meta: {"file": "/data/tomer/Sefaria-Export/txt_done/Modern Works/Footnotes to Kohelet by Bruce Heitler/English/merged.txt"}
text: Footnotes to Kohelet by Bruce Heitler
  הערות לקהלת מאת ברוס הייטלר
  merged
  
  This file contains merged sections from the following text versions:
  -Footnotes to Kohelet by Bruce Heitler
  -
  
  Footnotes to Kohelet by Bruce Heitler
  
  
  
  
  
  The concept of hevel is central to the theme of the Book of Kohelet. Hevel is the vapor of breath on a cold day that quickly disappears. The author points to the essential quality of perception that it is not firmly attached to the underlying reality. As meaning floats above the shape of the letters on a page, so our perception points to but never exactly grasps reality. A change in our perspective can alter the meaning of a word or an event. Yet it is impossible to grasp reality more firmly than through perception and the meaning of things. This is not a condition which can be improved upon. It is the very nature of our situation -- we apprehend reality through our perceptions, and they are ephemeral like a mist that disappears.  The notion of “hevel” is related to the observation that uncertainty is the most obdurate characteristic of human existence.  This has been a theme of many of the defining works of science, mathematics and philosophy of the twentieth century.  Compare: Russel’s Paradox; Einstein’s principles of Special and General Relativity; Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle; Bohr’s Argument for Complementarity; Godel’s incompleteness theorum; Mandelbrot’s Fractal Geometry, Von Neumann’s Game Theory, Frege’s Philosophy of Arithmetic; Claude Shannon’s Theory of Information and Entropy, Maurice Merleau Ponty’s Primacy of Perception; J.L. Austin’s Sense and Sensibilia, the Boyd or OODA Cycle in strategic studies, and the notion of agile development in both computer coding and entrepreneurial businesses.  
  The phrase "under the sun" indicates one of the two perspectives which are contrasted in the Book of Kohelet. "Under the sun" is the practical world of getting and spending, of looking out for our own interests. This is the perspective which we naturally assume. The other perspective which could be denoted as the "world beyond", or the "world to come" or simply "that world" is not separated from this world in time or space, but it derives from a different way of looking at things. In that world, what is right assumes more importance than what maximizes our individual benefit. The same events can be understood from the perspective of this world or from that world, from the perspective of what is under the sun or what is beyond the usual perspective of concern for our self-interest. 
  The sun yearns to return to the place where it shines. The word "sho'ef" indicates a persistent ambition which stands in contrast to the insubstantial nature of a person's perception. The matters of the physical world are constant and reliable; the perception of man is transitory and incapable of being firmly grasped. 
  Among the things which are missing for people who live only in the world which is under the sun is the quality of being remembered. Implicitly, Kohelet suggests that one way of scrutinizing an action from the perspective of that world (which is not under the sun) is whether it will be remembered -- or perhaps whether we would like it to be remembered. Alternatively, there may be some effect of merit in that world which elicits remembrance, as in "God remembered Sarah." 
  Befriending the wind" is ra'ut ruakh. Ra'ut can mean either "friend of" or "badness of". Ruakh can mean wind, spirit or even inspiration. The language of the Book of Kohelet frequently plays with these kind of ambiguities. "Befriending the wind" could also be translated "bad spirit".  Ethan Dor Shav suggests another interpretation and etymology for “ra’ut”:  The root “ra” as in “re’ut ruach” may suggest meandering rather than either “bad” or “friend”.  Compare, for example, Mishle 29:3 Ro’ah zonot, which could be translated as “one who is a companion of harlots”, or “one who wanders with harlots”.  The association of wandering with a shepherd connects with Hevel as the name of the original animal herder (Cain and Abel/Hevel); see sources in Ethan Dor-Shav (Azure • AUTUMN 5765 / 2004):     “. . . . the core meaning of this precise root verb [is], “to meander”; feeding, grazing, and herding are secondary transpositions. Critically, the Hebrew root ra’ah does not imply gathering, chasing, or herding-in; rather, it connotes the typical (outward-bound) movement of grazing over pasturelands. This is why the verb can easily apply to the roaming of a single animal, with no flock or shepherd about. Cf. Genesis 41:1-2; Song of Songs 4:5 and 6:2. Similarly, it applies where no feeding is involved; cf. Numbers 14:33. Hence, even if we knew no more than this, re’ut is to be understood as a fleeting movement of wind, or air, such as a gust or a breeze. This is cognate to tir’eh-ruah in Jeremiah 22:22 (“a puff of wind,” or “scattered by the wind”). Thus, a close approximation of the phrase hevel u’re’ut ruach, would be “vapor and a stirring of air,” or “vapor and a puff of wind.” In this light, the entire idiom stresses transient phenomena, of no material value. However, the etymology of re’ut itself may give us a clue to uncovering its original connotation; for its Semitic root had an additional meaning, one with a close affinity to the word “vapor.” While the Hebrew language lost this variant, it survives to this day in Arabic: The Arabic root of r-gh-w, as in the noun ragha—froth or foam—and the verb ragha—to froth. Like vapor, it is a potent metaphor of fleeting, passing phenomena. Froth and foam, of course, are made of air, which in the biblical Hebrew is always ruah, bringing us back again to Ecclesiastes’ idiom, “hevel ure’ut ruah,” which we may now render: Vapor and froth (cf. Shakespeare, The Rape of Lucrece: “What win I if I gain the thing I seek? A dream, a breath, a froth of fleeting joy”). “ 
  The Hebrew de'a is rendered as "judgment". In contemporary Hebrew, the word de'a could also mean, "opinion". Usually, the word is translated as "knowledge". Judgment is intended to indicate that there is a faculty of accurately applying one's perception, in addition to abstract knowledge.  In contemporary moral discourse, this notion is also connected to the quality of prudence. 
  The word that means foolishness, sikhlut, could also mean cleverness, from sekhel. The fundamental importance of this double meaning is not lost on Kohelet. 
  The Hebrew here is ra'ion ruakh, closely related to ra'ut ruakh (befriending the wind). Ra'ion means idea or notion, so the phrase could mean "notion of spirit", or "idea of wind". The concept is that perception has a quality of floating somewhat freely, even wandering, from the determined reality of the physical world. 
  The essence of wisdom and knowledge is the ability to predict and influence what will happen in various circumstances. However, if we focus merely on wisdom and knowledge, and not on uncertainty and the inherent limits to our power, then frustration, disappointment and pain result. We deceive ourselves into thinking that we have more influence than we really do. The only alternative to the pain of recognizing that we are not entirely in touch with the underlying nature of things is to cultivate an appreciation of the uncertainty itself. We are finite, God is infinite: what more could be expected of us? 
  
  
  
  Kohelet looks inward, but still from the perspective of this world, the world under the sun. Even goodness and joy look unsatisfying from this perspective.
  
  One can induce the physical into a preferred mood with the use of intoxicants such as alcohol, at least for a while.
  
  Compare with verse 1.17. This line could mean, "What can someone do since he is not the king?" Alternatively, the phrase could mean, "What can a person do who supplants the king?" In either case, the essential consideration is the limitation on one's ability. Either one cannot carry out the policy of the king, or one cannot do anything else but what the king would have done. Neither knowledge nor wild behavior can overcome this limitation. Ultimately, everything is subject to certain limitations.
  
  The acquisition of knowledge or even wisdom does not move us out of the world under the sun, and consequently the same frustration is the lot of the wise man and the fool. The transition to the perspective which is not under the sun involves a relationship with what is not subject to our control and not within our understanding or grasp. This is not merely a matter of intellect. Nevertheless, although wisdom is not adequate to cope with all of the eventualities which a person is subject to, still wisdom is preferable to foolishness since it tends to prevent unnecessary stumbling and bruises.
  
  One characteristic of a person who lives entirely in the world under the sun is the inability to form a gratifying relationship with his children and his successors. One who lives primarily in the world of getting and spending is unable to identify with future generations just as he is unable to appreciate that a person is not an isolated atom. The alternative perspective emphasizes that a person is inherently involved with the well being of family, friends, neighbors and society. 
  
  In contrast to the frustration of trying to find something worthwhile under the sun, the ultimate value appears in appreciating what comes from the "hand of God." Moreover, what is from the hand of God is the very ability to appreciate one's work without referring it to any outside standard or consequence. This is similar to the thought expressed in the Song of Songs where the feeling between lovers is expressed as God being present in His chamber. Our feelings of joy and satisfaction are themselves the gift of God.
  
  
  
  
  This beautiful passage highlights the importance of circumstances as a fundamental element of human perception. A figure is only apprehended when it is distinguished from a background. Perception does not grasp anything without a context. Every rule must be applied in certain circumstances, and if the circumstances change, the rule itself takes on a different meaning. For example, I might say that it is better to heal than to kill. Yet in the case of a severely wounded animal, the appropriate thing may be to kill. 
  
  God is the ultimate being; all space, time, objects, desires and perception are only reflections of God's existence. God's purpose controls all of existence, and everything is in accordance with God's will. Yet man is also free. The two facts can only co-exist if human perception and God's perception are fundamentally different. 
  
  God does not seek novelty or change in behavior for its own sake. In general, the point is not for us to change what we are doing. The focus instead is on transforming the way in which we apprehend our world so that it enhances our capacity for wonder, reverence and awe for the magnificence of reality. God does not seek something which is not already attractive, rather we are asked to elevate our relationship with the desires and projects which already concern us so that we come close to God through them. Hence, "God seeks what is pursued." However, this is no doctrine of passivity. Our projects and our tasks constantly require us to make choices. The situations which require active intervention on our part are as much part of our condition as the more static elements of our nature. God encourages us in our pursuit, not merely in our being.
  
  The power to influence things inherently attracts corruption. The arena for abuse or taking advantage is precisely the place where trust has been established. The place of fertility is particularly vulnerable to infection.
  
  The distinction between what is worthwhile and what is destructive is often not apparent until long after the event. The outcome of our deeds is often not what we intend or anticipate; after all, the author of this book is the offspring of the union of David and Bat Sheva.
  
  The Hebrew word behema refers to domesticated animals which serve man, not to wild beasts which would use the word chaya. The service of these beasts of nourishment and burden is an example for mankind, not an image of being dangerous to each other.
  
  The distinction between what is worthwhile and what is destructive is often not apparent until long after the event. The outcome of our deeds is often not what we intend or anticipate; after all, the author of this book is the offspring of the union of David and Bat Sheva.
  
  This is the challenge which distinguishes man, whether he can perceive his world in a way which apprehends the unique difference between our life of consciousness, of imagination, of fully developed language, and the life of the other species who are so much like us. The challenge of Kohelet is to overcome the tendency to see the world only from the perspective of what is under the sun. God does not seek novelty or change in behavior for its own sake. In general, the point is not for us to change what we are doing. The focus instead is on transforming the way in which we apprehend our world so that it enhances our capacity for wonder. God does not seek something which is not already attractive, rather we are asked to elevate our relationship with the desires and projects which already concern us so that we come close to God through them. Hence, "God seeks what is pursued." However, this is no doctrine of passivity. Our projects and our tasks constantly require us to make choices. The situations which require active intervention on our part are as much part of our condition as the more static elements of our nature. God encourages us in our pursuit, not merely in our being.
  
  Two crucial insights are joined here: First that our greatest benefit is to appreciate the situation we find ourselves in, and second that our greatest opportunity derives from our relationship with what is beyond our grasp. We will never know whether, in the final analysis, the total effect of our actions is beneficial. Unintended consequences are usually more important than the results we plan for. Nevertheless, we can rejoice at the prospect of making choices on the limited information available to us, and savor the glimpses we are afforded of the world which extends beyond our comprehension. Since we are often unable to control the world under the sun, we can enjoy our human condition by moving to a perspective which is not limited to what is under the sun.
  
  
  
  
  One of the foundations of Torah morality is the duty to offer protection to the weak and helpless such as widows, orphans, the newcomers within the community, and the dead. These obligations are emphasized because they offer the one who protects the helpless a special opportunity to experience a relationship with God. No direct reward is anticipated from the powerless, for they lack the resources to repay the kindness. Therefore, the reward can only come from God, and such rewards can be expected to derive from the world which is not under the sun. In Biblical code, these duties are often marked by the phrase, "Remember that you were strangers in Egypt, I am the Lord your God." Compare the Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Berachot, p. 19a, and its discussion of the obligation to bury an unclaimed corpse.
  
  All of a person's actions, both good and bad, are motivated by instinctive urges which characterize the world of under the sun. Jealousy can be channeled into the development of great skill, into thievery, into scholarship and perhaps even into philanthropy. However, the perspective of what is done under the sun only sees that these instinctive urges (yetzer ha'rah) are the source of futile and destructive actions, that every good action is contaminated by its venal motivation. However, there is another perspective which recognizes that without jealousy, greed, ambition, or desire for fame, not very much would get done. The urgent pressure of hunger, cold, fear or desire for recognition can also motivate a person to accomplish worthwhile objectives.
  
  The Talmud in the Chapter of Fundamentals (Pirke Avot, 4.1) makes the connection between wisdom and capacity for learning. "Ben Zoma says, 'Who is wise? He who learns from all men,' as it is said, 'From all my teachers I gained wisdom (Psalms 119.99).'" Wisdom is not the accumulation of learning, but the capacity for learning. In this sense, the wisdom of the child may exceed the wisdom of an old king.
  
  The old and foolish king is not cautious because his power has blinded him to the underlying uncertainty of things. Even though he may have access to every pleasure under the sun, he is not so well off as the poor child who is full of potential and capable of learning.
  
  Good derives from limitation, constraint and respecting guidelines. Wickedness is related to unfettered power, arrogance and licentiousness. The paradox of Kohelet is that the beneficial system of guidelines and constraint derives from our relationship with what is beyond our grasp, and not completely demonstrable or self-evident. Hence, the child who has no rigid perception eventually will grow into power, and the ruler who is rigid will eventually cause his kingdom to live in poverty.
  
  The inability to identify with posterity is a defect which is characteristic of living only under the sun. The alienation from ancestors and from succeeding generations results from the narrow focus of getting and spending, for living only under the sun. The first mitzvah in the Torah is to be fruitful and multiply, that is to dedicate our efforts for succeeding generations. Like all of the mitzvot, having and rearing children is a pathway for moving beyond what is under the sun.
  
  
  
  
  This phrase could also mean, "Do not be worried about your mouth, but do not rush your intellect . . . ." Both meanings probably apply, and the sense of "worry about your mouth" emphasizes the required balance between caution and boldness. However, we have chosen the translation which emphasizes the importance of restraining impulses and limiting the number of our words.
  
  Literally, "A dream comes with too much activity." This could refer to unrealistic ambition, fantasy which is encouraged by narrow-minded involvement with all the activity, or any other kind of loss of contact with hard reality.
  
  This phrase could mean, "God afflicts him in the rejoicing of his heart." “Ma’aneh” could mean either “answer” or “afflict”.  In other words, what appears as success to a person may in fact be a superficial, temporal reward which is actually preparation for a harsher outcome in another world (that is, from another perspec¬tive). Compare, for example Psalm 92 where it speaks about the fact that a fool cannot understand that when the wrong-doers blossom it is only so that they can be destroyed.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  The theme of this section is that the value of life lies in what is accomplished, so that it is more appropriate to celebrate the end of a person's journey than its beginning. However, external accomplishment is not emphasized -- building, acquiring or even planting -- but rather the transformation of one's character which can be accomplished using the challenges and opportunities which are afforded to us. Hence, by paying attention to what looks important in death, one can improve the heart.
  
  The sound of burning thorns is all crackle without much useful energy.
  
  This phrase seems to indicate the awe of God can come from either side of a dilemma. The phrase could also be translated, "Do not relax your grip, since awe of God can go out with all of these." In other words, the sentence simultaneously indicates that reverence for God could dissipate (go out) as well as it could flow from one or the other.
  
  Here the word "Kohelet" is used with a feminine verb, so the meaning seems to be "a gathering of women" rather than Kohelet, "the gatherer".
  
  
  
  
  Wisdom may bring light either to his own face or to the face of another; brazen arrogance transforms his own face, as it may transform the face of another into hatred.
  
  The word which means "changed" could also be understood to mean "hated". Thus, the sentence could indicate that the one with an arrogant or inflexible countenance causes either himself or others to change their disposition or to incur opposition.
  
  To be in a hurry" could also mean "to be afraid". Compare verse 5:1 where the same ambiguity is achieved with regard to whether to flee or dig in one's heels.
  
  
  
  
  Note that the word “yevuhar” is read as “yebuhar“.  The first would mean the one who chooses life entirely; the second means who is joined to life entirely. Both meanings work in this context.  Some might suggest that the source of value in the world is life itself. However, Kohelet hints that if life is all that counts, then is this value superior to the value of nobility, beauty, integrity or self sacrifice? Surely the security which is afforded by the simple view that life is to be preferred above all is an illusion. Even people who believe this certainly die, and focusing on preserving life only, they are likely to forego their opportunity to be remembered for the noble traits which they could have cultivated.  Alternatively, the translation could be rendered, “The dog has a good life because of the lion that died.”  In other words, the lion is the dead lion provides opportunity for the living dog, and the wellbeing of the dog is due to the efforts and understanding of the dead lion rather than his own achievement. This interpretation is parallel to the sense of 2:18,19 where the one who rules over all of my achievements and accomplishments may well be a fool.  Even if I am a great lion, my inheritor may be a living dog.
  
  Perhaps the realm of reward and punishment is not only after life, but also a different side of our current perception. "Sheol", which is translated here as "the abyss", conveys the idea that after death is impenetrable darkness. In contemporary physics, we find the notion of “dark matter” and “dark energy”.  They cannot be directly detected, but we assume they must exist if the rest of this paradigm is to hold together.  Similarly, no one can report reliably from where you are going, yet we believe in the existence of a realm we cannot directly observe.  We are advised not to look to what will happen after life runs its course, any more than we can expect to find simple justice under the sun. Fantastic eschatology is a distraction, yet focusing merely on the uncertain rewards of this world is inherently unsatisfactory. The uplifting theme of Kohelet sounds throughout: Accept the portion which has been allocated to you. Diligently undertake the tasks which present themselves. Be confident that the task which lies before you is appropriate. Fulfilling the assignment to the best of your ability is the source of real joy. The consequence of this perspective is that you will be able to enjoy your days. Moreover, your worthwhile deeds may even qualify to be remembered -- probably more than any monuments you may build or fortune you may acquire. This is the gift of God, the fulfillment of the human spirit is here and now, yet it is not under the sun.  Compare Pirke Avot, 4:19-22.
  
  
  
  
  Especially in the case of something that is of pure and consistent quality, a slight defect can contaminate the whole.  However, an unexpected, foreign element may also provide an advantage.  The notion of “brainstorming” endorses the idea that silly ideas may be the most valuable.  Thinking of a silly example may expose a deeper underlying view.  Einstein’s innovation that light travels at the same speed independent of the frame of reference appeared silly at first, as did Cantor’s idea that there are mathematical infinities of different sizes.   Being able to look ridiculous may be necessary to demonstrate a deeply important truth.  Compare King David dancing, and the critique of his wife Michal, daughter of Saul.
  
  The sentence turns on the homonym in Hebrew between the word "to leave" and "to be gentle". Hence the phrase could be understood as, "When the government arises against you, do not leave your place, for gentleness cures great wrongs." Alternatively, it could be, "Do not leave your place, since the cure makes even great wrongs depart." Perhaps what is essential is the ambiguity itself in this phrase, since we are often unable to discern surely whether gentleness and passivity is to be preferred or actively getting out of the situation.
  
  The phrase also turns on homonyms which can reverse the meaning entirely. The word "to carve" (ye-atzev) can also mean "to sadden". Thus the phrase could read, "The one who moves the stones will be saddened by them." Similarly, the word "to shelter" (sakan) could also come from the root which means "to endanger". This would yield a meaning, "The one who fells the tree will be endangered by them (falling)." One could align these phrases with the sense of the preceding lines which caution us about being quick to intervene in the natural course of things.
  
  
  
  
  The cycle of seven refers to the weekly, ordinary course of things. The cycle of eight refers to the miraculous which has a direct connection with God. Circumcision is performed on the eighth day, the Torah was received on the 50th day following Pesach which is the day following seven weeks of seven days, the miracle of Hanukah lasted eight days.
  
  
  
  
  In his commentary to Mishna 3:1 of Pirke Avot, Ethics from Sinai, Irving Bunim points to the three meanings of the word “bor’echa”, your Creator in Kohelet 12:1.  He says, “According to the Jerusalem Talmud, Akavya derived this threefold teaching most ingeniously from a verse in Kohelet (Ecclesiastes):  “Rembember too bor’echa , your Creator, in the days of your youth, before the evil days come” (12:1).  the Talmud observes that the word bor’echa (your Creator) suggests by association three different words, which sound quite alike:  b’er’cha, “your well,” i.e. your source, from where youcame; bor’cha, “your pit, your grave,” i.e. to where you are going; and bor’echa, “your Creator,” before whom you will have to give an accounting.  (Jerusalem Talmud, Sotah 2:2)  Irving Bunim, Ethics from Sinai (Feldheim, 2000) v. 1 p. 275
  
  Tractate Hagiga (5a) of the Babylonian Talmud elaborates about the meandering quality of this metaphor. A prod can be used to direct a plowing cow in either direction to cut a productive furrow; but if you think that the words of the sages are so flexible, remember that they are also like nails. However, if you think that the words are merely fixed like nails, which diminish in size as they are driven into a board, the verse continues that these nails are planted. Plants grow, like the words of the sages grow as future generations apply them to new situations. The growing words can be confusing as their various interpretations gradually unfold, so we are advised to rely on the assemblies where divergent opinions are expressed and debated. In keeping with the principal of Talmudic interpretation that generally all of the reported opinions -- even though they may be contradictory -- are true.  On some matters, the current state consists of conflict without resolution. Hence the final dimension of the metaphor is that all the diverse and contradictory opinions are given by one shepherd. 
  