King Solomon, often seen as the book’s author, is not so, but was the book’s inspiration.
Ecclesiastes. (photo credit: Courtesy)
Ecclesiastes (in Hebrew, Kohelet, the speaker of most of the book) is a study in contrasts. So controversial that the ancient rabbis considered withdrawing it from circulation, yet it has continued to engage readers for two millennia, some phrases having become a universal cultural inheritance: “Vanity of vanities, all is vanity”; “to everything there is a season and a time to every purpose under heaven”; “a three-ply cord is not quickly broken”; “there is nothing new under the sun”; “eat, drink and be merry”; “cast your bread upon the waters”; “of making books there is no end”; et al.
King Solomon, often seen as the book’s author, is not so, but was the book’s inspiration. The book’s language dates it toward 300-200 BCE. Indeed, it fits well into the world literature of its time, echoing questions that bothered early Greek philosophers. Jewish response, of course, differed. The nexus of monotheism as a given, and reliance on individual search and judgment, is basic to the book’s eternal appeal.
Ecclesiastes is not a philosophy, but the tale of one man’s search for verifiable truth in a world filled with doubt and contradiction. Kohelet is pictured in three stages of the search: (a) an imaginative account of personal experiments, as a king who has “everything,” seeking satisfaction and reward; (b) observations of others in seven cycles, each beginning with the term “see” and ending with recommended enjoyment; and (c) retrospective thoughts, approaching death.
Along the way, he dismisses the worth of many societal emphases: wisdom, wealth, hard work and reputation. Justice and wisdom do not seem to be rewarded; all planning leads to naught; and political power seems to have the final say. Nothing lasts and nothing is substantial (“all is vapor” or “vanity”). Is it any wonder that some sought to keep it out of the Bible?
This is a piece of fiction. Any Hebrew reader would know that there had never been a king named “Kohelet.” (The name structure reflects Second Temple times, and seems to imply either “teacher” or “preacher.”) If seen as a philosophy, the text is filled with contradictions. Once the book is seen as a story, however, the contradictions reveal a pattern of growth. The book presents not a system of thought but a challenged, intense individual. This book was designed not to answer questions but to confront the reader with questions.
Change is the key to Ecclesiastes. Note, for example, the following developments. Kohelet constantly returns to seeking enjoyment as the only “sure option,” but even here he evolves from dismissing it, to advising one to appreciate it when it occurs, to recommending seeking it. His early reliance on his own ability to understand gives way to the admission that no one understands. He first prefers death to life, but later totally reverses that. An extremely negative view of women is replaced by advice to seek out and marry a woman you love. Most remarkably, his early dismissal of eternity of the spirit evolves to the spirit returning to God upon death.
REINFORCING THIS climate of change are parallel literary patterns. “Anguish” and “what advantage,” dominate in the beginning, but then disappear. The early concentration on himself (“I”) also passes out of sight in the end. Simultaneously, other phenomena take precedence: the frequency of advice, the use of metaphor (as Kohelet grows from observer to teacher), and the concentration on death.
Analyses of these changes may differ. However, one possible summary is that age and death are decisive. Kohelet toward the end grows more trustful of received traditions, open to compromise, and suspicious of his early observations. He becomes more teacher than observer; personal urgency replaces philosophical musing.
However, the end does not obviate the beginning. The opposite is true. Kohelet’s earlier searing descriptions stay with the reader: the lack of justice, of certainty, of clarity; the uselessness of wealth and wisdom; the arbitrariness of power.
Because all observations derive from a fictional individual, readers will weigh them, despite Kohelet’s honesty and candor. Judgment will also be applied to the tale as a whole. Any reader will ask whether Kohelet, in light of approaching death, found wisdom, or weakly retreated from painful questions.
While Ecclesiastes seems to end, the bottom line is anything but clear instruction. Among the hints are the character’s late tendency to compromise (do a little of this and a little of that), and the presence of an added character (a narrator) who both admires Kohelet but warns the reader against carrying the issues forward in a personal way.
Nevertheless, it is Ecclesiastes’s prodigious achievement that, despite both Kohelet and the narrator ostensibly suggesting no further thought, the unknown author of the book achieves exactly the opposite. The issues continue to occupy the reader: man’s limitations of knowledge of this world; the very record of such honest observation, questioning and struggling; the apparent absence of factors that might have influenced him (children? A passionate love?) and experiments he did not pursue (tzedaka, charity?). The book is haunting, continually inviting comparisons to other literature, and challenging readers to confront Kohelet (and the readers themselves!) with such terms as “optimism,” “pessimism,” “absurdity,” “religiosity,” et al.
Kohelet ends not with an exclamation point, but with a question mark. As such, it is among the most enduring pieces of biblical writing.
In Ashkenazi tradition, Ecclesiastes is read on Sukkot, another puzzle. Is the book’s recommended “enjoyment” consistent with the holiday’s emphasis on happiness? Is the reading in fact a counterweight, Kohelet having sought firm, permanent knowledge while Sukkot finds truth precisely in that which is impermanent?
In any case, an annual rereading is certainly in place. “A book is a mirror,” wrote one 18th-century author. This is a mirror worthy of revisiting – at least once a year.
The writer is the author of Kohelet’s Pursuit of Truth: A New Reading of Ecclesiastes, available through Amazon or Gefen Publishing.
Menachem Begin in December 1942 wearing the Polish Army uniform of Gen. Anders’ forces with his wife Aliza and David Yutan; (back row) Moshe Stein and Israel Epstein
(photo credit: JABOTINSKY ARCHIVES)
During the inauguration of a memorial to the victims of the Siege of Leningrad in Jerusalem’s Sacher Park on January 24, 2020, before the climax of Holocaust remembrance events at which Russian President Vladimir Putin was given a central platform, we were stunned to hear a rendition of The Blue Kerchief (Siniy
Giant figures are seen during the 87th carnival parade of Aalst February 15, 2015
The annual carnival in Aalst, Belgium, is expected to take place on Sunday with even more antisemitic elements than in previous years.
Aalst’s organizers have sold hundreds of “rabbi kits” for revelers to dress as hassidic Jews in the carnival’s parade. The kit includes oversized noses, sidelocks (peyot) and black hats. The organizers plan to bring back floats similar to the one displayed in 2019 featuring oversized dolls of Jews, with rats on their shoulders, holding banknotes.
Pope Francis waves as he arrives at the Basilica of Saint Nicholas in the southern Italian coastal city of Bari, Italy February 23, 2020. Photo: REUTERS/Remo Casilli.
Pope Francis on Sunday warned against “inequitable solutions” to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, saying they would only be a prelude to new crises, in an apparent reference to US President Donald Trump’s Middle East peace proposal.
Francis made his comments in the southern Italian port city of Bari, where he traveled to conclude a meeting of bishops from all countries in the Mediterranean basin.
Palestinians walk past a shop selling fruits in Ramallah, Feb. 20, 2020. Photo: Reuters / Mohamad Torokman.
Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA) have reached an agreement to end a five-month long trade dispute, officials said on Thursday.
The dispute, which opened a new front in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, began in September when the PA announced a boycott of Israel calves. The PA exercises limited self-rule in the West Bank under interim peace deals.
Antisemitic caricatures on display at the annual carnival in Aalst, Belgium. Photo: Raphael Ahren via Twitter.
Disturbing images emerged on Sunday of the annual carnival at Aalst, Belgium, showing an astounding number of antisemitic themes, costumes, displays and statements.
Israeli journalist Raphael Ahren documented people dressed as caricatures of Orthodox Jews, a fake “wailing wall” attacking critics of the parade, blatantly antisemitic characters and puppets wearing traditional Jewish clothes and sporting huge noses.
The stench of anti-Semitism always hovers over Switzerland’s Lake Geneva when the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is meeting there. The foul emanations reached a new nadir last week with UNHRC’s publication of a “database” of companies doing business in the disputed territories in Israel.
Following the publication of the list, Bruno Stagno Ugarte, deputy director for advocacy of NGO Human Rights Watch, stated, “The long-awaited release of the U.N. settlement business database should put all companies on notice: To do business with illegal settlements [sic] is to aid in the commission of war crimes.”
One of the many things that annoys me about politicians is how sure they are of themselves. Everything is black and white. Every idea is good or bad. Take globalism, for example. You either love it or hate it. It works or it doesn’t.
Another thing that annoys me is how so much of a politician’s life revolves around power: Do everything you can to get it, and everything you can to keep it.
Why am I ranting? Because, while our politicians have been consumed with power and the media with the fights over power, a threat to our nation has been virtually ignored.
Blue and White Party leaders Benny Gantz and Yair Lapid are establishing their diplomatic credentials in the immediate run-up to Israel’s March 2 election with an insult to a U.S. administration that has arguably provided Israel with more diplomatic gains than any previous administration.
The Times of Israel reported that at a campaign stop in front of English-speaking Israelis, Gantz accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “of neglecting bipartisan ties in favor of exclusive support from U.S. President Donald Trump’s Republican Party,” under the headline “Gantz pledges to mend ties with U.S. Democrats if elected.”
Bipartisanship was in short supply at the State of the Union address earlier this month—with one notable exception.
Nancy Pelosi had been looking dyspeptic, shuffling the papers she would later rip to shreds, when President Donald Trump reminded his audience that “the United States is leading a 59-nation diplomatic coalition against the socialist dictator of Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro.”
Suddenly, the House Speaker applauded. Trump then introduced “the true and legitimate president of Venezuela: Juan Guaidó.”
The law professor Alan Dershowitz has thrown a legal hand-grenade into America’s political civil war by claiming to have evidence that former President Barack Obama “personally asked” the FBI to investigate someone “on behalf” of Obama’s “close ally,” billionaire financier George Soros.
He made his cryptic remark in an interview defending U.S. President Donald Trump against claims he interfered in the prosecution of his former adviser, Roger Stone.