for all your toil.
XIX
A GENTLE CYNIC
(Is it logical to conclude from premises such as
these, as Koheleth does, that "There is nothing
I better for man to do than 'to eat, drink, and to
\ 138

i

A GENTLE CTNIC
I have a good time' " ?** Hardly. If he were a consis-
/ tent pessimist, he would urge his readers "to hate
/ life," as he inadvertently does in one passage.** His
I advice would be to escape life, by suicide or by
/ withdrawing from all the idle pleasures of the
I world. But asceticism is as far removed from
Koheleth's frame of mind, as Is the Buddhistic
doctrine of making life a preparation for complete
extinction, without the consciousness that, ac
cording to Semitic beliefs, follows man beyond the
\ grave. It is precisely in the corollary "eat, drink,
and be merry" to the refrain of "all is vanity,"
that Koheleth reveals himself as the gentle cynic.
Do not take life seriously, or at all events not too
/ seriously, is the sum and substance of his philos-
' ophy. Even enjoyment must not be taken too
seriously. You will tire of it, as Solomon grew
weary of all his pleasures, but it is the best thing
that you can do under the circumstances. Life
has no goal — ^therefore, smile at life, and pity
those who live under the delusion that life is a
very serious business. This ironical attitude to
wards the fleeting panorama of human existence
naturally aroused the opposition of the pious and
orthodox towards the book. By his illogical con
clusion, he aimed a fatal blow at the whole structure
of Judaism which rests on the behef in man as
God's choicest handiwork — the crowning act of
creation, placed here by a just and good Providence.
" Chapter ii. 24 and repeated with variations iii. 12-13 and 22; v. 17;
viii. 15; ix. 7-10; xi. 7-IC.
''See above p. 136. 139

A GENTLE CTNIC
"Life is real, life Is earnest" was the doctrine that
grew up out of the prophet's conception of relig
ion. Koheleth says that life Is a shadow, without
substance. It cannot be earnest because it has no
aim. But why, then, enjoyment as the best way
of spending one's days on earth ? Simply, because
there is nothing else to do, certainly nothing
better. Koheleth does not preach happiness as
the goal of life, but as the only means of not being
'Overwhelmed by the sadness of life, which must
ensue if you have the courage to look at things as
they are.
Without formulating a system — which would
be distasteful to Koheleth's light and easy-going
nature — he proceeds to show that his advice is
in accord with God's plans for man, so far as we
can detect any plan. Unless we try to forget what
life really is by enjoying our days, we involve
ourselves in a tangle of arguments from which
there Is no escape. He has already proved*^ that
work cannot be the purpose of life, for work ends
In leaving the fruits of your labors to those who
will care nothing about you. You will be forgotten,
while others enjoy. Nor can the purpose of life be
to ascertain the meaning of existence, to contem
plate the works of God and penetrate to the core
of things. God is past finding out. Man cannot
know what God is doing (Hi. ii). The future is
hidden from man as behind a veil, and though a
wise man may think that he has solved the riddle
w See above, p. 137. 140

A GENTLE CTNIC
of the universe, it Is a delusion pure and simple
(viii. 17). All that man can ascertain as the result
of his search through wisdom and knowledge is
that the happenings of this world are preordained
by God and take place in the order and at the
time determined by the great Power who governs
all things — in nature and in human existence. Is
Koheleth then a fatalist? Surely, but he is as in
consistent In his fatalism as in his pessimism.
The time when a man Is to be born Is fixed as is the
time of his death (iii. 2) — ^fixed as definitely as the
time for sowing seeds and for pulling up the ri
pened plant. If everything is preordained, it is
Idle to make the effort to change things. Koheleth's
conclusion from his fatalistic outlook upon life is
to discourage those who believe that the aim of life
Is to work for reforms and improvement, to leave
the world better than they found it, even though"
it be only a trifle better.
Such an aim is an idle hope — "vanity and
chasing after wind" — as much as is the search for
wisdom and the amassing of wealth. It is a delu
sion to suppose that one can really do anything in
a world entirely controlled by a supreme Spirit —
aye. It Is presumptuous to make the attempt. Man
can add nothing to what God does, as little as he
can take anything away (HI. 14). To try "to make
that straight which He {i.e., God) has made
crooked" (vii. 13) is to interfere with God's plans,
to play the part of Providence. You must content
yourself with taking things as they are, and to
141

A GENTLE CTNIC
remember that prosperity and adversity (or what
you consider as such) are both the work of God
(vii. 14). As for the meaning of this constant
alternation of joy and sorrow, abandon the effort
to fathom the mystery. God purposely permits
the one to follow the other, so as to prevent you
from divining the future. With this thought that
God does not want man to solve the problem of
life, Koheleth may be said to have reached the
extreme point of separation from the orthodox and
conventional point of view, not so much, however,
in the thought itself as in his manner of putting it.
That God's ways are past finding out was good
orthodox doctrine, following upon the spiritual con
ception of a divine Providence who works in a
mysterious way, but with the doctrine went the
faith that a good and just God must do all things
for the best. At this point, Koheleth parts com-
j. pany from orthodoxy and boldly asserts that from
the evidence furnished by human experience one
has no warrant for such faith. If things are pre
ordained, it not only follows that it is presump
tuous to look upon one's aim in life to bring about
an improvement in the lot of mankind, to correct
abuses, to help the needy, to instruct the ignorant,
to correct the erring, but it also follows that you
must take things as they are and as they come.
Now what do we actually find In the world
in which we live and have our being? The cynic,
though stHl a gentle one, steps in and tells us.
How is it possible to believe that the world is
142

A GENTLE CTNIC
govemed by a just Power when we encounter —
as we constantly do — wickedness enthroned where
righteousness should be (Iii. i6) and oppression
everywhere with no relief in sight (iv. i)? Kohe
leth Is aware of the stock argument, which Is also
brought forward In the Book of Job to justify a
topsy-turvy world, by saying that suffering and
the apparent triumph of wrong is permitted by
God as a test of man's calibre and that In the
end — as the commentator adds (HI. 17) — God will
judge the righteous and the wicked, with the im
plication that the Innocent sufferers will receive
their reward for having endured the test, and that
the wrongdoers will meet their punishment. What
Is the value of such a test, asks Koheleth, as a
means of ascertaining who are genuinely virtuous
and God-fearing and who are not? What does
such a test show except that man is as the beast?
Some beasts are happy because they are permitted
j:o lead a peaceful life, others are hunted down
through no fault of their own. The inequality in
the fortunes of men Is of the same order and — what
makes the analogy complete — man and beast die
ahke. "All are of the dust and all return to dust."
There is no assurance that man's spirit ascends
after death, and that the spirit of the beast de
scends (iv. 21). Koheleth's argument is that the
test made by God is to no purpose, since there
is no recompense for suffering and injustice. The
virtuous die under the test, and the wicked thrive
despite the test. 143

A GENTLE CTNIC
The test, therefore, merely ends in the cer
tainty that man and beast share the same fate.
Were Koheleth a genuine pessimist, he might have
urged the chilly consolation of the Stoic that one
should be resigned to one's fate and suffer in pa
tience, but he is too human not to be deeply
stirred by the sufferings of mankind. Briefiy but
eloquently he describes the sad contrast between
"the tears of the oppressed without anyone to
console them" and the violence of their oppressors
(iv. i). Tears versus Power — such is the world in
which men live. So it has always been and so it
wHl continue to be. Are not the dead happier,
therefore, because relieved of suffering and of the
sight of suffering? Are not those happiest of all
who have never been born ? We know that Kohe
leth does not think so, but he puts the question in
order to illustrate more forcibly the point that he
has in mind, to wit, that there is no satisfactory
solution to the problem with which the author of
Job grapples — the reason for the triumph of wrong,
and for unjust suffering in a world created by a
good Power, who stamps His creation with His
trade-mark "And God saw that it was good." The
problem, it must be borne in mind, arises only with
the advanced conception of divine government
of the universe, which replaces the old view of
many gods as personifications of the powers man
ifesting themselves in nature — the power of the
sun, the power of fire, the power of the earth, of the
storm or what not — by a single Force, spiritually
144

A GENTLE CTNIC
conceived in terms of ethics. The chief attribute of
the old gods is strength, as against justice tempered
with mercy and love which are the attributes of
the spiritual Being, presiding over the destinies of
mankind. As long as Yahweh was merely the
national deity of the Hebrews, whose protection
and supervision were limited to one particular
group, the arbitrariness of his activity was taken
for granted. He had his favorites and he could
manifest his anger at his pleasure. The task of his
worshippers was limited to efforts to secure his
protection by bribes in the form of sacrifices, and
by flatteries in the form of Incantations and
direct appeals. But when Yahweh becomes a
Being who demands obedience to high ethical
Bstandards as a condition of His favor, the corollary
lis necessarily drawn that God Himself is good and
fi just. Such a Being cannot brook injustice, because
(/ contrary to the self-imposed laws by means of
which He rules the universe. At this stage the
vexing problem arises with which religious minds
ever since have grappled, how to reconcile the ex
istence of evil and injustice in the world with the
conception of a good and just God. The author
of the book of Job struggles earnestly and pathet
ically with this momentous question. The author
of Koheleth tackles It lightly and In a semi-ironical
spirit. He holds the mirror up to the real world
and asks us to look at the Image reflected therein.
Both Job and Koheleth, however, represent
the reaction on those who had the courage to face
10 145

A GENTLE CTNIC
the facts of existence against what had come to
be the conventional religious view of a world in
which — as was assumed — goodness and justice
must be triumphant, because the supreme Ruler
possesses these attributes. The Book of Job in its
original form ends in a non liquet, in a practical
admission that the problem is insoluble with a
faint suggestion, however, as a crumb of comfort,
that what may be hidden from us may neverthe
less rest on a basis of divine equity. There may be
a compensation for Innocent suffering, but such a
possibility is concealed behind a thick mist through
which the human mind cannot penetrate. Koheleth
says — why try to solve the problem ? It will be of
no use, for arguments cannot change facts, and the
solution, if one could be found, will not mitigate
the injustice and suffering In the world. It does
not ease Job's pain when suffering the tortures of
the damned to be told that it is all a test — even
if it were true; and It would only increase his
misery to become convinced that he must have
committed some misdeed, which is certainly not
true, for the point is that Job was "God fearing
and removed from evil." By all means, beHeve
in a just and merciful Providence if you can, says
Koheleth, but be frank enough to recognize that
you "cannot fathom the work of God from the
beginning to the end" (iii. ii). Do not delude
yourself with high-sounding phrases that are empty
of meaning. The jargon of the pious merely serves
to close your eyes to the wrongs that are being
146

A GENTLE CTNIC
done, and to shut your ears against hearing the
pitiful cries of those who suffer for no good reason.
Tears versus Power — such Is the world.
One thing, however, we do know, namely,
that joy makes life bearable; and since everything
that happens Is ordained of God, happiness should
be looked upon as a "gift of God" (Hi. 13, v. 18),
it comes from "the hand of God" (II. 24) and Is
"man's portion" (HI. 22). Joy is approved by God
^ (v. 19); it Is a sign that "God approves of man's
H works" (ix. 7). The variations in the expressive
I phrase used by Koheleth to justify his conclusion
I that man should spend his life in joy are not accl-
/ dental; they are introduced to emphasize in every
/ possible way that the one thing certain among the
uncertainties of the world is — happiness.
XX
KOHELETH AND GREEK THOUGHT
Is Koheleth to be called a Hedonist — an
adherent of the philosophy that looked upon
"pleasure" (hedone) as the aim of life? Is he a
follower of Epicurus, because of his oft-repeated
advice to "eat, drink, and be merry," which he
carries so far as to urge the young to "follow the
inclinations of their minds and the sight of their
eyes" (xi. 9)? Some scholars have seen in this
aspect of Koheleth's attitude toward life the reflex
of Greek philosophy, as they also attribute his
skepticism in regard to a just Providence to the
spread of Greek philosophy among the Jews. No
147

A GENTLE CTNIC
doubt Greek thought, as a significant phase of
Greek culture, must have made Its influence felt In
Palestine where Koheleth lived, with the influx of
Greek ideas, with the adoption of Greek forms of
government and the imitation of Greek modes of
life throughout the Orient after the conquests of
Alexander the Great (334-323 b.c). The Greek
spirit, we have seen, tended towards individualism;*^
it promoted independent thought, leading on the
one hand to the definite recognition of authorship
in literary production, and on the other to the rise
of systems of philosophy, associated with indi
vidual thinkers — Pythagoras, Heraclitus, Demo-
critus, Epicurus, Zeno, Socrates, Plato, and Aris
totle. The chief outcome, however, of Greek cul
ture In the intellectual domain was, outside of art,
the giving rise to the scientific spirit, substituting
astronomy for astrology without, to be sure, sup
pressing the latter entirely, giving to medicine,
up to that time a purely empirical art, a more scien
tific aspect by the study of anatomy and physiol
ogy, and promoting the exact study of the forces
of nature and the structure of animals. Koheleth
betrays to a considerable extent the influence of
this scientific spirit. His observations on nature,
especially in the Introduction to the book, lead
him to recognize the Invariability of the laws of
the universe. He knows that dreams come from
too much business (v. 2.), that is, from mental
activity continued during sleep. The interpreta-
" See above, p. 39. 148

A GENTLE CTNIC
tion of dreams is, therefore, an Idle pursuit. Per
haps the experience that overeating is not condu
cive to sleep (v. II ) may have been gained without
any knowledge of the reason therefor, but certainly
the manner of stating that the hard worker sleeps
"whether he has eaten little or much" sounds as
though the author had evolved a theory of the
cause of sleep. Significant is the knowledge of the
structure of the body and the function of the
human organs revealed in the impressive closing
chapter of the book.** There Is a system In the
successive enumeration of the hips, legs, teeth,
eyes, ears, voice and hair, as in the recognition of
the function of the brain, spine, and kidneys,
though veiled under poetic metaphors. On the
basis of this chapter Professor Haupt concludes
that Koheleth must have been a physician,*'
which may well have been the case. Certainly he
must have known something of the theories and
experiments of the Greek schools of medicine,
following along the path marked out by Hippo
crates. We also know from the discussions of the
Rabbis in the Talmud that the Greek systems of
philosophy had made their way into Palestine and
Babylonia during the last two centuries pre
ceding our era, while In Alexandria we note the
rise of a system of philosophy in the century be
fore this era, which attempts to reconcile the
speculations and conclusions of Greek phlloso-
^ See the comments to this chapter, p. 238 et seq.
»»"The Book of Ecclesiastes" in "Oriental Studies" (Philadelphia,
1894) p. 238 etseq., p. 275 (note 60). 149

A GENTLE CTNIC
phers with Jewish theology, and of which we find
significant traces in the Gospel of John and in the
Pauline epistles.'"
The spirit of Greek philosophy was at all
times hostile to the prevailing beliefs among the
Greeks. Plato alone appears to have made an
attempt to save some fragments out of the wreck
of Greek mythology, through the rise of systems
which found no place for the gods of ancient
Greece. The tone of Koheleth when he deals with
the naive conception of divine government that
marked the pious adherents of Judaism Is not
unlike the somewhat patronizing attitude of Greek
philosophers towards the conventional religion,
which they hardly regarded as of sufficient mo
ment to warrant an energetic campaign against it.
The old structure, they felt, was shaken in its
foundations and was destined to give way without
any direct attack. Koheleth is too good-natured
to oppose the theology that arose from the new
conception of religion brought forward by the
prophets. He tolerates It, but he shows by Insinu
ation rather than by any polemical disposition how
insufficient it is as a means of explaining the actual
conditions of life. His skepticism is of an easy
going character, as his cynicism is always gentle,
with only an occasional sting. In his general atti
tude towards the Judaism of his day, which on the
ceremonial side — sacrifices and inquiries of priests
'» See Schuerer, "The History of the Jewish People in the time of
Jesus Christ," ii. 3, p. 381, or Edward Caird, "Evolution of Theology in
the Greek Philosophers, ii., p. 357 et seq.
ISO

A GENTLE CTNIC
as to the significance of dreams and portents —
was full of survivals of primitive points of view,
we may recognize the Influence of the new spirit
that had come into the land with the advent of
the Greeks. But we must not press this influ
ence too hard, and attempt to see in Koheleth's
view of predestination and of submission to fate
the teachings of the Greek Stoics, or make him an
adherent of the school of Heraclitus or Epicurus,
because of his advocacy of enjoyment as the le
gitimate function of existence. He is not the type
of mind that follows strictly and consistently any
particular school of thought. He goes his own way
in setting before us the picture of the world, as it is
reflected in his mind. Above ah, he would lay no
claim to being consistent. We have seen that he
does not draw the conclusion, from his view of all
things being predetermined by God, that man lacks
freedom of will. It Is doubtful whether he would
quite have understood the meaning of the tech
nical term; and he merely goes so far as to dis
courage the effort of man to improve things, as
though this were the aim of Hfe. That is not
man's business. If there is to be any improvement
— and Koheleth sees no evidence for this, but
merely endless repetition — it must be left to God.
Do what lies immediately before you and do it'
to the full, "for there is no activity, no reckoning,
no knowledge and no wisdom in Sheol whither
thou goest" (ix. lo). As for the rest, enjoy your
self as much as you can.

A GENTLE CTNIC
It Is sufficient, therefore, to assume that con
tact with Greek culture lent a stimulus to Inde
pendent thought among the Jews; it helped to
accentuate the difficulties involved in accepting
the implications of a faith that placed at the head
of the universe a Power for good, but who per
mitted evil to flourish in a world of His making.
The problem itself, however, was a Jewish one,
insofar as It represented the reaction against the
conventional piety which grew up on the basis of
the distinctively ethical monotheism of the Jews.
It Is not necessary to pass outside of a Jewish en
vironment in order to explain either the trend of
Koheleth's thought or his conclusions, beyond the
Initial impulse towards independent thought which
through the spread of Greek culture In the Orient
had become part of the spirit of the age. Koheleth
was caught by the Zeitgeist, but without becom
ing an adherent of any particular school — Greek
or otherwise. XXI
KOHELETH'S ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE CULT
The further justification in thus regarding
Koheleth as a free lance, following the drift of his
own thought into whatever direction his changing
fancy, his good humor, and his human sympathies
— under a mask of gentle irony — led him, is to be
found in his easy-going and not altogether con
sistent attitude towards religious worship, towards
affairs of government, towards women, and above
all In his view that although enjoyment of life is
152

A GENTLE CTNIC
the best way of spending one's days, yet even of
this one will tire, and finally that toil is to be joined
to sipping the honey out of the flower of existence.
To go to the temple for the purpose of offering
sacrifices is from Koheleth's rationalistic point of
view a waste of time (iv. 17), as It is foolish to go to
the priest in order to receive an interpretation of a
dream or to obtain an oracle of any kind. "God is
In heaven and thou art upon earth. Therefore, let
thy words be few" (v. i). There is no use in recit
ing long formulas, for God will nevertheless bring
to pass what is going to happen. The priests can
not help you, and appeals to God are not going to
change His plans. That is bold language, and for
once Koheleth even passes beyond the bounds of
what we would call courteous discussion by his
insinuation that the priest Is a fool (iv. 17); or If
It is not the priest to whom the epithet is applied,
then it is the. one who brings the sacrifice.
To be sure, KoEel'STir-«iates'"ari attempt to
take off the keen edge of his sharp attack on the
senselessness of worship by suggesting that one
should "go to the house of God to hear" (Iv. 17).
One is tempted to conclude from this that, at the
time that Koheleth wrote, a discourse formed
part of the temple service. The synagogue as the
laymen's temple had already made its appearance
in the second century before our era." It began as
an "assembly" — such is the meaning of sunagoge —
»' See Schuerer, "The History of the Jewish People in the Time of
Jesus Christ," ii. 2, p. 54 et seq. 153

A GENTLE CTNIC
of laymen for the study of the Law. Around this
study a religious service grew up and on certain
days, notably on the Sabbath, a portion of the
Law was expounded for the benefit of the public.
This practice in turn became the starting-point of
the sermon as a feature both of the Jewish and of
the Christian Church. Whether in the official
center of worship at Jerusalem where priests
officiated and sacrifices were brought, the custom
of expounding the law had also been Introduced
is not certain, but it is not improbable that the
example of the synagogue was imitated in the
"central" sanctuary as an innovation, calculated
to Increase the attachment of the worshippers to
the official cult. The Law at all events was read,
iand Koheleth puts his stamp of approval on this
part of the service. To listen to sound advice,
he says, can do you only good. The temple
officials, however, could hardly have been satis
fied with such a concession, for to them as to
I the orthodox adherents of the Judaism of the
day the traditional sacrifices, as perscribed by
the Law, constituted the essential feature of the
* public cult.
Koheleth, again, offended the priests and the
laity alike by his evident contempt for those who
rushed to the temple to make vows which In many
cases, he insinuates, were prompted by a sudden
emotion only to be forgotten when the cause for the
emotion had passed by. A man in business dis
tress or in trouble of some other kind or when
IS4

A GENTLE CTNIC
seized with illness might make a vow to do certain
things in case of relief, and in human fashion would
forget all about it when things again went well.
Koheleth's irony passes over into biting sarcasm
I when he suggests that the one who is reminded of
the vow will pretend that it was a slip — was not
seriously meant (v. 5). Why arouse the anger of
God through urging lame excuses, when the fact
is that you merely made a vow In the hope of thus
escaping from a dangerous crisis ? Koheleth has no
patience with any form of hypocrisy or self-
deception. It is clear that he is hitting hard at
certain evils in religion which must have been
quite common, but the situation that he depicts
is evidently one that grew out of the decline of the
hold which the temple and its cult once had upon
the people. The pious members of the community
had begun to turn to the synagogues, which became
centers of serious religious study and were destined
to be the bulwarks of Judaism when the temple
service finally came to an end upon the destruction
of the sanctuary in 70 a.d.
The references in the Talmud and in Josephus
to the quarrels among the priesthood and to the
growing degeneracy of the official cult confirm the
unfavorable picture that we obtain from the New
H Testament of conditions in the temple at Jeru
salem in the days of Jesus. The temple ritual rested
on a foundation, incompatible with the worship of
a spiritually conceived God of the universe. The
force of tradition and the practical impossibility

A GENTLE CTNIC
of a religious organization to cut loose from old as
sociations combined to reintroduce a cult which the
pre-exilic prophets had denounced as leading to
the very evils which again flourished in Koheleth's
days, though not to the same extent as In the days
of the monarchy, when the temple was purely the
adjunct of the state. The synagogue as an insti
tution is an outcome of post-exilic Judaism; the
temple Is a survival of the old Yahwism carried
over into the new era. Koheleth would approve of
the synagogue as a center for religious study, but
he can see no purpose in an institution like the
temple, with rites that were incompatible with the
advanced religious ideas which had spread among
the people, through the influence of the prophets.
For all that, it must have been distasteful, even to
those who recognized the justice of Koheleth's
indictment of the stupidity or hypocrisy of the
priests and the absurdity of the temple rites, to
have the truth so bluntly put.
XXII
KOHELETH ON "REFORM," ROYALTY,
AND WOMAN
Even more distasteful to the powers that be
must have been Koheleth's exposure of the corrup
tion that, according to him. Inevitably eats its
way into government, and of the arbitrariness and
haughtiness that appear to be the prerogatives of
royalty. Bad as Is the oppression of the poor and
the perversion of justice, what is still worse is the
156

A GENTLE CTNIC
imposslbilility of getting at those who are really
responsible for the distressing conditions in the
state. Koheleth has no confidence in reform
movements, arising through indignation at the
discovery of corruption, but which fail to remove
the cause. Do not be amazed, he says, at finding
out how rotten things are, for there is always some
one "higher up" who is responsible and whom you
cannot reach (v. 7). In guarded language, the text
of which may have been interfered with in order
to remove the suspicion of lese-majeste, he suggests
that If we were to follow this attempt to get the
one "higher up," the quest would end with the
one at the "top" — that Is, with the king.
In keeping with this gloomy picture of the
hopelessness of bringing about improvements in
govemment and in social conditions that follow
upon a govemment honey-combed with corruption,
Koheleth ironically advises one not to rush into the
royal presence for the purpose of making complaint
(viii. 3). You will get no sympathy. The king will
do whatever he pleases, and all that you will get
for your pains is a dismissal from the office that
you may hold. It is the part of discretion to obey
the king's command. Who can say to a king,
"What art thou doing?" (vHI. 4.) Discretion is the
better part of valor. If the king is angry, try to
pacify him. Do not resign your position, for that
will only be looked upon as an acknowledgment
of guilt (x. 4). Be careful in what you say and
do. Koheleth Ironically suggests that even your
IS7

A GENTLE CTNIC
thoughts in the sohtude of your bed-chamber may
get you Into trouble. The walls have ears.
"Do not, even on thy couch, defame a king,
Nor in thy bed-chamber denounce a rich man.
For a bird of heaven will carry the sound.
And a winged creature will reveal the utterance." (x. 20.)
Not an agreeable picture, forsooth, of espion
age In ancient Palestine !
Kingship rested throughout antiquity on the
basis of divine right. '^ The king owed his position
to the belief that he was supposed to be the rep
resentative of the national deity on earth — his
terrestrial vicar. He was the visible lieutenant
of the invisible general. Hence the logical theory of
the descent of kings from the gods so common In
antiquity and of which we have some survivals In
our days. William II. still believed In it, with
consequences disastrous to his people and to him
self. The king is the earliest type of "the son
of God." Among the Egyptians and Assyrians the
kings are actually designated as the sons of some
god or the other. He Is "named" by the god to
occupy the throne; and the Idea of direct sonship
shades over almost Imperceptibly Into the doc
trine of the Incarnation of the God in an earthly
representative. The glamor of royalty arises from
this view of the position of the king. Koheleth,
realizing the absurdity of a theory which would
invest an ordinary human being with superhuman
prerogatives, brushes It away by a single sweep.
5^ See Sir Jas. G. Frazer, " Early History of Kingship," p. 32, et seq.
158

A GENTLE CTNIC
A poor and wise child Is superior to a king who is
old and foolish (iv. 13). How can one beHeve in a
hereditary kingdom of divine origin, when one
sees that through a rebellion or conspiracy a king
may be driven from his throne, and a person poor
and of humble birth may pass on to the royal
throne (Iv. 14). But the glory of the new king is
also destined to pass away. Be he received with
ever so great an enthusiasm by virtue of his youth
and of his success, he too will grow old and the
hopes centered in him will fade away. The rejoicing
at the change will cease, when it is recognized that
things follow in the same groove. "Surely this is
vanity and chasing after wind" (iv. 15-16). Royal
splendor is as fleeting as everything else In this
world. Moreover, what is this vaunted power of
the king? Koheleth has just told us that the king
does what he pleases, but even the king has no
power over the wind or over death; and If God
has so decreed, he as little as anyone else can escape
his fate in war (viii. 8).
Koheleth's reflections on the corruption of
government and on the arbitrariness of rulers
clearly mirror conditions which he saw about him.
It is not necessary, therefore, to assume outside
influences to account for this attitude towards
government, any more than for his views on the
futility of the temple cult. He is an observer
of human affairs and draws his conclusions from
what he has experienced. He is not a closet phil
osopher who immerses himself in the study of
IS9

A GENTLE CTNIC
systems of philosophy in order to evolve a system
of his own.
Similarly, when he enlarges upon the strange
distortions in the world, to further illustrate the
vanity of things, he again draws upon his expe
rience and does not speak as the adherent of any
particular system of the philosophy of life. He has
seen the wicked triumphant in this world, and their
glory extending even beyond the grave. They are
accorded the distinction of large funerals. The
people coming back from the cemetery praise
them in the very city in which the wicked dead
carried on the mischief that they wrought (viii. lo).
As an instance of the ingratitude of the world, he
tells the story of a wise man but poor who by his
wisdom saved a city from being taken by a pow
erful king who had besieged it. What happened to
the wise man? His great achievement for which
no doubt he was commended at the time was for
gotten (ix. 14-15). The incident clearly rests upon
an actual occurrence; and it is characteristic of
Koheleth's point of view that he concludes from
the occurrence that, despite the neglect to which
the wise man was exposed, wisdom is better than
mere strength (Ix. 16). This is another proof that
Koheleth's pessimism is only skin deep or he would
have asked. What is the use of being wise? His
pessimism neither affects his humor nor his sound
sense. All that he asks of us is to have the courage
to face the facts. Do not expect too much of the
world, but do not for that reason give yourself up
160

A GENTLE CTNIC
to despair. Above all do not imagine as you grow
old that things were better in former days. Kohe
leth has no use for the laudatores temporis acti,
who are constantly decrying the present and ideal
izing the past. The man who suggests that "the
former days were better than these" (vii. lo) is
not betraying superior wisdom. He is merely
suffering from mental arteriosclerosis. The pro
cesses of his mind have grown sluggish with age,
as the blood courses less freely through the veins,
and he is unable to keep pace with the more rapidly
moving age. Koheleth hits hard at the conserva
tism of advancing years, which he thus mercilessly
analyzes as not due to increasing wisdom but to
increasing age, heralding the approach of the time
when, as he says In the last chapter, one loses the
zest for life, "the evil days of which thou shalt
i say, I have no pleasure in them" (xii. i).
Nor need we assume outside influence to
account finally for Koheleth's mistrust of women.
The pleasures of youth and manhood are largely
taken up with sensual delights in which fem
inine charms naturally play a large part. As a
frank observer, Koheleth declines to take a prudish
view of the "eternal iFemlnine" that lures us on.
But as all pleasures pall in time, so a time comes
when the attractions of woman no longer arouse
the senses, and when this moment comes one dis
covers that of all things that are vain and empty
woman takes the lead. The main attraction of
woman according to Koheleth lies in her charm,
II i6i

A GENTLE CTNIC
not in her character. When that charm goes or
when we are no longer sensitive to It, the illu
sion is "more bitter than death." (vii. 26.)
"Her mind is all snares and nets, her hands are
fetters" is merely the Oriental way of phrasing
"the lure of the feminine," with a touch of bitter
ness that suggests an outburst due to personal
experience. Renan '^ was probably not the first to
suspect that Koheleth was a bachelor, but the very
vehemence of his indictment that he has failed to
find a decent woman among a thousand (vii. 28)
points to his having been not altogether insensible
to female charms. The large number need not be
taken literally, and one feels that Koheleth is bent
upon having his little joke — ^now grown somewhat
stale by incessant repetition for over two thou
sand years — at the expense of woman. Koheleth
could be certain also of finding an appreciative
audience for his joke, for in the ancient as in the
modern Orient woman plays a prominent part in
the life of man, though more as his tool than as
his partner. The Book of Proverbs reveals woman much
in the same light as she appears in Koheleth. We
have, to be sure, the eloquent and beautiful praise
of the virtuous housewife in the last chapter of
Proverbs, but one suspects that this late appendix '^
^ Introduction to "L'EccI6siaste," p. 89.
^ Prov. xxxi. 10-31 without any connection with what precedes and
not in the crisp epigrammatic style of the bulk of the collection. The first
letters of the 22 verses follow the order of the Hebrew alphabet—another
indication of its late date and of its rather artificial composition.
162

A GENTLE CTNIC
was added by some pious writer to present a
counter-picture to the portrayal of the charmer
and ensnarer in chapters v, vi, vii, and elsewhere.^'
"Can a man take fire in his bosom and his clothes
not be burned.
Or can he walk upon hot coals and his feet not be
scorched?" (vi. 27-28.)
Though the metaphor is applied to the bad woman
yet the prominence given In Proverbs to the
wamings against her is an indication of the general
attitude towards woman as the tempter. The
view is in accord with the picture drawn of the
first woman in the third chapter of Genesis, and
which finds an echo in the sayings of Ben Sira
(xxv. 24). "From a woman was the beginning of sin, and
because of her we all die."
Cherchez la femme, we must bear in mind. Is ortho
dox Biblical doctrine, and it was no small matter
to trace to the female allurement the hard lot of
man on earth to work for his food instead of find
ing It hanging on trees In a park. The wives of the
patriarchs are portrayed with serious blemishes.
Sarah lies and is severely rebuked by her husband.'*
She is also envious and heartless.'^ Rebecca de-
deceives her husband'* and Rachel is jealous.''
In the historical annals women are rarely held up
'* Prov. xxiii. 26-28. Three times the saying is repeated (xxi. 9 and 19;
xxv. 24) that living in a garret (or on a desert island) is better than life
with a contentious woman. See also Proverbs xxvii. 1 5-16 and xxx. 23 .
°' Genesis xviii. 15.
" Witness her treatment of Hagar and Ishmael (Gen. xvi. 6 and
xxi. 8 et seq. ^ Genesis xxvii. 6-17. " Genesis xxx. 1.
163

A GENTLE CTNIC
as models. David and Solomon are led astray by
women, and the queens of the two kingdoms are
greater sinners than the kings. The bad woman
must have become a common figure to be Intro
duced by the prophets so frequently as the meta
phor to illustrate Israel's falHng away from loyalty
to Yahweh. Koheleth, therefore, reflects a com
mon Oriental view In not having a very exalted
opinion of woman. Had he come strongly under
Greek influence, instead of merely receiving a
stimulus to independent thought from contact
with Greek culture, he might have given us a dif
ferent picture, for Greek literature on the whole,
with some notable exceptions, portrays woman as
heroic, faithful, self-sacrificing and as an ennobling
Infiuence. Helen and Klytemnestra are the ex
ceptions; Hecuba and the heroic women of Troy
are the rule. XXIII
"WORK AND PLAY"
f"^ But if any further evidence were needed for
the thesis here maintained that to account for
Koheleth's attitude towards life, including his
advice to seek as much enjoyment as possible,
we need not look for Influences of Greek thought,
it would be found in the rather inconsistent com
bination of toil with enjoyment as the best course
to follow in life, though both are vain and neither
constitutes a real aim. That is not the Greek way
of looking at things. The Greek thinker is logical.
He starts from some fundamental principle and
164

A GENTLE CTNIC
develops it to a consistent conclusion from the
consequences of which he does not shrink. Kohe
leth is sporadic, and, as illustrated by his book,
jumps from one topic to the other, without fear of
repeating himself, as he frequently does, or of
contradicting himself, of which he Is occasionally
guilty. He smiles at life and does not want us to
take anything too seriously, including himself.
He is not a theorist and, therefore, he realizes that
although enjoyment alone makes life tolerable,
activity of some kind is needed in order to keep the
appetite for enjoyment whetted. Without toil,
one would tire of enjoyment more quickly. His
advice "to eat, drink, and be merry" has, therefore,
no close affiliation with the doctrine of Epicurus,
whose hedonism, besides being a logical outcome
of his thought, is of a much more sober character,
any more than Koheleth's view of things being
preordained by God leads him to more than a
superficial approach to the doctrines of Stoicism.
Koheleth looks upon enjoyment as the fruit
of labor (HI. 22). He regards it as a misfortune to
amass wealth and to acquire fame without the ca
pacity to enjoy. Long life and a large family are
blessings of God, according to the Oriental point of
view, but they are empty forms without enjoyment.
The man who has not enjoyed his life had better not
have been born (vi. 3-5). The untimely birth Is
better off since it has not seen life and, therefore,
has not missed the chance for enjoyment. To
lose this chance is the greatest of aU evils. One loses
165

A GENTLE CTNIC
this chance in various ways, by being too ambitious
for worldly success, by being too anxious to heap up
silver, but also, as we shall see, by being over-
conscientious. Ambition, Koheleth has already
told us,"" is merely the endeavor to outstrip one's
I neighbor. That is foolish. Work so that you may
I enjoy your leisure — is the sum and substance of
[Koheleth's philosophy. Success beyond this is a
'will-o'-the-wisp. It eludes you — even at the mo
ment when you have grasped it. For look again at
things as they are. "The race Is not to the swift,
nor the battle to the strong" (ix. ii). There Is
perhaps an autobiographical touch when he adds
that "wise men lack an income and prophets do
not possess riches." Had Koheleth enjoyed a
competency, he would probably have fallen a
victim to a more sunny philosophy, for one feels
throughout his book that he loved life for the pleas
ures that it brought.
His pessimism, however, did not penetrate
into his soul and embitter it. Hence, he could say
with gentle Irony and without any bitterness that
"time and chance" are the accidental factors that
condition what men call worldly success (ix. ii).
Besides, what an empty bubble mere success is!
In a twinkling, man is caught in the trap set by
death, as fish in a net and as birds in a snare
(ix. 12). As for amassing wealth, the curse lies
in the desire for more, no matter how much one
has. "He who loves silver, will never have enough
i"" See above, p. 138, 4. 166

A GENTLE CTNIC
silver" (v. 9). The rich man merely Increases his
troubles. Having more, simply means that your
household expenses Increase (v. lo). Koheleth, just
because he was not rich, could recognize that the
rich are not happier, and that the enjoyment of
the millionaire Is not Infrequently limited to look
ing at his wealth (v. 10), which some day others
who do not care for him will enjoy.
For all that, he counsels work — only not as the
aim of life but as the means of enjoyment. If we are
justified in assuming that a portion of the first part
of the eleventh chapter^"^ formed part of the original
book, Koheleth even offers some shrewd business
advice to those engaged in mercantile pursuits. He
urges them to take some risks, for that is what is
meant by the famous phrase (xi. i)
" Cast thy bread upon the face of the waters,
for after many days thou shalt find it."
The conventional interpretation, as though Kohe
leth were inculcating charity with an assurance
that one will get one's reward, is merely another
illustration of the manner in which the entire
spirit of the book was altered by the attempt to
direct its thought into an orthodox channel. Kohe
leth is thinking of business ventures In sending
out one's goods on ships, and in world-wise fashion
he adds the caution not to trust all of your goods
in one ship.
"Divide it up into seven or eight portions,
for thou knowest not what will happen on earth" (xi. 2).
"1 Namely, verses I, 2, S and 6 as indicated in the translation.
167

A GENTLE CTNIC
Do not put all of your investments into one
stock, he would tell us to-day, but divide them up
Into seven or eight companies. Moreover, do not
try to forecast all possibilities, but work steadily.
No one can tell what part of his activity wHl be
successful, any more than one can forecast the di
rection of the wind. God alone knows. Therefore,
"In the morning sow thy seed
And till evening let not thy hand rest,
For thou knowest not which will succeed, this or that.
Or whether both alike shall be good" (xi. 6).
But through thy toil bear in mind that life is
pleasant only if It is enjoyed,
" Though a man live many years, let him be happy throughout"
(xi. 8).
The happy life is the only life worth living. Only
one who loves life could utter such a sentiment,
only one who did not allow his humor to be spoiled
by taking things too seriously could say as Kohe
leth does even when life approaches the end,
"Light is sweet, and it is pleasant for the eyes to see the sun"
(xi. 7).
Lastly, it is part of Koheleth's philosophy,
based on observation of things as they are In this
world, to utter a warning against the possible
sacrifice of one's chance of enjoyment by going to
an extreme in being overconscientious. He is a
preacher of sanity and moderation. Things are
not as they should be in this world. The wicked,
we have seen,^"^ sit in the seat of the righteous.
u» See above, p. 143. 168

A GENTLE CTNIC
The righteous often incur the fate that should
meet the wicked (viii. 14). The bad man is honored
even beyond the grave (viii. 10), but for all that If
if one sets out, on the basis of this observation, to
outdo others In wdckedness In the hope of getting
the largest return, one will be disappointed. If a
man is too wicked, he will be found out and meet
his just punishment. Don't overdo it, for the worid
is not quite so bad as, judging from topsy-turvy
conditions, it may appear to be. The man who is
overwicked overshoots the mark. He is a fool who
will die before his time (vii. 17).
But what Is the man to do who wishes to be
righteous and yet sees the "righteous perishing by
his righteousness"? (vii. 15.) Our gentle cynic
whispers, "Be not overrighteous nor overwise,
why ruin thyself?" (vii. 16.) The cynicism is undis
guised, but It is without any sting. Koheleth does
not say, "follow the wicked path, provided you do
not go at too rapid a pace," but rather utters the
warning that, "if you are too wicked, you will get
into trouble." At the same time, with a gentle
ironical smile playing on his lips, he restrains the
idealist from acting as though he were living in a
world in which his ideals have been realized. Do not
forget that things are most Imperfect In this world.
Do not walk with your head in the clouds. You will
come to grief if you do. Watch your step! You must
accommodate yourself to existing circumstances,
"'Be bold! be bold!' and everywhere, 'Be bold';
'Be not too bold!'" 169

A GENTLE CTNIC
reads the wise saying of old."' Koheleth might
even say of righteousness as Longfellow does of
courage: "Yet better the excess than the defect";
but he would add, "Do not allow your conscience,
however, to carry you too far above the standards
of the world in which you live." The advice is bad
— let us not close our eyes to that — ^but it is not
offered in a spirit of bitterness. It comes from one
who loves life, despite Its drawbacks and its
disappointments, and who would spare youth the
misery that comes from striking one's head against
the stars, with the result of tumbling into a muddy
abyss. Do not lose your chknce of enjoyment of
life by taking yourself too seriously. That is the
extent of his gentle cynicism. What will you get
for your pains in trying to reform the world,
beyond Hamlet's bitter self-reproach,
"The time is out of joint: 0 cursed spite,
That ever I was born to set it right!"
"Who is able to straighten out what God has made
crooked?" (vii. 13.) Take good and evil as they
come. Take neither too seriously. Koheleth
frankly does not approve of martyrs. They miss
enjoyment, and what is life worth without it ? Toil
is empty without pleasure as its reward, just as
pleasure without toil leads to ennui. Wisdom,
riches, honors, enterprises, royalty, riotous living,
woman, aye even piety — all tum out to be vain and
afford no permanent satisfaction. Pleasures, too,
one tires of, but enjoyment with toil at least makes
''" Longfellow's "Morituri Salutamus." 170

. A GENTLE CTNIC
' life bearable. One may grow weary even of this
combination and eventually find life itself "vanity
and chasing after wind," but not at all events
before old age comes on, presaging the gradual loss
of faculties and the weakening of functions, till at
last the Inevitable end comes — the common fate
to all — "to the righteous and to the wicked, to the
good [and bad], to the clean and to the unclean, to
the one who sacrifices and to the one who does
not sacrifice; as the virtuous so the sinner, the one
who swears an oath and the one who fears an oath"
(ix. 2). This is the worst of all evils "that there
should be one fate to all" (ix. 3). but you will go
down to Sheol in a more resigned frame of mind, if
you have tasted enjoyment throughout your life.
XXIV
JOY THAT IS SANE
Koheleth must be recognized as a cynic but,
^ it is now plain, as a gentle one; he shows himself in
this light by preaching moderation, even while
urging the young to rejoice In their youth, to be of
cheerful mind and to foUowthelr inclinations and the
sight of their eyes (xi. 9). Enjoy yourselves ! But
Koheleth's advice to "eat, drink, and be merry" does
not mean riotous living. It does not mean playing
the role of the Idler and spendthrift, who indulges
his passions and seeks for mere physical sensations
to stimulate his jaded body. Koheleth's enjoy
ment of life is that which comes as a respite from
toil. Enjoyment without toil is worse than toil
171

1° >1T

A GENTLE CTNIC
i without enjoyment. We may gather this from the
way In which he denounces those who feast in the
moming(x. i6). That Is a sign of gluttony — awaste
I of time thatshould bedevotedtotoil. If hewere liv-
Hng to-day, he would rail at those who play bridge In
the moming. One should feast and play at the pro
per time. Enjoyment should be for recreation "for
strength and not for guzzling" (x. 17). His picture
of a land badly ruled is one governed by a mere
puppet with "princes feasting in the morning,"
in contrast to a country governed by a real king
"with princes feasting at the proper time." Kohe
leth tells us in more specific terms what kind of
enjoyment he has In mind,
"Go, eat thy bread with joy,
And drink thy wine with a merry heart.
For God has already given His approval to thy deeds.
At all times be thy garments white, \
And let oil not be lacking for thy head.
Enjoy life with the woman of thy love. "(ix. 7-9.)
The passage Is particularly interesting because of a
remarkable parallel to it that has been found in
Babylonian literature, with so close a resemblance,
indeed, as to raise the question whether Koheleth
may not be quoting from some earlier work, which
may in turn have reverted to a Babylonian pro
totype. The paraHel occurs in the story of the
adventures of a hero who was known as Glsh^"
or Gilgamesh. This epic — for such it is — mforms the
most important literary production of ancient Baby
lonia. With constant additions. It passed down the
iMGish means "hero." 172

A GENTLE CTNIC
ages to Assyria, and we find echoes of this epic in the
Greek tale of Hercules and in the legends that gath
ered around Alexander. Of the entire story, which
in its final form was told on twelve tablets of some
250 lines each, not much more than one-half has
up to the present been recovered. ^"^ The partic
ular tablet in which the parallel to the passage
in Koheleth occurs dates from about 2000 b.c
and is therefore about 1800 years earlier than
Koheleth! Gilgamesh has been smitten with dis
ease as a punishment for having rejected the
offer of the goddess Ishtar to become her spouse.
This episode of the epic embodies a nature myth.
Gilgamesh is in part a human figure, but in part
also a god, and more specifically a personifica
tion of the sun-god, while Ishtar is the goddess
of the earth. The ripening of the fmits of the soil
was pictured as the result of a union between
the sun and the earth. The sun's rays penetrate
the earth, which Is the womb of the goddess, and
fractify her, but after some months the sun
recedes from the earth, and the rains with the
accompanying desolation of nature set in. The
sun-god after a short union has rejected the advan
ces of the earth. This change of seasons was pic
tured as an insult offered to Ishtar by Gilgamesh,
who now enters upon a long series of wanderings
in search for healing from his disease. The sickness
of Gilgamesh is the waningof the power of the sun's
'"' See my analysis and translation of the Gilgamesh Epic in "The
Sacred Books and Early Literature of the East," volume i. pp. 187-220.
173

A GENTLE CTNIC
rays with the approach of the wintry season. The
wanderings of the hero represent the course of the
sun through the heavens during the winter months,
seeking for the renewal of his strength which finally
comes with the spring. In the tale Gilgamesh is
portrayed as coming to a maiden Sabitu, dwelling
at the seashore. He inquires of her how he can
secure life which he feels to be ebbing away. To
the "human" Gilgamesh — ^who alternates in the
story with Gilgamesh the sun-god — the maiden
replies as follows:
"Why, O Gish, dost thou wander about?
The life that thou seekest, thou wilt not find.
When the gods created men,
Death they ordained for men.
Life they kept in their hands.
Thou, O Gish, fill thy belly!
Day and night be joyful!
Daily be glad!
Day and night make merry!
Let thy garments be' white,
Annoint thy head, and purify thyself!
With the children at thy side.
Enjoy the wife of thy bosom!"
The parallel Is not limited to the similarity of the
advice and to an agreement In the language in
which it is offered, but extends to the spirit that
dictates It. As in Koheleth there is a note of res
ignation to be content with life In this world, for
there is nothing to be hoped for in Aralu, as the
Babylonians called the great gathering place of the
dead in the subterranean hollow which for
the Hebrews was Sheol. The dead are conscious
174

A GENTLE CTNIC
but they have no joy in the nether world. With
out joy of what use is consciousness? Therefore,
since death Is the inevitable fate decreed by
the gods, get as much enjoyment out of life as
you can while it lasts. Feasting, white garments —
white being the color of joy — care and adorn
ment of one's body, happiness with one's wife
and children — such is the picture drawn by a
Babylonian writer, who lived almost two thousand
years before Koheleth. The latter's point of view,
therefore, is one that could grow up In a Semitic
environment at any time, without outside influ
ence. The undercurrent of resignation to the inev
itable also shows itself In Koheleth. Sleep after
toil Is sweet.
" Sweet is the sleep of the laborer, whether he has eaten
little or much" (v. 11)
but ever the shadow of the coming end Is thrown
across man's pathway. This tempers one's joy
and creates the mood which prompts Koheleth to
denounce the emptiness of life.
"The day of death is better than the day of birth.
It is better to go to the house of mourning than to a
house of feasting.
For the former marks the end of all men." (vii. 2.)
The pious commentator who adds "And the living
will take it to mind," has missed the point, as has
the one who adds, "Dissatisfaction is better than
laughter." Koheleth would reject the latter sen
timent completely, nor does he believe in sorrow
as a mental discipline, as the pious commentator
175

A GENTLE CTNIC
suggests (vii. 3*"). The "house of feasting" is
' the author's phrase for riotous living, for shallow
•p pleasures as the sole aim of one's life. To recognize
|;jthe seriousness of life, aye, its sad aspects through
the injustice and corruption that prevail In the
„, world, is part of Koheleth's gospel, and indeed is
lias essential to his thought as is the aim to get en-
'^' joyment out of it. One should be mindful even in
one's joy of what life means to those who have sor
row and who are bound down by its worries. He
does not advise going about with a long face, but
neither does he approve of those who act as though
life were all fun. The empty chatter that one
hears in a house given up to mirth is not the kind
of joy that Koheleth has in mind, and therefore he
can consistently with his gospel of joy declare,
"The mind of the wise is in a house of mourning,
but the mind of fools is in the house of mirth." (vii. 4.)
You can hear some sound talk in a house into which
death has entered. A funeral sermon, Koheleth
might have added, had he lived in more modern
times, is apt to be better than an after-dinner
speech, which he would often have found to be
"full of sound and fury — signifying nothing."
That life is made for enjoyment, sums up
Koheleth's philosophy, but the reverse prop
osition that enjoyment Is the aim of life is not true.
To make enjoyment the aim leads to excesses, to
"feasting in the moming," to making life consist
of idle chatter and foolish laughter, to complete
exhaustion of one's senses and — to ennui.
176

A GENTLE CTNIC
The most discouraging feature of Koheleth's
attitude towards life is the constant undercurrent of
the "one fate to all," of the "place to which all must
go," of the end that overtakes the wise as the fool,
the righteous and the wicked. Nevertheless, if he
were a real pessimist down to the bone he would
have struck a different key throughout the book.
Even though he might have felt that he was deceiv
ing himself he would have assumed an attitude of
disgust with life, and suggested that death was to *
be regarded as a release from the entanglements and
disappointments of a cruel and wicked world. To
be sure, he says that "the end is better than the
beginning" (vii. 8), but we know from the whole
tenor of his thought that he does not believe it.
He is too honest not to let us see even when he
rails against the various kinds of vanity in the
world, that "light is sweet" to him, that he loves
life as such. Though he has grown old — for only
an old man could have given the beautiful and
impressive picture of old age at the end of the book
— ^he still clings to life, if only because of the recol
lections of the joys which he has tasted. He must
have had his trials and disappointments. He is
disillusioned in regard to the value of life, he realizes
that things cannot be Improved, but he is also
sensible enough to see that the past was no better
than the present (vii. lo). Heknowsfrom experience
that wisdom cannot help us to discern the aim of
existence nor to penetrate the mystery of the
future. He sees men strugghng for wealth and
12 177

A GENTLE CTNIC
fame, setting aside ideals in the struggle — and
he smiles at all this vanity. He knows that there is
much injustice and innocent suffering — and again
he smiles at those who take such conditions too
seriously. His cynicism is gentle — resolving itself
into the formula, "Work and Play." Enjoy life
while it lasts, for It Is pleasant to see the sun, de
spite everything that "happens under the sun."
Koheleth would have espoused the sentiment with
which Renan — a modern Koheleth — closes his
delightful Souvenirs d^enfance et de jeunesse in
thanking the author of his being for the "charm
ing promenade across reality" — to Infinity.
XXV
KOHELETH AND THE CONVENTIONAL BELIEFS
OF HIS AGE
After this outline of the teachings of the book,
which has shown, I trust, that the thought as well
as the tone of Koheleth is to be explained as a reac
tion against the conventional view of a world raled
by divine justice and against the current piety
^resulting from these views, it only remains for us to
indicate the conditions under which such a book as
Loheleth arose and to summarize the impression
that it must have made. Apart from the evidence
of language,^"^ it is clear that Koheleth must have
been produced at a time when religion had come to
iM The Hebrew style of Koheleth is no longer the classic one of the
prophets, but the later one that we find in the Mishna which, dating from the
third century a.d. is that portion of the Talmud devoted to the actual laws
and to which the Gemara in Aramaic represents the commentary.
178

A GENTLE CTNIC
mean primarily piety, an attitude of complete faith
in God as conceived by the prophets and made
manifest by conformity to fixed rites, centering
around the temple. The synagogue or layman's
temple had, made its appearance but had not yet
replaced the temple. Nor had the Rabbi as the lay
religious teacher as yet come to the fore in place of
the priest. The priest was still the official repre
sentative of the religion, but his influence was on
the wane. The inconsistency involved in continu
ing to offer animal sacrifices to a Power of universal
scope and pictured as a spiritualized ethical Force
must have been pretty widely recognized, or Kohe
leth would not have spoken in such contemptuous
terms of the futility of sacrifices and the absurdity
of attributing any significance to dreams, which
come through natural causes. Koheleth is probably
not in advance of his times in voicing his skepticism
in regard to sacrifices and to dreams. His shafts
are rather directed against the theory of those whose
piety rested in the belief in a God whose workings
are described in the additions to the book — a God
whom one should fear, who punishes the sinner,
even though he may for a time escape retribution,
who brings man to judgment for all his acts, even
those which he tries to conceal, a God who has made
everything good and beautiful, in whose hands
are the righteous and the wise and to whom the
spirit returns when death overtakes the body.
Koheleth says boldly, let us look at this theory
and see whether the facts conform to it. His main
179

A GENTLE CTNIC
aim Is to show that you cannot account for things
as they are and for the actual conditions In the
world on this theory. His book arose, therefore, in
a circle which, while It did not question the exist
ence of God, declined to close its eyes to the diffi
culties involved In attempting to penetrate His
ways. It is the same circle from which the book of
Job emanated, the main difference between Job
and Koheleth being that Job takes up a partic
ular problem — the Innocent suffering in the world
— while Koheleth makes an attack upon the entire
line of the current theology. We miss the point of
both books if we regard them as purely individual
expressions. They voice views which must have
been pretty widely held, or they would not have
made a sufiiciently deep impression to be the sub
ject of subsequent elaboration and comment.
Koheleth is about a century later than Job, but
both reflect a period when independent thought
had become a factor in the intellectual life of the
day. The prophets who had brought about the
notable advance In religious thought no longer had
it all their own way. Men arose who asked the
question whether the prophets' view of life, noble
and inspiring as It was, furnished a satisfactory
explanation for the world as it actually appears.
The old opposition to prophetical Judaism on
the part of those who felt the lash of the prophets'
denunciation of Baal worship and of social cor
ruption, had died out. The new religious com
monwealth, organized by pious followers of Yahweh,
1 80

A GENTLE CTNIC
gradually changing to the universal Jehovah, con
formed in theory at least to the ideals maintained
by the prophets. The worship was purged of objec
tionable features, and though animal sacrifices as
tribute and as expiatory offerings continued to
be the basis of the new ritualistic code worked
out under the guiding direction of Ezra, a higher
interpretation was given to the rite, as also to the
other ceremonies of the religion, growing stead
ily in the elaboration of details. The old abuses,
however, albeit in a different form, were beginning
to creep in. The priests as a class were again
becoming worldly. Politics became hopelessly
intertwined with the religious organization and
led to intemal quarrels and intrigues. This state
of affairs was counterbalanced in a measure by
the growth of a personal piety among the laity
that found its expression in a deepening faith in a
watchful Providence, extending His care beyond
the grave, and in a punctilious ceremonialism,
such as a strict observance of the Sabbath and of
dietary laws.
Koheleth reflects clearly the two directions
towards which Judaism was drifting, a worldly
ecclesiasticism on the one hand, and personal piety
of a rather smug character on the other. The two
parties Into which Judaism split, Sadduceeism,
the party of the priests, and Phariseeism, the
party of the pious laity, existed in embryo, if not
yet in definite shape. The circle from which the
book of Koheleth emanated represents the inde-

A GENTLE CTNIC
pendent line of thought, opposed to both directions
in a measure, though not absolutely so. Unwilling
to be bound by either tradition or convention, the
circle raised the fundamental inquiry whether one
can see the workings in the world of a God such
as was set up by the party of tradition as well as by
that of pietistic convention. The spirit of Koheleth
is that of Goethe's Geist der stets verneint. This spirit
of denial, naturally, aroused the opposition of the
priests and of the pious laity alike. There is
indeed something of the mephistophellan quality in
Koheleth. He shares with Mephistopheles a sense
of humor, though not of the same sardonic caliber.
Koheleth Is too sympathetic with the sufferings of
mankind through the conditions prevailing in the
world to indulge in mockery at man's efforts to
rise superior to his surroundings. He does not
question the essential soundness of human nature
as a-whole, and he can appreciate the earnest strug
gle to seek a solution for the strange contradictions
in life. He manifests his pity for the struggle,which
he feels, however, is hopeless because one cannot
discover any real aim to human life. That is his
main contention, which leads him to the conclusion
that one must not take life too seriously. He,
therefore, smiles at things and conditions as they
are. The smile is at times benevolent, but more
frequently touched with a gentle irony. He smiles
at the zealous reformer who deludes himself in the
belief that 'he can improve matters; he smiles also
at the one who laments that things are growing
' 182

A GENTLE CTNIC
worse. That is not so, he tells us for our comfort.
The past only seems to be better because we
idealize it, and in part because with the approach
of old age we are apt to grow out of sympathy
with the everchanging present. If there is no real
progress, but merely endless repetition with vari
ations that are unessential, there is also no retro
gression. Nature has only one film — a long and
varied one, which it reels off and then reels off
again without cessation. Enjoy the film, he says,
but don't attempt to interfere with It — or you will
spoil the show.
His doctrine of enjoyment is simple and at
bottom sound. Don't be a mere spectator in the
drama of life or you will soon tire of it. Act your
part and you will enjoy the play in which you
participate by your toil so much the longer. Take
life as a play, but be actor and spectator at the
same time. Remember that the curtain will be
rung down sometime, and you will be left in dark
ness. Let not this thought, however, from which,
to be sure, you cannot escape, drive away your
enjoyment, but resign yourself to the inevitable by
the comforting assurance that the one certainty
given us is the legitimacy of enjoying our leisure
ifter the day's work. The capacity for enjoyment
[is a gift of God. God approves of joy, because joy
f\is the one thing that makes life bearable.
1 The pessimistic note is struck by Koheleth,
but it is a soft and not a harsh sound. He loves
life and therefore he is not a genuine pessimist;
183 .

A GENTLE CTNIC
and when he does occasionally go beyond bounds,
as when he says that he hates life, he contradicts
himself in the next breath. The pessimistic mood
is transitory and is generally aroused at the sad
thought that the life to which he is attached must
come to a close. The common fate that will over
take all rings like a refrain through the book,
but it is significant that the refrain to enjoy life
sounds still more strongly. His fling at woman,
which might be used as an argument to prove that
he Is a deep-dyed pessimist, is not to be taken
too seriously, any more than is his assertion in one
place — and in one place only — ^that he hates life.
One feels that he indulges in intentional exagger
ation when he declares that even among a thousand,
one cannot find a decent woman. It sounded
clever, and Koheleth is not the only humorist who
indulges in a witty hyperbole to raise a laugh.
I call his doctrine of enjoyment sound, because
he preaches joy for joy's sake. He has no sym
pathy with gluttony or riotous living, or with a life
entirely given up to stimulating the passions and
sensual tastes. He is saved from any extreme
hedonism by his gospel of work as the condition to
genuine enjoyment. Hence, when he advocates
"Eat, drink, and be merry, " he knows that there is
little danger of making enjoyment the aim of life.
Enjoyment as an aim Is vanity and indeed the
greatest of all vanities, for it must soon lead to
ennui. He knows that even when he urges the
young to follow the Inclinations of their mind and
184

/

A GENTLE CTNIC
the sight of their eyes, the quest for enjoyment
after toil will go no further than to eat and drink
with a merry heart, to keep oneself in a festive
, / mood, keen for the enjoyment of one's leisure,
/ / and to live happily with one's wife and family.
It should be borne in mind In an estimate of
this worldly aspect of Koheleth's philosophy that
it does not differ materially from the practical
wisdom frequently found in the book of Proverbs
which aroused no opposition, either from the
priests or from the pious laity. Poverty is looked
upon In proverbs as synonymous with shame
(Proverbs xiii. 1 8). There Is a touch of cynicism
In the sentiment that
"The poor is hated even by his neighbor.
But the rich has many friends" (xiv. 20).
The warning against the anger of kings sounds
like an entry in Koheleth's diary,
"A king's wrath is as a messenger of death.
A wise man will pacify it" (xvi. 14).
The sentiment is the same as in Ecclesiastes (x. 4)."'
Koheleth might have given the worldly advice
not to sing one's praises in the presence of a king
(Proverbs xxv. 6), because it will not lead to one's
advancement. Such sayings as "it Is not good
to eat too much honey" (xxv. 27), and "not to
set one's foot too often in one's neighbor's house,
lest he may tire of thee" (xxv. 17), "not to boast
of to-morrow, for thou knowest not what to-morrow
"" See above, p. 157. i8s

A GENTLE C2NIC
may bring forth" (xxvH. i), might have found a
place among the "words of Koheleth." No doubt
this similarity between the tone of many of Kohe
leth's utterances and the philistine sentiments in
Proverbs was a factor in leading commentators to
amplify Koheleth by sayings taken from collections
of maxims. To an uncritical age, anxious, more
over, to weaken the unorthodox character of Kohe
leth's point of view, the device of regarding the book
merely as a collection of sayings to which others
bearing on the themes discussed — ^wisdom, the
conduct of life, the value of discretion, avoidance
of trouble and the like — could be added, would
suggest itself as one of the means to accomplish the
end in view, namely, to give the flavor of conven
tionalism to a popular but dangerous book.
XXVI
THE OMAR KHAYYAM OF THE BIBLE
Where then shall we place Koheleth among
the many philosophers of earlier and later days
who have set forth their attitude towards life. We
have seen that he Is not Mephistopheles, though he
shows something of the spirit of that grim cynic.
He Is not a follower of Epicums, any more than he
is an adherent of Stoic philosophy. He is not unlike
Lucian in his frankness and in his sense of humor.
Not quite so irreverent as Lucian, he lacks the
latter's biting sarcasm, but one can well under
stand that the more gentle cynicism of Koheleth
was as distasteful to those who did not favor the
1 86

A GENTLE CTNIC
disturbance of the status quo, as was the sharper
irony in Lucian's flings at the gods as pictured in
the current myths in which the intelligent public
no longer believed in the second century of our
era when Lucian wrote.
There are some striking points of resemblance
between Koheleth and Hesiod who, reflecting the
spirit of the depressing age in which he must have
lived, sets forth his philosophy of life in his famous
"Works and Days." Like Koheleth, Hesiod sub
scribes to the doctrine Cherchez la femme. Pandora,
the type of feminine lure, is created by Zeus in
punishment for Prometheus's crime of stealing fire
from heaven for the benefit of mankind. She brings
a box as a fatal gift to her husband Epimetheus,
the brother of Prometheus, from which, upon being
opened, all the ills to which human flesh is heir es
cape. Hope alone remains. Like Koheleth, also,
Hesiod sees in work, in unceasing and unremitting
labor, the only salvation for man against falling
into temptation or sinking into the slough of de
spair in the hard "iron age" in which mankind is
condemned to dwell, the age in which Honor and
Justice are ever threatening to desert the world
and leave it in utter misery. But Hesiod strikes a
far harsher and sadder note than Koheleth. To
him the successive ages of the world from the gol
den to the iron, represent a steadily degenerating
process. Not so Koheleth, who denies that the
world is any worse than it always was, though he
also does not beheve that it is better, nor that it
187

A GENTLE CTNIC
can be improved. The thought, moreover, which
we encounter so frequently in Greek literature,
that the gods are jealous of man and fear his grow
ing power, is entirely absent in Koheleth, though
there Is a suggestion of it In the more genuinely
pessimistic view of mankind taken in tbe third
chapter of Genesis. Yahweh wishes to keep man
away from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and
Evil and fears that he may also approach the Tree
of Life and by plucking Its fruit secure immortality
(Genesis HI, 22). Hesiod's doctrine of work approa
ches more closely in fact to the view taken by the
Yahwist in Genesis that toil is a curse imposed on
man by an angry deity, than it does to Koheleth's
view of toil as the only means of securing an en
joyment of life that will make existence bearable.
To Hesiod, as to Genesis, work means, primarily,
tilling of the soil. Both look upon toil as a hard
task, but Hesiod tries to rise superior to the hard
ship and to look upon work as man's salvation.
Genesis is franker in recognizing that man's life
was a happier one In the golden age when he
could get his sustenance without working for it in
the sweat of his brow. Koheleth goes his own way
and separates himself from both Hesiod and Gen
esis, in suggesting that the purpose of work is to
save man from ennui and that enjoyment, com
ing as leisure after the heat and burden of the day.
Is apt to last longer and will endure at all events
until the time comes when life itself ceases to be a
1/ joy and when, as described in the last chapter

A GENTLE CTNIC
(xii, 3-7) — perhaps the finest In the book — strength
fails and the faculties decline. "The guardians of
the house" — by which Koheleth means the hips
— tremble; "the grinding maidens" — the teeth
— cease; "those that peer through the windows"
— by which the eyes are meant — are darkened;
"the sound of the mill" — the hearing — is low;
and so on through the list to "the snapping
of the silver cord" — the spine — and the "shatter
ing of the golden bowl" — the brain — till at last,
"sans teeth, sans eyes, saris taste, sans everything,"

(C

man goes to his eternal home and the wallers
go about the street." Work as long as you can,
says Koheleth. Sow your seed in the morning and
rest not until the evening of life comes. In this way,
by enjoying also your leisure, you will get as much
happiness out of life as it can furnish. Hesiod, like
Koheleth, urges man to look upon work from the
brighter side, but, more conventional In his atti
tude towards prevailing customs and beliefs, he
cautions man against offending the gods by not
performing prescribed rites of sacrifice and wor
ship. On the other hand, Hesiod again joins with
Koheleth in giving practical advice for the con
duct of Hfe, Including the suggestion not to trust
all one's goods in one venture and to live happily
with one's wife and to provide for offspring —
though not, he adds, in too large numbers.
Koheleth reminds one most of Omar Khay
yam, who represents the natural reaction against
189

A GENTLE CTNIC
a stern Islamic environment, as Koheleth marks a
reaction against the unbending ecclesiasticism and
conventional piety of his Jewish surroundings.
The touch of irony in Omar Khayyam's immortal
quatrains is singularly like that which we en
counter in Koheleth.
" With them the seed of Wisdom did I sow.
And with mine own hand wrought to make it grow;
And this was all the Harvest that I reap'd —
I came like Water, and like Wind I go."
In their attitude towards life, both are free from
any real bitterness. Their cynicism is without any
sting, or if occasionally there is a sting it is gentle;
it pricks a little but does not bite. Both are enam
ored of life, despite its sorrows and its imperfections.
To both life means joy — joy for joy's sake, with
perhaps this distinction, that Omar Khayyam has
no fear of ennui resulting from joy, whereas Kohe
leth advocates as a preventive the combination of
toil with joy, so that the enjoyment may be more
lasting. The undertone of sadness, too, is common
to both, suggested by the brevity of life and by the
approach of old age, devoid of enjoyment, with the
shadow of death thrown across one's path.
"Alike for those who for To-day prepare.
And those that after some To-morrow stare,
A Muezzin from the Tower of Darkness cries:
'Fools! your Reward is neither Here nor There.' "
Both writers are worldly in their spirit and their
outlook; and this is the severest indictment — if it
be one — to be preferred against their productions.
190

A GENTLE CTNIC
Carpe diem! is the motto of Koheleth and of Omar
Khayyam alike.
"Come, fill the Cup, and in the fire of Spring
Your Winter-garment of Repentance fling;
The Bird of Time has but a little way
To flutter — and the Bird is on the Wing."
Let us be frank and recognize that there is no
spiritual uplift — ^to use a term that Is much over
worked in modern days — in Koheleth, as little as
in the Islamic poet. Koheleth In its original form
was not a religious book, and had no place In a
sacred canon. It lacks edification, so essential
to a religious production. But neither is It irre
ligious, as the pious commentators believed who
tried to give to Koheleth's utterances an orthodox
tum. Koheleth is not a scoffer, and he is certainly
not atheistically Inclined . He takes the existence of
God for granted. He has thrown off the beliefs
common to all Semites and indeed to all peoples In
an early stage of culture, who, because unable to
conceive of life coming to a complete stop, Imag
ined a great gathering place where the dead lie
conscious but inactive, but he has not advanced to
any faith in a real immortality. In this respect,
however, he stands on the same grade as the Sad
ducees, who because of their conservatism likewise
did not accept the more advanced doctrine. Kohe
leth draws the consequences of the position held by
him, and, no longer accepting the view that any
consciousness remains to the dead, boldly says that
"They know nothing" (ix. 4). Death ends every-
191

A GENTLE CTNIC
thing. It was this attitude that was largely respon
sible for the opposition that the book encountered
in Pharisaic circles, where opposing views of a ret
ribution in another world for one's acts in this one
are reflected in the additions to the book. We
must bear in mind however. In defending Koheleth
from the charge of being irreligious, that even the
Psalmist declares when praying for a prolongation
of life that the dead cannot praise God in Sheol
(Psalms vi. 6). The author of Job, likewise, does
not stress the belief In Immortality, even though
he may not specifically have denied it. Job's long
ing for the grave,
"Where the wicked cease from troubling
And the weary are at rest" (iii. 17),
suggests no distinction between the fate of the
just and that of the wicked, as little as it leaves
place for any consciousness — certainly not for any
happiness — beyond the portals of this world.
It may be claimed that the general attitude
1 of mind of Koheleth betokens an irreligious spirit.
/| Perhaps — from the orthodox and pietistic point of
// view; and it must be admitted that his advice,
objectionable also from the standpoint of ethics
— "not to be overrighteous" (vii. i6) — may be in
stanced as a proof of his lack of religious reverence.
Outbalancing such an utterance, however, is his
sympathy with those who suffer Injustice and with
those who perish because of human ingratitude.
Such sympathy is typical of a religiously inclined
disposition. We might go so far as to say that
192

A GENTLE CTNIC
\ Koheleth is non-religious, but even this verdict is
\ open to question, seeing that his faith in God is
\ strong enough to warrant him in asserting several
times that God wants man to enjoy life and that
He has so ordered His creation that man cannot
fathom the mysteries by which he is surrounded.
His doctrine, furthermore, that everything is pre
ordained by God, since it follows from the belief in
a Power who is omniscient as well as omnipotent,
certainly rests on a religious basis. The world Is
not a blind mechanism, according to Koheleth,
but the outcome of plan and design on the part of
I the great Artificer, who has made and who super-
! intends every piece of the great machinery — only
we cannot see the plan.
Perhaps it Is fairest to say in summing up
ikoheleth's relationship to the religious current of
/his age, that he is unwilling to go further than the
j evidence of his senses warrants. He will not shrink
I from a recognition of facts and, therefore, he ap-
/ pears in the light of an uncomfortable interro-
/ gation mark. He questions everything — questions
/ the conventions of the day, questions the basis of
beliefs, questions the belief in a genuine immor
tality in the new sense, questions the motives of
men and the sincerity of woman, questions all
aims and ambitions and at times he seems to ques
tion also the value of life. He takes a certain
pleasure in exposing the foibles of mankind and
the hoUowness of most things, and in so far he
is cynical, but not consistently so. If he were
13 193

A GENTLE CTNIC
consistent, he would have revealed himself as a real
cynic and a genuine pessimist, with the sting and
y-bitterness that accompany full-fledged cynicism
\\ and pessimism. Fortunately, he is not bent upon
\ building up a system of thought, and, therefore,
\he can afford to be inconsistent. His bonho-
1 mie never deserts him. In reading Koheleth, we
I should picture him to ourselves as an amiable man
Iwho has grown old gracefully, who looks back
lupon his own career with a realization of the
Wanlty of most things that he once coveted. The
Btorm-and-stress period of life is over. He has
grown mellow and the evening calm has set in.
He may have his regrets but he prefers to smile.
Life appears to him to be a big game of "chasing
after wind," and he does not hesitate to say so
and to try to prove his thesis in a series of charm
ing and witty talks. He does not want to be taken
too seriously and would smile at the thought of
being regarded as the exponent of any system of
philosophy. He is a dilettante in philosophy and a
free lance in religion. He has no especial interest in
Judaism, except as the religion which he sees
around him. "Work and Play" — may be taken as
the motto of the book. Do both as well as you can,
but do not regard either as the aim of life. There
is no aim. There is merely life, and life is there to
be enjoyed or it is entirely wasted. Retain your
sense of humor so that you may not grow morose
when you contemplate the ills and sorrows in the
world. When you get into a particularly pessi-
194

A GENTLE CTNIC
mistic mood — smile at the world, not with a bitter
smile, but with a suggestion of irony.
Renan, whose own nature found a response in
Koheleth and who was fascinated by the book as
everyone must be who penetrates its spirit, goes so
far as to say that it is the only amiable book written
by a Jew. That is hardly correct, for we have a
modern analogy to Koheleth (as Renan himself
suggests) in Heine, who looks upon the world in
the same smiling manner. While thoroughly as
similating the culture and surroundings of his age,
Heine's humor and general type of mind are char
acteristically Jewish. Heine is a nineteenth-cen
tury Koheleth; and heposesses the same irresistible
charm. His pen, though trenchant, is never dipped
in venom; his irony, though pointed, is tempered
with pathos. Even his satire, when most biting,
betrays his amiability. The analogy between the
two might be carried further, for their skepticism
is much of the same order: they are both "gentle
cynics!" We can imagine Koheleth as he bids
farewell to the world, and in the contemplation of
his life recalls, perhaps, the utterances in his book
which offended the orthodox and the pious, mur
muring with a smile on his dying lips, as did Heine,
"Dieu me pardonnera — c^est son metier. ^^

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
IN THEIR ORIGINAL FORM, STRIPPED
OF SUBSEQUENT INTERPOLATIONS,
MAXIMS AND COMMENTS

Explanatory Note: — ^The translation follows
the original text, as restored in accordance with the
principles laid down in the preceding discussion. All
additions, as well as comments and glosses, are relegated
to the footnotes; and in order that the reader may
obtain a connected survey of these amplifications to
the original book of Koheleth, they have been grouped
in the appendix under three divisions: (i) The addi
tions made by the pious commentators with a view of
converting Koheleth into a book acceptable to Jewish
orthodoxy; (2) the maxims added in large numbers to
give the book the character of a collection of sayings
for the guidance of life, like the Book of Proverbs and
the Wisdom of Ben Sira {i.e., Ecclesiasticus); and (3)
miscellaneous comments, glosses and minor changes
introduced into the text.
The translation, disregarding the late divisipns
into chapters in our Bibles, has been divided into 24
sections, each section covering some aspect ofthe theme,
with the conclusions drawn by Koheleth from his argu
ments and observations. A general heading for each
section has been added on the margin. For the sake of
convenience, and in order to facilitate a comparison of
the translation with the Book of Koheleth as given in
our Bibles, the chapter and verses in the Bible version,
corresponding to each section, are likewise placed on the
margin and — as a further guide — so that the reader
may see at a glance the omissions in my translation,
the number of the verse preceding and that of the verse
following an omission are likewise added on the mar
gin. A letter after a verse number indicates a part of
that verse, thus i* means the first part of the verse,
I*" the second part, while 1'= is the third part in the
case of a long verse, divided into three obvious parts,
and i*^ a fourth part. In the case of brief insertions, I
have not considered it necessary to indicate this on the
margin, but all such insertions have been noted in the
footnotes.

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH'

What gain has a man of all his toil,^ i. 3-11
Which he toils under the sun?' ^^'
/^ , • J • Eternal Cycle
Generation comes and generation goes, ^-^ j^u^ ^nd
But the earth remains forever. Nature, wiik-
The sun rises and the sun sets, out Goat
And to his rising place he returns.^
Around to the south and circling to the north,
Around and around goes the wind.
And on Its circuits the wind returns.*

or Progress.

^ The heading in our Bibles (i. i) "The words of Kohe
leth (son of David) a King in Jerusalem" represents a late
addition. The Hebrew construction, moreover, shows that
the words " son of David " have been superimposed upon the
heading after the tradition had been established which
identified Koheleth with Soloraon, "the son of David." The
superimposed words are, therefore, in the nature of a gloss or
comment. See further above, p. 66. The summary (i. 2)
that follows the heading ^
" Vanity of vanities, says Koheleth, vanity of vanities, all is vanity"
is likewise a late insertion taken over from the end of the book
(xii. 8), with "vanity of vanities" repeated, either for the
sake of emphasis or as a general superscription to the book.
"The first nine verses (i. 3-1 1), consisting of two sec
tions (i) verses 3-8 (poetic in form) and (2) verses 9-1 1
(prose) are in the nature of an introduction. This introduc
tion may be regarded as a general summary of the teachings
of the book, which properly opens with verse 12. The intro
duction was added after the book had been written, and it
may be the work of someone who shared the views of Kohe
leth and tried his hand at making an addition to the book.
At the same time, while the possibility of this view, held by

A GENTLE CTNIC
All streams flow into the sea.
But the sea is not full.
To the place whither the streams flow.
From there they flow back again.'
Everything is wearied.
Beyond human utterance,^

some scholars, may be admitted, the tone and language of the
introduction are so completely in the manner of Koheleth,
that it seems preferable in the absence of any decisive evi
dence to the contrary, to include it as an integral part of the
work. I so regard it with all the less hesitation, because of the
difficulty of assuming the existence of a writer who could imi
tate Koheleth so successfully and produce such a literary gem as
this picture of the perpetual repetition in the domain of nature.
*The picturesque expression "under the sun" occurs
no less than 30 times in the book. It is, therefore, a charac
teristic phrase of our author, who prefers it to the more prosaic
and conventional "upon the earth" (viii. 14, 16 and xi. 2).
By the side of "under the sun," we also find three times the
phrase "under heaven" (i. I3,ii. 3 and iii. i), though" heaven"
(written in Hebrew sh-m-m) may be a copyist's slip in these
passages for "sun" (written sh-m-sh).
* My translation of this line rests upon a slight textual
change and involves also taking one word as an explanation
of a rarer one. The thought is that the sun never reaches
any goal, though always appearing to be moving towards one.
° It comes back to the direction whence it started. The
wind, too, has no goal.
'The view rests upon the theory, widely held in an
tiquity, that there was an ocean encircling the earth, upon
which the earth .floated like a rubber ball. Rivers and lakes
and springs were supposed to be fed by subterranean streams,
connecting with the great encircling ocean. The streams
likewise have no goal; they simply flow forward and backward.
'This monotony of regular changes without any goal
makes life so wearisome that speech fails one in trying to
describe it.

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
Beyond sight and hearing."
What has been is that which shall be;
And what has happened is that which shall
happen.
So that there is nothing new under the sun.
If something (occurs) of which one says, " See,
this is new" — ages before us it has already hap
pened. Former occurrences are not recorded, and
later occurrences also shall not be remembered by
the ages that are to come. II
I, Koheleth, was king over Israel in Jemsalem, ¦• i^-ii. u.
and I applied my mind^ to seek and explore" every- ^^' .
thing under the sun^"" — a sorry business which puasures.
God" has given the children of men for [their]
alfllction.'^ I saw all that happened under the sun i- h
* Literally: "The eye is not satisfied with seeing and
the ear is not filled through hearing," i.e., no matter how
much one sees and how much one hears, one cannot exhaust
the impression of the utter wearisomeness of the processes
of nature. Nature herself grows tired and weary of this
perpetual movement without progress.
' The Hebrew word is "heart," but the heart was sup
posed by the Hebrews (and other peoples of antiquity) to be
the seat ofthe "intellect." Hence, wherever the word "heart"
occurs in the O.T., the mind is meant.
^^ "Through wisdom," added by a commentator to
conform ¦ to the Solomon of tradition.
'"'Text has "heaven," but this is probably a slip for "sun."
" Koheleth always uses the generic name for the deity —
Elohim— never the specifically Hebrew one, Yahweh. He does
not write from the Hebrew point of view. See above p. 134.
'* The desire for knowledge, implanted in man, is a
cause of trouble and vexation. The word rendered "busi-
203

A GENTLE CTNIC
— and behold It was all vanity and chasing after
wind.^'
i. i6 Now I thought to myself,^* I have become
great and acquired much more'* than any one who
reigned before me over Jerusalem, and my mind
was stored with very much wisdom and knowledge.
'¦ 17 And so I set out to experience frivolity and
foolishness," though I knew that this, too, was
chasing after wind.''
ness" (or we might say "task" or "occupation") occurs only
in Ecclesiastes— and no less than eight times. The point of
view is much the same that we find in the famous third
chapter of Genesis, which likewise assumes that the evil in
the world is due to man's desire for knowledge. The state of
blissful ignorance before man ate of the "Tree of Knowledge
of Good and Evil" was Paradise. See above p. 188.
'' A very striking phrase, occurring nine times in the
book, to indicate the utter foolishness of it all. Life is an
empty bubble. Ambition is like chasing the wind. You can
never catch it, and if you did it would be of no use. At this
point (i. 15), a commentator added a popular saying:
" The crooked cannot be straightened.
And the lacking cannot be supplied."
This interrupts the context and introduces an entirely differ
ent thought, namely, that things cannot be changed. See
vii. 13. " Literally: "I spoke with my heart" {i.e., my mind).
'* A commentator adds "wisdom," to make the de
scription conform to the traditional Solomon, but Koheleth
here has in mind material possessions.
'* A pious editor, who thought that this was a bit too
strong and hardly consistent with the traditional figure of a
wise Solomon, added "wisdom and knowledge," though
these words are manifestly out of place. The point made by
the author is that Koheleth after having acquired "wisdom
and knowledge" (in addition to possessions), and finding that
this was "vanity and chasing after wind," now determined
204

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
I said to myself, come I'll make a test of "
pleasure and of having a good time,'* but alas ! This
also turned out to be vanity. Of sport, I was led to
conclude that it was madness, and of joy — what does
it accomplish ! I made up my mind to stimulate my
body with wine'' and to pursue folly, In order to
ascertain whether this was a good way for the chil
dren of men to spend'^* the days of their lives.
I undertook great works. I acquired me houses ;
I planted me vineyards, I made me gardens and
parks."" I planted in them all kinds of fruit trees,"'
to see what the antithesis of "wisdom and knowledge",
i.e., "frivolity and foolishness," would lead to.
" A glossator, perhaps not the same as the one who
interspersed the book with proverbial sayings (see above
p. 76), here added (i. 18.)
" For in much wisdom is much trouble.
And increase of knowledge is increase of pain."
This saying (verse 18) properly belongs after verse 14.
'* Literally "looking upon good" — a perfect equivalent
to our colloquial "having a good time." Koheleth is not
afraid of using the expressive slang of his day.
" At this point a pious commentator, still concerned
for the reputation of the good and wise king, added "though
my mind was acting with wisdom," i.e., the king kept con
trol of himself. It would not do to represent Solomon as a
wine bibber, led by his sensual taste to pass beyond bounds.
He was merely experimenting and with a conscious purpose.
"^ A glossator adds "under heaven," but this is quite
superfluous, and besides appears to be a slip for "under the
sun." See note 3.
"" The word is the Persian pairidaSza, literally an
"enclosure," which passed over into Greek as Paradeisos.
Outside of this passage, it occurs only twice in the O.T.
(i) Song of Songs iv. 13 and (2) Neh. ii. 8 — both books
belonging to the post-Persian period.
20s

A GENTLE CTNIC
I made me pools of water to Irrigate the sprouting
forest." I purchased slaves and hand-maidens,
and had a household of dependents, besides having
possessions of cattle and flocks in large number,
more than anyone before me in Jerusalem. I gath
ered me also silver and gold, royal treasures and
provinces,^^ I got me singers and dancing maidens'**
and [all] the dehghts of the children of men.''*
And so I became great,"® In excess of any one
who was before me In Jerusalem."' I did not
withhold anything that my eyes desired, I did not
deny myself any pleasure, for I rejoiced in all my
toil, and this was my portion of all my toil. But
when I looked on all what my hands had
wrought and on what I had toiled for — all indeed
seemed vanity and chasing after wind. Nothing
seemed worth while"* under the sun.

"' With an allusion to the primaeval garden (Gen. ii. 9)
with all kinds of trees.
"" A commentator adds "of trees."
"' Instead of "provinces," Ehrlich (Randglossen,
Vol. vii. 61) by a slight textual change, obtains the word
"choice treasures" which forms a suitable parallel to "royal
treasures." However, the text as it stands gives a satis
factory meaning, in view of Solomon's extension of his
kingdom. "^ Literally, "male and female singers."
"' Two obscure terms are added, commonly taken as
"many concubines," but it seems more likely that they were
intended as variants to "singers and dancing maidens"; and,
not being understood, they were incorrectly spelled.
"'Note the sarcastic touch, that the greatness of kings
consists in having large possessions and in surrounding
themselves with luxuries, slaves and courtesans.
206

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
III
And so I made a test of madness and folly,"' ii. 12- 16
for what can any man do who comes after a king, ^'¦"''"«
beyond what he has already done?'" And yet it ^"^^f ^
seemed to me that perhaps wisdom has an advan- Vain.
tage over folly, in so far as light is better than
darkness." But then I realized that there is one ii- u*"
and the same fate for all; and I reflected that the
fate of the fool will also overtake me. Why then
should I be overwise? So I concluded — this, also,
is vanity. For of the wise man, as of the fool,
there is no permanent record, inasmuch as in the
days to come everything is forgotten.'" And [see]
how the wise man dies just as the fool !
"' Our pious commentator again adds, "However, my
wisdom abided with me." Solomon must be represented as
keeping wise through it all.
"^Literally: "advantage." The word used occurs only in
Ecclesiastes, though a favorite one with our author, who
introduces it no less than nine times. It seems to be a collo
quial expression, equivalent to our "worth while."
"' Our pious commentator to conform to the Solomonic
tradition again adds "and wisdom."
'" The experiment made by Koheleth is final, for surely
no one can make a more complete test of pleasure, wealth
and riotous living than a king. There is also an implied sar
casm that no one can possibly be more foolish than a king.
" The commentator, who intersperses appropriate
proverbs throughout the book, adds:
"The wise man has his eyes in his head.
But the fool walks in darkness." (Verse 14".)
'"It is interesting to contrast with this the point of view in
Proverbs x. 7 : "The memory of the righteous shall be blessed,
but the name of the wicked shall rot. " Similarly Psalm cxii. 6
" The righteous shall be in everlasting remembrance. "
207

A GENTLE CTNIC
IV
ii- I7-2S So I hated life, for all that happened under
Life IS -(-i^g g^j^ seemed evil to me, since all was vanity and
ToiUs chasing after wind. And I hated [the thought]
Useless— that I must leave all that I had tolled for under
Therefore the suu, to ouc who comcs after me. And who
^''*' ^andl'e ^nows whether he who will control all that I have
Merryi toIlcd for Under the sun with my wisdom will be a
wise man or a fool? Surely this is vanity!
And I gave myself up to despair over all that
I had tolled for under the sun, inasmuch as a man
who toils with wisdom, knowledge and integrity"
must hand it over as an inheritance to one who
has not toiled for it — surely this is vanity and a
great evil.'*
What has a man of all his toil and of his
painstaking efforts under the sun, since all his days
are pains and his ambition a vexation, with no rest
for his mind even at night? Surely this Is vanity.
There is nothing better for a man than to eat
and to drink and to enjoy himself for his toil; and It
indeed seems to me that such is the will of God.'*
" Again a word used only in Koheleth (occurring three
times), and which represents either a late formation or a
colloquial expression.
'* Koheleth betrays a very "modern" point of view in
thus railing against the law of inheritance, which obliges a
man to leave his property to his children who have not
worked for it.
'* Literally: "This is from the hand of God," i.e., enjoy
ment is sanctioned by the divine fiat. The capacity to enjoy is
God's gift to man. The same thought is found in iii. 13, and v. 19
and forms an essential part of Koheleth's philosophy. See p. 147.
208

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
For who should eat and who should drink,'® apart
from him," though this, also, is vanity and chasing
after wind.'* V
Everything has its appointed time," and "'• '-'s
there is a time [determined] for every occurrence f^^^y'^'^s
under the sun.'"^ _ 'ordlined-
There is a time [appointed] to be born, and a iii. 2
time to die.
There Is a time [appointed] for planting, and
a time for uprooting.*"
" I follow the Greek text in preference to the Hebrew,
which has an obscure word, that may rest upon a misreading. ^
"Who is to enjoy the products ofthe earth if not man? j
I follow the Greek translation reading "him," instead of the
Hebrew"!." '* The pious commentator who aims to tone down the
cynical conclusion, which is particularly distasteful to him,
adds (ii. 26):
"For to the man who is good in His sight. He {i.e., God) has given
wisdom and knowledge and enjoyment, but to the sinner He has
assigned the task of gathering and amassing, in order to hand it over
to the one who is good in the sight of God."
This is optimism with a vengeance, and in complete contrast
to Koheleth's philosophy. See above, p. 137, et seq. It is
amusing to follow the mental antics of some exegetes in their
endeavor to reconcile the two points of view — the one abso
lutely exclusive of the other.
" The word used occurs only in late books of the 0. T.
^'" So read instead of "heaven." See note 3.
*" Some elaborator has amused himself — or perhaps
several hands are to be assumed — ^by adding a somewhat
tiresome series of 12 further antitheses (verses 3-8), in illus
tration of the general principle of a time being preordained
for all occurrences, as laid down by Koheleth. Some of these
antitheses are appropriate, others are far-fetched and a few
14 209

A GENILE CTNIC
"1- 9 What profit, then, has the worker of his toil ?*'
I have observed [every] ambition*" which God
has given the children of men for their affliction.*'
He has given them a grasp of the whole world,**
are banal. Koheleth was too much of a literary artist to
weaken his thought by an over supply of illustrations.
(l) A time to destroy, and a time to repair.
(2) A time to break down, and a time to build up.
(3) A time to weep, and a time to laugh.
(4) A time to mourn, and a time to dance.
(5) A time to scatter stones, and a time to gather stones.
(6) A time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing.
(7) A time to seek, and a time to give up as lost.
(8) A time to keep, and a time to throw away.
(9) A time to rip, and a time to sew.
(10) A time to keep silent, and a time to speak.
(11) A time to love, and a time to hate.
(12) A time of war, and a time of peace.
It will be observed that the 3d and 4th of these antitheses are
practically synonymous, as are the 2nd and 5th and 9th, and
again the 7th and 8th. Some like the 6th and nth are rather
trivial, or at all events entirely too obvious to be worthy of a
place in a book like Koheleth. The list impresses one as an
attempted jeu d^ esprit, to see how many 'antitheses might be
suggested. We ought to be grateful that the list was not fur
ther extended, as it might easily have been. It would also
• appear that the one (or those) who added these illustrations
lost sight of Koheleth's thought of predetermination and
took "time" to mean the proper time, instead of the f,xed time.
*' Koheleth's thought is, that everything is preordained
and the time for its occurrence fixed. Why then toil and
worry .^ Things will happen anyway at the appointed time.
^" The same word as above, i. 13 ("business") of
which our author is so fond. The Greek text adds "every"
which is proper at this point.
*' The pious commentator interposes a counter-reflec
tion (iii. II'), "He has made everything beautiful in its
season," with an allusion perhaps to the refrain in the first
chapter of Genesis, "And God saw that it was good."
** Literally: "He has placed the [whole] world in their

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
AvIthout, however, the possibility on the part of
man to fathom the work which God has made from
the beginning to the end.
I realized, therefore, that there is nothing
better for a man than to be happy and to enjoy
himself,*^ in his life, and that indeed every man
who eats and drinks and has a good time in all
his toil [enjoys] a gift of God.*® I [also] realized
that whatever God does is forever, to which one
cannot add and from which one cannot take away.*'
Whatever has been has been before, and what is
to be has already been.**
mind," meaning that God has given men a grasp on the world.
The Greek text adds "whole" to "world" which shows that
the Hebrew word here used, olam, originally, "forever," had
acquired the meaning "world," common in post-Biblical
Hebrew. *^ The text says "to do good," but that is surely not
what Koheleth has in mind. Either the phrase has also the
force of to "get pleasure," or it is an intentional correction
of the phrase "to look upon good" which is the one that
Koheleth generally uses {e.g., ii. i and 24) to express the
idea of "having a good time."
*® i.e.. It is God's will — as above ii. 24.
*' God's work is permanent, just as He has made it.
Man cannot add to it or take away from it. Why, therefore,
be ambitious to direct affairs into their proper channel? The
pious commentator adds, "God has so made it {i.e., the
world) that men will fear Him."
*' The same thought as in i. 9. Then follows what ap
pears to be an addition on the part of a pious commentator
(15'') "And God seeks out what has been driven away," by
which apparently is meant that God looks out for those who
are rejected or persecuted, and that nothing worth preserving
is lost in this world — a pious and conventional thought
hardly in keeping with Koheleth's point of view.

iii. l8

A GENTLE CTNIC
VI
iii. 16-22 And furthermore, I saw under the sun In
Injustice the placc of justice wickedness, and where the
and the righteous should have been the wicked was.*'
""f^i" [And] I reflected that God [permits this] In the
case of children of men to test them and to show
that they are — beasts.^" For the fate of the chil
dren of men and the fate of the beast is the same.
As this one dies, so is the death of that, and there
is the same spirit*' to all. Man has no advantage
over the beast, for all is vanity. All go to one place.
All are of the dust and all return to dust.*"
*' i.e., a topsy-turvy world, where things are just the
contrary of what they ought to be. Our pious commentator,
shocked at this picture of perversion in a world supposed to
be under the government of a just God, adds, in imitation of
the style of Koheleth (verse 17), "But I reflected that God
will judge both the righteous and the wicked, for there is an
appointed time for every occurrence and for every [fixed] act."
The commentator thus rather cleverly turns Koheleth's view
of preordination against him. A supercommentator has added
"fixed." The Greek text omits the word, but it is a proper
explanation to the word "time" to which it perhaps belongs.
*" Koheleth ironically introduces the stock argument
of the pious conservatives — as in the book of Job — that God
allows injustice, in order to test the caliber of men. Oh yes,
says Koheleth, to test them but with what result? To find
out that they are — simply beasts, on a par with the animal
world. At the end of verse 18, there is a gloss "they to them"
— probably misplaced and belonging to verse 19, to explain
that men are like beasts in having the same fate.
" Literally: "breath," used in Hebrew to convey the
idea of both life and the soul.
*" Almost a literal quotation from Genesis iii. 19:
"Dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return."
The book of Koheleth thus assumes the existence of the Book
of Genesis in its final form.

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
Who knows whether the spirit of the children of
men mounts up" and the spirit of the beast goes
down?** So it appeared to me that there is nothing
better for man than to enjoy himself, for that Is his
portion, for who can help him to see what shall
be after him ?** VII
And once more I considered all the oppres- 'v- '-8
sions practised under the sun, and Oh, the tears of oppression
the oppressed without any one to console*® them, '^yanityd
and the violence of their oppressors with no com- Effort.
forter*' in sight! And I praised those long since
dead more than those still living; and better than
both is the one who has not yet been. Inasmuch as
he has not seen the evil happenings under the sun.*'
And I considered that all toil and all honest*' '^- *
work Is merely due to man's zeal against his
*' An interesting indication of the existence at the time
of the composition of Koheleth of at least the beginnings of
the belief which placed the seat of the dead in the heavens, as
against the earlier view among all Semites which assumed a
large gathering-place for all the dead — good and bad alike —
in the hollow ofthe earth. Seeabove,p. I2<jetseq. and Jastrow
"Hebrew and Babylonian Traditions," chapter iv.
**An explanatory gloss adds "to the earth."
**The future is hidden behind a veil, which no one can lift.
*®In the sense of avenging them.
"i.^., no avenger.
*'A similar thought is expressed in the famous passage
in Job iii. 11-17. By way of contrast, and voicing the opti
mism of the pious believer, the Psalmist (cxv. 17-18) praises
the living who can sing to Yahweh, whereas "the dead praise
not Yahweh" and are therefore to be pitied.
*' The same late term as used above, ii. 2 1 (" integrity ")
to indicate a sincere and properly carried out task.
213

A GENTLE CTNIC
neighbor — surely this is vanity and chasing after
iv. 6 wind.'" Better a handful in quiet than two hands-
ful in toil and chasing after wind.®'
And I further considered the vanity that there
iv. 8 is under the sun. There is a single man without a
mate,®" without a son or brother, yet toiling with
out end, and with an eye never satisfied by his
wealth. For whom then should I toil and deprive
myself of a good time ? Surely this is vanity and a
sorry business.®' VIII
iv. 13-16 Better is a child of humble birth®* and wise
Vanity of than an old king who Is a fool and unable to take
Youth and of  — °
Popularity. '" This rather cynical reflection that even honest work
done by man is prompted merely by his keen desire to outdo
his neighbor, leads the "maxim" commentator to add a
popular proverb to illustrate the superiority of work over
idleness — which is exactly what Koheleth did not mean.
"The fool folds his hands and consumes his own flesh."
(iv. 5.) The thought is in accord with the point of view in
Proverbs vi. lo; xix. 24; xxiv. 33, etc. — quite conventional.
®' This saying may have been added by some commen
tator, but it is so appropriate to Koheleth's thought that the
point must not be pressed. I, therefore, retain it as part of
the original work, just as in the case of the saying (ix. 4),
"As a living dog, one is better off than a dead lion"
where Koheleth himself, without much doubt, quotes a
familiar proverb.
®" Was Koheleth an old bachelor? There seems to be
an autobiographical touch here, especially in the question
with which the verse ends.
®' Some commentator takes up the point in a much
more serious sense than Koheleth intended and tells us at
length (iv. 9-12)
"Two are better than one,
for they secure a better return for their toil.
214

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
care of himself.®* For through a rebellion®® one may
come to rule, even though one is born poor in one's
own kingdom.
I saw all the living®^ under the sun flocking
to the side of the child, who®' was to stand in his®'
place. There was no end to all the people,'" yet
those that come after will not rejoice in him — now
surely this is vanity and chasing after wind.
In case they fall [i.e., if they fail in business], the one can lift his fellow
up,
but if a single person falls, there is none to lift him up.
Again, if two sleep together [the reference is to marriage] they keep
warm,
but how can a single person keep warm ?
And if some one attacks, there are two to withstand;
and a triple cord is not easily snapped,"
i.e., when three get twisted up in a melee, there is little
danger of the two who stick together being worsted. At
the worst, such a struggle ends in a draw.
®* The term used is mis ken which, through the Arabic, has
passed over into European languages (French WifJ^ttin) reverts
to the Babylonian mushkenu, which designates a "plebeian."
®* So Ehrlich's happy interpretation of the phrase used.
^ Literally: "house of rebellion" in the sense of "con
spiracy". This is more probable than "prison house" in the
ordinary translations. See Barton's commentary, p. 121.
®' i.e., all the people.
®' The text adds the words "the second," which is a
misplaced gloss and belongs to verse 10 as an explanation of
"the one," who lifts his fallen partner up.
®' i.e., in place of the deposed king.
'" The text adds as a note to "all," i.e., "before whom
he was." The point is that those who once stood by the old
king now rush to follow the popular youth, rising from his
humble station to the kingdom, but even this popularity
will not last. Those who come later, when this young king
will have grown old, will not care for him. There is a refer
ence here to some actual occurrence, from which Koheleth
drew his lesson. 215

A GENTLE CTNIC
IX
^"vHiiyof Observe thy pilgrimages" to the house of
Worship, God but draw nigh to hear, rather than to have
of Sacrifice {qqI^i^ offcr a Sacrifice, for they do not know
^^^y enough to do any harm.
v. 1 Be not rash with thy mouth, and be not led
hastily to utter a word before God, for God is in
V- 3' heaven and thou art upon earth. Therefore, let
thy words be few. " If thou dost make a vow to God,
do not defer paying it.'* Whatever thou vowest,
v. 4 pay ! It Is better not to vow, than to vow and not
pay. Let not thy mouth bring sin upon thee, '* and
do not say before God'® that It was a slip." Why
" A reference to the three festivals during the year,
when it was customary for those living outside of Jerusalem
to pay a visit to the temple.
'" By "fools," Koheleth in most uncomplimentary
fashion means the priests. If you go to a place of worship,
go to listen to a sermon and not to see the priests offer an
animal sacrifice, as though this were pleasing to God. From
Koheleth's advanced point of view, animal sacrifice is a
silly survival and those who carry it out are fools. A mis
placed gloss (in verse 3) adds "for He [t.^., God] has no
pleasure in fools." See above, p. 153, et seq.
" Don't make too many vows, and be careful before
you promise anything in the house of worship when you are
supposed to be in God's presence. Verse 2 interrupts the
context. It belongs to verse 6. See below, note 79.
'* The text adds, "for He has no pleasure in fools,"
which is a misplaced gloss, evidently a comment on the part
of one who sympathized with Koheleth's characterization of
priests as fools (iv. 17). See above, note 72.
'* i.e., by hastily making a vow which you have no in
tention to pay.
" So the Greek text, for which the Hebrew in order to
avoid the anthropomorphism has "angel," i.e., a messenger
216

Government.

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
arouse God's anger" and destroy thy own handi
work? A multitude of dreams results in many foolish
words,
for a dream comes through too much business,
and a fool's voice is heard In many words."
X
If thou seest the oppression of the poor, and v. 7-8
justice and righteousness In the country^" de- <^°''''^P'^o«'>I
frauded, do not be amazed at the occurence, for
of God. This substitute is quite frequent in the O.T. So,
e.g.. Genesis xlviii. 16, Jacob is made to speak of "the angel
who redeemed me," meaning Yahweh. In accordance with
this tendency to avoid the earlier assumption that Yahweh
himself appears and speaks, later documents — like the Elo
hist in the Hexateuch — speak of the "angel of Yahweh"
appearing in a dream or in a theophany. So Genesis xxviii. 12
the angels of God appear to Jacob in a dream, whereas in an
earlier document, which has been dovetailed into a later
one, Yahweh himself appears and speaks (verse 13).
" The word used is the technical one in the ritual laws
of the Pentateuch for an "unintentional error." It is peculiar
to the late Priestly Code and points, therefore, to the exist
ence of this Code at the time that Koheleth wrote. This of
itself would bring the composition of our book to a date later
than the close of the fifth century.
" Literally: "Why should God be angry at thy voice,"
i.e., at thee?
" I combine verse 6 with verse 2. The fool's voice is
that of the one who pretends to interpret a dream, which is
merely due to having too much on one's mind. Koheleth
might have added "or too much in one's stomach." At the
close of verse 6 the pious commentator adds "but fear God."
®" The word used {medina=pTovince) is a late one and
stamps Palestine as a "province" of the Persian Empire.
217

A GENTLE CTNIC
there is some "guardian"®' higher up and still
higher ones above this one; and overtopping them
all is the King.'" XI
V. 9-16 Hewholovessilverwillneverhaveenoughsilver,
y^mtyof ^jjjj ]^g ^jjQ loves a big pile, will have no
Wealth. r r p • 1 o r 7
profit [of It] —
surely this is vanity.
With the increase of goods, its participants
increase ;
and what advantage is it to its owner except
to look at it ?
Sweet is the sleep of the laborer, whether he
has eaten little or much,
but the satiety of the rich does not permit
him to sleep.®'
A sore evil that I have seen under the sun, is
V 13 riches hoarded by the owner,'* and when that for-
" Koheleth uses the word "guardian," i.e.,oi the law,
ironically. His point is that if there is graft in the land, there
is always some one "higher up" who is responsible and who
cannot be reached.
'" This translation of verse 8 is a mere venture. The
text as it stands cannot be correct. The two words at the
close "attached to the field" give no sense whatsoever, and
may represent a misplaced gloss to "laborer" in v. 11 to
indicate that the "laborer" meant is a farmer. The previous
verse suggests some such meaning as that responsibility for
corruption in the final analysis rests with the king who
stands above all. It is not improbable that the text has been
intentionally manipulated for fear of Ihse-majeste.
^ These two lines form a popular saying, but probably
introduced by Koheleth himself.
** A gloss adds "to his hurt."
2l8

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
tune is lost through a bad venture, the son begotten
by him has nothing.
He cannot carry anything that he has acquired v. i^^
by his toil away with him.®* Surely this is a sore
evil, that just as he came, so he goes. Therefore,
what profit is it to him that he toils for the wind
and that he spends all his days in saving'® and in
constant worry and sickness and distress?
XII
Therefore, it seems to me the thing that is v. 17-19
good and proper is to eat, drink, and to have a ^''''
good time with all one's toil under the sun during ^„ ™^/
the span of life which God has allotted to one, for Merry.
that is his portion. Every man to whom God has
given riches and possessions and who has [also]
the power to enjoy it and to take his pyrtlon and to
be happy in his toil — this is a gift of God." For
he should remember that life is short and that
God approves of joy."
'* Our "maxim" commentator adds (at the beginning
of verse 14) as appropriate at this point:
"As he came naked from his mother's womb, so he retums as he came."
The saying is identical with Job i. 20 — there put into
the mouth of Job. It is, in all probability, intended as a
quotation, though placed in the third person as against the
first person in Job.
** So by a slight change in the text.
" As above ii. 24.
" Literally: "God answers the joy of his heart" —
evidently meaning that God puts his stamp of approval on
man's enjoyment of his life. This use of "answer" in the
sense of "approve" is also found in Arabic and Assyrian.
219

A GENTLE CTNIC
XIII
^- 1-9 There is an evil which I have observed under
""'^y "S the sun and it bears heavily on mankind — a man
Enjoyment, to whom God has given riches and possessions
and superfluity" with nothing lacking of anything
that he might wish for, but to whom God has not
given the power to enjoy it, so that a stranger'"
enjoys it — this surely is vanity and a sore evil.
If a man beget a hundred children" and live
many years, be his life ever so long, and he does
not get his fill of joy out of it'" — I say that the
abortion Is happier than he. Even though it [the
untimely birth] comes Into vanity, moves in dark
ness, and with darkness its name is covered and it
has never seen the sun nor has known [anything] —
V'- 6 yet this Is preferable to the other." And though a
man live a thousand years twice told, and has not
had a good time — do not all go to one place?'*
" Literally "honor," but when used with "riches" it
has the force of luxury.
'" i.e., some one for whom he does not care. Is
Koheleth again giving us an autobiographical touch of him
self as a bachelor who must leave his fortune to strangers?
" Grandchildren and great-grandchildren would also
be counted as a man's offspring.
'" A glossater has added "And he has not even a burial,"
i.e., is even neglected when he dies. The common view Smong
Semites was that the unburied corpse is unhappy in the
world of shadows.
" i.e., the fate of the untimely birth is better than a
long life without joy, even if one has children to whom to
leave one's fortune.
'* According to Koheleth, there is no heaven for the
good man who has lived his life in abstinence and whose

THE .WORDS OF KOHELETH
What advantage has a wise man'* over a fool, vi. s
or the poor man who by his knowledge sets an ex
ample to the living?'® Better is enjoyment" than
longing — though this also is vanity and chasing
after wind. XIV
Whatever Is has long since been determined" vi. lo-u
and what man is has been fixed." He cannot con- ^""''y
tend with what is stronger than himself.'"" Since "V ' ,
many possessions'"' merely Increase vanity, what against Fate.
energy was entirely taken up with toil without cessation.
His fate is no better than that of the man who lived solely
for enjoyment. A "maxim" commentator has added a
popular saying at this point as an antidote to Koheleth's
poisonous doctrine of eating and drinking and jollification
as the goal and aim of life (v. 7) —
"AU the toil of a man is for his mouth [i.e., for his belly],
and yet the appetite is never satisfied."
'*The wise man being here as elsewhere also thegood man,
and by implication the one who lives to work and not to enjoy.
'® My translation of the close of verse 8 is a guess at
the meaning of an obscure phrase.
" Literally: "sight [i.e., feasting] of the eyes." This
saying may also be an insertion by the " maxim " commenta
tor, though it is in keeping with Koheleth's tone and thought.
"Literally: "its name has been called." The "giving
of a name" according to Semitic ideas is equivalent to calling
something into existence. The phrase, therefore, means
that whatever is has been brought into existence long before
it actually appears, i.e., things are preordained.
" Every man's fate is fixed — why struggle against it?
Koheleth may be reflecting, the corollary drawn by the
Greek astrologers that man's career and destiny is deter
mined by his horoscope at the time of birth or (according
to some) at conception.
'"" i.e., fate, which is always stronger than man.
'" Literally, "many words," but "words" is used by

A GENTLE CTNIC
advantage are they to man? For who knows
what is good for a man during the span of his life
of vanity? And though he spends [his life] like a
shadow,'"" is there any one who can tell man what
is to be after him under the sun ?'"'
XV
vii. i^'-M Thedayofdeathisbetterthanthedayofbirth.'"*
Vamtyof j.^ jg ]-,etter to go to the house of mourning
than to a house of feasting,
for the former marks the end of all men."*
Koheleth also for "things." The thought seems to be that
possessions do not make man master of his fate, since wealth
has been shown to lead merely to the increase of vanity; it
does not enable man to change the course of destiny. Fate is
fate — and man has no advantage over anything else in
nature, which is all preordained.
'"" i.e., without seeing the reality of things, which to
Koheleth means enjoyment.
'"' No one knows what is really good for man, not
the wisest nor the incessant worker nor even the astrologer
whose knowledge of man's fate does not extend beyond the
grave. Koheleth might have added his usual refrain — "there
fore, enjoy yourself , though this,too, is vanity and chasing after
wind." For a misplaced comment to vi. 12, see below note 123.
'"* In order to counteract the effect of this pessimistic
and unorthodox reflection, which runs counter to the accepted
belief that life is a blessing from God and that the longer it
lasts the greater the blessing, the pious commentator adds at
the beginning of the chapter, "Better is a name [i.e., a good
reputation] than fine oil," meaning the good name that one
leaves behind after life is over. Koheleth is not thinking of
this, but only of the vanity of existence — direct and undis
guised vanity, not tempered by any consoling thought of
immortality or of leaving a fragrant memory behind one.
From this point of view, we must approach the chapter which is
one of the finest in the book, or we miss its meaning completely.

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
The mind of the wise Is in the house of vii. 4
mourning,'"®
but the mind of fools is In the house of mirth,'"®
though this too Is vanity.'"®*
Better is the end of athing than its beginning.'"' vii. S"
Do not say, why is it that the former days vii. 10
were better than these, for it is not out of wisdom
that thou puttest this question.'"' Consider the vii. 13
'"* Our pious commentator, still intent upon giving the
reflections of Koheleth a more orthodox and less cynical
turn, adds (2''-3)
(a) "And the living will take it to mind" and (b) "Dissatisfaction
is better than laughter, for through misfortune the mind is improved."
This point of view is urged by the friends of Job in their
attempts to answer Job's complaint against unjust suffering.
"'® i.e., you may hear sensible talk at a funeral, but
not at a banquet. A funeral discourse is apt to be better
than an after-dinner speech. At this point the "maxim"
commentator steps in to introduce some wise saws in illustra
tion of the superiority of wisdom, but what he says takes
us far away from the subject that Koheleth has in mind
(verses 5-6^ 7, S'', and 9).
"It is better to listen to the rebuke of a wise man,
than for a man to listen to the praise [literally, song) of fools."
(6*) " For as the crackling of thorns under a pot,
so is the applause of fools."
(7) "For extortion deprives a wise man of reason,
and a bribe corrupts the mind."
(S*") " Better patience than haughtiness."
(9) "Do not be prone to anger,
for anger endures [only] in the bosom of fools."
^'^ i.e., even the discourse of the wise in the house of
mourning is vanity. There is not much sense even in a funeral
oration, although it is apt to be better than an after-dinner
speech. '"'This saying may likewise be an addition by the
"maxim" commentator. The "end" is here to be taken
as the outcome or issue. 223

A GENTLE CTNIC
work of God, for who is able to straighten out
what He has made crooked?'"' Therefore, In the
day of prosperity, have a good time; and when the
day of adversity comes,"" remember that God has
made the one as well as the other, so as to render it
impossible for man to find out anything of what is to
come hereafter. XVI
vii. is-22 J have seen all kinds of things in my life of
Cherri'ht- Vanity. Here Is a righteous man who perishes by
eousness and hIs rlghteousncss, and there is a wicked man round-
Overwicked- ing out hIs life'" In his wickedness. [Therefore] be
ness.  '"* Those who laud the past {laudatores temporis acti)
do not betray their wisdom in imagining that things were
better in former days. Things are always the same — says
Koheleth. Our "maxim" commentator in order again to
give a different tone to Koheleth's depressing reflection
seizes hold of the term "wisdom" as a handle for some further
reflections to emphasize his favorite theme — the advantage of
wisdom (verse ii): "Wisdom is better than an inheritance"
(so Renan's suggestion by a slight change of the text which
says "with" instead of "than") "and an advantage to the
living" (lit. : "those who see the sun") (verse 12). "Forthe
protection of wisdom is [as strong] as the protection of silver,
and the advantage of knowledge [a variant reads, wisdom]
is that it gives life to those who possess it."
"" Same thought as i. 15. You cannot change matters,
and this is another reason against indulging in vain regrets
that things are worse at present than they were in the past —
even if this were true, which is not the case.
"" Prosperity and adversity are constantly following
each other in endless succession, and no one can tell when the
one will come to an end, and the other will set in. Therefore —
carpe diem, enjoy the present and don't lament when things
change. That is the hidden law of nature and God's way of
doing things which man cannot fathom.
224

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
not overrighteous and be not overwise — why ruin
thyself ? But do not be overwicked and do not be a
fool, why die before thy time ?"" It is good to take vii. i8«
hold of this and not to refrain from that."' There vii. 20
is no man on earth so righteous that he [always]
does the right thing and never sins.
Furthermore, do not pay attention to all that
is said about thee, lest thou hear thy servant
defame thee."* Surely, many times as thou knowest
thou hast defamed others. XVII
All this I tested by wisdom. I resolved to be vii- 23-28
wise, but it was far from me. Far off is that which ^""^Xf!'"
exists and very deep — who can find it out?"* I msdom

and for
'" i.e., has a long life, which according to the conven- Decent
tional view is a sign of God's favor and the reward of virtue, Women.
as set forth in Psalms xci. 16; Proverbs x. 27 etc., etc.
"" If you carry your wickedness too far, you will be
caught and perish, just like the overrighteous.
"' Act so as to get the most out of life. Exercise judg
ment so as to know what to do and what to refrain from doing.
The "pious" commentator gives the rather cynical advice a
different turn by adding (verse 18") "He who fears God will
steer clear of everything" — he will neither fall into the pit
falls of wickedness nor suffer because of his righteousness.
To this the "wisdom" commentator adds (verse 19): "Wis
dom makes a wise man stronger than the ten rulers of a city."
The "ten rulers" constitute the city council.
"* Do not be too anxious to find out what people think
of you. You may find out that even the servants of your
household gossip about you — ^just as you gossip about others.
"* This is probably a popular saying. A similar thought
that wisdom is far off is to be found in Job, e.g., xi. 7-8 and
xxviii. 12-28.
IS 2^5

A GENTLE CTNIC
firmly resolved"® to search and to seek wisdom.
The substance"' of what I found out was that
wickedness is foolish and that folly is madness.
vii. 26" And I [also] found out that more bitter than
death is a woman whose mind is [all] snares and
nets, and whose hands are fetters."' There is
vii. 28 something [else] which I sought but never found.
Among a thousand, I did find a [real] man, but
never a [decent] woman among all these."'
XVIII '""
viii. 2-9 Obey the order of the king.'^'
^^ Do not be in a hurry to go into his presence,'""
Caprice of 
Rulers. M ^ gloss to " I resolved " (literally " I turned about")
adds "my heart to know," explanatory of the verb used.
'" A misplaced comment (v. 27') to this unusual word
"substance" or "sum" explains it as follows, "See this I
have found, Koheleth says, one and one to find the sum,"
i.e., counting up one thing after the other, the total of what
can be found out is that wickedness is foolish and does not
pay. Surely not much of a result for all one's pains.
"® Our pious commentator adds (26'') "He that is good
before God shall escape from her, but the sinner shall be
caught by her." On Koheleth's attitude toward woman, see
above, p. 161 et seq.
"' Our pious commentator adds in characteristic
fashion, to furnish the antidote to Koheleth's cynicism
(verse 29), "Besides, however, I have found this that God
has made man straight, but they have devised many con
trivances," i.e., people have found various methods to cor
rupt the originally fine nature of man.
'"" The section is again full of sayings, added in part by
the commentator who is bent upon using every occasion to
counterbalance Koheleth's distasteful philosophy by the
praise of wisdom, and in part by the pious commentator who
seeks to give an orthodox turn to his impious philosophy of
'' 226

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
for whatever he desires, he does. viii. 4
Inasmuch as the word of a king is supreme,
who can say to him, what art thou doing?'"'
life. So the "maxim" commentator introduces the chapter
with (viii. l)
(a) "Who is like the wise man, and who knows [as he does] the
explanation of a matter.'"
(b) "The wisdom of a man illumines his face,
And the coarseness of his countenance is changed."
(At the beginning of the second verse there is an entirely
meaningless "I" — evidently a textual error.)
'"' A commentator adds "because of the oath of God,"
as though Koheleth wanted to justify obedience to a king
because one has sworn fealty to him. What Koheleth says is
ironically meant. Obey and do what the king says and do
not rush to him with a complaint, for he will in any case do
just as he pleases.
'^ Again the "pious" commentator totally distorts the
irony of the advice — and no doubt with intent — by adding
"Do not plead a bad cause," as though this were the reason
why one should not be in haste to seek an audience of a king.
The entire flavor of the original book is lost by such additions.
'"' The pious commentator (or the "maxim" commen
tator in a pious spirit) adds (verse 5)
"The law observer shall know no harm.
And a wise mind knows the [proper] time and manner."
To this some super-commentator added (verse 6*,
quoting chapter iii. l)
"for to every occurrence there is a time and manner."
The second part of verse 6, reading
"for man's evil weighs heavily upon him"
is in the style of Koheleth, but is not in place here, as little
as is verse 7,
"For no one knows the future, so that there might be
some one to tell him when it will come to pass."
The two Utterances (6*" and 7) are perhaps to be taken as
misplaced comments belonging to vi. 12,
"Who knows what is good for a man's life?"
227

A GENTLE CTNIC
viii. 8 And yet no one can rule the wind,'"*
or restrain the wind.
No one can lord it over the day of death,
nor ensure escape in war.'"*
All this I experienced by applying my mind
to everything that happened under the sun, where
man has the power to harm his fellow.
XIX
viii. 10-17 And so [among other things] I have seen
No Solution wlckcd men buried, and [people] coming back
In ustice ^^'^^^ ^hc Sanctified ground,'"® and going about
singing their praises'"' In the very city In which
they acted thus — surely this is vanity.'"'

to which some one might appropriately have added "for
man's evil weighs heavily upon him, that there is no one
who knows the future, so that he might tell a man when it
will come. " No one can tell, our commentator implies, for no
one knows. '"* There are limitations even to the powers of a king —
he has no control over the wind, nor over death nor over
the chances of war.
'"* The pious commentator adds (verse 8'') "nor will
wickedness help its possessors to escape."
'"' i.e., the cemetery.
'"' i.e., the praises of the wicked. I follow the Greek
text which by the change of a single letter in the Hebrew
obtains a satisfactory meaning, instead of the senseless "are
forgotten." Koheleth's point is that the wicked are not
forgotten, but praised and celebrated even after death, and
in the very place in which they spent their evil lives.
'"* At this point, our pious commentator enters upon an
elaborate argument (verses 11-13) somewhat in the style of
Job's friends to prove that the wicked are punished, even
though the punishment be delayed. " Because the sentence
228

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
There is another vanity which happens upon viii. 14
earth — that there are righteous who are treated
as though they were wicked, and that there are
wicked whose lot is as though they were righteous
— I reflected that this Is surely vanity.
Therefore, I commend joy, because there is
nothing better for a man under the sun than to
eat and drink and to be merry, as the accompa
niment to his toil during the span of life allotted to
him by God under the sun.
When I set my mind to acquire wisdom and viii- 16"
to penetrate to the core of what happens on earth,'"'
I realized [finally] in regard to the work of God viii- 17
that man cannot understand what happens under
the sun, despite all efforts to seek a solution, and
though he deprive himself of sleep day and night,""
he cannot fathom it; and even if a wise man'"
thinks that he knows — yet he cannot find out."" '''• '"
Man does not know. Everything in the past"'
is vanity."*
for an evil deed is not promptly carried out, therefore the
inclination of man is to do evil [cf. Genesis viii. 21]. But
although a sinner does a great deal of evil and is accorded a
respite, yet I know that good fortune will attend those who fear
God [comment or variant: Those who fear His presence]
and that it shall not be well for the wicked, and that he will
not lengthen out his days as a shadow [ ? ], because he does
not fear the presence of God."
'"' The second part of verse 16 is misplaced. It belongs
in the middle of verse 17. See the following note.
"° This part of the verse "and though .... night" is
taken over froip v. 16.
'" i.e., a philosopher. 229

A GENTLE CTNIC
XX
ix. 2-10 Since there is a common fate to all, to the
nu-^^^f righteous and to the wicked, to the good [and to
Oblivion '«',,,, , , , , 1 1
Common the bad],"* to the clean and to the unclean, to the
Fate, one who sacrifices and to the one who does not
Therefore, gacrlfice; as the virtuous so the sinner, the one who
Drink, and be ^^^^^^ and the One who fears an oath — this is
Merry, the wotst evIl among all the things that happen
under the sun, that there should be one fate to all,
and that the mind of the children of men is full of
evil and of foolish thoughts while they live and after
that — to the dead [they go.]
Yet there is at least some assurance to the one
who is classed with the living, for as a living dog,
he is better off than a dead lion."® Since the
"" The greater part of the first verse of chapter ix. is
taken up with a comment in the spirit of the pious commen
tator to give a different turn to Koheleth's thought. The
commentator, repeating from (verse i6) "all this I set my
mind to search," says: "all this," namely, that "the righteous
and the wise and their works are in the hand of God" to
which a super-commentator adds: "also hate and love."
After this the original text sets in: "Everything in the past
is vanity" (end of section XIX).
"' Literally: "before them," i.e., anterior to them, i.e.,
all experience is of no avail in penetrating the mystery about us.
"* So the Greek text reads instead of the Hebrew
"everything." The difference between "vanity" {h-b-l)
and "everything" {h-k-l) in Hebrew is simply a slight curve
to one letter, which changes a Hebrew b to k.
"* So the Greek text.
"® i.e., even though while living he leads a dog's life,
that is better than being a dead lion. So Ehrlich's interpre
tation, which I follow. Koheleth here quotes a popular say
ing, but gives it an ironical turn. 230

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
living [at least] know that they will die, whereas the
dead know absolutely nothing. Nor is there any
remembrance'" of them, for their memory is for
gotten. Aye, their love as their hate and jealousy
is utterly lost, and they have no further share for
ever in all that happens under the sun.
Therefore go, eat thy bread with joy.
And drink thy wine with a merry heart.
For God has already given His approval to
thy deeds."'
At all times be thy garments white,"'
And let oil not be lacking for thy ihead.
Enjoy life with the woman of thy love,'*"
All the days of thy vain life,'*'
Which God has given thee under the sun,
for that is thy portion in life, and the compensation
for thy toil under the sun. Whatever thou canst
afford with thy substance do,'*" for there Is no ac
tivity, or reckoning, or knowledge, and no wisdom
in Sheol,'*' whither thou goest.
"' So by a slight change in the text instead of "reward,"
which is not in place here.
'" Namely, by permitting you to be joyful. The same
thought as above, note 35.
'" i.e., clean.
'*"0n this passage, for which we have a remarkable
parallel in Babylonian literature, see above, p. 174.
'*' A variant or comment that has found its way into
the text reads (Q""): "all the days of thy vanity" — like vii. 15
"my life of vanity."
'*^ So correctly interpreted by Ehrlich.
'*' This shows that Koheleth clings to the Semitic belief
in a gathering-place in a cave under the earth for all the dead,
irrespective of their merits or deeds in this world. The
231

A GENTLE CTNIC
XXI
ir. 11-16 And again, I experienced under the sun that
cWf ^j^g j.^(,g jg j^Qt to the swift.
Uncertainties Nor the battle to the strong;
of Life. Wise men lack an income.
Prophets'** do not possess riches.
And the learned lack wealth, '***
But time and chance overtake them all.
Furthermore, man does not know his time.'** As
fish are caught in a net,'*®and as birds are trapped, so
the children of men are entrapped at an unlucky
moment, when [evil] comes suddenly upon them.
This I experienced'*' under the sun, and it
seemed a great [evil]'*' to me.
There was a small town with few inhabitants,
and a great king came and surrounded It and built
great bulwarks againstlt. And there wasin the town
a man of humble birth'*' but wise, and he saved the
town through his wisdom, but no one took notice
picture that he has in mind of the nether world accords with
what we learn from Babylonian literature as a place where
the dead lie inactive, conscious but unable to do anything
for themselves. See Jastrow, "Hebrews and Babylonian
traditions," chapter iv.
'** So read by a textual change for "men of understand-
ing. '**° So by a slight change in the text.
'** i.e., his end.
'*® The word "evil" added to "net" is superfluous. It
belongs perhaps to the close of verse 13, as the subject of the
verb "comes suddenly."
'*' The word "wisdom" after " I experienced " is either
misplaced, or is an error for " evil " which the context demands,
like in ii. 21 and vi. I.
'*' To be supplied. See preceding note.
232

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
of that man of humble birth.'*" And I reflected that ix- 16
wisdom [nevertheless] is better than strength, even
when the wisdom of the man of humble birth is
despised and his words be not heeded.'*'
XXII
If a ruler's anger is stirred up against thee, >.. 4-20
do not throw up thy post,'*" for gentleness allays Caprice of
real offences.'*' '*' Misken "plebeian" as above iv. 13. See note 64.
'*" This illustration of the lack of reward to those who
merit it probably rests upon some historical incident.
'*' The point is that even though the wise man who
saved the city had not been listened to, nevertheless his
wisdom was superior to mere strength. Koheleth sets aside
the ingratitude as natural in a topsy-turvy world where all
is chance and uncertainty. The "maxim" commentator
could not miss such a good opportunity of introducing
some saws about the advantage of wisdom, and so he gives
us a series of six that might just as well have been included in
the Book of Proverbs, for they are entirely in the style of
that collection. The series extends from ix. 17 to x. 3.
(i) "The words of the wise, though spoken quietly,
are stronger than the loud cry of an arch-fool."
(2) " Better is wisdom than weapons."
(Here the "pious" commentator adds "one sinner de
stroys much good" — though this probably belongs before
verse 2 of chapter 10.)
(3) "A dead fly spoils the perfumer's precious oil"
(4) "A little foolishness annuls wisdom."
(The text as it stands gives no sense, but the meaning
appears to be as indicated in the translation, which rests
upon some necessary textual changes.)
(5) "A wise man's mind is on his right side [i.e., the good side],
but a fool's mind is on the left."
(6) "Also, when a fool struts in his senseless way —
he says of every one else, 'he is a fool'."
In the text and translation of the third and fourth saying, I
follow Ehrlich. 233

A GENTLE CTNIC
There Is an evil which I observed under the
sun, which proceeds from a ruler.
Folly'** is often placed in high positions,
while the choice'** spirits sit in an humble place.'*®
^- 7 I have seen slaves on horses, and princes walking
on foot like slaves.'*'
'*" Do not resign your office, but try to pacify the ruler.
The man who resigns confesses his guilt, according to Kohe
leth who cynically ' adds that by pacifying a ruler's anger
you can escape punishment for real offences.
'*' This cynicism is too much for the pious commen
tator, and so he adds to "great sins," {i.e., real offences,) "as
an unintentional error," implying that the "sin" was unin
tentional, which is exactly what Koheleth did not mean to
convey. This note, however, has crept into the text in the
wrong place. It must be removed from the middle of verse
5 and placed at the end of verse 4.
'** The abstract is used in the sense of "fools."
'** Literally: "the tens," i.^., the "upper ten," as we
would say. To read "rich," as is commonly done, spoils the
thought. '*® i.e., a ruler often makes bad appointments to offices.
'*' Our maxim commentator again steps in and adds a
furthe;- series of ten wise saws (verses 8-14% 15* and 18)
which have no connection whatsoever with the thought
and philosophy of Koheleth.
(i) "He who digs a pit shall fall therein,
And he who breaks through a wall, a serpent shall bite him."
(2) "He who quarries stones shall be hurt by them,
And he who cleaves wood, shall get a cut."
(3)"If the iron be dull" [comment:!.^.,' the edge has not been whetted"
"One must exert one's utmost force."
(4) "The advantage of wisdom is that it secures success."
(S) " If a serpent bites before it is charmed,
the charm has no advantage."
(6) "Words from the mouth of a wise man are full of grace,
but the lips of the fool confuse hini" [i.e., a fool condemns him
self by his utterances].
(7) "The beginning of the words issuing from him is folly,
and the end of his speech is madness" (a variant says, evil].
(8) "The fool multiplies words." 234

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
Woe to thee, O land, whose king is a puppet, ^ i6
and whose princes feast in the morning!'*'
Happyartthou,Oland,whoseking is independent,'*' i 17
and whose princes feast at the proper time,
for strength and not for guzzHng!'®"
At this point (14'') the text has an insertion, "Man
does not know what shall be, and who can tell him what will
be after him," which has strayed from its proper place —
perhaps from chapter vi. 12 or from viii. 7.
(9) "The toil of a. fool wears him out.''
The balance of this v. is*", "Who does not know his
way to the city," appears to be a gloss to "fool" in v. 12;
14 or 15.
(10) "Through neglect, the beam-work sinks.
And through idleness, the house leaks" (verse 1 8).
The overloading of this chapter through long insertions
of sayings and comments, so that only seven verses out of the
twenty of which chapter x consists belong to the original
text, is particularly noticeable. The aim is unmistakable to
change the entire character of the book so as to give it the
appearance of a collection of sayings, rather than an exposi
tion of a particular philosophy of life.
'** A sign of gluttony and riotous living. The proper
time for a feast is in the evening, as a recreation after the
day's work.
'*' Literally: "a free man," i.e., not at the mercy of his
advisers. '®" Another saying is introduced at this point (verse
i8) which belongs to the preceding series — above note 157,
and has there been given as 10. Verse 19 is a comment on the
closing words of verse 17 "for strength and not for guzzling"
to explain that the proper kind of a feast is one arranged
"for laughter, with wine to enliven life and sufficient money
to provide for everything," i.e., to foot the bill.
The admonition is not quite in the spirit of Koheleth,
but also does not contradict that spirit, as do so many of the
comments. Even the Psalmist. civ. 15 ("Wine that makes a
235

A GENTLE CTNIC
X- 20 Do not even on thy couch'®' defame a king.
Nor in thy bed-chamber denounce a rich man,
For a bird of heaven will carry the sound.
And a winged creature will reveal the utterance.
XXIII
^'- '-6 Cast thy bread upon the face of the waters.
Uncertainty of '^o^ after many days thou shalt find It.'®"
Things, ^i- 2 Divide It up Into seven or eight portions,'®'
for thou knowest not what'®* will happen on earth.'®*
man's spirit merry") approves of drinking, though the gen
eral attitude towards viniculture until the Exilic period was
not favorable. See the author's paper on "Wine in the Pen
tateuchal Codes" in the Journal of the American Oriental
Society, vol. xxxiii. pp. 180-192.
'^' By a slight change in the text — suggested by Ehr
lich — we obtain "couch" instead of " thought," which forms
a better parallel to "bed-chamber."
'®" A bit of shrewd advice to take risks in business by
trusting one's goods on ships that will after many days re
turn with a profit, but do not commit all your possessions to
o«i? venture. Send your goods out in many ships. "Bread"
does not refer specifically to corn trade, but is used for
"goods" in general.
163 "Seven or eight" represent a large number. As we
say, "Do not put all your eggs in one basket." See Haupt,
"The Book of Ecclesiastes" in "Oriental Studies" (Boston,
1899), p. 274, note 52.
'®* A commentator adds the word "evil."
'^* Our "maxim" commentator cannot resist the temp
tation to add some practical saws of his own (verses 3-4) :
(l) "If the clouds be filled with rain,
they will empty themselves on the earth."
(2) "If a tree falls to the south or to the north,
where the tree falls, there it remains." '
(3) "A wind observer does not sow,
and a cloud gazer does not harvest."
236

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
As thou knowest not the way of the spirit Jti. s
into the bones in a pregnant womb,'®®
so thou dost not know the work of God who makes
all things.
In the morning sow thy seed,
and till evening let not thy hand rest,'®'
For thou knowest not which will succeed, this or
that,
or whether both alike shall be good.

XXIV
Light is sweet, xi. 7-xii,8
And It is pleasant for the eyes to see the sun. Jl'^^
Though a man live many years. You Can,
Let him be happy throughout. *^/<"'' oid
And remember the days of darkness,'®' "^^^ ^'^' '"
For they will be many.
Whatever is coming'®' is vanity.
Rejoice, O young man in thy youth, xi. g^''
And be happy in the days of thy young vigor !
And follow the inclinations of thy mind.
The "wind observer" as the "cloud gazer" is the
diviner who looks for omens in winds and clouds. The ref
erence to the diviner is sarcastic. He is an idler who does
not work. This last is more properly an elaboration to verse 6.
While the spirit of these three sayings is quite in
accord with that of Koheleth, yet they take us away from
the immediate theme, and thus reveal their origin as ad
ditions by some other hand.
'®® i.e., how life enters into the embryo. So Ehrlich's
explanation. '®' i.e., be active at all times from youth to old age.
'" Old age with its infirmities — and death.
'®'i.f., old age and death. 237

A GENTLE CTNIC
And the sight of thine eyes !""
xi. io» Put away trouble from thy mind,'"
xii- 1"" Before the evil days come on,
And the years approach of which thou wilt say,
"I have no pleasure in them."
1 Before the sun is darkened"" and the clouds return
after the rain,'"
The day when the guardians of the house"* tremble.
And the strong men"* are bent.
And the grinding maidens cease,"® for they are few;
And the peering ladies'" [who look out] through the
windows grow dim.
"" i.e., do whatever you please to enjoy life. This was
too much for our pious commentator, who in order to give an
entirely different turn to Koheleth's dangerous advice adds:
(9") " But know that for all these things God will bring thee
into judgment." '" Once more the pious commentator adds the antidote
and effectively spoils the thought of Koheleth (lO*"), "And
remove evil from thy flesh, for youth and prime are vanity,"
and (xii. I*) "RememberthyCreatorin the days of thy youth."
"" To which a commentator adds "The light [ as well as]
the moon and the stars" The "light" is the daylight, while
the moon and stars are the lights of night.
'" The picture of clouds instead of the sun returning
after the rain suggests old age which cannot look forward
to a renewal of youth and sunshine, but only to inactivity
and final darkness.
"* The hips are meant, or according to the Talmud
(Sabbath 152") the "ribs."
"* The legs totter.
"® The grinding maidens are the teeth which begin to
drop out upon the approach of old age.
'"i.^., the eyes which are pictured as the veiled women
of the Orient, peering through lattice windows to see what
is going on. 238

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
And the doors are closed to the street."'
When the sound of the mill is low,"'
And one rises at the twittering of the birds ;""
And all the daughters of song lie prostrate.'"
One is afraid of a height,""
And terror is on the road.'"
And the almond tree blossoms,"*
And the grasshopper is burdensome,"*
And the caper berry becomes ineffectual."®
Before the silver cord is snapped,"'
'" According to the Talmud {ibid.), this refers to
constipation which sets in with old age, but it is more plausible
to explain the "closed" doors as the ears, which no longer
receive sound.
'" Loud sounds are only faintly heard when deafness
sets in. "" Old people are easily awakened and cannot sleep
long. '" The voice becomes harsh and, later, quite faint.
"" Climbing is difficult.
'" Even walking on the highway is fraught with danger
when the feebleness of old age sets in.
"* The blossoms of the almond tree are at first pink at
the base but turn white. The reference is to the change of
the color of the hair in old age.
'"According to the Talmud (Sabbath, 152^), thegrass-
hopper is a picture for the male organ, which would make
the line refer to the loss of sexual vitality with the approach
of old age. It is also possible, however, that the compari
son with the grasshopper is intended to suggest that the
smallest weight is a burden, or that a man's frame shrinks,
and he loses weight until he seems to be merely a lean grass
hopper. Even then life is a burden.
"® The caper berry was used to excite the sexual pas
sion. With old age sexual pleasures also go.
"' The spine is bent so that one no longer walks erect.
239

A GENTLE CTNIC
And the golden bowl is broken.'"
And the jar Is shattered at the spring.
And the wheel is broken at the cistern."'
When man goes to his eternal house;
And the wallers go about the street.""
xii. 7» And the dust returns to the earth as it was.'"
=='!¦ 8" All is vanity.""
xii- 13-  The End.'"
"' The golden bowl is the brain, which loses its power
when old age sets in.
"' The jar at the spring may be the picture of the
kidneys which refuse to work, and the wheel at the cistern,
the machinery of the body — bowels, intestines and liver —
which does not carry off the discharges. At all events the
two verses together are to indicate that the natural functions
are impaired. The whole machinery breaks down. This in
terpretation of the final utterance of Koheleth as a series of
metaphors to describe the failing vitality of all organs and
functions with the approach of old age reverts to the early
Jewish commentators and exegetes, and is undoubtedly
correct. An English physician of the seventeenth century,
Dr. John S. Smith, reached the same view independently,
and set it forth in his interesting book, "The Portrait of Old
Age" (2nd ed. London, 1666).
"" the hired mourners for the funeral procession, as is
still customary in the Orient. These two lines form the last
part of verse 5 in the Hebrew text, but their proper place is
after verse 6. Through a careless scribe they were misplaced.
'" Again a direct reference to Genesis iii. 19. The
pious commentator, expressing the current orthodox belief,
adds "and the spirit returns to God who gave it." That is
not Koheleth's view.
192 This represents the close of the original book. The
balance of chapter xii., verses 8-14, is taken up with a
series of no less than eleven comments and further endeavors
to remove the heterodox taint. First, a commentator or reader
added to "all is vanity" a note to complete the summing
240

THE WORDS OF KOHELETH
up of the teachings of the book (verse 8), "Koheleth says,
vanity of vanities." To this another commentator adds a bio
graphical note (verse 9), "And furthermore Koheleth was a
wise man [i.e., a philosopher] who in other ways instructed
people, by composing and searching." A third hand explains
this by asserting that " he compiled many proverbs." Another
reader sums up an apologetic view of Koheleth (verse 10)
as follows: "Koheleth aimed at a pleasant style [literally,
agreeable words] with straightforward expression"; and
by way of explanation for the latter phrase, someone
added " truthful words, " i.e., in order to understand Koheleth,
one must bear in mind that his aim was to be perfectly
sincere and that, while writing gracefully, he spoke the truth.
See further above p. 95. There follows a final insertion
in the style of the "maxim" commentator (verse 11):
"The words of the wise are as goads.
And collections are as nails, driven with a mace,"
i.e., the aim of sayings is to act as an incentive to man, while
collections of such sayings skillfully put together are like
nails driven into the proper place. Our "maxim" commen
tator, in order to justify his interspersion of sayings through
out the book, wants us to look upon the book as merely a col
lection of miscellaneous proverbs strung together in skillful
fashion. At the close of the eleventh verse appears an addi
tion "given by one shepherd," which is obscure. "Shepherd"
has been taken in the sense of "teacher," and the phrase
interpreted to mean that the collection is by one author — so
McNeile, "Introduction to Ecclesiastes," p. 24, and Haupt,
1, c, p. 278 — but this is hardly satisfactory. The phrase may
be simply a comment to "goads," to explain that the word refers
to the staff with which a shepherd drives his flock. Then
another apologetic commentator has his say by warning us
against taking Koheleth too seriously. He indulges in a
general flingattheunceasingproduction of literature (verse 12) :
"Furthermore, beware, my son, of the writing [literally, making] of
many books without end,
And much discussion [ ?] is a weariness of the flesh."
Last of all, the pious commentator, as his parting shot, in his
usual fashion gives expression to the orthodox view (verse 13) :
(a) "Fear God, and keep His commandments," to
16 241

A GENTLE CTNIC
which a super-commentator adds, (a) "for this [applies to]
every man"; and (b) (verse 14), "since for every deed God will
bring into judgment," to which again a super-commentator
adds (c) "for every hidden act, whether good or bad."
'" Literally "The end of the matter," i.e., finis. This
phrase appears at the beginning of verse 13, but ought to have
been placed immediately after "all is vanity" (verse 8'').
As an explanation to the misplaced phrase, someone added
"all has been heard" — i.e., the argument is done. These
many additions, each independent of the other, bear witness
to the interest that the book must have aroused; and it
should furthermore be borne in mind, as a further justifica
tion for thus regarding verses 9-14 (with the exception of
"The end of the matter " at the beginning of verse 13) as a
series of miscellaneous comments, that in ancient manuscripts
the close of a book is the favorite place for such notes, just
as we are inclined to scribble some comment on the last page
of a book. Recalling that in ancient days a single manuscript
passed through many hands, it will not be surprising to find
such comments increasing in number, as time went on. There
might easily have been more than eleven such notes.

APPENDIX
I. ADDITIONS BY THE "PIOUS" COMMENTATORS
II. ADDITIONS BY THE "MAXIM" COMMENTATORS
III. MISCELLANEOUS COMM^ENTS AND GLOSSES

APPENDIX

ADDITIONS BY PIOUS COMMENTATORS, WHOSE
AIM IS TO OFFSET THE UNORTHODOX
CHARACTER OF THE ORIGINAL BOOK
In i. 13. "Through wisdom," added to conform to the
picture of the "wise" Solomon of tradition.
In i. 16. "Wisdom," added to suggest that Solomon's
greatness and wealth lay in his surpassing wisdom.
Ini. 17. "Wisdom and knowledge," added to "frivolity
and foolishness" as the aim proper to the wise king.
In ii. 3. "Though my mind was acting with vsrisdom,"
added to suggest that Koheleth, as the disguise for
Solomon, did not throw himself" senselessly into all
kinds of pleasure, but with his mind intent upon
noting their effect.
Inii. 9. "However, my wisdom abided with me" is added
with the same intent as the addition to ii. 3.
In n. 12. "Wisdom" added to "madness and folly," to
conform to the traditional picture of Solomon.
ii. 26. " For to the man who is good in His sight. He
has given wisdom and knowledge and enjoyment,
but to the sinner He has assigned the task of gath
ering and amassing, in order to hand it over to the
one who is good in the sight of God" — added to
tone down the cynicism in the advice "to eat,
drink, and be merry," as the best thing to do
with one's Hfe.
In in. II. "He [i.e., God] has made everything beautiful
in its season," added so as to give a pious turn to
Koheleth's pessimistic reflection that the purpose
of God is past finding out.
24s

A GENTLE CTNIC
In in. 14. "God has so made it that men will fear Him"
— a pious reflection that interrupts the context.
In iii. 15. "And God seeks out what has been driven
away," i.e., nothing worth preserving is lost in this
world — a reflection added bythe pious commentator.
iii. 17. "But I reflected that God will judge both the
righteous and the wicked, for there is an appointed
time for every occurrence and for every [fixed] act "
added to counteract Koheleth's picture of a per
verted world' in which injustice and wickedness are
triumphant, and to give a different turn to the
sentiment expressed at the beginning of chapter 3.
The superfluous word "fixed" is omitted in the
Greek text.
In v. 6. "But fear God," added to give a pious turn to
Koheleth's rationalistic view of dreams.
In vii. I. "Better is a name than fine oil," added to
counterbalance Koheleth's unorthodox view that
"the day of death is better than the day of birth."
In vii. 2. "And the living will take it to mind," added
to give a less objectionable turn to Koheleth's
cynicism that it is better to go to a funeral than
to a banquet.
vii. 3. " Dissatisfaction is better than laughter, for
through misfortune the mind is improved," added
with the same intent as the addition to vii. 2.
In vii. 18. "He who fears God will steer clear of every
thing," added to tone down Koheleth's point of
view that one must not be too good or too bad,
since excess of either leads one into trouble.
In vii. 26. "He that is good before God shall escape
from her, but the sinner shall be caught by her,"
added to give an assurance of God's protection of
the innocent against the wiles of the bad woman.
vii. 29. "Besides, however, I have found this, that
God has made man straight, but they have devised
many contrivances," added to support the ortho-
246

APPENDIX
dox point of view as found in Genesis, chapter in,
that man's sinful state is due to his disobedience
of God's commands.
In viii. 2. "Because of the oath of God," added to
Koheleth's advice to "obey the order of a King,"
to remove the ironical spirit in which it is offered.
In viii. 3. "Do not plead a bad cause," added to convey
the impression that this was the reason why Kohe
leth warns one against rushing into the royal
presence.
vni. 5. "The law observer shall know no harm, and a
wise mind knows the [proper] time and manner" —
an addition obviously in the interest of orthodoxy.
In vin. 8. "Nor will wickedness help its possessors to
escape" — an addition that is in the style of the
pious commentator, and interrupts Koheleth's
point that no one is master of nature or of his
fate.
viii. 1 1-13. " Because the sentence for an evil deed is
not promptly carried out, therefore the inclination of
man is to do evil, but although a sinner does a
great deal of evil and is accorded a respite, yet
I know that good fortune will attend those who
fear God [comment or variant: Those who fear
His presence] and that it shall not be well forthe
wicked, and that he will not lengthen out his days
as a shadow, [?] because he does not fear the presence
of God" — a long addition to counteract the cyni
cism of Koheleth, who has just said that the
wicked flourish and are even honored after they
have passed away.
In ix. I. "That the righteous and the wise and their
works are in the hand of God," added to indicate
what Koheleth meant by "All this," which he was
determined to find out. A super-commentator
adds "also hate and love" sc. are in the hands of
God. See further the comment to this verse.
247

A GENTLE CTNIC
In ix. 1 8. "One sinner destroys much good," added as
a "pious" maxim and perhaps misplaced. It fits in
better at x. 2.
In X. 5. "As an unintentional error," added to "real
off"ences," to tone down the cynicism involved in
Koheleth's statement.
In xi. 9. "But know that for all these things God will
bring thee into judgment" — added as the antidote
to the advice to enjoy oneself to the full.
In xi. 10 — xii. I. Three insertions: (a) "And remove evil
from thy flesh," added to counterbalance "And put
away trouble from thy mind," (b) for youth and
prime are vanity, and (c) "Remember thy Creator
in the days of thy youth," added to further counter
act the objectionable character of Koheleth's advice
to the young.
In xii. 7. "And the spirit returns to God who gave it"
— added to make Koheleth conform to the current
orthodox belief.
xii. 12. "Beware, my son, of the writing of many
books without end, and much discussion [ .''] is a
weariness to the flesh," added as a warning not to
take Koheleth too seriously, in case the pious
additions fail of their intended purpose to change
the objectionable tone and general unorthodox
character of the book in its original form.
In xii. 13. "Fear God and keep His commandments,
for this [applies to] every man," added as a final
summary.
xii. 14. "Since for every deed God will bring into
judgment," added as a parting shot against the
cynicism and skepticism of Koheleth. A super-
commentator supplemented this by adding "for
every hidden act, whether good or bad."
248

APPENDIX II
PROVERBS AND PROVERBIAL SAYINGS, INTER
SPERSED THROUGHOUT THE BOOK OF
KOHELETH, AND WHICH LIKEWISE REPRE
SENT ADDITIONS TO THE ORIGINAL WORK,
MADE IN ORDER TO CONVEY THE IMPRES
SION THAT THE BOOK OF KOHELETH IS
MERELY K COLLECTION OF WISE AND PRAC
TICAL SAYINGS LIKE THE BOOK OF PROV
ERBS. IT WAS ALSO HOPED THAT BY THUS
OVERLOADING THE BOOK WITH UNOBJEC
TIONABLE MAXIMS, THE CYNICAL SAY
INGS, INTRODUCED BY KOHELETH HIM
SELF IN HIS BOOK, WOULD BE COUNTER
BALANCED.
i. 15. "The crooked cannot be straightened.
And the lacking cannot be supplied."
I. 18. "For in much wisdom is much trouble.
And increase of knowledge is increase of pain. "
In ii. 14. "The wise man has his eyes in his head.
But the fool walks in darkness."
in. 3-8. "Thereisatimetodestroy,and atimetorepair.
A time to break down, and a time to
build up.
A time to weep, and a time to laugh.
A time to mourn, and a time to dance.
A time to scatter stones, and a time to
gather stones.
A time to embrace, and a time to refrain
from embracing.
A time to seek, and a time to give up as lost.
A time to keep, and a time to throw away.
A time to rip, and a time to sew.
A time to keep silent, and a time to speak.
A time to love, and a time to hate.
A time of war, and a time of peace."
249

A GENTLE CTNIC
iv. 5. "The fool folds his hands and consumes his
own flesh."
iv. 9-12. "Two are better than one,
for they secure a better return for their toil."
"In case they fall, the one can Hft his fellow up,
but if a single person falls, there is none to Hft
him up."
(This may be an explanatory comment to the saying
about "two being better than one," giving the
reason therefor.)
"If two sleep together, they keep warm,
but how can a single person keep warm ?
And if some one attacks, there are two to
withstand ;
and a triple cord is not easily snapped."
In v. 14. "As he came naked from his mother's
womb, so he returns as he came."
vi. 7. "All the toil of a man is for his mouth,
and yet the appetite is never satisfied."
vii. 5-6*. " It is better to listen to the rebuke of a wise
man,
than for a man to listen to the praise of fools."
" For as the crackUng of thorns under a pot,
so is the applause of fools."
vii. 7. "Extortion deprives a wise man of reason,
and a bribe corrupts the mind."
In vii. 8. "Better patience than haughtiness."
vii. 9. "Do not be prone to anger,
for anger endures [only] in the bosom of fools."
vii. II. "Wisdom is better than an inheritance,
and an advantage to the living."
vii. 12. "For the protection of wisdom is [as strong]
as the protection of silver.
And the advantage of knowledge [variant, wis
dom] is that it gives Hfe to those who possess it."
vii. 19. "Wisdom makes a wise man stronger than
the ten rulers of a city."

APPENDIX
viii. I. "Who is Hke the wise man, and who knows
[as he does] the explanation of a matter?"
"The wisdom of a man illumines his face.
And the coarseness of his countenance is changed."
ix. 17-x, 3. "The words of the wise, though spoken
quietly, are stronger than the loud cry of an arch-
fool."
"Better is wisdom than weapons."
"A dead fly spoils the perfumer's precious oil."
"A little foolishness annuls wisdom."
"A wise man's mind is on his right side,
but a fool's mind is on his left."
"Also, when a fool struts in his senseless way,
he says of everyone else, 'he is a fool.' "
X. 8-15*. "He who digs a pit shall fall therein,
And he who breaks through a wall, a ser
pent shall bite him."
"He who quarries stones shall be hurt by
them.
And he who cleaves wood shall get a cut."
"If the iron be dull [which a commentator
explains as meaning, 'the edge has
not been whetted'], one must exert
one's utmost force."
"The advantage of wisdom is that it secures
success."
"If a serpent bites before it is charmed,
the charm has no advantage."
"Words from the mouth of a wise man are
full of grace,
but the Hps of the fool confuse him."
"The beginning of the words issuing from
him [i.e., from a fool] is folly.
And the end of his speech is madness"
[variant, evil].
"The fool multipHes words."
"The toil of a fool wears him out."
251

A GENTLE CTNIC
x. 1 8." Through neglect, the beamwork sinks.
And through idleness, the house leaks."
xi. 3-4." If the clouds be filled with rain,
they will empty themselves on the earth."
"If a tree falls to the south or to the north,
where the tree falls, there it remains."
"A wind observer does not sow.
And a cloud gazer does not harvest."
xii. II. " The words of the wise are as goads.
And collections are as nails, driven with a
mace." Ill
MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS AND GLOSSES
ADDED TO THE BOOK
i. I. The heading, added subsequently to the comple
tion of the book, read originally (on the basis
of i. 12)
"Words of Koheleth, a King in Jerusalem," to
which someone added "son of David," to con
firm the impHcation that Koheleth is Solomon.
See further, page 65, et seq.
i. 2. "Vanity of Vanities, says Koheleth, Vanity of
Vanities, All is vanity." — ^A summary, taken
over from the end of the book, xii. 8.
In i. 5. The word "rises " toward the end of the verse
is to be taken as an explanation of the preceding
word.
In ii. 6. "of trees" — added to "forest" by way of
explanation.
In iii. 12. "to do good," probably intentionally
changed from "to look upon good," i.e., to have
a good time.
In iii. 17. "fixed, " misplaced comment, belonging to
act. '
In iii. 18. "they to them" — probably misplaced gloss,
belonging to v. 19. See the comment in note 50
to v. 18. 252

APPENDIX
In IH. 21. "to the earth," explanatory gloss to "goes
down."
In iv. 15. "the second" added to "child," and probably
a misplaced note to "the one" in v. 10.
In iv. 16. "before whom he was," added as a note to
the word "aU.';
In V. 3. "For He {i.e., God) has no pleasure in fools,"
a misplaced gloss to the word "fools" in iv. 17.
In V. 8. "attached to a field" (translation doubtful!)
appears to be a misplaced and corrupt gloss to the
word "laborer" in v. 11.
In V. 12. "to his hurt," added as an explanatory gloss
to "owner."
In vi. 3. "And he has not even a burial," added to
complete the picture of an unhappy and useless
life, because deprived of joy.
In vii. 12. "wisdom," added as a variant to "knowl
edge," to suggest the synonymity of the two terms.
In vn. 25. "my heart to know," gloss explanatory of
the phrase, "I resolved."
vii. 27. "See, this, I have found, Koheleth says, one
and one to find the sum," a comment to explain
the word "substance," in verse 25.
viii. 6-7. Two insertions: (a) "for to every occurence
there is a time and manner," added by a super-
commentator to the "pious" reflection in v. 5;
(b) "for man's evil weighs heavily upon him that
there is no one who knows the future, so that he
might tell a man when it will come" — likewise
a misplaced comment and belonging probably
to vi. 12.
In via. 12. "Those who fear His presence," a variant
or comment to "those who fear God."
In ix. I. "Also hate and love," added by a super-com
mentator.
In ix. 9. "All the days of thy vanity," a variant or
comment to "all the days of thy vain life."
253

A GENTLE CTNIC
In ix. 12. "evil," added to "net" is quite superfluous.
The word "evil" may be misplaced, and have
been intended as the subject of "comes suddenly"
in V. 13.
In X. 10. "the edge has not been whetted," added
as an explanatory note to "if the iron be dull."
In x. 13. "evil," added as a variant to "madness."
In X. 14. "Man does not know what shall be, and
who can tell him what will be after him" — prob
ably a misplaced comment. It fits in at vi. 12
or viii. 7.
In X. 15. "Who does not know his way to the city" —
a gloss to the word "fool" in v. 12, 14 or 15.
X. 19. "A feast is made for laughter,
with wine to enliven Hfe,
and sufficient money to provide for everything"
— added as an explanation to the proper kind of
feasting.
In xi. 2. "evil," added to "what" by some commenta
tor.
In xii. 2. "And the light and the moon and the stars,"
added by way of elaboration and as a comment
to "sun," to suggest that by "sun" all phases of
light are meant — the light of the moon and of the
stars as well.
In xii. 8. "Vanity of vanities, says Koheleth," added
to "all is vanity," which was originally the close
of the book.
For the eleven comments at the end ofthe book xii. 9-14,
see note 192 to the translation, p. 240. Of these,
three (xn. 12-14) are by the "pious" commenta
tor, (see above, p. 248), with an addition by a super-
commentator "for every hidden act, whether
good or bad" (xii. 14''), one (xii. 11) bythe "maxim"
commentator (above p. 241), and the balance
represent miscellaneous comments partly of an
explanatory and partly of an apologetic character.
2S4

APPENDIX
Purely explanatory is the comment to the words, "End
ofthe matter" (verse 13"), i.e., finis, the end of
the book, to which the comment "all has been
heard," i.e., the argument is finished, has been
added. Verses 9-10 contain five comments of an
apologetic nature, one superimposed on the other
in succession, to explain who Koheleth was, what
he did and what his aim was, viz., (a) he was wise,
and taught people, (b) he compiled many proverbs,
(c) he tried to write in an interesting manner, (d)
but he was frank, (e) he spoke the truth. Quite
obscure is the comment, "given by one shepherd"
(in v. 11). It may be a misplaced comment to
the word "goads" in the first part of verse 11.

By MORRIS JASTROW, Jr., Ph.D., LL.D.
IN PREPARATION
UNIFORM WITH THIS VOLUME
The Book of Job
The Song of Songs

The Civilization of Babylonia and
Assyria
ITS REMAINS, LANGUAGE, HISTORY, RELIGION, COMMERCE,
LAW, ART AND LITERATURE.
With Map and 164 Illustrations.
Octavo. Gilt Top. In a box $7.00 Net.
Art and Archeology: "This magnificent book gives a com
prehensive and complete survey of the whole civilization of
the ancient peoples, who dwelt in the Tigro-Euphrates Valley.
It is written by one of the foremost Semitic scholars of the
world, and supersedes all works upon the subject. Written
in the author's characteristic lucid style, it is sumptuously
illustrated, and is a beautiful specimen of bookmaking."
The War and the Bagdad Railway
THE STORY OF ASIA MINOR AND ITS RELATION TO THE
GREAT CONFLICT.
14 Illustrations and a Map. ^1.50 Net.
Boston Transcript: "Of all the books that have come to
our notice, works dealing primarily with the problems of
Bagdad, Professor Morris Jastrow's 'The War and the Bag
dad Railway,' with its illustrative map, is unquestionably the
best." The New Republic: "Hard to match for brevity and clear
ness. As an Oriental scholar, Professor Jastrow is singularly
well equipped to set forth in the light of history the con
ditions that have made Asia Minor such a disastrous breeder
of strife, and this is, in fact, his most interesting contribution."
The War and the Coming Peace
A DISCUSSION OF THE GREAT MORAL ISSUE IN THE
WAR AND OF THE BASIS FOR AN ENDURING PEACE
12 mo. cloth. $1.00 Net.
New York Times: "The author's discussion is scholarly in
the range of its historical scrutiny . . calm and judicial in its
spirit, and marked by a notable clarity and simplicity of state
ment. Underneath it all is the conviction that moral law
does finally govern mankind, and that the spirit of man is the
greatest of all forces which he has it in his power to exert."

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 08837 421 1

Y A L E

:>il!

im:

m

m^iii
If
iiil
mm
mmHi<
ni
,f'l5|.
!ja
ml
^ini
(m