Ecclesiastes

Attending to ongoing debates about the "meaning of life" in Ecclesiastes, this article determines how Qoheleth addressed meaningfulness by drawing on a threefold scheme of definitions for life's meaning. These definitions are derived from psychological research and used to argue that all three conceptions appear within the book of Ecclesiastes. Qoheleth was primarily concerned with life's "coherence," which depends on predictable and reliable patterns in life that render it sensible, yet he also addressed life's "purpose" and "significance." While primarily determining how these three forms of meaning, along with their attendant ideas, are handled within Ecclesiastes itself, this article also demonstrates how resources from psychological research help to resolve debates among biblical interpreters, who agree far more than it at first appears once clearer definitions of "meaning" are employed.

The ultimate purpose of this article is to show the value of Ecclesiastes by using the book's message to restate the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism in Christian terminology. To some degree, Christians relatively agree with Buddhists on the first and second Truths, that all of existence is suffering and that this suffering is caused by an unhealthy attachment to desire of the worldly. However, while Buddhists, in their primarily atheistic worldview, teach that man must eliminate desire, Christians, in their theistic worldview, can restate the Four Noble Truths to teach that man must simply reorient his desire toward someone non-worldly. The article begins with an overview of both the diagnosis-cure model for understanding religions and an overview of the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism. Then, I provide a few of the most pertinent similarities and differences between the two religions. After showing the relevance of Ecclesiastes to Buddhists, I employ the book to present the "Four Noble Truths of Christianity," as a contextualized message for missionaries to present in their attempts to make the gospel known to Buddhists.

Commentators frequently compare Eccl 10:5-7 to examples of the "topsy-turvy" motif in extrabiblical wisdom texts, especially Egyptian exemplars. The topos is found elsewhere, however, and a Neo-Assyrian letter from an unemployed exorcist named Urad-Gula to the Assyrian king provides a close parallel to Qoheleth's sentiments. Beyond matters of specific content, the Neo-Assyrian letter is also nearer Qoheleth's time period than most of the other Egyptian parallels typically adduced. Still further, Urad-Gula's real-life (mis)fortunes suggest that the topsy-turvy motif may (at least in some instances) be much more than only or merely a literary device: it may also describe situations that were actually experienced by sages and other persons like Urad-Gula-people like Qoheleth himself.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether the narrative elements of Abel in Genesis 4 supply the underlying structure of Ecclesiastes.  The idea of substructure does not require that every detail of Ecclesiastes has a direct connection to Abel in Genesis 4.  Rather, Abel’s story may serve as the foundation underneath the surface that gives strength or support to the textual building.  At the same time the prevalence of the word hebel in the book indicates that Abel significantly breaks through the surface, as it were, and into the preacher’s sermon.

The theme of undeserving suffering is apparent in the book of Ecclesiastes. The predicament of the righteous is obvious in the speech: a righteous person dies in his righteousness while a wicked person’s life is prolonged in his wickedness. Certainly, the speech touches on a range of sufferings endured by the righteous. Ultimately, the crux of the problem lies in the “unfair” ends of the righteous.  This article seeks to consider the theme of suffering in the context of the call to fear God in Ecclesiastes.

This paper is a study of the interrelationship between science, philosophy, and the Bible. A relationship between the three is found in that all of them deal with the fundamentals of reality. In particular my interest is in quantum physics, existentialism, and the biblical text of Ecclesiastes and how all three disciplines view reality as absurd. In the first section I will discuss the scientific discoveries of Einstein that shook the philosophical world of the 20th century and compare that to the cosmological context of Ecclesiastes. In the next section I will compare how Jean-Paul Sartre's novel Nausea and Ecclesiastes explain this absurd cosmos and what response they recommend. I will conclude with some final comments about our present day.

Faith of Ecclesiastes is put to a severe trial - as the faith of Abraham, Moses and Job. Koheleth has nothing to support his faith: he has no experience of God's love and God's closeness, he has no evidence for God acting for the benefit of man. Finally, he has no hope of any reward for good, wise and godly life. This is a test of faith - perhaps the most difficult in the history of the characters of the Bible. We all have times when emptiness and meaninglessness seem absolute. Then the voice of Qoheleth speaks our pain and offers us the consolation of companionship, if not of explanation.

The Book of Qohelet presents the most elaborate discussion of the topic of time in the Hebrew Bible. Humans experience time as past, present and future. The more distant a period of time is from the present, the less people know about it. Thus time limits their knowledge and their ability to carry out plans, the more so because fitting occasions come and go in the course of time in a way that is not fully foreseeable. Those who can be happy only if they manage to achieve their goals, like the king in chapters 1-2, are necessarily driven to despair by the experience of time. But if one, like the authorial voice in chapters 3-12, understands time as a creation of a god who sometimes lets people be happy, sometimes punishes them for mistakes, and sometimes reminds them of their limits, one is in with a chahce to find some happiness in life, the more so if people let others take part in their fortune. With regard to its view of time the Book of Qohelet overlaps with a large part of the Hebrew Bible. However, there is a marked difference between Qohelet's insistence on the limits of human knowledge of the future and an optimistic wisdom that claims to know the sure way to success in life, or late prophetic traditions which claim to know in detail what will happen until the end of the world. From today's perspective, Qohelet obviously is proved right against these other streams of biblical thought.

This article is a philosophical re-examination of Ecclesiastes using the work of Martin Heidegger, particularly his early work in Being and Time. Heidegger's focus on death, temporality, and history provides a powerful and compelling framework for understanding these same themes in Ecclesiastes. In elaborating these philosophical motifs and correspondences, this article proposes that ‭לכה‬ should be understood as an analog to Heidegger's concept of Geschichtlichkeit (historicity). If ‭לכה‬ is understood as such, then most of the traditionally puzzling terms in Ecclesiastes (e.g. ‭םלעה‬, ‭למע‬, ‭החמש‬) can be made sense of using the aforementioned philosophical framework. This framework additionally shows that Ecclesiastes (like Being and Time) cannot be understood as a proto-existentialist text.

הבל is a key word in Ecclesiastes. This article seeks to analyse the meaning and function of הבל in relation to worthwhile purpose of life. Considering that substantial research has been done on this theme, the attention will be directed at the meaning, function and implication of הבל in relation to the subject of the meaning of life. It will show a redefined and an alternative position on the meaning and function of הבל in the speech, and its relation with 12:13b-14.

Traditionally, it is believed that human thinking is captured and shaped by the so-called logic, and the relationship between language and meaning/thought is based on the notions of “true” and “false” that Aristotle chose and on which the current binary logic is based. The work outlines the process by which Aristotle arrived at these two notions and shows that he chose them through a process of elimination of options; that explains why logic has no applicability to analyzing language, establishing meaning, and capturing the human thinking. Then the work introduces a complex reasoning square that includes not only the notions of “true” and “false,” but also all other oppositions that Aristotle had discarded and are involved in any human discourse, therefore it establishes the true structure that is involved in any thought process. In order to show that this is not just a theoretical model but the actual structure that is involved in any discourse, the rational or reasoning square is applied to various literary forms such as metaphors, similes, syllogisms, informal arguments, narratives, humor, and so on. The second part of the study analyses the biblical book of Ecclesiastes, a notoriously difficult book to understand, and outlines its thinking and what might be the problems with accepting it. In the last part, the dissertation analyses some scholarly works on Ecclesiastes not only to understand how scholars deal with a text, but also the scholarly arguments that are used to support their claims.

The work has profound implications for all academic disciplines that come under the broad umbrella called “humanities” because it defines for the first time what “meaning” in language is, a notion that has proved so far to be illusive as any scholar knows. Since the work proves that the current binary logic is unable to establish meaning in language, all current research on artificial intelligence based on such logic is doomed to failure and instead it should be based on the theory advanced in this work. Once these rational structures are properly understood, not only the meaning of any discourse can be accurately established and analyzed, but it can also be replicated by machines.

In the recent years, Qoheleth studies have seen a number of scholars argue that the royal ‘persona’ in its autobiographic sections (1:12-2:26) was adopted to illustrate Qoheleth's initial thesis that all of one’s toil is but hebel. Once this goal was achieved, ‘the royal fiction’ was effectively discarded. The passages that seem to critique the inefficiency of the aristocracy - styled as ‘anti-royal passages’ - are drawn to support such line of reasoning (4:1-3, 5:7-8 [Eng. 5:8-9], 10:20). In their estimation, what Qoheleth brings to us then is the striking appraisal of a nameless wisdom teacher on Israelite aristocracy, and wisdom traditions of the Second Temple period. This paper explores whether such seeming disruption of the royal autobiography after chapter 2 is perceivable or warranted. It also sets in context how the ‘anti-royal passages’ fit Qoheleth’s ambitious agenda of observing everything under the sun, and justify that his search by the extent of its very scope had to move beyond the royal precincts into the wider world under the sun.

I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favor to men of skill, but time and chance happeneth to all. (9.11)

The study and evaluation of the worldview & deeds of the divine rulers has always been considered by the followers of religions due to their value position and because of they have been a valuable models for others especially for religious rulers. Imam Ali (AS) and Solomon (AS) in their ascetic rule, due to their heavy social responsibility, have never withdrawn from society and on the one hand, they were involved in the paradox of full-time economic and social conflicts, and on the other hand, their independence from the world.
This paper reports and compares the model of the rule of two ideal rulers in both Islamic and Jewish traditions and part of their worldviews - based on the statements attributed to them in the two books of Nahj al-Balaghah by Imam Ali and the book of Ecclesiastes by Solomon. According to this essay, like in other books of wisdom, Thematic similarities are seen in two books.  In addition to thematic similarities, and the same principles of theology, and eschatology, and practical wisdom, surprisingly, there are many similarities in sentences and phrases.

ABSTRACT

The historical-critical method that characterizes academic biblical studies too often remains separate from approaches that stress the history of interpretation, which are employed more frequently in the area of Second Temple or Dead Sea Scrolls research. Inaugurating the new Eisenbrauns series, Critical Studies in the Hebrew Bible, A More Perfect Torah explores a series of test-cases in which the two methods mutually reinforce one another. The volume brings together two studies that investigate the relationship between the composition history of the biblical text and its reception history at Qumran and in rabbinic literature.

The Temple Scroll is more than the blueprint for a more perfect Temple. It also represents the attempt to create a more perfect Torah. Its techniques for doing so are the focus of part 1, entitled “Revelation Regained: The Hermeneutics of KI and 'IM in the Temple Scroll.” This study illuminates the techniques for marking conditional clauses in ancient Near Eastern literature, biblical law, and the Dead Sea Scrolls. It also draws new attention to the relationship between the Temple Scroll’s use of conditionals and the manuscript’s carefully organized spacing system for marking paragraphs. Syntax serves as a technique, no less than pseudepigraphy, to advance the Temple Scroll’s claim to be a direct divine revelation.

Part 2 is entitled “Reception History as a Window into Composition History: Deuteronomy’s Law of Vows as Reflected in Qoheleth and the Temple Scroll.” The law of vows in Deut 23:22-24 is difficult in both its syntax and its legal content. The difficulty is resolved once it is recognized that the law contains an interpolation that disrupts the original coherence of the law. The reception history of the law of vows in Numbers 20, Qoh 5:4–7, 11QTemple 53:11–14, and Sipre Deuteronomy confirms the hypothesis of an interpolation. Seen in this new light, the history of interpretation offers a window into the composition history of the biblical text.

The volume shows the significance of syntax and historical linguistics for understanding how ancient scribes established claims of religious and textual authority. Appendixes on the use of conditionals in biblical law and the Dead Sea Scrolls provide resources for further research.

KEYWORDS

Pentateuch, Biblical Law, Dead Sea Scrolls, Qumran, Historical Criticism, History of Interpretation, Historical Linguistics, Reception History, Composition History, Redaction, Exegesis, Innerbiblical Exegesis, Rewritten Scripture, Halakic Exegesis, Legal Exegesis, Legal Hermeneutics, Covenant Code, Law of Vows, Syntax, Grammar, Oaths, Vows, Pleonasm, Conditionals, Casuistic Law, Scribal Practice, Textual Authority, Interpolation, Revelation, Voicing, Protasis, Apodosis, Lexik, Bundesbuch, Auslegungsgeschichte, Entstehungsgeschichte des Dtn, Wirkungsgeschichte, Grammatik, Innerbiblische Exegese

REVIEWS

"A More Perfect Torah is an important contribution to the ongoing dialogue about text and composition. The best feature of the work is the author's effort to bring together two often insular disciplines—biblical studies and the history of Jewish interpretation."
—Matthew McAffee, Bulletin for Biblical Research 24.1 (2014)

"L. has provided us with two fine detailed studies that nicely demonstrate the interplay of language and hermeneutics. The brief summary presented here does not do full justice to his arguments, which draw parallels from cuneiform law and rabbinics as well as from the Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls."
—John J. Collins in Theologische Literaturzeitung 139.2 (2014)

"[In this book,] Levinson accomplishes his goal with a clarity and specificity that is–in sum–nearly unassailable. . . . [He] states his case clearly, carefully, and brilliantly. . . . Levinson’s argument is so persuasive and his critical skills so sharpened by use that readers may find themselves bewitched into accepting without argument or question the conclusions he proffers. . . . [As a result,] it is so very tempting to surrender and suggest that Levinson has uttered the final word on the subject. The book is just that good."
—Jim West, "Zwinglius Redivivus" blog (2013)

"This cutting-edge monograph is the first in the new Eisenbrauns series Critical Studies in the Hebrew Bible. It is presented in two parts, the first of which, 'Revelation Regained: The Hermeneutics of ky and 'm in the Temple Scroll', was co-authored with Molly Zahn. By examining the syntax, linguistic forms, and the spacing system employed, the authors explain the replacement of the conditional particle ky ('if') in Deuteronomy with 'm ('if' or 'when') in 11QT as the redactor's desire to resolve the inconsistent arrangement and awkward content of the pre-existing laws. This textual sprucing was further accompanied by re-presenting the speeches of Moses as direct divine revelation, to construct a superior and definitive finished product for the Temple Scroll's audience(s). A separate analysis of the reception of Deuteronomy's law of vows (in Num. 20, Qoh. 5.4-7, 11QT 53.11-14 and Sifre Deut.) is then shown to illuminate the compositional history of the earlier biblical forms. This is a highly persuasive and compelling study, less accessible to non-specialists, but essential reading for understanding the development of authoritative Judaean texts in the Second Temple Period."
—Sandra Jacobs, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 38:5 (2014): 194

“In the final analysis, this short book about biblical literature should challenge scholars of rabbinic Judaism in a number of productive ways. First, the book’s daunting melding of hermeneutics with historical linguistics argues against the separation of labor that currently characterizes a great deal of work on rabbinic Judaism. Second, the book convincingly destabilizes the categories of scripture and rewritten scripture. This is not only a helpful reminder that the history of biblical exegesis begins before scripture was fixed. By showing how the earliest exegetical impulses have impacted biblical texts, Levinson is shaking the canonical foundation on which many histories of biblical exegesis begin. Third, the book demonstrates what can be seen by working both forward and backward through time. A great deal of scholarship on rabbinic Judaism is structured chronologically—from the Torah to the Talmud. There are plenty of good reasons for this, and certainly no justification for wholesale change. Indeed, the first chapter of the present work is perfectly chronological. But the second chapter disturbs this all-to-neat structural device, demonstrating that the shakiness of some foundations can best be seen not just by looking down from above but by climbing down and probing deeply and carefully. Finally, Levinson’s contribution to our understanding of the Second Temple period quest for a more perfect Torah sheds general light on rabbinic literature, especially by implicit contrast. Rabbinic Judaism—with its belief in the dual Torah, and its employment of explicitly exegetical midrashic styles—developed an entirely different approach, whereby revelation could be regained from a Torah that need not, and no longer could, be perfected by rewriting.”
    —Jonathan Klawans, The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 18 (2015): 167–170

“A More Perfect Torah contains two short yet richly rewarding studies which seek to combine what are frequently considered separate disciplinary pursuits within biblical studies, skillfully demonstrating the benefits of a broader and more integrative approach to the field. . . .

“The two studies. . .demonstrate that history critics must at least consider Rewritten Scripture and reception history as avenues of historical-critical inquiry. Moreover, the studies show that the evidence of Rewritten Scripture or reception history will, in certain cases, be determinative or strongly corroborative of historical-critical conclusion. The studies in this volume thus not only issue a challenge to the boundaries between disciplinary specialization within biblical studies, but significantly problematize any distinction between Scripture and Rewritten Scripture or between Bible and reception.”
—Deane Galbraith, University of Otago, Relegere: Studies in Religion and Reception 4:1 (2014): 105–8. Online: http://dx.doi.org/10.11157/rsrr4-1-636

The book of Qohelet was probably written in the Persian era, in the middle of the fifth century B.C. Here speaks a philosopher, a psychologist, someone who makes research in a conspicuously original way about human conditions. The framework of the book takes the form of an autobiographical account, in which the author examines life under the sun with the conceptual tools of oriental wisdom. The result is pessimistic as to the possibilites to earn any stable profit out of human efforts. There is, however, a portion for man, a gift from God, under the sun:  joy in the midst of all efforts. The enigma of the book is the shape of Solomonic authorship. The author is presented as the son of David, king in Jerusalem. How does it come that this guise of royal prerogatives is tracable only in the first chapters of the book? In other chapters the author appears as an original and egocentric teacher of oriental wisdom. It seems that the royal guise is just a philosophical experiment, with literary references to the royal inscriptions in the Ancient Near East.

A number of important books on Ecclesiastes have appeared in recent years, including works by Sneed, Barbour, Weeks, and Robinson. The first two of these began as doctoral dissertations (which usually means a fresh approach). Sneed contributes a thoroughly sociological interpretation of Ecclesiastes, following the theories of Max Weber.  Sneed locates Qoheleth as one of the retainer class. He argues that Qoheleth used pessimism as a coping mechanism and survival strategy within the oppressive socio-historical context of Ptolemaic Judah. Barbour's approach is unique because she sees historical allusions in Ecclesiastes, although not in the obvious way that others have seen the presence of some historical situations. Her major contribution is the interpretation of Ecclesiastes 12:1-7 in terms of a city lament. The thesis of Weeks' book is that Ecclesiastes cannot properly be called skeptical. A more important contribution, however, is in his innovative interpretation of several passages, including the identification of rhetorical questions, which other interpreters had always taken as statements. Robinson has done a great service to Ecclesiastes scholarship in his translation and publication of Salmon ben Yeroham's medieval commentary of Ecclesiastes (written in Arabic, using Hebrew characters). The document was previously translated only into Hebrew (in an unpublished dissertation), and Robinson has also provided critical apparatus for most of the available manuscripts. My presentation will introduce and evaluate the new ideas in these four publications on Ecclesiastes.

Bibliographical data:

Mark R. Sneed, The Politics of Pessimism in Ecclesiastes: A Social-Science Perspective, Ancient Israel and its Literature. Atlanta, Ga.: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012.
Reviewed by Stephen J. Bennett and Charles Awasu in Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 13 (2013). Available online at: http://jhsonline.org/reviews/reviews_new/review692.htm 

Jennie Barbour, The Story of Israel in the Book of Qohelet: Ecclesiastes as Cultural Memory, Oxford Theological Monographs. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.
Reviewed by Stephen J. Bennett in Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 56/3 (2013) 603-605.

Stuart Weeks, Ecclesiastes and Scepticism. LHBOTS 541. New York: T & T Clark International, 2012.
Reviewed by Stephen J. Bennett in Vetus Testamentum 63/3 (2013) 510-512. Available online for subscribers at: http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/10.1163/15685330-12340011

James T. Robinson, Asceticism, Eschatology, Opposition to Philosophy: The Arabic Translation and Commentary of Salmon ben Yeroham on Qohelet (Ecclesiastes).Études sur le Judaïsme Médiéval, Tome XLV. Karaite Texts and Studies, Volume 5. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2012.
Reviewed by Stephen J. Bennett in Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 57/1 March, 2014 (anticipated).

Io, l'Ecclesiaste, sono stato re d'Israele a Gerusalemme, e ho applicato il cuore a cercare e a investigare con saggezza tutto ciò che si fa sotto il cielo: occupazione penosa, che Dio ha data ai figli degli uomini perché vi si affatichino. Io ho visto tutto ciò che si fa sotto il sole: ed ecco tutto è vanità, è un correre dietro al vento. Ecclesiaste 1:12-14

Many contradictory proposals have been made with regard to the literary structure of Micah 4-5. This study shows that three coherent units (4:1-7; 4:8-14; 5:1-14) can be distinguished and that they form a triptych, each panel of which uses the same major themes.

‘FOR EVERYTHING ITS SEASON’ IN TRANSLATION INTO THE KIRIWINA LANGUAGE

Citation (formatted-apa)
Szczerbowski, T. (2003). "Wszystko ma swój czas" w przekładzie na język Kiriwiny. W: I. Bobrowski (red.), Anabasis. Prace ofiarowane Profesor Krystynie Pisarkowej (s. 309–316). Kraków: Wydawnictwo LEXIS.