Ecclesiastes 2:18-19

A Focused Exploratory Exegesis

Erica VanSteenhuyseTHST 603: Old Testament TheologyDr. Daniel Smith-Christopher

VanSteenhuyse

17 February 2014Loyola Marymount University

The Book of Ecclesiastes in the Old Testament provides

an interesting platform for biblical exegesis because of its

characteristic surface skepticism to life’s toils, its

outlook of enjoying the present, and even its empirical

emphasis. This paper will utilize a selected passage from

the book and conduct an exegesis in regards to the passage’s

word usage, literary context, date of passage, and

comparative commentary analysis to investigate the Book of

Ecclesiastes, specifically Ecclesiastes 2:18-19, in an

attempt to better understand it’s relevance within the

wisdom literature of the Old Testament.

The following verses make-up the selected verses from

the Book of Ecclesiastes that will be focused on in this

exegesis:

18.  I hated all my toil in which I had toiled under the sun, seeing that I must leave it to those who come after me

2

VanSteenhuyse19. —and who knows whether they will be wise or foolish?

Yet they will be master of all for which I toiled and used my wisdom under the sun. This also is vanity.

In the first of the selected verses, Qohelet refers to

the ‘toil’ that

humans must endure. This is a term that is used in various

different canonical books, as is

seen in these examples:

1. …You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life; (Genesis 3:17)

2. We cried to the Lord, the God of our ancestors; the Lord heard our voice and saw our affliction, our toil, and our oppression. (Deuteronomy 26:7)

3. Like wild asses in the desert they go out to their toil, scavenging in the wasteland food for their young.(Job 24:5)

4. In all toil there is profit, but mere talk leads only to poverty. (Proverbs 14:23)

5. Then I considered all that my hands had done and the toil I had spent in doing it, and again, all was vanityand a chasing after wind, and there was nothing to be gained under the sun. (Ecclesiastes 2:11)

6. The case of solitary individuals, without sons or brothers; yet there is no end to all their toil, and their eyes are never satisfied with riches. "For whom am I toiling," they ask, "and depriving myself of pleasure?" This also is vanity and an unhappy business.(Ecclesiastes 4:8)

3

VanSteenhuyse

7. So I commend enjoyment, for there is nothing better forpeople under the sun than to eat, and drink, and enjoy themselves, for this will go with them in their toil through the days of life that God gives them under the sun. (Ecclesiastes 8:15)

8. Why did I come forth from the womb to see toil and sorrow, and spend my days in shame? (Jeremiah 20:18)

Though the word ‘toil’ appears throughout the Old

Testament, it seems it is

primarily used within the wisdom literature texts of Job,

Psalms, and Proverbs, but is primarily seen in Ecclesiastes,

with twenty-two of the forty-two verses containing ‘toil’

residing in this book. Using the various passages as

support, the term ‘toil’ seems to have two potential

meanings: 1.The physical work of humans that we must endure

to maintain a comfortable life (Gen 3:17, Deut 26:7, Prov

14:23, Eccl 8:15, Jer 20:18), and 2. The hardships, trials,

and tribulations that humans are faced with on a daily basis

(Job 24:5, Eccl 2:11, Eccl 4:8). Even though these two

definitional meanings can, and do, blend together

contextually, it is important to note that a difference in

definition exists. Interestingly enough, the past tense

4

VanSteenhuyseversion of toil, ‘toiled’, is found only three times in the

Old Testament, in Ecclesiastes 2:18, 2:19, and 2:21.

Schoors provides an excellent breakdown of how this

term ‘toil’ can be defined theologically:

We have to go back to 2:1-2 for the reason for this evaluation. Inasmuch as pleasure, the best possible product of toil, in “inane, and “does nothing”, toil isnot worth the strain. “Futile” could serve as a translation-equivalent here, but so can “absurd”, because the significance as well as the value of the effort resides in its productivity, and this is not commensurate with the unpleasantness of toil. In fact, “absurd” is preferable, because toil is not truly futile, since it does produce wealth, the means of pleasure, though this product is not adequate to save the act from absurdity. (It may be absurd to sweat and strain for three dollars an hour when someone else receives much more for less work done with less skill, but the underpaid labor is not truly futile.) (Schoors 195).

This definitional understanding of what an accurate

contextual synonym for ‘toil’ could be can potentially help

readers better understand not only the selected passage, but

also the book itself, due to this extended, theological

definition of the word, as opposed to a more general,

generic definition.

5

VanSteenhuyse

Another important word within our selected passage is

vanity. Vanity is found

precisely thirty times within the NRSV canonical Old

Testament, and all but three of

those uses are found within the Book of Ecclesiastes:

1. Remember how short my time is— for what vanity you havecreated all mortals! (Psalm 89:47)

2. But I said, "I have labored in vain, I have spent my strength for nothing and vanity; yet surely my cause iswith the Lord, and my reward with my God." (Isaiah 49:4)

3. Ephraim is oppressed, crushed in judgment, because he was determined to go after vanity. (Hosea 5:11)

4. For to the one who pleases him God gives wisdom and knowledge and joy; but to the sinner he gives the work of gathering and heaping, only to give to one who pleases God. This also is vanity and a chasing after wind. (Ecclesiastes 2:26)

5. The case of solitary individuals, without sons or brothers; yet there is no end to all their toil, and their eyes are never satisfied with riches. "For whom am I toiling," they ask, "and depriving myself of pleasure?" This also is vanity and an unhappy business.(Ecclesiastes 4:8)

6. Those to whom God gives wealth, possessions, and honor,so that they lack nothing of all that they desire, yet God does not enable them to enjoy these things, but a stranger enjoys them. This is vanity; it is a grievous ill. (Ecclesiastes 6:2)

6

VanSteenhuyse

7. There is a vanity that takes place on earth, that thereare righteous people who are treated according to the conduct of the wicked, and there are wicked people who are treated according to the conduct of the righteous. I said that this also is vanity. (Ecclesiastes 8:14)

8. Is vanity, since the same fate comes to all, to the righteous and the wicked, to the good and the evil, to the clean and the unclean, to those who sacrifice and those who do not sacrifice. As are the good, so are thesinners; those who swear are like those who shun an oath. (Ecclesiastes 9:2)

Because ‘vanity’ is nearly exclusively found within the

Book of Ecclesiastes, it is clear that the word ‘vanity’ is

acting out a unique role here. ‘Vanity” is found thirty

times in the Old Testament, and twenty-seven of those

appearances are found within the Book of Ecclesiastes. The

three examples outside of the Book of Ecclesiastes are

listed first in the examples found above, while the

subsequent five examples illustrate how the word is used in

the Book of Ecclesiastes. While it is common in modernity to

associate the word ‘vanity’ with vain or conceited persons,

this is not entirely the case when applied biblically and

theologically. Though the Bible usage of the word does

include a taste of this contemporary nuance, biblically

7

VanSteenhuysespeaking, vanity is better understood as the “world having

no ultimate meaning” (Elwell 626). Etymologically speaking,

these attributed meanings of emptiness and meaninglessness

are already present in the Latin vanitas, which is the

derivative word for our English ‘vanity’. Hebel, the Hebrew

term for vanity, suggests a reference to a kind of wind or

vapor, alluding that “Man’s life is like a breath” (Elwell,

627). This contextual definition points directly to another

phrase that is unique to Ecclesiastes, and that is “chasing

after wind” (Eccl 1:14, 1:17, 2:11, 2:17, 2:26, 4:4, 4:6,

4:16, 6:9). Although this phrase will not be specifically

analyzed here, it is a vitally important facet of the Book

of Ecclesiastes. This phrase is found exclusively within

Ecclesiastes and is used to illustrate man’s futile attempts

at attaining happiness through toil during our mortal life;

despite the amount of effort put forth, we will never

successfully “catch the wind”. This linguistic connection

further supports this Biblical definition. With this

theological demarcation in place contextually, we are able

to appreciate the ancient Hebrew ideology that is palpable

8

VanSteenhuysein the Book of Ecclesiastes and is illustrated further with

the use of the word ‘vanity’: that life, apart from God, has

no ultimate significance, and is therefore valueless.

Another word that is used extensively throughout the

canonical book of the selected passage worth looking deeper

into is actually a phrase, ‘under the sun’. The examples

below show just how this word set is used:

1. Moreover I saw under the sun that in the place of justice, wickedness was there, and in the place of righteousness, wickedness was there as well. (Ecclesiastes 3:16)

2. Again I saw all the oppressions that are practiced under the sun. Look, the tears of the oppressed—with noone to comfort them! On the side of their oppressors there was power—with no one to comfort them. (Ecclesiastes 4:1)

3. This is what I have seen to be good: it is fitting to eat and drink and find enjoyment in all the toil with which one toils under the sun the few days of the life God gives us; for this is our lot. (Ecclesiastes 5:18)

4. So I commend enjoyment, for there is nothing better forpeople under the sun than to eat, and drink, and enjoy themselves, for this will go with them in their toil through the days of life that God gives them under the sun. (Ecclesiastes 8:15)

5. Then I saw all the work of God, that no one can find out what is happening under the sun. However much they may toil in seeking, they will not find it out; even

9

VanSteenhuyse

though those who are wise claim to know, they cannot find it out. (Ecclesiastes 8:17)

6. This is an evil in all that happens under the sun, thatthe same fate comes to everyone. Moreover, the hearts of all are full of evil; madness is in their hearts while they live, and after that they go to the dead. (Ecclesiastes 9:3)

7. Enjoy life with the wife whom you love, all the days ofyour vain life that are given you under the sun, because that is your portion in life and in your toil at which you toil under the sun. (Ecclesiastes 9:9)

8. Again I saw that under the sun the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor bread to the wise, nor riches to the intelligent, nor favor to the skillful; but time and chance happen to them all. (Ecclesiastes 9:11)

In a similar scenario as the previous term ‘vanity’,

the phrase ‘under the sun’ is entirely unique to the Book of

Ecclesiastes. The phrase is used twenty-seven times, only

within the Book of Ecclesiastes; and every single time the

phrase is used, it is used in the same contextual manner. In

every one of these appearances, the phrase ‘under the sun’

seems to most accurately refer to all of God’s earthly

creations that exist in the mortal world, including the

planet itself, all humans, animals, creeping things, etc.

Ultimately, it seems that this earthly life that we all are

10

VanSteenhuyseforced to live ‘under the sun’ is what causes Qohelet such

frustration and distress: everything ‘under the sun’ is

meaningless, in the sense that there is ultimately no reward

during material life. Although this understanding of life

could make for an ideal narrative segue into the belief of a

blissful afterlife in the eternal presence of the divine, it

is not unanimously understood that Qohelet has an optimistic

outlook on life after death, as Ecclesiastes 3:20 so

mercilessly depicts, “the dead know nothing; they have no

further reward, and even the memory of them is forgotten…all

go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all

return” (Eccl 3:20). This verse, clearly, does not promise

an eternal afterlife in the presence of the divine. On the

contrary, the text portrays an empty afterlife where we

simply return to the earth that we came from. To mitigate

this hard-hitting message, some interpreters focus on the

six passages that can be interpreted as offering a more

positive view toward life and the afterlife (Eccl 2:24-26;

3:12-14; 3:22; 5:17-19; 8:15, 9:7-10). Qohelet, however,

only suggests limited kinds of joy in these passages, such

11

VanSteenhuyseas eating, drinking, and work (Elwell, 619), leaving the

optimistic portrayal of these passages as inadequate when

standing on their own. Thus, it seems that a kind of

compromise between the two extremes of optimism and

pessimism must be met, and that is skepticism. Qohelet is

obviously skeptical of the meaning and purpose of life, but

ultimately concludes that our fundamental task during our

mortal life on earth ‘under the sun’ besides loving and

embracing God is to simply seize the day, carpe diem.

As Crenshaw points out, the ‘catchword/phrase’, “and I

hated”, is an important phrase because it functions as a

transition to the subject of a successor, potentially

Rehoboam, mentioned in 2:12, and it is also reaffirming the

argument made in 2:12; this argument is regarding the

involuntary separation of a person’s “toil and fruits” due

to death, and the discomfort of knowing that your labors and

treasures will be left to ‘fools’ (Crenshaw 88-89). Qohelet

finds the process of death unjust largely because his

projects and fortunes were earned by him alone, yet will be

given to someone else to control after his passing. This has

12

VanSteenhuysebeen understood by some as being a skeptic worldview, and

some of the language he uses supports this idea, such as in

the rhetorical question phrase ‘who knows’, which occurs ten

times in the Hebrew Bible (II Sam 12:22; Joel 2:14; Jonah

3:9; Ps. 90:11, Esth. 4:14; Prov. 24:22, Eccl. 2:19, 3:21,

6:12, 8:1) (Crenshaw 87). Each time this phrase is used it

contextually expresses utter skepticism.

Schoors also begins his analysis of this passage by

focusing on the catchword/phrase ‘I hated’, as it ties in

directly to Rehoboam by referring to 1 Kings and using it to

fill in the missing pieces of Ecclesiastes 2:18-19, “And I

hated all my toil in which I toiled under the sun in this

world. For I must leave it to Rehoboam my son, who comes after

me. And Jeroboam his servant will come and take away out of his hands ten

tribes, and will posses half of the kingdom” (Schoors 191). By

juxtaposing these two verses together, Schoors argues the

direct correlations to Rehoboam are nearly obvious. Schoors

also uses Sir. 47:23 as support for the Rehoboam connection

for those who identify Qohelet with Solomon. Similarly in

agreement with Crenshaw, Schoors makes a point to state that

13

VanSteenhuysethe phrase ‘who knows’ is a rhetorical question that is used

to express skepticism elsewhere in Ecclesiastes (Eccl. 3:21,

6:12, 8:1) (Schoors 193). However, it should be noted, that

Ecclesiastes 1:16, poses some problems with this association

with Solomon: “I said to myself, “I have acquired great

wisdom, surpassing all who were over Jerusalem before me;

and my mind has had great experience of wisdom and

knowledge” (Eccl. 1:16).

Brown accepts a similar understanding as Crenshaw, but

emphasizes that Qohelet’s largest desire, aside from

unattainable immortality, is to be remembered; yet he cannot

ever be in full control of his legacy. Brown points out,

however, that Qohelet is not alone in regards to having a

kind of consuming concern with legacy. Preserving a legacy

for posterity was of utmost concern to most ancient despots;

so much so that typical elements of a royal memorial

consisted of giving codified witness to the mighty works of

the king, as well as issuing a final warning address against

effacing the kings testimonial inscription, using threats of

death and disease as a deterrent (Brown 36). Considering

14

VanSteenhuyseQohelet introduces himself as being a king or of royalty,

this understanding correlates with what Qohelet’s outlook

presumably could have been. This outlook of having grave,

intertwining concern over both his reputation and his

possessions reinforces the contextual accuracy, seeing as,

for Israel, people’s property and land were inextricable

tied to ones familial identity.

Eaton explains that Qohelet’s hatred of life is

followed by a hatred of toil. As was found in earlier word

study, toil can either refer to the whole struggle with the

problem of life (Gen 3:17, Deut 26:7, Prov 14:23, Eccl 8:15,

Jer 20:18), or sometimes more specifically to one’s daily,

routine responsibilities (Job 24:5, Eccl 2:11, Eccl 4:8).

Either way, Qohelet is expressing the pointlessness of

either kind of toil because it all must be left behind and

left to a predecessor whom is not guaranteed to ‘carry on

the good work’. Though Qohelet is adamant about death

separating the living from life, he does not confirm nor

deny a kind of afterlife at this point. Eaton also contrasts

Crenshaw by stating that any direct reference to Rehoboam

15

VanSteenhuyse(1Ki. 11:42; 12:26-27) is doubtful, yet the point is

illustrated.

Enns points out an interesting paradox in Qohelet’s

thinking that was not mentioned by the other examined

commentaries. In 2:19, Qohelet is frustrated by the fact

that he cannot know what kind of person will inherit the

things he has worked so hard for and been so wise for in

order to attain. To Enns, this logic is absurd because it is

paradoxical. This is because should the man who inherits his

goods be a fool, he would benefit from that for which he has

not labored, bringing rise to a potential situation that

dethrones the notion that wisdom brings blessing but

foolishness brings negative consequences (e.g. Psalm 1)

(Enns 48). Despite this philosophic enigma, Enns points out

that it is also important to note that Qohelet’s concern was

not so much with the 50/50 possibility of a fool or a wise

man inheriting the fruits of his labor, instead it was the

unpredictability of it all – it should not be left to chance

like this. In other words, the strict deed-consequence

relationship that is so often touted in Proverbs and in the

16

VanSteenhuyselaw (Prov 4:23-27; 9:8; 12:13-14; 17:14; 20:19-20; 24:17-18;

28:10-11) comes to naught by simple virtue of the fact of

death: leaving ones goods to ones descendant is not the

solution to the problem of death but the very thing that

makes death’s sting so harsh (Enns 49).

Longman understands the reference in 18b where Qohelet

complains about leaving the fruit of his toils to ‘those who

come after me,’ as not necessarily having reference to

Rehoboam or even to Solomon, such as is thought within the

early Jewish interpretation of the verse, but instead, to all

people. He takes this approach due to the fact that, when

translated, the verse omits a definite article; thus, the

verse could potentially mean something like “to man”, thus

possibly referring to leaving all of his fruits to ‘all

people’ (Longman 102). This frustration follows us into v19,

where Qohelet utters his characteristic expression ‘who

knows’. Though it occurs in different contexts throughout

the Old Testament (2 Sam. 12:12; Joel 2:14; Jonah 3:9; Ps.

90:11; Esth. 4:14; Prov. 24:33), Longman agrees with

Crenshaw that, within the Book of Ecclesiastes, this phrase

17

VanSteenhuyseis used with the single intention of expressing skepticism

(Longman 103). This blatant skepticism has led Longman to

uniquely mention the meaninglessness of life that Qohelet is

so trying to illustrate; not only are our toils and our

wisdom meaningless, but “the whole mess [of life] is

meaningless (Longman 103).

Provan continues this topic of meaningless by

attributing the characteristic of lack of fulfillment to

life in general. He goes on to explain that the accumulation

of wealth in the pursuit of joy has little “gain” at the end

of each pursuit. And, in the end, what does all our gain add

up to?: “A chasing after wind” with accompanying stress,

anxiety and sleepless nights. (This overarching struggle

claims a pertinent place within the lives of those living in

modern, urban areas, and would even be a realistic

“confession of a work-a-holic”, so Provan, 76). Thus this

endless pursuit of gain, to Provan, seems to be an ancient

phenomenon as well as a universal mystery of irrationality

within all humans, which has its roots within sin. Thus,

despite the inherent skepticism, Ecclesiastes advocates an

18

VanSteenhuysealternative lifestyle and outlook that is more optimistic

and encouraging in nature. Provan defines the biblical view

of life as that of being “designed to be lived in humility

and obedience before God, accepting the limitations that are

placed on us as mortal beings and finding joy and

satisfaction in the ordinary things of life” (Provan 84).

Thus, because of these unavoidable and overarching

limitations, Qohelet suggests a simpler understanding of

life in 2:24, “There is nothing better for a man than that

he should eat and drink and make his soul enjoy good in his

labor. This also I saw, that is from the hand of God.” Verse

24b seems to contrast the meaningless nature of life that

seems to be upon the surface of Ecclesiastes; for those who

have found joy in things such as toil will know greater joy;

and those who have lived their lives in the knowledge that

death is the ultimate statement of human non-control will

rise to new life beyond death (Provan 85). Thus, potentially

the meaning of life is simply to “live the good life” and to

know that “but the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace,

19

VanSteenhuysepatience, kindness, good-ness, faithfulness, gentleness and

self-control.” (Gal. 5:22-23).

Provan brings to light another interesting concept

represented within Ecclesiastes, and that is the notion of

empiricism. Ecclesiastes is constantly recommending that its

hearers learn from the observation of creation. Qohelet is

resolutely empirical to his approach to life: we should all

base our lives on the evidence that we have, meaning that we

should make the most out of our here and now, rather than

live in the uncertain hope of the hereafter (Collins 523).

Ecclesiastes is a piece of wisdom literature that offers an

alternative biblical spirituality: a different path to the

spirituality of the Bible (Smith-Christopher). This

alternative path is generally appealing to that of the

scientist and the rationalist. Thus, though science and

faith are seemingly contradictory in the non-scholastic

realm, Ecclesiastes is a friendly reminder that this is a

false assumption. “For the great multitude of facts we may

discover about the world require some greater Story about

the nature of things, containing some central and undisputed

20

VanSteenhuyselarger Facts, in the context of which their meaning and

significance may be comprehended” (Provan 79); all of the

scientific discoveries made can only be fully understood

through the lens of something divinely bigger than what we

can empirically comprehend.

Shapiro attempts to bring this analysis full circle, by

pointing out a parallel between Qohelet’s outlook, and one

of the Hindu canonical books, the Bhagavad Gita,

particularly 2:48, “ Perform all your actions with mind

concentrated on the Divine, renouncing attachments and

looking upon success and failure with an equal eye.

Spirituality implies equanimity” (Shapiro 20). This Ancient

Indic philosophy mirrors that of Qohelet, except it takes

the philosophy a step further by understanding and accepting

that despite the supposed redundancy of the toils of life,

spirituality requires composure and self-control over our

earthly frustrations.

As far as dating the passage is concerned, despite the

scattered acceptance of the reference to Solomon and/or

Rehoboam, the language of the books shows that it cannot

21

VanSteenhuysehave been written in the age of Solomon. The language

presented in Ecclesiastes is similar to the Late Biblical

Hebrew that was heavily influenced by Aramaic. Additionally,

two Persian words are used in this book, pardes (garden) and

pitgam (response, sentence) that reinforce this argument

(Collins 518). The absence of Greek words is also a positive

reinforcement of dating because Greek words are rarely found

in admittedly later writings such as Daniel, Ben Sira and

the Dead Sea Scrolls (Collins 519). Some scholars have

suggested the influence of Greek Philosophy, specifically

Epicureanism; however, the similarities are merely

superficial, never giving the argument much weight. Verse

3:21 provides one possible clue into the date of this book

due to authors testament about life after death: “Who knows

whether the human spirit goes upward and the spirit of

animals goes downward to the earth?” In Judaism, the view

that the human spirit goes upward after death is not

attested before the Hellenistic period when we see reference

to it in the apocalypses of Enoch and Daniel (Collins 519).

Thus, this understanding would not have developed prior to

22

VanSteenhuysethe late third century B.C.E. With this all in mind, there

is no singular agreed upon age of the book, but the dates

proposed for the books authorship range from the Persian

period (fifth-fourth century B.C.E.) to the Hellenistic

period (third or early second century B.C.E.). However, as

is with the rest of the Wisdom Books (Proverbs, Job, and

Ecclesiastes) precise dating is not the main concern:

Qohelet is primarily concerned with aspects of life and

death that are pertinent to all times and places, even our modern

day.

Several scholarly attempts at identifying a literary

structure of the Book of Ecclesiastes have proven

unsuccessful. This book does not exhibit any clear

progression of thought, a potential parallel between

Qohelet’s attitude toward progression being pointless;

instead, it returns numerous times to the basic themes of

vanity and toil presented in the books opening chapters.

What we do know, is that there is a clear editorial frame,

consisting of a superscription in 1:1 and two epilogues, in

12:9-11 and 12-14, and that the book is ‘book-ended’ with

23

VanSteenhuysepoems (1:2-11 and 11:7-12:7) (Collins 519). We are also able

to confidently distinguish two halves of the book: the first

half is punctuated by the refrain: “All this is vanity and

chasing after wind,” which marks off sections 2:1-11; 2:12-

17; 2:18-26; 3:1-4:6; and 4:7-6:19 (Collins 519). Second

half of the book is demarcated by the phrases “not find out”

and “who can find out” and “cannot know”. Unfortunately, as

far as literary structure is concerned, this is the most

depth that has been academically accepted; literary context,

however, is a different beast entirely.

Contextually speaking, several analogies from Egyptian

wisdom literature have been found both for Qohelet’s

simultaneous pessimism and advice of enjoyment. The two most

important Egyptian tales in question are “The Dispute of a

Man with His Ba” and the “Songs of the Harpers”. In the

“Dispute” story, a man contemplates suicide due to his

disillusionment with life; however, his ba, or soul,

convinces him that life is still preferable to death

(although Qohelet describes those who ‘had not been born

yet’ as more fortunate than those who had ‘lived and already

24

VanSteenhuysedied in verse 4:9-12), while in the “Harper’s Songs” there

are tomb inscriptions that reflect on death and call for the

enjoyment of life (Collins 519). Qohelet’s narrative mirrors

both of these ancient Egyptian wisdom stories (as well as

the Epic of Gilgamesh, in which the hero fails in his quest

for everlasting life and is advised to enjoy the life that

is given to him) (Collins 519-520).

When the selected passage is looked at individually,

it appears particularly pessimistic, sad, and skeptical.

However, when placed in context with the rest of the book,

there is a virtually Zen nature to the expressed ideology:

Though life may seem empty with fruitless toil, it is

actually full with the Spirit, though life may seem

irrelevant due to our lack of control, there is nothing more

relevant because it is the only thing that cannot be taken

away from us; though life may seem worthless because we all

reach and share the same demise, life and our creations are

our greatest treasures. The Book of Ecclesiastes is here to

remind us of this inherent value that our lives have and of

25

VanSteenhuysethe uniqueness of ourselves, even when we are feeling the

most worthless.

This is wisdom literature meant to teach people about

their surroundings, their life, their toils, and their

motives. It achieves this without having listing laws or

responsibilities, but instead by simply addressing empirical

matters about the world around us that everyone can relate

to on some degree or level. The surface message may seem

pessimistic, and it undoubtedly is; however, there is a

definite underlying optimism. Qohelet, though frustrated and

upset by the toils of life and the uncontrollability of

death, sees a necessity to do something that many humans

tend to take for granted, and that is to simply enjoy.

26

VanSteenhuyse

Bibliography

Brown, William. Interpretation Commentary: Ecclesiastes.

Louisville, Kentucky: John Knox Press, 200.

Collins, John. Introduction to the Hebrew Bible. Minneapolis,

Minnesota: Fortress Press, 2004.

27

VanSteenhuyse

Crenshaw, James. The Old Testament Library: Ecclesiastes.

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Westminster Press, 1987.

Eaton, Michael A. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries:

Ecclesiastes, Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 1983.

Elwell, Walter. Baker’s Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology.

Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 1996.

Enns, Peter. The Two Horizons Old Testament Commentary:

Ecclesiastes, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans

Publishing Co., 2011.

Longman, Tremper. The New International Commentary on the Old

Testament: Ecclesiastes, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans

Publishing Co., 1998.

Provan, Iain. The NIV Application Commentary: Ecclesiastes and

Song of Songs, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2001.

Schoors, Antoon. Historical Commentary on the Old Testament:

Ecclesiastes, Leuven, Belgium: Peeters Publishers, 2013.

Shapiro, Rami. Ecclesiastes. Woodstock, Vermont: SkyLight

Paths Publishing, 2010.

28

VanSteenhuyse

Weeks, Stuart. The Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies:

Ecclesiastes, New York, New York: T&T Clark International,

2012.

29