“What, then, is the Paraclete's administrative office but this: the direction of discipline, the revelation of the Scriptures, the reformation of the intellect, the advancement toward the "better things"? Nothing is without stages of growth: all things await their season. In short, the Preacher says, "A time to everything." Look how creation itself advances little by little to fruitfulness. First comes the grain, and from the grain arises the shoot, and from the shoot struggles out the shrub. Thereafter boughs and leaves gather strength, and the whole that we call a tree expands. Then follows the swelling of the germen, and from the germen bursts the flower, and from the flower the fruit opens. That fruit itself, rude for a while, and unshapely, little by little, keeping the straight course of its development, is trained to the mellowness of its flavor. So, too, righteousness—for the God of righteousness and of creation is the same—was first in a rudimentary state, having a natural fear of God. From that stage it advanced, through the law and the prophets, to infancy. From that stage it passed, through the gospel, to the fervor of youth; now, through the Paraclete, it is settling into maturity.”

“For this present time is filled with all things that are most contrary to each other— births and deaths, the growth of plants and their uprooting, cures and killings, the building up and the pulling down of houses, weeping and laughing, mourning and dancing. At this moment a man gathers of earth's products, and at another casts them away; and at one time he ardently desires the beauty of woman, and at another he hates it. Now he seeks something, and again he loses it; and now he keeps, and again he casts away; at one time he slays, and at another he is slain; he speaks, and again he is silent; he loves, and again he hates. For the affairs of men are at one time in a condition of war, and at another in a condition of peace; while their fortunes are so inconstant, that from bearing the semblance of good, they change quickly into acknowledged ills. Let us have done, therefore, with vain labours. For all these things, as appears to me, are set to madden men, as it were, with their poisoned stings. And the ungodly observer of the times and seasons is agape for this world, exerting himself above measure to destroy the image of God, as one who has chosen to contend against it from the beginning onward to the end. I am persuaded, therefore, that the greatest good for man is cheerfulness and well-doing, and that this shortlived enjoyment, which alone is possible to us, comes from God only, if righteousness direct our doings. But as to those everlasting and incorruptible things which God has firmly established, it is not possible either to take anything from them or to add anything to them. And to men in general, those things, in truth, are fearful and wonderful; and those things indeed which have been, abide so; and those which are to be, have already been, as regards His foreknowledge. Moreover, the man who is injured has God as his helper. I saw in the lower parts the pit of punishment which receives the impious, but a different place allotted for the pious. And I thought with myself, that with God all things are judged and determined to be equal; that the righteous and the unrighteous, and objects with reason and without reason, are alike in His judgment. For that their time is measured out equally to all, and death impends over them, and in this the races of beasts and men are alike in the judgment of God, and differ from each other only in the matter of articulate speech; and all things else happen alike to them, and death receives all equally, not more so in the case of the other kinds of creatures than in that of men. For they have all the same breath of life, and men have nothing more; but all are, in one word, vain, deriving their present condition from the same earth, and destined to perish, and return to the same earth again. For it is uncertain regarding the souls of men, whether they shall fly upwards; and regarding the others which the unreasoning creatures possess, whether they shall fall downward. And it seemed to me, that there is no other good save pleasure, and the enjoyment of things present. For I did not think it possible for a man, when once he has tasted death, to return again to the enjoyment of these things.”

“It is necessary to bear in mind that for certain other tasks a particular time is allotted, according to the words of Ecclesiastes: "All things have their season." For prayer and psalmody, however, as also, indeed, for some other duties, every hour is suitable, that, while our hands are busy at their tasks, we may praise God sometimes with the tongue (when this is possible or, rather, when it is conducive to edification); or, if not, with the heart, at least, in psalms, hymns and spiritual canticles, as it is written. Thus in the midst of our work we can fulfill the duty of prayer, giving thanks to him who has granted strength to our hands for performing our tasks and cleverness to our minds for acquiring knowledge, and for having provided the materials, both that which is in the instruments we use and that which forms the matter of the arts in which we may be engaged, praying that the work of our hands may be directed toward its goal, the good pleasure of God.”

“We ought to think of God even more often than we draw our breath; and if the expression is permissible, we ought to do nothing else. Yea, I am one of those who entirely approve that Word which bids us meditate day and night, and tell at eventide and morning and noon day, and praise the Lord at every time; or, to use Moses' words, whether a person lie down, or rise up, or walk by the way, or whatever else he is doing—and by this recollection we are to be molded to purity. So that it is not the continual remembrance of God that I would hinder, but only the talking about God; nor even that as in itself wrong, but only when unreasonable; nor all teaching, but only want of moderation. As of even honey, repletion and satiety, though it be of honey, produce vomiting. As Solomon says and I think, there is a time for everything, and that which is good ceases to be good if it be not done in a good way; just as a flower is quite out of season in winter, and just as a man's dress does not become a woman, nor a woman's a man; and as geometry is out of place in mourning, or tears at a carousal. Shall we in this instance alone disregard the proper time, in a matter in which most of all due season should be respected? Surely not, my friends and brethren (for I will still call you brethren, though you do not behave like brothers). Let us not think so nor yet, like hot-tempered and hard-mouthed horses, throwing off our rider reason, and casting away reverence, that keeps us within due limits, run far away from the turning point. But let us philosophize within our proper bounds and not be carried away into Egypt, nor be swept down into Assyria, nor sing the Lord's song in a strange land. By this I mean before any kind of audience, strangers or kindred, hostile or friendly, kindly or the reverse, who watch what we do with great care, and would like the spark of what is wrong in us to become a flame, and secretly kindle and fan it and raise it to heaven with their breath and make it higher than the Babylonian flame which burned up everything around it. For since their strength lies not in their own dogmas, they hunt for it in our weak points. And therefore they apply themselves to our, shall I say "misfortunes" or "failings," like flies to wounds. But let us at least be no longer ignorant of ourselves or pay too little attention to the due order in these matters. And if it be impossible to put an end to the existing hostility, let us at least agree upon this, that we will utter mysteries under our breath and holy things in a holy manner, and we will not cast to profane ears that which may not be uttered, nor give evidence that we possess less gravity than those who worship demons, and serve shameful fables and deeds; for they would sooner give their blood to the uninitiated than certain words. But let us recognize that as in dress and diet and laughter and demeanor there is a certain decorum, so there is also in speech and silence; since among so many titles and powers of God, we pay the highest honor to the Word. Let even our disputings then be kept within bounds.”

“Everything has an appointed season Let not the gatherer of wealth from vanity rejoice, for even though it is in his hand now, the righteous will yet inherit it; only the time has not yet arrived, for everything has an appointed season when it will be. for every matter Heb. חֵפֶץ, for every thing. All things are called חֲפָצִים in the language of the Mishnah.”

“Heaven, in this world, where alone things change. (St. Jerome) — Nothing is here perpetual, but to be used in a proper manner. (Worthington) — The heart must not be attached to any thing created. (Calmet) — Pleasure had been condemned and approved, chap. 2. He shews that all must have its time. (Menochius)”

“"Everything has its time, and every purpose under the heavens its hour." The Germ. language is poor in synonyms of time. Zckler translates: Everything has its Frist ..., but by Frist we think only of a fixed term of duration, not of a period of beginning, which, though not exclusively, is yet here primarily meant; we have therefore adopted Luther's excellent translation. Certainly זמן (from זמן, cogn. סמן, signare), belonging to the more modern Heb., means a Frist (e.g., Dan 2:16) as well as a Zeitpunkt, point of time; in the Semit. (also Assyr. simmu, simanu, with ס) it is the most common designation of the idea of time. עת is abbreviated either from ענת (ועד, to determine) or from ענת (from ענה, cogn. אנה, to go towards, to meet). In the first case it stands connected with מועד on the one side, and with עדּן (from עדד, to count) on the other; in the latter case, with עונה, Exo 21:10 (perhaps also ען and ענת in כען, כּענת). It is difficult to decide this point; proportionally more, however, can be said for the original ענת (Palest.-Aram. ענתּא), as also the prep. of participation את is derived from אנת (meeting, coming together). (Note: Vid., Orelli's work on the Heb. Synon. der Zeit u. Ewigkeit, 1871. He decides for the derivation from ועד morf ; Fleischer (Levy's Chald. W.B. II. 572) for the derivation from ענה, the higher power of אנה, whence (Arab.) inan, right time. We have, under Job 24:1, maintained the former derivation.) The author means to say, if we have regard to the root signification of the second conception of time - (1) that everything has its fore-determined time, in which there lies both a determined point of time when it happens, and a determined period of time during which it shall continue; and (2) that every matter has a time appointed for it, or one appropriate, suitable for it. The Greeks were guided by the right feeling when they rendered זמן by χρόνος , and עת by καιρός. Olympiodorus distinguishes too sharply when he understands the former of duration of time, and the latter of a point of time; while the state of the matter is this, that by χρόνος the idea comprehends the termini a quo and ad quem, while by καιρός it is limited to the terminus a quo. Regarding חפץ, which proceeds from the ground-idea of being inclined to, and intention, and thus, like πρᾶγμα and χρῆμα, to the general signification of design, undertaking, res gesta, res. The illustration commences with the beginning and the ending of the life of man and (in near-lying connection of thought) of plants.”

“This is written in the Scriptures and is manifest to all. For although it be hidden and unknown to all, what period of time is allotted to each, and how it is allotted; yet every one knows this, that as there is a time for spring and for summer, and for autumn and for winter, so, as it is written, there is a time to die, and a time to live.”

“For as our Savior passed three days and three nights in the bowels of the earth, so you by your first rising out of the water represented Christ's first day in the earth, and by your descent the night. For as in the night one no longer sees, while by day one is in the light, so you during your immersion, as in a night, saw nothing, but on coming up found yourselves in the day. In the same moment you were dying and being born, and that saving water was at once your grave and your mother. What Solomon said in another context is applicable to you: "A time for giving birth, a time for dying," although for you, contrariwise, it is a case of "a time for dying and a time for being born." One time brought both, and your death coincided with your birth.”

“It is right that at the start he makes this tight bond linking death to birth; for death inevitably follows birth, and everything born dissolves in decay. He intends, through the demonstration that death and birth are connected, by using the reference to death as a goad, to wake from sleep those who are sunk deep in fleshly existence and love this present life, and to rouse them in awareness of the future. This insight Moses, the friend of God, used secretly in the first books of Scripture, writing Exodus immediately after Genesis, so that those who read what has been written may learn what affects them even through the very arrangement of the books; for it is impossible to hear of a birth ("genesis") without also envisaging a departure ("exodus"). Here also the great Ecclesiast, having noticed this, points it out, classing death with birth.”

“time to die-- (Psa 31:15; Heb 9:27). plant--A man can no more reverse the times and order of "planting," and of "digging up," and transplanting, than he can alter the times fixed for his "birth" and "death." To try to "plant" out of season is vanity, however good in season; so to make earthly things the chief end is vanity, however good they be in order and season. GILL takes it, not so well, figuratively (Jer 18:7, Jer 18:9; Amo 9:15; Mat 15:13).”

“(Note: These seven verses, 2-8, are in Codd and Edd., like Jos 12:9., and Est 9:7., arranged in the form of a song, so that one עת (time) always stands under another, after the scheme described in Megilla 16b, Massecheth Sofrim xiii. 3, but without any express reference to this passage in Koheleth. J has a different manner of arranging the words, the first four lines of which we here adduce: - 'ēth lāmoth veeth lalěděth 'ēth 'ēth nathu'ǎ lǎ'ǎqor veeth lathǎ'ǎth 'ēth lirpō veeth lǎhǎrog 'ēth livnoth veeth liphrots) "To be born has its time, and to die has its time; to plant has its time, and to root up that which is planted has its time." The inf. ללדת signifies nothing else than to bring forth; but when that which is brought forth comes more into view than she who brings forth, it is used in the sense of being born (cf. Jer 25:34, לט = להטּבח); ledah, Hos 9:11, is the birth; and in the Assyr., li-id-tu, li-i-tu, li-da-a-tu, designates posterity, progenies. Since now lālǎděth has here lāmuth as contrast, and thus does not denote the birth-throes of the mother, but the child's beginning of life, the translation, "to be born has its time," is more appropriate to what is designed than "to bring forth has its time." What Zckler, after Hitzig, objects that by lěděth a הפץ an undertaking, and thus a conscious, intended act must be named, is not applicable; for לכּל standing at the beginning comprehends doing and suffering, and death also (apart from suicide) is certainly not an intended act, frequently even an unconscious suffering. Instead of לטעת (for which the form לטּעת (Note: This Abulwalid found in a correct Damascus ms., Michlol 81b.) is found, cf. למּוט, Psa 66:9), the older language uses לנטע, Jer 1:10. In still more modern Heb. the expression used would be ליטע, i.e., לטּע (Shebith ii. 1). עקד has here its nearest signification: to root up (denom. of עקּד, root), like עקר, Kg2 3:25, where it is the Targ. word for הפּיל (to fell trees). From out-rooting, which puts an end to the life of plants, the transition is now made to putting to death.”

“"A time to live and a time to die": you can see, therefore, beloved brothers, that this was said concerning the time of the Lord's birth and death. Thus you must accept his virgin birth if we are to believe not only that the Word in the beginning who was called "is" was born, but, as I said, also that the humanity which he adopted and put on was born, both Lord and man. For it says, "what is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the spirit is spirit." Yet, what suffered, died, was buried, and resurrected was not God but man, since he raised man to God, not God to man.”

“A time to kill an entire nation, when the day of its visitation arrives, as it is said (Isa. 14:30): “and he shall slay your remnant with the sword (sic).” and a time to heal their ruin, as it is written concerning Egypt (ibid. 19:22): “and they shall return to the Lord, and He shall accept their prayer and heal them.” a time to break the wall of the city, when it is decreed upon it, as it is said (Neh. 1: 3): “and the wall of Jerusalem is breached.” and a time to build as it is said (Amos 9:11): “and build it up as in the days of yore.””

“time to kill--namely, judicially, criminals; or, in wars of self-defense; not in malice. Out of this time and order, killing is murder. to heal--God has His times for "healing" (literally, Isa 38:5, Isa 38:21; figuratively, Deu 32:39; Hos 6:1; spiritually, Psa 147:3; Isa 57:19). To heal spiritually, before the sinner feels his wound, would be "out of time," and so injurious. time to break down--cities, as Jerusalem, by Nebuchadnezzar. build up--as Jerusalem, in the time of Zerubbabel; spiritually (Amo 9:11), "the set time" (Psa 102:13-16).”

“"To put to death has its time, and to heal has its time; to pull down has its time, and to build has its time." That harog (to kill) is placed over against "to heal," Hitzig explains by the remark that harog does not here include the full consequences of the act, and is fitly rendered by "to wound." But "to put to death" is nowhere = "nearly to put to death," - one who is harug is not otherwise to be healed than by resurrection from the dead, Eze 37:6. The contrast has no need for such ingenuity to justify it. The striking down of a sound life stands in contrast to the salvation of an endangered life by healing, and this in many situations of life, particularly in war, in the administration of justice, and in the defence of innocence against murder or injury, may be fitting. Since the author does not present these details from a moral point of view, the time here is not that which is morally right, but that which, be it morally right or not, has been determined by God, the Governor of the world and Former of history, who makes even that which is evil subservient to His plan. With the two pairs of γένεσις καὶ φθορά there are two others associated in Ecc 3:3; with that, having reference, 2b, to the vegetable world, there here corresponds one referring to buildings; to פּרוץ (synon. הרוס, Jer 1:10) stands opposed בּנות (which is more than גּדור), as at Ch2 32:5. These contrasts between existence and non-existence are followed by contrasts within the limits of existence itself: -”

“Passionate and profound lamentation is called "mourning" in Scripture. Similarly, dancing also indicates the strength of joy, as we learn in the gospel, where it says, "We played to you, and you did not dance; we lamented, and you did not mourn." In the same way history relates that the Israelites mourned at Moses' death and that David danced as he went at the front of the procession of the ark, when he carried it away from the foreigners, not appearing in his usual clothes. It says that he sang, playing an accompaniment on his musical instrument, and moved to the rhythm with his feet, and by the rhythmic movement of the body made public his devotion. Since, then, a human being is twofold, I mean made of soul and of body, and correspondingly twofold also the life operating in each of them within us, it would be a good thing to mourn in our bodily life—and there are many occasions for lamentation in this life—and prepare for our soul the harmonious dance. For the more life is made miserable with sadness, the more occasions for joy accumulate in the soul. Selfcontrol is gloomy, humility is dreary, being punished is a grief, not being equal with the powerful is a reason for sorrow, but "the one who humbles himself will be lifted up," and the one who struggles in poverty will be crowned, and the one covered with sores, who exhibits his life as thoroughly lamentable, will rest in the bosom of the patriarch. May we too rest in it, through the mercy of our Savior Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory forever.”

“"To weep has its time, and to laugh has its time; to mourn has its time, and to dance has its time." It is possible that the author was led by the consonance from livnoth to livkoth, which immediately follows it; but the sequence of the thoughts is at the same time inwardly mediated, for sorrow kills and joy enlivens, Sir. 32:21-24. ספוד is particularly lamentation for the dead, Zac 12:10; and רקוד, dancing (in the more modern language the usual word for hholēl, kirkēr, hhāgǎg) at a marriage festival and on other festal occasions. It is more difficult to say what leads the author to the two following pairs of contrasts: -”

“"A moment for embracing and a moment for avoiding an embrace." These ideas cannot possibly become clear to us unless the passage has first been interpreted through the Scripture, so that it has become clear to us in what connection the divinely inspired word consciously uses the word embrace. Great David exhorts us in the words of the psalm, "Circle Zion and embrace her," and even Solomon himself, when he was describing poetically the spiritual marriage of the one in love with Wisdom, mentions a number of ways in which union with virtue becomes ours and adds this: "Honor her, so that she may embrace you." If, then, David tells us to embrace Zion, and Solomon says that those who honor Wisdom are embraced by her, perhaps we have not missed the correct interpretation if we have identified the object which it is timely to embrace. For Mount Zion rises above the upper city of Jerusalem. Thus the one who urges you to embrace her is bidding you to attach yourself to high principles, so that you hasten to reach the very citadel of the virtues, which he indicates allegorically by the name Zion. And the one who makes you live with wisdom announces the good news of the embrace she will give you in the future. Therefore there is a moment for embracing Zion and for being embraced by Wisdom, since the name Zion denotes the pinnacle of conduct and Wisdom in herself means every instance of virtue. If we have learned through these words the right moment for embracing, we have been taught through the same words in what cases separation is more beneficial than union. For he says, "A moment for avoiding an embrace." The one who has become familiar with virtue is a stranger to the state of evil.… So when the loving disposition clings to the good—that is the "right moment"—the result is surely estrangement from its opposite. If you really love selfcontrol, then of course you hate its opposite. If you look with love at purity, you obviously loathe the stink of filth. If you have become attached to the good, you surely avoid attachment to evil.”

“Now this propagation of children which among the ancient saints was a most bounden duty for the purpose of begetting and preserving a people for God, among whom the prophecy of Christ's coming must have had precedence over everything, now has no longer the same necessity. For from among all nations the way is open for an abundant offspring to receive spiritual regeneration, from whatever quarter they derive their natural birth. So that we may acknowledge that the Scripture which says there is "a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing," is to be distributed in its clauses to the periods before Christ and since. The former was the time to embrace, the latter to refrain from embracing.”

“A time to cast stones The youths of Israel scattered during the destruction of the Temple: (Lam. 4: 1): “The holy stones are scattered.” and a time to gather them from the exile, as it is written (Zech. 9: 16): “And the Lord God (sic) shall save them on that day like the flocks of his people, for crown stones are exalted on His land.” a time to embrace (Jer. 13:11): “For, just as a girdle clings etc.” and a time to refrain from embracing (Isa. 6:12): “And the Lord removes the people far away.””

“Stones, with a sling, or to render a field useless, 4 Kings iii. 25., and Isaias v. 2. — Embraces. Continence was sometimes prescribed to married people, Leviticus xx. 18., and 1 Corinthians vii. (St. Jerome) (St. Augustine, Enchiridion 78.) (Calmet) — Hatred often succeeds love, ver. 8., and 2 Kings xiii. 14. (Haydock)”

“cast away stones--as out of a garden or vineyard (Isa 5:2). gather--for building; figuratively, the Gentiles, once castaway stones, were in due time made parts of the spiritual building (Eph 2:19-20), and children of Abraham (Mat 3:9); so the restored Jews hereafter (Psa 102:13-14; Zac 9:16). refrain . . . embracing-- (Joe 2:16; Co1 7:5-6).”

“"To throw stones has its time, and to gather together stones has its time; to embrace has its time, and to refrain from embracing has its time." Did the old Jewish custom exist at the time of the author, of throwing three shovelfuls of earth into the grave, and did this lead him to use the phrase השׁ אבּ? But we do not need so incidental a connection of the thought, for the first pair accords with the specific idea of life and death; by the throwing of stones a field is destroyed, Kg2 3:25, or as expressed at Kg2 3:19 is marred; and by gathering the stones together and removing them (which is called סקּל), it is brought under cultivation. Does לה, to embrace, now follow because it is done with the arms and hands? Scarcely; but the loving action of embracing stands beside the hostile, purposely injurious throwing of stones into a field, not exclusively (Kg2 4:16), but yet chiefly (as e.g., at Pro 5:20) as referring to love for women; the intensive in the second member is introduced perhaps only for the purpose of avoiding the paronomasia lirhhoq mahhavoq. The following pair of contrasts is connected with the avoiding or refraining from the embrace of love: -”

“Do you want to learn, too, the right moment to seek the Lord? To put it briefly—all your life. In this case alone the one moment to pursue it is the whole state of life. For it is not at a fixed moment and an appointed time that it is good to seek the Lord, but never to cease from continual search—that is the real timeliness.”

“A time to seek As it is stated (Ezek. 34:16): “I will seek the lost,” concerning those of Israel gone astray. and a time to lose and a time when He lost them in exile, as it is said (Lev. 26:38): “And you will become lost among the nations.” a time to keep (Num. 6:24): “May the Lord bless you and keep you,” when you do His will. and a time to cast away (Deut. 29:27): “and cast them into another land.””

“time to get--for example, to gain honestly a livelihood (Eph 4:23). lose--When God wills losses to us, then is our time to be content. keep--not to give to the idle beggar (Th2 3:10). cast away--in charity (Pro 11:24); or to part with the dearest object, rather than the soul (Mar 9:43). To be careful is right in its place, but not when it comes between us and Jesus Christ (Luk 10:40-42).”

“"To seek has its time, and to lose has its time; to lay up has its time, and to throw away has its time." Vaihinger and others translate לאבּד, to give up as lost, which the Pih. signifies first as the expression of a conscious act. The older language knows it only in the stronger sense of bringing to ruin, making to perish, wasting (Pro 29:3). But in the more modern language, אבד, like the Lat. perdere, in the sense of "to lose," is the trans. to the intrans. אבד, e.g., Tahoroth; viii. 3, "if one loses (המאבּד) anything," etc.; Sifri, at Deu 24:19, "he who has lost (מאבּד) a shekel," etc. In this sense the Palest.-Aram. uses the Aphel אובד, e.g., Jer. Meza ii. 5, "the queen had lost (אובדת) her ornament." The intentional giving up, throwing away from oneself, finds its expression in להשׁ. The following pair of contrasts refers the abandoning and preserving to articles of clothing: -”

“Jerusalem, therefore, was abandoned "like a booth in a vineyard" because the guardian angels left it along with the Lord when Christ had suffered. A crop in the field is guarded by the Lord not for its own sake but only for the grain it yields, such that the stalk is permitted to be destroyed once its fruit is harvested. So also it was not principally for its own sake that Jerusalem was guarded temporarily, but on account of Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born according to the flesh within its borders. But when its fruit had been harvested, that is, the body of Christ, whence came the heavenly bread of life, then Jerusalem was abandoned like a field after the harvest, like a booth in a vineyard after its grapes had been gathered. This, then, is why it was said here in the divine Scriptures, "There is a time for guarding and a time for casting aside," for there was a time when Jerusalem was guarded and a time when it was being cast aside.”

“In words about things concerning God, when the discussion is about his being, that is the "moment for keeping silent." But when it is about some good activity [of God], of which the knowledge reaches down even to us, then is the moment for speaking of the powers, to proclaim the wonders, to recount the works, to use language thus far. In matters that lie beyond, it is the moment not to allow the creation to overstep its boundaries but to be content to know itself.”

“Ought we to be dumb? Certainly not. For "there is a time to keep silence and a time to speak." If, then, we are to give account for an idle word, let us take care that we do not have to give it also for an idle silence. For there is also an active silence, such as Susanna's was, who did more by keeping silence than if she had spoken. For in keeping silence before others she spoke to God and found no greater proof of her chastity than silence. Her conscience spoke where no word was heard, and she sought no judgment for herself at the hands of men, for she had the witness of the Lord. She therefore desired to be acquitted by the One who she knew could not be deceived in any way. The Lord himself in the gospel worked out in silence the salvation of humankind. David rightly therefore enjoined on himself not constant silence but watchfulness.”

“The tongue, therefore, should be discreetly curbed, not tied up fast. For it is written, "A wise man will hold his tongue until the time," in order, assuredly, that when he considers it opportune, he may relinquish the censorship of silence and apply himself to the service of utility by speaking such things as are fit. And again it is written, "A time to keep silence and a time to speak." For, indeed, the times for changes should be discreetly weighed, lest either, when the tongue ought to be restrained, it run loose to no profit in words, or, when it might speak with profit, it slothfully restrain itself. Considering which thing well, the psalmist says, "Set a watch, O Lord, on my mouth, and a door round about my lips."”

“A time to rend the kingdom of the House of David, as it is said (I Kings 14:8): “And I tore the kingdom, etc.” and a time to sew (Ezek. 37:17): “and they shall be one in your hand”; (ibid. verse 22): “neither shall they any longer be divided into two kingdoms.” a time to be silent Sometimes a person is silent and receives a reward, as it is said (Lev. 10:3): “and Aaron was silent,” and he merited that the Divine speech be especially addressed to him, as it is said (ibid. verse 8): “And the Lord spoke to Aaron: Drink neither wine nor strong drink.” and a time to speak (Exod. 15:1): “Then Moses... sang”; (Jud. 5:1): “Now Deborah...sang”; (Hos. 14:3): “Take words with you.””

“rend--garments, in mourning (Joe 2:13); figuratively, nations, as Israel from Judah, already foretold, in Solomon's time (Kg1 11:30-31), to be "sewed" together hereafter (Eze 37:15, Eze 37:22). silence-- (Amo 5:13), in a national calamity, or that of a friend (Job 2:13); also not to murmur under God's visitation (Lev 10:3; Psa 39:1-2, Psa 39:9).”

“7a. "To rend has its time, and to sew has its time." When evil tidings come, when the tidings of death come, then is the time for rending the garments (Sa2 13:31), whether as a spontaneous outbreak of sorrow, or merely as a traditionary custom. - The tempest of the affections, however, passes by, and that which was torn is again sewed together. Perhaps it is the recollection of great calamities which leads to the following contrasts: - 7b. "To keep silence has its time, and to speak has its time." Severe strokes of adversity turn the mind in quietness back upon itself; and the demeanour most befitting such adversity is silent resignation (cf. Kg2 2:3, Kg2 2:5). This mediation of the thought is so much the more probable, as in all these contrasts it is not so much the spontaneity of man that comes into view, as the pre-determination and providence of God. The following contrasts proceed on the view that God has placed us in relations in which it is permitted to us to love, or in which our hatred is stirred up: -”

“If we have learned, then, whom we should go to war with and how to carry on the fight, we must also learn the other part of the lesson, with whom the Scripture solemnly warns us to make a peaceful alliance. What is the good army, with which I am to join forces through peace? Who is the king of such an army? It is clear, from what we are taught by the inspired Scriptures, that it is the array of the angels of the host of heaven.”

“"To love has its time, and to hate has its time; war has its time, and peace has its time." In the two pairs of contrasts here, the contents of the first are, not exclusively indeed (Psa 120:7), but yet chiefly referred to the mutual relations of peoples. It is the result of thoughtful intention that the quodlibet of 2 x 7 pairs terminates this for and against in "peace;" and, besides, the author has made the termination emphatic by this, that here "instead of infinitives, he introduces proper nouns" (Hitz.).”

“But these earthly pursuits, while lawful in their season, are "unprofitable" when made by man, what God never intended them to be, the chief good. Solomon had tried to create an artificial forced joy, at times when he ought rather to have been serious; the result, therefore, of his labor to be happy, out of God's order, was disappointment. "A time to plant" (Ecc 3:2) refers to his planting (Ecc 2:5); "laugh" (Ecc 3:4), to Ecc 2:1-2; "his mirth," "laughter"; "build up," "gather stones" (Ecc 3:3, Ecc 3:5), to his "building" (Ecc 2:4); "embrace," "love," to his "princess" (see on Ecc 2:8); "get" (perhaps also "gather," Ecc 3:5-6), to his "gathering" (Ecc 2:8). All these were of "no profit," because not in God's time and order of bestowing happiness.”

“Since, then, everything has its time depending not on human influence, but on the determination and providence of God, the question arises: "What gain hath he that worketh in that wherewith he wearieth himself?" It is the complaint of Ecc 1:3 which is here repeated. From all the labour there comes forth nothing which carries in it the security of its continuance; but in all he does man is conditioned by the change of times and circumstances and relations over which he has no control. And the converse of this his weakness is short-sightedness.”

“"I saw the travail, which God gave to the children of men to fatigue themselves with it - : He hath well arranged everything beautiful in its appointed time; He hath also put eternity in their heart, so that man cannot indeed wholly search through from beginning to end the work which God accomplisheth." As at Ecc 1:14, ראיתי is here seeing in the way of research, as elsewhere, e.g., at Ecc 2:24, it is as the result of research. In Ecc 3:10 the author says that he closely considered the labour of men, and in Ecc 3:11 he states the result. It is impossible to render the word ענין everywhere by the same German (or English) word: Ecc 1:13, wearisome trouble; Ecc 2:26, business; here: Geschftigkeit, the idea is in all the three places the same, viz., an occupation which causes trouble, costs effort. What presented itself to the beholder was (1) that He (viz., God, cf. Ecc 3:10 and Ecc 3:11) has made everything beautiful in its time. The author uses יפה as synon. of טוב (Ecc 3:17); also in other languages the idea of the beautiful is gradually more and more generalized. The suffix in בּעתּו does not refer to God, but to that which is in the time; this word is = ἐν καιρῷ ιδίῳ (Symm.), at its proper time (vid., Psa 1:3; Psa 104:27; Jer 5:24, etc.), since, as with יחדּו (together with) and כּלּו (every one), the suffix is no longer thought of as such. Like יפה, בעתו as pred. conception belongs to the verb: He has made everything beautiful; He has made everything (falling out) at its appointed time. - The beauty consists in this, that what is done is not done sooner or later than it ought to be, so as to connect itself as a constituent part to the whole of God's work. The pret. עשׂה is to be also interpreted as such: He "has made," viz., in His world-plan, all things beautiful, falling out at the appointed time; for that which acquires an actual form in the course of history has a previous ideal existence in the knowledge and will of God (vid., under Isa 22:11; Isa 37:26). That which presented itself to the beholder was - (2) the fact that He (God) had put את־העלם in their hearts (i.e., the hearts of men). Gaab and Spohn interpret 'olam in the sense of the Arab. 'ilam, knowledge, understanding; and Hitz., pointing the word accordingly עלם, translates: "He has also placed understanding in their heart, without which man," etc. The translation of אשׁר אשׁלי is not to be objected to; מבּ is, however, only seldom a conjunction, and is then to be translated by eo quod, Exo 14:11; Kg2 1:3, Kg2 1:6, Kg2 1:16, which is not appropriate here; it will thus be here also a prep., and with asher following may mean "without which," as well as "without this, that" = "besides that" (Venet. ἄνευ τοῦ ὃτι, "except that"), as frequently כּי אפס, e.g., at Amo 9:8. But that Arab. 'ilam is quite foreign to the Heb., which has no word עלם in the sense of "to rise up, to be visible, knowable," which is now also referred (Note: Vid., Fried. Delitzsch's Assyr. Stud. (1874), p. 39. Otherwise Fleischer, who connects 'alima, "to know," with 'alam, "to conceal," so that to know = to be concealed, sunk deep, initiated in something (with ba of the obj., as sh'ar, whence shâ'ir, the poet as "one who marks").) to for the Assyr. as the stem-word of עילם = highland. It is true Hitzig believes that he has found the Heb. עלם = wisdom, in Sir. 6:21, where there is a play on the word with נעלם, "concealed:" σοφία γὰρ κατὰ τὸ ὄνομα αὐτῆς ἐστί, καὶοὐ πολλοῖς ἐστὶ φανερά. Drusius and Eichhorn have here already taken notice of the Arab. 'ilam; but Fritzsche with right asks, "Shall this word as Heb. be regarded as traceable only here and falsely pointed only at Ecc 3:11, and shall no trace of it whatever be found in the Chald., Syr., and Rabbin.?" We have also no need of it. That Ben-Sira has etymologically investigated the word חכמה as going back to חכם, R. chap, "to be firm, shut up, dark" (vid., at Psa 10:8), is certainly very improbable, but so much the more probable (as already suggested by Drusius) that he has introduced (Note: Grtz translates eth-ha'olam by "ignorance" (vid., Orelli, p. 83). R. Achwa in the Midrash has added here the scriptio defectiva with the remark, שהועלם וגו, "for the mysterious name of God is concealed from them.") into חכמה, after the Aram. אכם, nigrescere, the idea of making dark. Does eth-ha'olam in this passage before us then mean "the world" (Jerome, Luther, Ewald), or "desire after the knowledge of the world" (Rashi), or "worldly-mindedness" (Gesen., Knobel)? The answer to this has been already given in my Psychol. p. 406 (2nd ed.): "In post-bibl. Heb. 'olam denotes not only 'eternity' backwards and forwards as infinite duration, but also 'the world' as that which endures for ever (αἰών, seculum); the world in this latter sense is, however, not yet known (Note: In the Phoen. also, 'olam, down to a late period, denotes not the world, but eternity: melek 'olam, βασιλεὺς αἰώνος (αἰώνιος), seculo frugifero on a coin = the fruit-bringing 'olam (Αἰών).) to the bibl. language, and we will thus not be able to interpret the words of Koheleth of the impulse of man to reflect on the whole world." In itself, the thought that God has placed the whole world in man's heart is not untrue: man is, indeed, a micro-cosmos, in which the macrocosmos mirrors itself (Elster), but the connection does not favour it; for the discussion does not proceed from this, that man is only a member in the great universe, and that God has given to each being its appointed place, but that in all his experience he is conditioned by time, and that in the course of history all that comes to him, according to God's world-plan, happens at its appointed time. But the idea by which that of time, את (זמן), is surpassed is not the world, but eternity, to which time is related as part is to the whole (Cicero, Inv. i. 26. 39, tempus est pars quaedam aeternitatis). The Mishna language contains, along with the meaning of world, also this older meaning of 'olam, and has formed from it an adv. עולמית, aeterne. The author means to say that God has not only assigned to each individually his appointed place in history, thereby bringing to the consciousness of man the fact of his being conditioned, but that He has also established in man an impulse leading him beyond that which is temporal toward the eternal: it lies in his nature not to be contented with the temporal, but to break through the limits which it draws around him, to escape from the bondage and the disquietude within which he is held, and amid the ceaseless changes of time to console himself by directing his thoughts to eternity. This saying regarding the desiderium aeternitatis being planted in the heart of man, is one of the profoundest utterances of Koheleth. In fact, the impulse of man shows that his innermost wants cannot be satisfied by that which is temporal. He is a being limited by time, but as to his innermost nature he is related to eternity. That which is transient yields him no support, it carries him on like a rushing stream, and constrains him to save himself by laying hold on eternity. But it is not so much the practical as the intellectual side of this endowment and this peculiar dignity of human nature which Koheleth brings her to view. It is not enough for man to know that everything that happens has its divinely-ordained time. There is an instinct peculiar to his nature impelling him to pass beyond this fragmentary knowledge and to comprehend eternity; but his effort is in vain, for (3) "man is unable to reach unto the work which God accomplisheth from the beginning to the end." The work of God is that which is completing itself in the history of the world, of which the life of individual men is a fragment. Of this work he says, that God has wrought it עשׂה; because, before it is wrought out in its separate "time," it is already completed in God's plan. Eternity and this work are related to each other as the accomplished and the being accomplished, they are interchangeably the πλήρωμα to each other. ימצא is potential, and the same in conception as at Ecc 8:17; Job 11:7; Job 37:23; a knowledge is meant which reaches to the object, and lays hold of it. A laying hold of this work is an impossibility, because eternity, as its name 'olam denotes, is the concealed, i.e., is both forwards and backwards immeasurable. The desiderium aeternitatis inherent in man thus remains under the sun unappeased. He would raise himself above the limits within which he is confined, and instead of being under the necessity of limiting his attention to isolated matters, gain a view of the whole of God's work which becomes manifest in time; but this all-embracing view is for him unattainable. If Koheleth had known of a future life - which proves that as no instinct in the natural world is an allusion, so also the impulse toward the eternal, which is natural to man, is no illusion-he would have reached a better ultimatum than the following: -”

“Of all these things there is not one either idle or useless. Not even the meanest of them—the hair, or the nails, or such like—is so; but all have their service to do, and all their contribution to make, some of them to the soundness of bodily constitution and others of them to beauty of appearance. For Providence cares not only for the useful but also for the seasonable and beautiful.”

“everything beautiful in its time At the time of good, it is beautiful that the reward be given for good deeds, and at the time of evil, it is fitting for the recompense for evil deeds. also the world He put in their hearts, etc. Also the wisdom of the world that He put into the hearts of the creatures—He did not put it all into the heart of everyone, but [He gave] a little to this one and a little to that one, in order that man should not comprehend the entire deed of the Holy One, blessed be He, to know it; and he will not know the day of his visitation [i.e., the day of his death] and on what he will stumble, in order that he put his heart to repent, so that he will be concerned and say, “Today or tomorrow I will die.” Therefore, הָעֹלָם is written here defectively, an expression of concealment (הַעֲלָמָה), for if man would know that the day of his death was near, he would neither build a house nor plant a vineyard. Therefore, he says that He made everything beautiful in its time. The fact that there is a time for death is a beautiful thing, for a person relies and says, “Perhaps the time of my death is far off,” and he builds a house and plants a vineyard, and it is [therefore] beautiful that it is concealed from people.”

“Consideration. Literally, “dispute.” Hebrew and Septuagint, “heart.” (Haydock) — Pagnin, “He has implanted the desire of immortality in their hearts.” — End. If we could discover the properties of each thing, we should be in raptures; (Calmet) but as we cannot, this increases our vexation. (Menochius)”

“his time--that is, in its proper season (Psa 1:3), opposed to worldlings putting earthly pursuits out of their proper time and place (see on Ecc 3:9). set the world in their heart--given them capacities to understand the world of nature as reflecting God's wisdom in its beautiful order and times (Rom 1:19-20). "Everything" answers to "world," in the parallelism. so that--that is, but in such a manner that man only sees a portion, not the whole "from beginning to end" (Ecc 8:17; Job 26:14; Rom 11:33; Rev 15:4). PARKHURST, for "world," translates: "Yet He hath put obscurity in the midst of them," literally, "a secret," so man's mental dimness of sight as to the full mystery of God's works. So HOLDEN and WEISS. This incapacity for "finding out" (comprehending) God's work is chiefly the fruit of the fall. The worldling ever since, not knowing God's time and order, labors in vain, because out of time and place.”

“in them--in God's works (Ecc 3:11), as far as relates to man's duty. Man cannot fully comprehend them, but he ought joyfully to receive ("rejoice in") God's gifts, and "do good" with them to himself and to others. This is never out of season (Gal 6:9-10). Not sensual joy and self-indulgence (Phi 4:4; Jam 4:16-17).”

“"Thus I then perceived that among them (men) there is nothing better than to enjoy themselves, and indulge themselves in their life." The resignation would acquire a reality if לע טוב meant "to do good," i.e., right (lxx, Targ., Syr., Jer., Venet.); and this appears of necessity to be its meaning according to Ecc 7:20. But, with right, Ginsburg remarks that nowhere else - neither at Ecc 2:24, nor Ecc 3:22; Ecc 5:17; Ecc 8:15; Ecc 9:7 - is this moral rendering given to the ultimatum; also טוב ור, 13a, presupposes for לע טוב a eudemonistic sense. On the other hand, Zckler is right in saying that for the meaning of עשות תוב, in the sense of "to be of good cheer" (Luth.), there is no example. Zirkel compares εὖ πράττειν, and regards it as a Graecism. But it either stands ellipt. for לע לו טוב (= להיטיב לו), or, with Grtz, we have to read טוב לראות; in any case, an ethical signification is here excluded by the nearest connection, as well as by the parallels; it is not contrary to the view of Koheleth, but this is not the place to express it. Bam is to be understood after baadam, Ecc 2:24. The plur., comprehending men, here, as at Ecc 3:11, wholly passes over into the individualizing sing. But this enjoyment of life also, Koheleth continues, this advisedly the best portion in the limited and restrained condition of man, is placed beyond his control: -”

“"But also that he should eat and drink, and see good in all his labour, is for every man a gift of God." The inverted and yet anacoluthistic formation of the sentence is quite like that at Ecc 5:18. כּל־הא signifies, properly, the totality of men = all men, e.g., Psa 116:11; but here and at 5:18; 12:13, the author uses the two words so that the determ. second member of the st. constr. does not determine the first (which elsewhere sometimes occurs, as bethulath Israel, a virgin of Israel, Deu 22:19): every one of men (cf. πᾶς τις βροτῶν). The subst. clause col-haadam is subject: every one of men, in this that he eats ... is dependent on God. Instead of מיּד the word מתּת (abbrev. from מתּנת) is here used, as at Ecc 5:18. The connection by vegam is related to the preceding adversat.: and (= but) also (= notwithstanding that), as at Ecc 6:7, Neh 5:8, cf. Jer 3:10, where gam is strengthened by becol-zoth. As for the rest, it follows from Ecc 3:13, in connection with Ecc 2:24-26, that for Koheleth εὐποΐ́α and εὐθυμία reciprocally condition each other, without, however, a conclusion following therefrom justifying the translation "to do good," Ecc 3:12. Men's being conditioned in the enjoyment of life, and, generally, their being conditioned by God the Absolute, has certainly an ethical end in view, as is expressed in the conclusion which Koheleth now reaches: -”

“I knew that everything that God made [i.e.,] that the Holy One, blessed be He, [made] in the Creation, is fit to exist forever, and it cannot be changed, either by adding or by diminishing, and when it is changed, God commanded and caused it to be changed, in order that they should fear Him. The ocean broke through its boundary in the generation of Enosh and inundated a third of the world, and God did this so that they would fear Him. For seven days, the course of the sun was changed in the Generation of the Flood, to rise in the west and set in the east, in order that they fear Him. The sun went back ten steps in the days of Hezekiah, and in the days of Ahaz his father, the day was shortened and the night was lengthened on the day of his death, so that he should not be eulogized. All this was so that they would fear Him. Therefore, there is nothing better for a man to occupy himself with than with His commandments and to fear Him.”

“(Sa1 3:12; Sa2 23:5; Psa 89:34; Mat 24:35; Jam 1:17). for ever--as opposed to man's perishing labors (Ecc 2:15-18). any thing taken from it--opposed to man's "crooked and wanting" works (Ecc 1:15; Ecc 7:13). The event of man's labors depends wholly on God's immutable purpose. Man's part, therefore, is to do and enjoy every earthly thing in its proper season (Ecc 3:12-13), not setting aside God's order, but observing deep reverence towards God; for the mysteriousness and unchangeableness of God's purposes are designed to lead "man to fear before Him." Man knows not the event of each act: otherwise he would think himself independent of God.”

“"Thus I discerned it then, that all that God will do exists for ever; nothing is to be added to it, and nothing taken from it: God has thus directed it, that men should fear before Him." This is a conclusion derived from the facts of experience, a truth that is valid for the present and for the time to come. We may with equal correctness render by quidquid facit and quidquid faciet. But the pred. shows that the fut. expression is also thought of as fut.; for הוּ יה לע does not mean: that is for ever (Hitz.), which would be expressed by the subst. clause הוּא לעולם; but: that shall be for ever (Zck.), i.e., will always assert its validity. That which is affirmed here is true of God's directing and guiding events in the natural world, as well as of the announcements of His will and His controlling and directing providence in the history of human affairs. All this is removed beyond the power of the creature to alter it. The meaning is not that one ought not to add to or to take from it (Deu 13:1; Pro 30:6), but that such a thing cannot be done (vid., Sir. 18:5). And this unchangeableness characterizing the arrangements of God has this as its aim, that men should fear Him who is the All-conditioning and is Himself unconditioned: he has done it that they (men) should fear before Him, אשׂה שׁ, fecit ut; cf. Eze 36:27. ποιεῖν ἳνα, Rev 13:15; and "fear before Him," as at Ecc 8:12.; cf. Ch1 16:30 with Psa 96:9. The unchangeableness of God's action shows itself in this, that in the course of history similar phenomena repeat themselves; for the fundamental principles, the causal connections, the norms of God's government, remain always the same.”

“That which was is already That which was before us, was already done, and we saw it or heard it from others who saw it, and we can attest to it, for we saw that the Holy One, blessed be He, seeks the pursued. Jacob was pursued, [and] Esau was a pursuer, (Mal. 1:2f): “And I loved Jacob. And I hated Esau.” The Egyptians pursued Israel. The Egyptians drowned in the sea, and Israel went forth with a high hand. and that which is destined to be at the end is a model of what already was. As it was in the beginning, so will it be at the end. The Holy One, blessed be He, does not change His standards in the world. and God seeks the pursued to punish the pursuer. Therefore, what is the profit of one who does evil in what he toils? He is destined to he called to account.”

“Resumption of Ecc 1:9. Whatever changes there be, the succession of events is ordered by God's "everlasting" laws (Ecc 3:14), and returns in a fixed cycle. requireth that . . . past--After many changes, God's law requires the return of the same cycle of events, as in the past, literally, "that which is driven on." The Septuagint and Syriac translate: "God requireth (that is, avengeth) the persecuted man"; a transition to Ecc 3:16-17. The parallel clauses of the verse support English Version.”

“"That which is now hath been long ago; and that which will be hath already been: God seeketh after that which was crowded out." The words: "hath been long ago" (הוּא כּבר), are used of that which the present represents as something that hath been, as the fruit of a development; the words: "hath already been" (היה כּבר), are used of the future (ל אשׁר, τὸ μέλλον, vid., Gesen. 132. 1), as denying to it the right of being regarded as something new. The government of God is not to be changed, and does not change; His creative as well as His moral ordering of the world produces with the same laws the same phenomena (the ו corresponds to this line of thought here, as at Ecc 3:14) - God seeks את־ן (cf. Ecc 7:7; Ewald, 277d). Hengstenberg renders: God seeks the persecuted (lxx, Symm., Targ., Syr.), i.e., visits them with consolation and comfort. Nirdaph here denotes that which is followed, hunted, pressed, by which we may think of that which is already driven into the past; that God seeks, seeks it purposely, and brings it back again into the present; for His government remains always, and brings thus always up again that which hath been. Thus Jerome: Deut instaurat quod abiit; the Venet.: ὃ τηεὸς ζητήσει τὸ ἀπεληλαμένον; and thus Geier, among the post-Reform. interpreters: praestat ut quae propulsa sunt ac praeterierunt iterum innoventur ac redeant; and this is now the prevailing exposition, after Knobel, Ewald, and Hitzig. The thought is the same as if we were to translate: God seeks after the analogue. In the Arab., one word in relation to another is called muradif, if it is cogn. to it; and mutaradifat is the technical expression for a synonym. In Heb. the expression used is שׁמות נרדּפים, they who are followed the one by another, - one of which, as it were, treads on the heels of another. But this designation is mediated through the Arab. In evidence of the contrary, ancient examples are wanting.”

“the place of justice, etc. I saw with the holy spirit the place of the Chamber of Hewn Stone in Jerusalem, which was (Isa. 1:21): “full of justice”; there they will judge wickedly, as it is said (Micah 3:11): “Its heads judge for bribes,” and I saw their punishment. and the place of righteousness the middle gate, which was the place of deciding the laws. there is wickedness there sat Sarsachim, Rab- Saris, Nergal-Sarezer, Rab-Mag (Jer. 39:3), and Nebuchadnezzar and his hosts, and they judged Israel with harsh tortures and death sentences. there is wickedness Heb. הָרָשַׁע. The accent mark is before the last syllable, indicating that it is a noun like הָרֶשַּׁע, but since it is the end of the verse, it is changed to be vowelized with a “kamatz,” although we do not find another instance of this word that changes in the case of an ethnachta or a sof pasuk.”

“"And, moreover, I saw under the sun the place of judgment, that wickedness was there; and the place of righteousness, that wickedness was there." The structure of the verse is palindromic, like Ecc 1:6; Ecc 2:10; Ecc 4:1. We might also render מקום as the so-called casus absol., so that שׁם ... מק is an emphatic בּמקום (Hitz.), and the construction like Jer 46:5; but the accentuation does not require this (cf. Gen 1:1); and why should it not be at once the object to ראיתי, which in any case it virtually is? These two words שׁמה הרשׁע might be attribut. clauses: where wickedness (prevails), for the old scheme of the attributive clause (the tsfat) is not foreign to the style of this book (vid., Ecc 1:13, nathan = nethano; and Ecc 5:12, raithi = reithiha); but why not rather virtual pred. accus.: vidi locum juris (quod) ibi impietas? Cf. Neh 13:23 with Psa 37:25. The place of "judgment" is the place where justice should be ascertained and executed; and the place of "righteousness," that where righteousness should ascertain and administer justice; for mishpat is the rule (of right), and the objective matter of fact; tsedek, a subjective property and manner of acting. רשׁע is in both cases the same: wickedness (see under Psa 1:1), which bends justice, and is the contrary of tsěděk, i.e., upright and moral sternness. רשׁע elsewhere, like mělěk̂ tsěděk, preserves in p. its e, but here it takes rank along with חסד, which in like manner fluctuates (cf. Psa 130:7 with Pro 21:21). שׁמּה is here = שׁם, as at Psa 122:5, etc.; the locative ah suits the question Where? as well as in the question Whither? - He now expresses how, in such a state of things, he arrived at satisfaction of mind.”

“I ask you, then, are we to suppose that the only decree of God that will not come to pass, the only decree of God, will be the one which we read in those same writings as being about to judge between believers and unbelievers, when everything else that we read has happened as it was foretold? On the contrary, it will come to pass as all those other prophecies came to pass. Then there will be no person of our times who will be able at that judgment to find an excuse for unbelief when everyone shall call on Christ: the upright for justice, the perjurer for deceit, the king for power and the soldier for battle, the husband to maintain his authority and the wife to show her submission, the father for command and the son for obedience, the master for his right to rule and the servant for his subjection, the humble for piety and the proud for ambition, the rich man to distribute and the poor to receive, the drunkard at his wine cups and the beggar at the gate, the good person that he may excel in virtue and the bad one that he may cheat, the Christian worshiper and the pagan sycophant. All have the name of Christ upon their lips, and, with whatever intention and formula they invoke him, without doubt they shall render an account of it to him whom they invoke.”

“The Divine Wisdom has pointed out in Ecclesiastes that for everything, i.e., for all things happy or those which are considered unfortunate and unhappy, there is a right time: saying: "For all things there is a time, and a time for everything under the heaven." … and below: "For there is a time," it says, "for everything and for every deed." None therefore of these things does it lay down as always good, but only when any of them are fittingly done and at the right time, so that these very things which at one time, when done at the right moment, turn out well, if they are ventured on at a wrong or unsuitable time, are found to be useless or harmful; only excepting those things which are in their own nature good or bad, and which cannot ever be made the opposite, as, e.g., justice, prudence, fortitude, temperance and the rest of the virtues, or on the other hand, those faults, the description of which cannot possibly be altered or fall under the other head. But those things which can sometimes turn out with either result, so that, in accordance with the character of those who use them, they are found to be either good or bad, these we consider to be not absolutely in their own natures useful or injurious, but only so in accordance with the mind of the doer, and the suitableness of the time.”

“I said to myself, etc. Therefore, I say: The Holy One, blessed be He, judges everyone after a time, and even though the matter is delayed, it will ultimately reach its time, for there is a time for every matter, even for retribution, and there is a time for the visitation of judgment. and for every deed that man did, they will judge him there when the time of the visitation arrives; there at that time, a time is given for every deed, to be judged for it. [The Rabbis say:] At the gate of the fold there are words (of bargaining), but in the stall (where the sheep are delivered) there is strict accounting (Shab. 32a).”

“Solution of it. There is a coming judgment in which God will vindicate His righteous ways. The sinner's "time" of his unrighteous "work" is short. God also has His "time" and "work" of judgment; and, meanwhile, is overruling, for good at last, what seems now dark. Man cannot now "find out" the plan of God's ways (Ecc 3:11; Psa 97:2). If judgment instantly followed every sin, there would be no scope for free will, faith, and perseverance of saints in spite of difficulties. The previous darkness will make the light at last the more glorious. there-- (Job 3:17-19) in eternity, in the presence of the Divine Judge, opposed to the "there," in the human place of judgment (Ecc 3:16): so "from thence" (Gen 49:24).”

“"I said in mine heart: God shall judge the righteous as well as the wicked: for there is there a time for every purpose and for every work." Since "the righteous" stands first, the word ישׁפּט has here the double sense of judging [richtens = setting upright] = acting uprightly, justly by one, as in the shofteni of Psa 7:9; Psa 26:1, etc., and of judging = inflicting punishment. To the righteous, as well as to the wicked, (Note: The lxx (in Aquila's manner): σὺν τὸν δίκαιον καὶ σὺν τὸν ἀσεβῆ - according to the Talm. hermeneut. rule, that where the obj. is designated by את, with that which is expressly named, something else is associated, and is to be thought of along with it.) God will administer that which of right belongs to them. But this does not immediately happen, and has to be waited for a long time, for there is a definite time for every undertaking (Ecc 3:1), and for (על, in the more modern form of the language, interchanges promiscue with אל ht and ל, e.g., Jer 19:15; Eze 22:3; Ewald, 217i) every work there is a "time." This שׁם, defended by all the old interpreters, cannot have a temporal sense: tunc = in die judicii (Jerome, Targ.), cf. Psa 14:5; 36:13, for "a time of judgment there is for all one day" is not intended, since certainly the שׁם (day of judgment) is this time itself, and not the time of this time. Ewald renders שׁם as pointing to the past, for he thus construes: the righteous and the unrighteous God will judge (for there is a time for everything), and judge (vav thus explicat., "and that too," "and indeed") every act there, i.e., everything done before. But this שׁם is not only heavy, but also ambiguous and purposeless; and besides, by this parenthesizing of the words וגו עת כּי for there is a time for everything, the principal thought, that with God everything, even His act of judgment, has its time, is robbed of its independence and of the place in the principal clause appropriate to it. But if שׁם is understood adverbially, it certainly has a local meaning connected with it: there, viz., with God, apud Deum; true, for this use of the word Gen 49:24 affords the only example, and it stands there in the midst of a very solemn and earnest address. Therefore it lies near to read, with Houbig., Dderl., Palm., and Hitz., שׁם, "a definite time ... has He (God) ordained;" שׂום (שׂים) is the usual word for the ordinances of God in the natural world and in human history (Pro 8:29; Exo 21:13; Num 24:23; Hab 1:12, etc.), and, as in the Assyr. simtuv, so the Heb. שׂימה (שׂוּמה), Sa2 13:32, signifies lot or fate, decree. (Note: Vid., Schrader's Keilsch. u. A. T. p. 105, simtu ubilsu, i.e., fate snatched him away (Heb. simah hovilathhu), cf. Fried. Delitzsch's Assyr. Stud. p. 66f.) With this reading, Elster takes exception to the position of the words; but at Jdg 6:19 also the object goes before שׂם, and "unto every purpose and for every work" is certainly the complement of the object-conception, so that the position of the words is in reality no other than at Ecc 10:20; Dan 2:17. Quite untenable is Herzfeld's supposition (Frst, Vaih.), that שׁם has here the Talm. signification: aestimat, taxat, for (1) this שׁוּם = Arab. sham, has not על, but the accus. after it; (2) the thought referring to the tie on which Ecc 3:18 rests is thereby interrupted. Whether we read שׂם, or take שׁם in the sense of עמּו (Job 25:2; Job 23:14, etc.), the thought is the same, and equally congruous: God will judge the innocent and the guilty; it shall be done some time, although not so soon as one might wish it, and think necessary, for God has for every undertaking and for every work its fixed time, also its judicial decision (vid., at Psa 74:3); He permits wickedness, lets it develope itself, waits long before He interposes (vid., under Isa 18:4.). Reflecting on God's delay to a time hidden from men, and known only to Himself, Koheleth explains the matter to himself in the following verse: -”

“I said to myself when I saw all this. [that this is] because of the children of men who adopted the trait of haughtiness, to exert rulership and superiority over those smaller than they. [so that God] should clarify for them The Holy One, blessed be He [judges them], to let them know that their rulership is naught, and to show them and also the princes and the kings. that they are like beasts to themselves like other cattle and beasts they are to themselves.”

“estate--The estate of fallen man is so ordered (these wrongs are permitted), that God might "manifest," that is, thereby prove them, and that they might themselves see their mortal frailty, like that of the beasts. sons of men--rather, "sons of Adam," a phrase used for "fallen men." The toleration of injustice until the judgment is designed to "manifest" men's characters in their fallen state, to see whether the oppressed will bear themselves aright amidst their wrongs, knowing that the time is short, and there is a coming judgment. The oppressed share in death, but the comparison to "beasts" applies especially to the ungodly oppressors (Psa 49:12, Psa 49:20). They too need to be "manifested" ("proved"), whether, considering that they must soon die as the "beasts," and fearing the judgment to come, they will repent (Dan 4:27).”

“"Thus I said then in mine heart: (it happeneth) for the sake of the children of men that God might sift them, and that they might see that they are like the cattle, they in themselves." Regarding על־דּב for the sake of = on account of as at Ecc 8:2, vid., under Psa 110:4, where it signifies after (κατά) the state of the matter. The infin. לבּ is not derived from בּוּר. - לּבוּר, Ecc 9:1, is only the metaplastic form of לבר or לברר - but only from בּרר, whose infin. may take the form בּר, after the form רד, to tread down, Isa 45:1, שׁך, to bow, Jer 5:26; but nowhere else is this infin. form found connected with a suff.; קחם, Hos 11:3, would be in some measure to be compared, if it could be supposed that this = בּקחתּם, sumendo eos. The root בר proceeds, from the primary idea of cutting, on the one side to the idea of separating, winnowing, choosing out; and, on the other, to that of smoothing, polishing, purifying (vid., under Isa 49:2). Here, by the connection, the meaning of winnowing, i.e., of separating the good from the bad, is intended, with which, however, as in לברר, Dan 11:35, the meaning of making clear, making light, bringing forward into the light, easily connects itself (cf. Shabbath 138a, 74a), of which the meaning to winnow (cf. להבר, Jer 4:11) is only a particular form; (Note: Not "to sift," for not בּרר but רקּד, means "to sift" (properly, "to make to keep up," "to agitate"); cf. Shebith v. 9.) cf. Sanhedrin 7b: "when a matter is clear, brwr, to thee (free from ambiguity) as the morning, speak it out; and if not, do not speak it." In the expression לב האל, the word האל is, without doubt, the subject, according to Gesen. 133. 2. 3; Hitz. regards האל as genit., which, judged according to the Arab., is correct; it is true that for li-imti-ḥânihim allahi (with genit. of the subj.), also allahu (with nominat. of the subj.) may be used; but the former expression is the more regular and more common (vid., Ewald's Gramm. Arab. 649), but not always equally decisive with reference to the Heb. usus loq. That God delays His righteous interference till the time appointed beforehand, is for the sake of the children of men, with the intention, viz., that God may sift them, i.e., that, without breaking in upon the free development of their characters before the time, He may permit the distinction between the good and the bad to become manifest. Men, who are the obj. to לב, are the subject to לראותו to be supplied: et ut videant; it is unnecessary, with the lxx, Syr., and Jerome, to read ולראות (= וּלהר): ut ostenderet. It is a question whether המּה (Note: המּה שׁהם בּהמה thus accented rightly in F. Cf. Michlol 216a.) is the expression of the copula: sunt (sint), or whether hēmmah lahěm is a closer definition, co-ordinate with shehem behēmah. The remark of Hitzig, that lahěm throws back the action on the subject, is not clear. Does he suppose that lahem belongs to liroth? That is here impossible. If we look away from lahem, the needlessly circumstantial expression הם ... שה can still be easily understood: hemmah takes up, as an echo, behemah, and completes the comparison (compare the battology in Hos 13:2). This play upon words musically accompanying the thought remains also, when, according to the accentuation שׁה בהם ה לה, we take hemmah along with lahem, and the former as well as the latter of these two words is then better understood. The ל in להם is not that of the pure dat. (Aben Ezra: They are like beasts to themselves, i.e., in their own estimation), but that of reference, as at Gen 17:20, "as for Ishmael;" cf. Psa 3:3; Kg2 5:7; cf. אל, Sa1 1:27, etc. Men shall see that they are cattle (beasts), they in reference to themselves, i.e., either they in reference to themselves mutually (Luther: among themselves), or: they in reference to themselves. To interpret the reference as that of mutual relation, would, in looking back to Ecc 3:16, commend itself, for the condemnation and oppression of the innocent under the appearance of justice is an act of human brutishness. But the reason assigned in Ecc 3:19 does not accord with this reciprocal rendering of lahem. Thus lahem will be meant reflexively, but it is not on that account pleonastic (Knobel), nor does it ironically form a climax: ipsissimi = hchstselbst (Ewald, 315a); but "they in reference to themselves" is = they in and of themselves, i.e., viewed as men (viewed naturally). If one disregards the idea of God's interfering at a future time with the discordant human history, and, in general, if one loses sight of God, the distinction between the life of man and of beast disappears.”

“In describing the pleasures of the flesh, he puts all cares out of his mind and states that it is good to eat and drink. Later, he finds fault with this view from the standpoint of reason and says it is better to go to the house of mourning than to the house of feasting. Likewise, from purely carnal considerations he advises a young man to find his pleasure in his youth, and later, modifying this statement, he blames youth and its pleasures as fleeting. So, too, when he speaks from the minds of the infirm, our Preacher voices an opinion based on suspicion. "For the lot of man and of beast," he says, "is one lot; the one dies as well as the other. Both have the same life breath, and man has no advantage over the beast." Later, however, he presents conclusions drawn from reason and says, "What has the wise man more than the fool? and what the poor man, but to go where there is life?" So, after he says, "Man has no advantage over the beast," he again specifies that the wise person has an advantage not only over the beast but also over the foolish person, namely, his ability to go "where there is life."”

“For the happening of the children of men, etc. This is the reason for the matter, that the Holy One, blessed be He, gave a fate and a mishap to the children of men, and there is a fate and a mishap to the beasts, and He gave one fate to them both, for just as this one dies, so does that one die. and the superiority of man over beast And the superiority and success of man over the beasts is not apparent after he dies, for everything is converted to become vanity, to return to the dust.”

“Literally, "For the sons of men (Adam) are a mere chance, as also the beast is a mere chance." These words can only be the sentiments of the skeptical oppressors. God's delay in judgment gives scope for the "manifestation" of their infidelity (Ecc 8:11; Psa 55:19; Pe2 3:3,4). They are "brute beasts," morally (Ecc 3:18; Jde 1:10); and they end by maintaining that man, physically, has no pre-eminence over the beast, both alike being "fortuities." Probably this was the language of Solomon himself in his apostasy. He answers it in Ecc 3:21. If Ecc 3:19-20 be his words, they express only that as regards liability to death, excluding the future judgment, as the skeptic oppressors do, man is on a level with the beast. Life is "vanity," if regarded independently of religion. But Ecc 3:21 points out the vast difference between them in respect to the future destiny; also (Ecc 3:17) beasts have no "judgment" to come. breath--vitality.”

“"For the children of men are a chance, and the beast a chance, and they both have once chance: as the death of the one, so that death of the other, and they have all one breath; and there is no advantage to a man over a beast, for all is vain." If in both instances the word is pointed מקרה (lxx), the three-membered sentence would then have the form of an emblematical proverb (as e.g., Pro 25:25): "For as the chance of men, so (vav of comparison) the chance of the beast; they have both one chance." מקרה with segol cannot possibly be the connecting form (Luzz.), for in cases such as מע שׂ ם, Isa 3:24, the relation of the words is appositional, not genitival. This form מקר, thus found three times, is vindicated by the Targ. (also the Venet.) and by Mss.; Joseph Kimchi remarks that "all three have segol, and are thus forms of the absolutus." The author means that men, like beasts, are in their existence and in their death influenced accidentally, i.e., not of necessity, and are wholly conditioned, not by their own individual energy, but by a power from without - are dependent beings, as Solon (Herod. i. 32) says to Croesus: "Man is altogether συμφορή," i.e., the sport of accident. The first two sentences mean exclusively neither that men (apart from God) are, like beasts, the birth of a blind accident (Hitz.), nor that they are placed under the same law of transitoriness (Elst.); but of men, in the totality of their being, and doing, and suffering, it is first said that they are accidental beings; then, that which separates them from this, that they all, men like beasts, are finally exposed to one, i.e., to the same fate. As is the death of one, so is the death of the other; and they all have one breath, i.e., men and beasts alike die, for this breath of life (חיּים רוּח, which constitutes a beast - as well as a man a חיּה נפשׁ) departs from the body (Psa 104:29). In זה ... זה (as at Ecc 6:5; Exo 14:20, and frequently), להם (mas. as genus potius) is separately referred to men and beasts. With the Mishnic בּמות = bibl. כּמו (cf. Maaser Sheni, v. 2), the כּמות here used has manifestly nothing to do. The noun מותר, which in the Book of Proverbs (Pro 14:23; Pro 21:5, not elsewhere) occurs in the sense of profit, gain, is here in the Book of Koheleth found as a synon. of יתרון, "preference," advantage which is exclusively peculiar to it. From this, that men and beasts fall under the same law of death, the author concludes that there is no preference of a man to a beast; he doubtless means that in respect of the end man has no superiority; but he expresses himself thus generally because, as the matter presented itself to him, all-absorbing death annulled every distinction. He looks only to the present time, without encumbering himself with the historical account of the matter found in the beginning of the Tra; and he adheres to the external phenomenon, without thinking, with the Psalmist in Ps 49, that although death is common to man with the beast, yet all men do not therefore die as the beast does. That the beast dies because it must, but that in the midst of this necessity of nature man can maintain his freedom, is for him out of view. הבל הכּל, the ματαιότης, which at last falls to man as well as to the beast, throws its long dark shadows across his mind, and wholly shrouds it.”

“The resurrection as a fact is not to be rejected because of an exceptional situation. Yet, since all things earthly return and crumble into the earth, I wonder how there can be any doubt even concerning the instances noted. For the most part, the sea itself also casts up on neighboring shores whatever human bodies it has swallowed. And if this were not so, it surely would not be difficult for God to join what has been scattered and to unite again what has been dispersed. Could it be maintained for a moment that God, whom the universe and the silent elements obey and nature serves, did not perform a greater miracle in giving life to clay than in joining it together?”

“In order, indeed, that you may have the fullest and clearest assurance that what is the soul is in the usage of the Holy Scriptures also called spirit, the soul of a brute animal has the designation of spirit. And of course cattle have not that spirit which you, my beloved brother, have defined as being distinct from the soul. It is therefore quite evident that the soul of a brute animal could be rightly called "spirit" in a general sense of the term; as we read in the book of Ecclesiastes, "Who knows the spirit of the sons of men, whether it goes upward; and the spirit of the beast, whether it goes downward into the earth?" In like manner, touching the devastation of the deluge, the Scripture testifies, "All flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth, and every man: and all things which have the spirit of life." Here, if we remove all the windings of doubtful disputation, we understand the term spirit to be synonymous with soul in its general sense. Of so wide a signification is this term, that even God is called "a spirit"; and a stormy blast of the air, although it has material substance, is called by the psalmist the "spirit" of a tempest. For all these reasons, therefore, you will no longer deny that what is the soul is called also spirit. I have, I think, adduced enough from the pages of Holy Scripture to secure your assent in passages where the soul of the very brute beast, which has no understanding, is designated spirit.”

“"All goes hence to one place; all has sprung out of the dust, and all returns to the dust again." The "one place" is (as at Ecc 6:6) the earth, the great graveyard which finally receives all the living when dead. The art. of the first העפר is that denoting species; the art. of the second is retrospective: to the dust whence he sprang (cf. Psa 104:29; Psa 146:4); otherwise, Gen 3:19 (cf. Job 34:15), "to dust shalt thou return," shalt become dust again. From dust to dust (Sir. 40:11; 41:10) is true of every living corporeal thing. It is true there exists the possibility that with the spirit of the dying man it may be different from what it is with the spirit of the dying beast, but yet that is open to question.”

“Who knows Like (Joel 2:14): “Whoever knows shall repent.” Who is it who understands and puts his heart to [the fact] that the spirit of the children of men ascends above and stands in judgment, and the spirit of the beast descends below to the earth, and does not have to give an accounting. Therefore, one must not behave like a beast, which does not care about its deeds.”

“Who knoweth, &c., viz., experimentally; since no one in this life can see a spirit. But as to the spirit of the beasts, which is merely animal, and becomes extinct by the death of the beast, who can tell the manner it acts so as to give life and motion, and by death to descend downward, that is, to be no more? (Challoner) — Few are able to prove that the soul of man is immortal rather than that of beasts, since the bodies of both are subject to the like inconveniences. The objection is answered [in] chap. xii. 7. (Calmet) — The difficulty of answering is intimated by “Who?” &c., Psalm xiv. 1. (Menochius)”

“Who knoweth--Not doubt of the destination of man's spirit (Ecc 12:7); but "how few, by reason of the outward mortality to which man is as liable as the beast and which is the ground of the skeptic's argument, comprehend the wide difference between man and the beast" (Isa 53:1). The Hebrew expresses the difference strongly, "The spirit of man that ascends, it belongeth to on high; but the spirit of the beast that descends, it belongeth to below, even to the earth." Their destinations and proper element differ utterly [WEISS].”

“"Who knoweth with regard to the spirit of the children of men, whether it mounteth upward; and with regard to the spirit of a beast, whether it goeth downward to the earth?" The interrogative meaning of העלה and הירדת is recognised by all the old translators: lxx, Targ., Syr., Jerome, Venet., Luther. Among the moderns, Heyder (vid., Psychol. p. 410), Hengst., Hahn, Dale, and Bullock take the h in both cases as the article: "Who knoweth the spirit of the children of men, that which goeth upward ... ?" But (1) thus rendered the question does not accord with the connection, which requires a sceptical question; (2) following "who knoweth," after Ecc 2:19; Ecc 6:12, cf. Jos 2:14, an interrogative continuance of the sentence was to be expected; and (3) in both cases היא stands as designation of the subject only for the purpose of marking the interrogative clause (cf. Jer 2:14), and of making it observable that ha'olah and hayorěděth are not appos. belonging as objects to רוח and ורוח. It is questionable, indeed, whether the punctuation of these words, העלה and היּרדת, as they lie before us, proceeds from an interrogative rendering. Saadia in Emunoth c. vi., and Juda Halevi in the Kuzri ii. 80, deny this; and so also do Aben Ezra and Kimchi. And they may be right. For instead of העלה, the pointing ought to have been העלה (cf. העלה, Job 13:25) when used as interrog. an ascendens; even before א the compens. lengthening of the interrog. ha is nowhere certainly found (Note: For ה is to be read with a Pattach in Jdg 6:31; Jdg 12:5; Neh 6:11; cf. under Gen 19:9; Gen 27:21. In Num 16:22 the ה of האישׁ is the art., the question is not formally designated. instead of the virtual reduplication; and thus also the parallel היּר is not to be judged after היּי, Lev 10:19, הדּ, Eze 18:29, - we must allow that the punctation seeks, by the removal of the two interrog. ha (ה), to place that which is here said in accord with Ecc 12:7. But there is no need for this. For יודע מי does not quite fall in with that which Lucretius says (Lib. I): "Ignoratur enim quae sit natura animai, Nata sit an contra nascentibus insinuetur? An simul intereat nobiscum morte diremta?" It may certainly be said of mi yode'a, as of ignoratur, that it does not exclude every kind of knowledge, but only a sure and certain knowledge resting on sufficient grounds; interire and ירד לם are also scarcely different, for neither of the two necessarily signifies annihilation, but both the discontinuance of independent individual existence. But the putting of the question by Koheleth is different, for it discloses more definitely than this by Lucretius, the possibility of a different end for the spirit of a man from that which awaits the spirit of a beast, and thus of a specific distinction between these two principles of life. In the formation even of the dilemma: Whether upwards or downwards, there lies an inquiring knowledge; and it cannot surprise us if Koheleth finally decides that the way of the spirit of a man is upwards, although it is not said that he rested this on the ground of demonstrative certainty. It is enough that, with the moral necessity of a final judgment beyond the sphere of this present life, at the same time also the continued existence of the spirit of man presented itself to him as a postulate of faith. One may conclude from the desiderium aeternitatis (Ecc 3:11) implanted in man by the Creator, that, like the instincts implanted in the beasts, it will be calculated not for deception, but for satisfaction; and from the למעלה, Pro 15:24 - i.e., the striving of a wise man rising above earthly, temporary, common things, - that death will not put an end to this striving, but will help it to reach its goal. But this is an indirect proof, which, however, is always inferior to the direct in force of argument. He presupposes that the Omnipotence and Wisdom which formed the world is also at the same time Love. Thus, though at last, it is faith which solves the dilemma, and we see from Ecc 12:7 that this faith held sway over Koheleth. In the Book of Sirach, also, the old conception of Hades shows itself as yet dominant; but after the οὐκ ἀτηάνατος υἱὸς ἀντηρώπου, 17:25, we read towards the end, where he speaks of Elias: καὶ τὰρ ἡμεῖς ζωῇ ζησόμεθα, 48:11. In the passage before us, Koheleth remains in doubt, without getting over it by the hand of faith. In a certain reference the question he here proposes is to the present day unanswered; for the soul, or, more correctly, according to the biblical mode of conception the spirit from which the soul-life of all corporeal beings proceeds, is a monas, and as such is indestructible. Do the future of the beast's soul and of man's soul not then stand in a solidaric mutual relation to each other? In fact, the future life presents to us mysteries the solution of which is beyond the power of human thought, and we need not wonder that Koheleth, this sober-minded, intelligent man, who was inaccessible to fantastic self-deception, arrives, by the line of thought commenced at Ecc 3:16, also again at the ultimatum.”

“And I saw in all of these. that there is nothing better for man. than that man rejoice in his deeds in the toil of his hands he should rejoice and eat, but not to widen his desire like the grave, to covet riches, to accumulate that which is not his. for that is his portion The toil of his hands—that is his portion given him from Heaven, and with it he will rejoice. for who will bring him to see after he dies, what his sons will have; if they too will prosper with the riches that he gathered and left over for them or whether they will not prosper.”

“After him. He knows not who shall be his heir, or how soon he may die. None returns from the other world to inform him of what is there transacted. Thus the libertine encourages himself. (Calmet) Bible Text & Cross-references: All human things are liable to perpetual changes. We are to rest on God’s providence, and cast away fruitless cares. 1 All things have their season, and in their times all things pass under heaven. 2 A time to be born, and a time to die. A time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted. 3 A time to kill, and a time to heal. A time to destroy, and a time to build. 4 A time to weep, and a time to laugh. A time to mourn, and a time to dance. 5 A time to scatter stones, and a time to gather. A time to embrace, and a time to be far from embraces. 6 A time to get, and a time to lose. A time to keep, and a time to cast away. 7 A time to rend, and a time to sew. A time to keep silence, and a time to speak. 8 A time of love, and a time of hatred. A time of war, and a time of peace. 9 What hath man more of his labour? 10 I have seen the trouble, which God hath given the sons of men, to be exercised in it. 11 He hath made all things good in their time, and hath delivered the world to their consideration, so that man cannot flnd out the work which God hath made from the beginning to the end. 12 And I have known that there was no better thing than to rejoice, and to do well in this life. 13 For every man that eateth and drinketh, and seeth good of his labour, this is the gift of God. 14 I have learned that all the works which God hath made, continue for ever: we cannot add any thing, nor take away from those things which God hath made, that he may be feared. 15 That which hath been made, the same continueth: the things that shall be, have already been: and God restoreth that which is past. 16 I saw under the sun in the place of judgment, wickedness, and in the place of justice, iniquity. 17 And I said in my heart: God shall judge both the just and the wicked, and then shall be the time of every thing. 18 I said in my heart concerning the sons of men, that God would prove them, and shew them to be like beasts. 19 Therefore the death of man, and of beasts is one, and the condition of them both is equal: as man dieth, so they also die: all things breathe alike, and man hath nothing more than beast: all things are subject to vanity, 20 And all things go to one place: of earth they were made, and into earth they return together. 21 Who knoweth if the spirit of the children of Adam ascend upward, and if the spirit of the beasts descend downward? 22 And I have found that nothing is better than for a man to rejoice in his work, and that this is his portion. For who shall bring him to know the things that shall be after him? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12”

“(Compare Ecc 3:12; Ecc 5:18). Inculcating a thankful enjoyment of God's gifts, and a cheerful discharge of man's duties, founded on fear of God; not as the sensualist (Ecc 11:9); not as the anxious money-seeker (Ecc 2:23; Ecc 5:10-17). his portion--in the present life. If it were made his main portion, it would be "vanity" (Ecc 2:1; Luk 16:25). for who, &c.--Our ignorance as to the future, which is God's "time" (Ecc 3:11), should lead us to use the present time in the best sense and leave the future to His infinite wisdom (Mat 6:20, Mat 6:25, Mat 6:31-34). Next: Ecclesiastes Chapter 4”

“"Thus I then saw that there is nothing better than that a man should rejoice in his works, for that is his portion; for who can bring him to this, that he gains an insight into that which shall be after him?" Hengstenberg, who has decided against the interrog. signification of the twice-repeated ה in Ecc 3:21, now also explains אהריו ... בּמה, not: What shall become of him after it (his death)? but: What further shall be done after the state in which he now finds himself? Zckler, although rightly understanding both ה as well as אחריו (after him = when he will be separated, or separates from this life, Ecc 7:14; Ecc 9:3; cf. Gen 24:67), yet proceeds on that explanation of Hengstenberg's, and gives it the rendering: how things shall be on the earth after his departure. But (1) for this thought, as Ecc 6:12 shows, the author had a more suitable form of expression; (2) this thought, after the author has, Ecc 3:21, explained it as uncertain whether the spirit of a man in the act of death takes a different path from that of a beast, is altogether aside from the subject, and it is only an apologetic tendency not yet fully vanquished which here constrains him. The chain of thought is however this: How it will be with the spirit of a man when he dies, who knows? What will be after death is thus withdrawn from human knowledge. Thus it is best to enjoy the present, since we connect together (Ecc 2:24) labour and enjoyment mediated thereby. This joy of a man in his work - i.e., as Ecc 5:18 : which flows from his work as a fountain, and accompanies him in it (Ecc 8:15) - is his portion, i.e., the best which he has of life in this world. Instead of בּמה־שּׁ, the punctuation is בּמה, because שׁיהיה אחריו is a kindred idea; vid.' regarding מה under Ecc 2:22. And לראות בּ is sued, because it is not so much to be said of the living, that he cannot foresee how it shall be with him when he dies, as that he can gain no glimpse into that world because it is an object that has for him no fixity.”