Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 5.djvu/291

 ECCLESIASTES

245

ECCLESIASTES

in iii, 18 sqq., and iv, 2 sij., must be explained by the writer's tragic vein, and tliis does credit to tlie writer, who, speaking as Solomon, deplores bitterly what has often enough happened in liis kingdom also, whether through his fault or without his knowledge. The despotic rule of the kings was described in advance by Samuel, and Solomon caimot be cleared of all guilt (see below). But even the best prince will, to his grief, find by experience that countless wrongs cannot be prevented in a large empire. Qoheletli does not speak of the wrongs which he himself has suffered, but of those which others sustained. Another of life's vanities consists in the fact that mad competition leads many to fall into idleness (iv, 4-6); a third causes many a man through greed to shun society, or even to lose a throne because his unwisdom forbids him to seek the help of other men (iv, 7-16). Qoheleth then turns once more to the three classes of men named: to those who groan under the weight of injustice, in order to exhort them not to sin against God by murmuring against Providence, for this would be tantamount to dishonouring God in His temple, or to breaking a sa- cred vow, or to denying Providence (iv, 17-v, 8) ; in the same way he gives a few salutary counsels to the miser (v, 9-19) and describes the misery of the supposed foolish king (vi, 1-6). A long oratorical amplification closes the second part (vi, 7-vii, 30). The immutable predestination of all things by God must teach man con- tentment and modesty (vi, 7-vii, 1, Vulg.). A serious life, free from all frivolity, is best (vii, 2-7, Vulg.). Instead of passionate outbreaks (vii, 8-15), he recom- mends a golden mean (vii, 16-23). Finally, Qoheleth inquires into the deepest and last reason of "vanity" and finds it in the sinfulness of woman; he evidently thinks also of the sin of the first woman, through which, against the will of God (30), misery entered the world (vii, 24-30). In this part, also, Qoheleth returns to his admonition to enjoy in peace and modesty the blessings granted by God, instead of giving oneself up to anger on account of wrongs endured, or to avarice, or to other vices (iii, 22; v, 17 sq.; vii, 15).

Part III begins with the question: "Who is as the wise man?" (In the Vulg. these words have been wrongly placed in chap, vii.) Qoheleth here gives seven or eight important rules for fife as the quin- tessence of true wisdom. Submit to God's ("the king's") will (viii, 1-8). If you observe that there is no justice on earth, contain yourself, " eat and drink" (viii, 9-15). Do not attempt to solve all the riddles of life by human wisdom; it is better to enjoy modestly the blessings of life and to work according to one's strength, but always within the narrow limits set by God (viii, 16-ix, 12. — In the Vulg. ad aliud must be dropped). In this " siege " of your city (by God) seek help in true wisdom (ix, 13-x, 3). It is always most important not to lose your temper because of wrongs done to you (x, 4-15). Then follows the repetition of the advice not to give oneself up to idleness; sloth destroys countries and nations, therefore work dili- gently, but leave the success to God without murmur- ing (x, 16-xi, 6). Even amid the pleasures of life do not forget the Lord, but think of death and judgment (xi, 7-xii, 8).

In the epilogue Qoheleth again lays stress upon his authority as the teacher of wisdom, and declares that the pith of his teachings is: Fear God and keep the Commandments; for that is the whole man.

In the above analysis, as must be expected, the writer of this article has been guided in some particu- lars by his conception of the difficult text before him, which he has set forth more completely in his commen- tary on the same. Many critics do not admit a close connexion of ideas at all. Zapletal regards the book as a collection of separate aphorisms which form a whole only exteriorly: Bickell thought that the arrangement of the parts had been totally destroyed at an early date; Siegfried supposes that the book had been sup-

plemented and enlarged in strata; Luther assumed several authors. Most commentators do not expect that they can show a regular connexion of all the " say- ings" and an orderly arrangement of the entire book. In the above analysis an attempt has been made to do this, and we have pointed out what means may lead to success. Several parts must be taken in the sense of parables, e. g. what is said in ix, 14 sqq., of the siege of a city by a king. And in viii, 2, and x, 20, " king" means God. It appears to me that iv, 17, is not to be taken Uterally; and the same is true of x, 8 sqq. Few will hesitate to take xi, 1 sqq., figuratively. Chap, xii must convince every one that bold allegories are quite in Qoheleth's style. Chap, iii would be very flat it the proposition, "There is a time for everything", carried no deeper meaning than the words disclose at first sight. The strongest guarantee of the unity and sequence of thoughts in the book is the theme, " Vani- tas vanitatum", which emphatically opens it and is repeated again and again, and (xii, 8) with which it eiiils. Furthermore, the constant repetition of ridi or of sinular expressions, which connect the arguments for the same truth; finally, the sameness of verbal and rhetorical turns and of the writer's tragic vein, with its hyperbolical language, from beginning to end.

In order to reconcile the apparently conflicting statements in the same book or what seem contradic- tions of manifest truths of the religious or moral order, ancient commentators assumed that Qoheleth ex- presses varying views in the form of a dialogue. Many modern commentators, on the other hand, have sought to remove these discrepancies by omitting parts of the text, in this way to obtain a harmonious collection of maxims, or even affirmed that the author had no clear ideas, and, e. g., was not convinced of the spirituality and immortality of the soul. But, apart from the fact that we cannot admit erroneous or varying views of life and faith in an inspired writer, we regard frequent alterations in the text or the proposed form of a dialogue as poor makeshifts. It suffices, in my opin- ion, to explain certain hyperbolical and somewhat paradoxical turns as results of the bold style and the tragic vein of the writer. If our explanation is correct, the chief reproach against Qoheleth — viz. that against his orthodoxy — falls to the ground. For if iii, 17; xi, 9; xii, 7, 14, point to another life as distinctly as can be desired, we cannot take iii, 18-21, as a denial of im- mortality. Besides, it is evident that in his whole book the author deplores only the vanity of the mortal or earthly life; but to this may be truly applied (if the hyperbolical language of the tragical mood is taken into consideration) whatever is saiil there by Qoheleth. We cannot find fault with his comparing the mortal life of man and his death to the life and death of the beast (in vv. 19 and 21 nil must always be taken as "breath of life"). Again, iv, 2 sq., is only a hyper- bolical expression; in like manner Job (iii, 3) curses in his grief the day of his birth. True, some allege that the doctrine of immortality was altogether unknown to early antiquity; but even the Saviour (Luke, xx, 37) adduced the testimony of Moses for the resurrec- tion of the dead and was not contradicted by his adversaries. And ix, 5 sq. and 10, must be taken in a similar sense. Now, in dooming all things earthly to destruction, but attributing another life to the soul, Qoheleth admits the spirituality of the soul; this fol- lows especially from xii, 7, where the body is returned to the earth, but the .soul to God.

Sometimes Qoheleth also seems to be given to fatal- ism; for in his peculiar manner he lays great stress on the immutability of the laws of nature and of the uni- verse. But he considers this immutability as depen- dent on God's will (iii, 14; vi, 2; vii, 14 sq.). Nor does he deny the freedom of man within the limits set by God; otherwise his admonitions to fear God, to work, etc. would be meaningless, and man would not have brought evil into the world through his own fault (vii,