Introduction

The Book of Ecclesiastes, as is evident from its opening, contains the words of the Ecclesiastes, the son of David, king in Jerusalem. Since only one son of David was king, namely Solomon, it is clear that he is the one named Ecclesiastes here. Solomon was distinguished by great wisdom and, as the creator of many instructive proverbs, was a teacher of the people. With such a character he appears in this book. He “was wise and still taught the people knowledge,” remarks the writer of the book in Eccl 12:9. Corresponding to this characteristic, Solomon was given the Hebrew name Koheleth. It derives from the root kahal, which in verb form means: to assemble, to gather (Greek ekkaleo), cf. Lev 8:3; Num 1:18; Deut 4:10 and others; in noun form (like Greek ekklesia) it means assembly in general, religious assembly in particular, for example, Num 10:7; Ps 21:23; Nehem 5:7 and others. From this Hebrew koheleth, like Greek ekklesiastes, means: one who assembles an assembly, one who speaks in an assembly, a church orator, a preacher. A particular occasion for such a designation of Solomon could be given by a most significant fact, described in 1 Sam 8 (cf. 2 Chr 5-6), when Solomon at the dedication of his temple, having assembled (jakhel) the Israelites, pronounced his most remarkable prayer for the sending of God’s mercy to all who would come to the temple, both to the Hebrew people and to foreigners, then blessing the assembly (kahal) turned to it with a speech in which he entreated God that He would direct the heart of the people toward preserving the statutes and observing the commandments. Here, thus, in a visible, tangible form Solomon appeared to be that which he was for his people and in all subsequent times, that is, a koheleth, a preacher. The feminine form of the Hebrew name points either to the implied noun chokma (wisdom), or, more likely, to Solomon’s official mission as a teacher of the people, since names designating an office often took the feminine form among the Hebrews. Probably through this path, the symbolic name of Solomon thus formed – Koheleth – (Ecclesiastes) gave its name to the book itself.

The entire content of the Book of Ecclesiastes serves as a kind of answer to the question: wherein lies happiness on earth, is it possible for a person to attain complete, perfect happiness (Eccl 1:3)? To this question the Ecclesiastes gives a most decisive negative answer. Ithron – as he calls perfect happiness – in distinction from temporary and fleeting joys – is not possible for man. Nothing in the world and in human life can give such happiness. From this all is vanity, all is insignificant and futile.

“Vanity of vanities, all is vanity.” This is the conclusion to which the Ecclesiastes came through long and difficult seeking, and which he expresses with equal decisiveness both at the beginning and at the end of the book (Eccl 1:2). But why is absolute happiness unattainable, why does everything turn out, in this sense, to be futile and vain? The reason is that everything in the world is subject to immutable and, at the same time, uniform laws and as a result is in constant circular motion, giving nothing new, nothing that could in the future ensure the attainment of Ithron (Eccl 1:4-11). Motion not forward but around, non-progressive circular motion is observed not only in external nature but also in human life, where psychic phenomena alternate with the same sequence as natural phenomena, depend so little on human will, where also there is a time for everything (Eccl 3:1-8).

This inevitability of the natural course of things, the powerlessness of human will to change its direction, to subject it to itself, make happiness, available to man, unstable, inconstant, accidental, fleeting. Man cannot be assured for even one moment that happiness will not abandon him. Of course, such happiness is not Ithron. Investigating then particular cases from his own life and the lives of others, the Ecclesiastes becomes even more convinced that nothing can give man true happiness.

Wisdom? But it brings people suffering, exposing both in the world and in man ugliness and insignificance, covered by apparent beauty and purposefulness, generating in man a painful awareness of the limitation of his mind and the incomprehensibility of all that exists (Eccl 1:13-18).

Carefree joy, the enjoyment of all kinds of pleasures and entertainment? But it leaves in man’s soul a painful sensation of emptiness and meaninglessness (Eccl 2:1-2).

The joys of labor, of varied activity? But they fade from the awareness of the insignificance and chance quality of the results of labor (Eccl 2:4-11). The latter depend not so much on man himself, his talents and energy, as on time and chance (Eccl 9:11). Man has no power over the good of being able to eat and drink (Eccl 2:24). Wealth? But it belongs properly not to man but to life. At the death of the owner it passes to the heir, who may prove to be foolish and abuse the inheritance (Eccl 2:18-19). And even during life the wealthy often feel alone, are tormented by envy, quarrels, avarice (Eccl 4:4-8) or suddenly lose their wealth (Eccl 5:10-16).

But over all these human sorrows and vicissitudes reigns the greatest evil – death, which equally strikes down both the wise and the foolish (Eccl 2:14-16), both the righteous and the wicked (Eccl 9:1-3), thereby destroying any distinction between people and making their happiness illusory. And what follows death, existence in Sheol, is a life without knowledge, thought, without love, hope and hatred, a life compared to which even sad earthly existence is a good, as a living dog is better than a dead lion (Eccl 9:4-6). Where death reigns, there happiness cannot be. But what does this signify?

Should man fall into gloomy despondency, into a conscious aversion to life, which so mercilessly shatters all dreams of happiness? No!

Where, apparently, the darkest pessimism should have hung like an impenetrable fog, for the Ecclesiastes there gleamed a living hope for the possibility of some happiness, faith in some value of life. Ithron – perfect happiness – for the Ecclesiastes remained unattainable as before, but he found in life a comparative good, a relative happiness, something of which one can say with assurance that it is something better. In place of unattainable Ithron came possible Tob for man.

What is this Tob? In order to understand and be able to attain this Tob, one must look at the world and human life from a completely new point of view, from a religious point of view, one must replace worldly consciousness with God-consciousness, a living awareness of the Divine power acting in the world. Everything in the world is subject to certain immutable laws, but these laws are nothing other than the expression of Divine will.

Man is dependent not on blind fate but on Divine providence. All is from the hand of God. Without Him man cannot even eat and drink (Eccl 2:24-26).

Man is not able to contend with God (Eccl 6:10), to change what God does (Eccl 3:14; cf. Eccl 7:13). He does not know the ways of God (Eccl 3:16-17), knows neither the future nor the purposes of the present (Eccl 3:11). Although the ways of God are incomprehensible, they cannot be unjust. God will repay each according to his deeds, reward those who fear Him and punish the wicked (Eccl 8:12-13). As soon as man begins to regard the world from a religious point of view, his disposition fundamentally changes. Convinced that man’s fate is in God’s hands (Eccl 9:1), he abandons all anxious cares and fearful expectations of the future, all irritation, grief and vexation (Eccl 5:16), which, leading to nothing, spoil the present, poison all joys, and sees in the acquisition of God’s mercy through heartfelt prayer, reverent observance of rites, keeping of commandments and vows (Eccl 4:17) the most reliable means of ensuring the future. Calm about the future he serenely enjoys the joys which God sends to him (Eccl 7:14). He eats his bread with gladness, drinks his wine with joy, counting the one and the other as the gift of God (Eccl 9:7). He enjoys life with the wife whom God gave him for all the vain days under the sun (Eccl 9:9). At all times his clothes are white, and oil does not fail upon his head (Eccl 9:8). Sweet to him is the light and pleasant to him the sun (Eccl 11:7). If God sends him misfortune, he reflects (Eccl 7:14) and comes to terms with it, fully convinced of the purposefulness and justice of Divine providence, in the educating and purifying power of suffering. Knowing that by sorrow the heart is made better (Eccl 7:3), he intentionally seeks what arouses sorrow. He prefers the day of death to the day of birth, the house of mourning to the house of feasting, lamentation to laughter, rebuke by the wise to songs of fools (Eccl 7:1-6). In relation to others he is filled with a spirit of harmlessness, forbearance, kindness. He seeks moral unity with people, knowing that two are better than one (Eccl 4:9-10).

Convinced that the fate of others depends on his fate, he does everything to promote their well-being, generously distributing his possessions (Eccl 11:1-2).

Such a state of spirit, when man, having completely entrusted himself to Divine providence, serenely enjoys life, calmly and successfully bears all the trials sent to him, is the only possible happiness for him, his Tob. But this happiness is not complete, it cannot fully satisfy the desire for eternal happiness implanted in man (Eccl 3:10-11). Ithron is unattainable. All is vanity and striving after wind. This is the result to which the Ecclesiastes came. With his teaching about Sheol, with his uncertain conception of God’s judgment, with his complete ignorance of the resurrection of the dead, the Ecclesiastes could come to no other conclusion. He sought perfect happiness “under the sun,” that is, within the bounds of earthly existence, but it could not be there.

Below one can set forth one version (certainly not beyond dispute) about the origin and time of composition of the Book of Ecclesiastes.

The Book of Ecclesiastes in its superscription (Eccl 1:1) is attributed to Solomon. But the superscription of the book alone does not finally and unconditionally settle the question of its author. In ancient times it was customary to reproduce the thoughts and feelings of remarkable historical figures in dialogue or poetic form. This was a kind of literary device, a special literary form in which the author, concerned with the identity of spirit rather than the letter, took from history only the general thought, subjecting it to independent development. An example of such distinctive exposition of prophetic speeches can be found in the Books of Kings and Chronicles. Certain peculiarities of the Book of Ecclesiastes convince us that we are dealing with a similar literary device here as well. First of all, the language of the book unmistakably shows that it arose after the Babylonian captivity, when the Hebrew language had lost its purity and received a strong Aramaic coloring. The Book of Ecclesiastes is filled with Aramaicisms to an even greater degree than the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah and other post-exilic works, contains many abstract and philosophical expressions and even has something in common with Talmudic usage (see the linguistic peculiarities in M. Olesnitsky, Book of Ecclesiastes, p. 156–157). One scholar was right in saying that if Solomon had written the Book of Ecclesiastes, there would have been no history of the Hebrew language. In any case, one would not then attribute the Book of Proverbs to Solomon. And in the content of the book itself we will find many signs of its later editing. The Ecclesiastes says of himself: “I was king over Israel in Jerusalem” (Eccl 1:12). Before Solomon, only David was king in Jerusalem, consequently, during Solomon’s lifetime one could not speak of all the kings who had been in Jerusalem. According to Eccl 2:3-9 it appears that Solomon indulged in wine-drinking and various constructive and accumulative activities for the sake of philosophical experiments with ideal motives. Speaking of the religious shortcomings of contemporary society, our book remains completely silent about idolatry, and notes instead the Pharisaic, soulless observance of rites (Eccl 4:17 and following). It was during the height of Solomon’s reign that the greatest glorification of God the Almighty occurred, of whom the prophet Malachi speaks often. The warning against writing and reading many books is incomprehensible for the time of Solomon (Eccl 12:12). The very content of the book, complaints about the vanity of all things, a general sense of dissatisfaction, exhortation not to fall into gloomy despondency, to be content with little in life. This, probably, expresses the general discontent of the post-exilic period, the general weariness in the constant struggle with difficult political and socio-economic conditions of life. “Do not say, ‘Why were the former days better than these?’” the Ecclesiastes instructs. At no other time was this said as often as after the Captivity. All this leads us to recognize that the Book of Ecclesiastes was edited by someone who lived in the post-exilic period. Metropolitan Filaret himself admitted some doubt about its belonging to Solomon. “Unfortunately,” he wrote, “the conversion of Solomon is not as certain as his error. The Book of Ecclesiastes appears to be a monument to his repentance” (Outline of Church-Biblical History. Ed. 9. pp. 230–231).

As is evident from the content of the book and from the historical circumstances of its appearance, the goal which its author set for himself was to comfort contemporaries who were falling into despondency, on the one hand by clarifying the vanity and perishability of all earthly things, and on the other by pointing out the means by which, despite the existing difficult conditions, to create a more or less tolerable existence. This means consisted in living, laboring, enjoying all accessible joys, constantly, so to speak, feeling one’s dependence on Divine providence and drawing from it the source of moral courage and mental peace. Such a task of the book, like all its content, completely in accord with the God-revealed Old Testament teaching, provides no grounds for doubting the canonical authority of the book. If some ancient rabbis, and after them Christian writers (for example, Justin, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen) were completely silent about the Book of Ecclesiastes and doubted its canonical authority, this is explained by the fact that they took and interpreted certain passages that troubled them in fragments, without connection to the general content of the book, and as a result found in them signs of Epicureanism, fatalism, and pessimism. Nothing of the sort appears in the book with its proper understanding.

* * *

Greek ekklesia and Latin concilium share a common root with Hebrew kahal.

SHEOL (Hebrew, possibly “the inquired,” “the unsearchable”; in Greek it is translated as “the nether world,” “hades,” sometimes as “the grave”), in Jewish mythology the kingdom of the dead, the afterlife, the “lower” or “nether” world, opposed to heaven (Ps 138:8; Amos 9:2; Job 11:8). Sheol is depicted as an animate being, a terrible monster, in many ways analogous to Tiamat in Akkadian mythology. Sheol swallows the dead, closing over them its gigantic jaws, the belly of Sheol is eternally insatiable, and its soul expands and stirs in anticipation of prey (Isa 5:14; Hab 2:5; Ps 140:7; Prov 27:20; Job 24:19). Various names for Sheol – “the land of silence,” “the land of forgetfulness,” “the valley of the shadow of death,” “destruction” (cf. Abaddon), “the nether world,” “the source of extinction,” “the gates of death” (Ps 22:4 and others). Early biblical texts consider Sheol as the dwelling place of all the dead (Gen 37:35 and Gen 44:31). Only the most terrible sinners, such as Korah, who dared to rebel against Moses himself, sink through the earth and descend into Sheol alive (Num 16:30-33; cf. Ps 54:16; Prov 1:12). Later, however, ideas spread of Sheol as a place of confinement and punishment of sinful souls, which during life “became like the animals” (Ps 48:15). The souls of the wicked imprisoned in Sheol experience torments: they are “bound with sorrow and iron,” exist in impenetrable darkness, in chaotic “disorder” (Ps 17:6; Job 10:21-22). According to the prophetic books, transgressive tyrant kings in Sheol are devoured alive by worms (Isa 14:5-20; Ezek 32:21-27). God-opposers, dark powers of Sheol seize while they are still living, “the firstborn of death” is cast upon them and brings them down to the demonic “king of terrors” (Job 18:13-14). The haters of mankind are surrendered in Sheol to the fire of God’s wrath (Deut 32:22; Isa 66:24), while ordinary sinners God “brings down to Sheol and brings up” (1 Sam 2:6), purifying them from sins through punishment. Besides the dead sinners, in Sheol dwell the Rephaim, evil spirits “shedim,” as well as “angels of torment.” In Old Testament apocrypha Sheol is often identified with Gehenna, it appears as a “fiery abyss,” where blazing rivers flow for the “healing of the spirit” of sinners (“Book of Enoch” 10 and 61:8; 3rd Book of Ezra 7). In the “Covenant” of the Qumran community there is mentioned “the shame of destruction in the fire of dark regions,” which is opposed to “life in eternal light.” According to Talmudic legends, Sheol is not beneath the earth but as if in another space, beyond the “mountains of darkness,” so that from Sheol one can see paradise, and vice versa (“Eruvin” 32). Sheol is compared to a “fiery sword,” guarding the way to the tree of life (cf. Gen 3:24), so that the evil do not partake of eternity and thereby perpetuate evil. Three gates lead to Sheol: one near Jerusalem, the second in the wilderness, and the third at the bottom of the sea; at the same time Sheol has 40 thousand entrances and is 60 times larger than paradise and 3600 times larger than the earth (“Taanit” 10a). Travelers approaching the gates of Sheol in the sea or in the wilderness hear the heart-rending cries of sinners tortured there (“Shevet-Musar” 26). Sheol consists of seven divisions (a prototype of the “circles of hell” in Christian conceptions), and in each subsequent one the fire is 61 times hotter than in the previous one. The depth of each division is 300 years’ journey (“Sota” 10). Sheol is a kind of purgatory, and torments in it serve only to free one from malice and uncleanness. Only confirmed sinners are tormented in Sheol for more than a year, with half of this cleansing period the soul spends in fire and half in ice (“Berachot” 28; “Yalkut Devarim” Eccl 8:92). Types of punishment in Sheol symbolize the sins they punish. A fiery river flows from beneath the Throne of Glory, goes around the universe, and descends upon sinners in Sheol (Commentary of Avren-Ezra to Dan 7:9-10). The most criminal souls, sent into “exile” to two icy mountains, secretly bring snow from there and scatter it around, reducing the power of the flame, and thus manage to sin even in Sheol. On the Sabbath and other festivals souls are freed from the torments of Sheol. In the future (eschatological times) the great Archangels Michael and Gabriel, sent by God, will open the gates of Sheol and “lead by the hand” all who fell into it (Masekhat-Gihenem to 26:19).