King James Version
Ecclesiastes 5
20 verses with commentary
Fear God and Keep Your Vows
Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools: for they consider not that they do evil.
View commentary
This verse introduces the theme of approaching God with reverence and caution: 'Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools: for they consider not that they do evil.' The phrase 'keep thy foot' (Hebrew 'shmor raglekha,' שְׁמֹר רַגְלֶךָ) means watch your step, be careful—approaching God requires mindful intentionality, not careless routine. 'The house of God' refers to the Temple (in Solomon's era) or synagogue worship. The command prioritizes hearing over sacrificing, echoing Samuel's declaration: 'to obey is better than sacrifice' (1 Samuel 15:22). The 'sacrifice of fools' describes ritualistic religion—external religious activity disconnected from internal devotion and obedience. Fools 'consider not that they do evil'—they're unaware their empty religiosity offends God. This verse teaches that authentic worship requires humble receptivity to God's word rather than presumptuous religious performance. It anticipates Jesus's condemnation of Pharisaical religion (Matthew 23) and His teaching that true worshipers worship in spirit and truth (John 4:23-24).
Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God: for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few. thing: or, word
View commentary
Continuing the theme of reverent worship, the Preacher warns: 'Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God: for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few.' The Hebrew 'bahal' (בָּהַל, rash/hasty) means acting impulsively without careful thought. The verse contrasts God's transcendence ('in heaven') with human limitation ('upon earth'), counseling humble restraint in speech before the Almighty. Verbose, hasty prayers demonstrate presumption—treating God as peer rather than sovereign. The command 'let thy words be few' doesn't prohibit extended prayer but counsels thoughtful, reverent communication over thoughtless verbosity. Jesus taught similar principle: 'use not vain repetitions' (Matthew 6:7). Quality matters more than quantity in prayer.
For a dream cometh through the multitude of business; and a fool's voice is known by multitude of words.
View commentary
For a dream cometh through the multitude of business—excessive activity (rov inyan, רֹב עִנְיָן, abundance of occupation) produces confused, meaningless dreams. The Hebrew chalom (חֲלוֹם, dream) represents mental chaos resulting from overwhelming preoccupation. Just as an overactive mind generates disordered dreams, a fool's voice is known by multitude of words—kesil (כְּסִיל, fool) reveals himself through rov devarim (רֹב דְּבָרִים, many words).
This verse appears within Ecclesiastes 5:1-7's instructions on approaching God in worship. The context warns against rash vows (5:4-6) and emphasizes reverent fear (5:1,7). Verse 3 provides supporting analogy: excessive busyness disorders thought as excessive talking characterizes fools. Before God, fewer words spoken thoughtfully prove superior to verbose emptiness. Jesus taught, 'Use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking' (Matthew 6:7). James warned that the tongue, though small, causes great damage when uncontrolled (3:5-6).
This verse appears within Ecclesiastes 5:1-7's instructions on approaching God in worship. The context warns against rash vows (5:4-6) and emphasizes reverent fear (5:1,7). Verse 3 provides supporting analogy: excessive busyness disorders thought as excessive talking characterizes fools. Before God, fewer words spoken thoughtfully prove superior to verbose emptiness. Jesus taught, 'Use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking' (Matthew 6:7). James warned that the tongue, though small, causes great damage when uncontrolled (3:5-6).
When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed.
View commentary
When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it—the Hebrew neder (נֶדֶר, vow) refers to voluntary religious promises made to God, often conditional ("If You do X, I will do Y") or expressions of devotion. The command al te'acher (אַל־תְּאַחֵר, defer not) means do not delay or be late. Unlike secular contracts, vows to God carried absolute moral obligation (Deuteronomy 23:21-23).
For he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed—God takes no delight (chephets, חֵפֶץ) in kesilim (כְּסִילִים, fools), those who treat sacred commitments carelessly. The fool makes rash promises then ignores them. This echoes Jephthah's tragic vow (Judges 11:30-40) and Ananias and Sapphira's broken promise (Acts 5:1-11). Ecclesiastes teaches that voluntary vows create binding obligations—better never to vow than to vow and break faith.
For he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed—God takes no delight (chephets, חֵפֶץ) in kesilim (כְּסִילִים, fools), those who treat sacred commitments carelessly. The fool makes rash promises then ignores them. This echoes Jephthah's tragic vow (Judges 11:30-40) and Ananias and Sapphira's broken promise (Acts 5:1-11). Ecclesiastes teaches that voluntary vows create binding obligations—better never to vow than to vow and break faith.
Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay.
View commentary
Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay—this stark comparison uses the Hebrew tov (טוֹב, better) to establish priorities. Since vows were voluntary, not mandatory, abstaining from vowing was safer than vowing and defaulting. The verse doesn't prohibit vows but insists on their seriousness. Unfulfilled vows constitute sin (chata', חָטָא)—breaking faith with God (Deuteronomy 23:21).
This wisdom parallels Jesus's teaching: "Let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil" (Matthew 5:37). Simple honesty surpasses elaborate oaths. James similarly commands: "Let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation" (James 5:12). The New Covenant emphasis shifts from vows to integrity—consistent character making oaths unnecessary.
This wisdom parallels Jesus's teaching: "Let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil" (Matthew 5:37). Simple honesty surpasses elaborate oaths. James similarly commands: "Let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation" (James 5:12). The New Covenant emphasis shifts from vows to integrity—consistent character making oaths unnecessary.
Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands?
View commentary
Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin—the Hebrew basar (בָּשָׂר, flesh) means your whole person, not just physical body. Careless speech (peh, פֶּה, mouth) leads to guilt requiring sacrifice or judgment. Rash vows create obligations one cannot fulfill, thus causing sin.
Neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error—the mal'akh (מַלְאָךְ, angel/messenger) may refer to the priest who received vow-offerings (Malachi 2:7) or to God's angelic witness. Claiming shegagah (שְׁגָגָה, error/mistake) doesn't excuse broken vows—they were voluntary commitments. Wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands?—unfulfilled vows provoke divine qatsaph (קָצַף, anger/wrath), resulting in cursed labor. This echoes Haggai 1:6-11, where disobedience brought frustration to work. The warning is severe: treat God's name and your word with utmost seriousness.
Neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error—the mal'akh (מַלְאָךְ, angel/messenger) may refer to the priest who received vow-offerings (Malachi 2:7) or to God's angelic witness. Claiming shegagah (שְׁגָגָה, error/mistake) doesn't excuse broken vows—they were voluntary commitments. Wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands?—unfulfilled vows provoke divine qatsaph (קָצַף, anger/wrath), resulting in cursed labor. This echoes Haggai 1:6-11, where disobedience brought frustration to work. The warning is severe: treat God's name and your word with utmost seriousness.
For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities: but fear thou God.
View commentary
For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities—the Hebrew harbeh (הַרְבֵּה, multitude) modifies both chalomot (חֲלֹמוֹת, dreams) and devarim (דְּבָרִים, words). Dreams could claim divine origin (Joel 2:28), but most were mere mental wanderings. Similarly, verbose prayers (Matthew 6:7) and lengthy religious discourse often mask empty devotion. The phrase havalim harbeh (הֲבָלִים הַרְבֵּה, many vanities) indicates multiplied futility—more words and dreams don't produce more substance, just more emptiness (hevel, הֶבֶל, vapor/breath).
But fear thou God—this succinct conclusion (et-ha'Elohim yera', אֶת־הָאֱלֹהִים יְרָא) cuts through the verbosity. True religion centers on yir'ah (יִרְאָה, fear/reverence)—humble, obedient worship of the sovereign God. The contrast is stark: human religion multiplies words, dreams, and rituals; true faith fears God and obeys simply. This anticipates Ecclesiastes' final conclusion: "Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man" (12:13).
But fear thou God—this succinct conclusion (et-ha'Elohim yera', אֶת־הָאֱלֹהִים יְרָא) cuts through the verbosity. True religion centers on yir'ah (יִרְאָה, fear/reverence)—humble, obedient worship of the sovereign God. The contrast is stark: human religion multiplies words, dreams, and rituals; true faith fears God and obeys simply. This anticipates Ecclesiastes' final conclusion: "Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man" (12:13).
The Vanity of Wealth
If thou seest the oppression of the poor, and violent perverting of judgment and justice in a province, marvel not at the matter: for he that is higher than the highest regardeth; and there be higher than they. at the: Heb. at the will, or, purpose
View commentary
If thou seest the oppression of the poor, and violent perverting of judgment and justice—the Hebrew ra'ita (רָאִיתָ, if thou seest) acknowledges that social injustice is observable reality. Oshek rash (עֹשֶׁק רָשׁ, oppression of the poor) describes exploitation of the vulnerable. Gezel mishpat va-tsedek (גֵּזֶל מִשְׁפָּט וָצֶדֶק, violent robbery of judgment and righteousness) indicates corrupt legal systems perverting justice.
Marvel not at the matter: for he that is higher than the highest regardeth—al-titmah (אַל־תִּתְמַהּ, marvel not/be not amazed) counsels not surprise at injustice—sin produces systemic evil. The phrase gavoha me-al gavoha shomer (גָּבֹהַּ מֵעַל גָּבֹהַּ שֹׁמֵר, he that is higher than the highest watches) points to God's sovereign oversight above human hierarchies. Shomer (שֹׁמֵר, watches/guards) indicates divine vigilance. And there be higher than they—plural gevohim (גְּבֹהִים, higher ones) may refer to multiple layers of corrupt officials or to God and His angels. Either way, no injustice escapes divine notice. God will judge (Ecclesiastes 3:17; 12:14).
Marvel not at the matter: for he that is higher than the highest regardeth—al-titmah (אַל־תִּתְמַהּ, marvel not/be not amazed) counsels not surprise at injustice—sin produces systemic evil. The phrase gavoha me-al gavoha shomer (גָּבֹהַּ מֵעַל גָּבֹהַּ שֹׁמֵר, he that is higher than the highest watches) points to God's sovereign oversight above human hierarchies. Shomer (שֹׁמֵר, watches/guards) indicates divine vigilance. And there be higher than they—plural gevohim (גְּבֹהִים, higher ones) may refer to multiple layers of corrupt officials or to God and His angels. Either way, no injustice escapes divine notice. God will judge (Ecclesiastes 3:17; 12:14).
Moreover the profit of the earth is for all: the king himself is served by the field.
View commentary
Moreover the profit of the earth is for all: the king himself is served by the field—this verse's interpretation is debated. The Hebrew yitron erets ba-kol (יִתְרוֹן־אֶרֶץ בַּכֹּל, profit of the earth is for all) may mean agriculture benefits everyone, or that hierarchy extends everywhere (connecting to v. 8). The phrase melekh le-sadeh ne'evad (מֶלֶךְ לְשָׂדֶה נֶעֱבָד, king for/to the field is served/enslaved) is ambiguous.
Most likely meaning: Even the king depends on agriculture—the field serves him. This highlights human interdependence and agriculture's foundational importance. Despite hierarchies of power (v. 8), everyone depends on cultivated land for sustenance. The greatest monarch cannot eat gold or silver; he needs bread from the field. This levels social distinctions—all humans share fundamental dependence on God's provision through creation. It also may provide context for v. 8: corruption in high places ultimately harms agriculture and thus hurts everyone, including the corrupt officials themselves.
Most likely meaning: Even the king depends on agriculture—the field serves him. This highlights human interdependence and agriculture's foundational importance. Despite hierarchies of power (v. 8), everyone depends on cultivated land for sustenance. The greatest monarch cannot eat gold or silver; he needs bread from the field. This levels social distinctions—all humans share fundamental dependence on God's provision through creation. It also may provide context for v. 8: corruption in high places ultimately harms agriculture and thus hurts everyone, including the corrupt officials themselves.
He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver; nor he that loveth abundance with increase: this is also vanity.
View commentary
The Preacher warns against obsessive wealth-seeking: 'He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver; nor he that loveth abundance with increase: this is also vanity.' The Hebrew 'ahav' (אָהַב, loveth) denotes deep affection and attachment, not mere desire. Loving money creates insatiable appetite—acquiring more intensifies craving rather than satisfying it. The parallel phrase 'he that loveth abundance with increase' reinforces this: accumulated wealth doesn't fulfill but generates desire for more. This verse diagnoses the paradox of materialism: the more you have, the more you want. It's 'vanity' (hevel, הֶבֶל) because pursuit of satisfaction through accumulation proves futile. True satisfaction comes from God, not possessions. Jesus taught: 'a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth' (Luke 12:15). Paul commanded: 'having food and raiment let us be therewith content' (1 Timothy 6:8).
When goods increase, they are increased that eat them: and what good is there to the owners thereof, saving the beholding of them with their eyes?
View commentary
When goods increase, they are increased that eat them (בִּרְבוֹת הַטּוֹבָה רַבּוּ אוֹכְלֶיהָ, birvot hatovah rabbu okhleiha)—when prosperity multiplies, so do the consumers/dependents. The Hebrew okhleiha literally means 'those eating them,' referring to household members, servants, staff, and parasitic hangers-on. And what good is there to the owners thereof, saving the beholding of them with their eyes? (וּמַה־כִּשְׁרוֹן לִבְעָלֶיהָ כִּי אִם־רְאוּת עֵינָיו, umah-kishron liv'aleiha ki im-re'ut einav)—the only advantage is visual observation.
Qoheleth identifies wealth's ironic burden: prosperity attracts dependents proportionally, leaving the owner with mere spectatorship rather than actual enjoyment. The term kishron ('advantage' or 'success') recalls the book's recurring question: 'What profit has man from all his labor?' (1:3). Jesus later warned that 'a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions' (Luke 12:15). The wealthy man becomes custodian rather than consumer, watching resources flow through his hands to others—rendering ownership functionally meaningless beyond the psychological satisfaction of 'having.' True contentment comes not from accumulation but from enjoying God's sufficient provision (1 Timothy 6:6-8).
Qoheleth identifies wealth's ironic burden: prosperity attracts dependents proportionally, leaving the owner with mere spectatorship rather than actual enjoyment. The term kishron ('advantage' or 'success') recalls the book's recurring question: 'What profit has man from all his labor?' (1:3). Jesus later warned that 'a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions' (Luke 12:15). The wealthy man becomes custodian rather than consumer, watching resources flow through his hands to others—rendering ownership functionally meaningless beyond the psychological satisfaction of 'having.' True contentment comes not from accumulation but from enjoying God's sufficient provision (1 Timothy 6:6-8).
The sleep of a labouring man is sweet, whether he eat little or much: but the abundance of the rich will not suffer him to sleep.
View commentary
The sleep of a labouring man is sweet (מְתוּקָה שְׁנַת הָעֹבֵד, metukah shenat ha'oved)—literally 'sweet is the sleep of the worker.' The adjective metukah conveys pleasantness and satisfaction. Whether he eat little or much (אִם־מְעַט וְאִם־הַרְבֵּה יֹאכֵל, im-me'at ve'im-harbeh yokhel)—regardless of quantity consumed. But the abundance of the rich will not suffer him to sleep (וְהַשָּׂבָע לֶעָשִׁיר אֵינֶנּוּ מַנִּיחַ לוֹ לִישׁוֹן, vehasava le'ashir einennu maniach lo lishon)—prosperity's satiation doesn't permit him to sleep.
One of Scripture's most pointed contrasts: the laborer sleeps soundly regardless of modest means, while the rich man suffers insomnia despite (or because of) abundance. The verb maniach ('permit' or 'allow') suggests wealth actively prevents rest—through anxiety about preservation, fear of loss, complications of management, or the spiritual burden Jesus described: 'the deceitfulness of riches' (Matthew 13:22). Physical labor produces healthy fatigue and clear conscience; wealth accumulation produces restless worry. Proverbs 3:24 promises the righteous, 'When you lie down, you will not be afraid; your sleep will be sweet'—a sweetness dependent on trust in God rather than portfolio size.
One of Scripture's most pointed contrasts: the laborer sleeps soundly regardless of modest means, while the rich man suffers insomnia despite (or because of) abundance. The verb maniach ('permit' or 'allow') suggests wealth actively prevents rest—through anxiety about preservation, fear of loss, complications of management, or the spiritual burden Jesus described: 'the deceitfulness of riches' (Matthew 13:22). Physical labor produces healthy fatigue and clear conscience; wealth accumulation produces restless worry. Proverbs 3:24 promises the righteous, 'When you lie down, you will not be afraid; your sleep will be sweet'—a sweetness dependent on trust in God rather than portfolio size.
There is a sore evil which I have seen under the sun, namely, riches kept for the owners thereof to their hurt.
View commentary
There is a sore evil which I have seen under the sun (יֵשׁ רָעָה חוֹלָה רָאִיתִי תַּחַת הַשָּׁמֶשׁ, yesh ra'ah cholah ra'iti tachat hashemesh)—'a grievous evil I have observed.' The term cholah means 'sick' or 'diseased,' intensifying ra'ah (evil). Riches kept for the owners thereof to their hurt (עֹשֶׁר שָׁמוּר לִבְעָלָיו לְרָעָתוֹ, osher shamur liv'alav lera'ato)—wealth guarded/hoarded for its owner unto his harm.
Qoheleth identifies a tragic paradox: wealth accumulated for security becomes the source of ruin. The verb shamur ('kept' or 'guarded') suggests anxious preservation rather than generous circulation. This 'hurt' (ra'ato) can manifest physically (stress, obsession), relationally (isolation, distrust), legally (lawsuits, theft), or spiritually (idolatry of mammon). Jesus's parable of the rich fool (Luke 12:16-21) perfectly illustrates this—the man hoarded for future security, only to lose his soul that very night. Paul warns that 'those who desire to be rich fall into temptation' (1 Timothy 6:9). Wealth hoarded becomes a curse; wealth stewarded becomes blessing.
Qoheleth identifies a tragic paradox: wealth accumulated for security becomes the source of ruin. The verb shamur ('kept' or 'guarded') suggests anxious preservation rather than generous circulation. This 'hurt' (ra'ato) can manifest physically (stress, obsession), relationally (isolation, distrust), legally (lawsuits, theft), or spiritually (idolatry of mammon). Jesus's parable of the rich fool (Luke 12:16-21) perfectly illustrates this—the man hoarded for future security, only to lose his soul that very night. Paul warns that 'those who desire to be rich fall into temptation' (1 Timothy 6:9). Wealth hoarded becomes a curse; wealth stewarded becomes blessing.
But those riches perish by evil travail: and he begetteth a son, and there is nothing in his hand.
View commentary
But those riches perish by evil travail (וְאָבַד הָעֹשֶׁר הַהוּא בְּעִנְיַן רָע, ve'avad ha'osher hahu be'inyan ra)—'and that wealth was lost through bad business/misfortune.' The noun inyan refers to occupation, affair, or venture—the wealth vanishes through failed enterprise. And he begetteth a son, and there is nothing in his hand (וְהוֹלִיד בֵּן וְאֵין בְּיָדוֹ מְאוּמָה, veholid ben ve'ein beyado me'umah)—he fathers a child, yet has nothing left to provide.
The 'sore evil' (v.13) now plays out concretely: the hoarded wealth disappears through misfortune or bad decisions, leaving the owner unable to fulfill paternal duty of inheritance. The phrase 'nothing in his hand' (ein beyado me'umah) emphasizes complete emptiness—the grasping hand opens to reveal nothing. This illustrates Jesus's teaching: 'Do not lay up treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and thieves break in and steal' (Matthew 6:19). The father who focused on accumulation for his son's sake finds his singular focus produces the opposite result. True inheritance is training in godliness (Proverbs 22:6), not merely material transfer.
The 'sore evil' (v.13) now plays out concretely: the hoarded wealth disappears through misfortune or bad decisions, leaving the owner unable to fulfill paternal duty of inheritance. The phrase 'nothing in his hand' (ein beyado me'umah) emphasizes complete emptiness—the grasping hand opens to reveal nothing. This illustrates Jesus's teaching: 'Do not lay up treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and thieves break in and steal' (Matthew 6:19). The father who focused on accumulation for his son's sake finds his singular focus produces the opposite result. True inheritance is training in godliness (Proverbs 22:6), not merely material transfer.
As he came forth of his mother's womb, naked shall he return to go as he came, and shall take nothing of his labour, which he may carry away in his hand.
View commentary
As he came forth of his mother's womb, naked shall he return (כַּאֲשֶׁר יָצָא מִבֶּטֶן אִמּוֹ עָרוֹם יָשׁוּב לָלֶכֶת כְּשֶׁבָּא, ka'asher yatsa mibeten immo arom yashuv lalekhet keshebba)—echoing Job's famous declaration: 'Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return' (Job 1:21). And shall take nothing of his labour, which he may carry away in his hand (וּמְאוּמָה לֹא־יִשָּׂא בַעֲמָלוֹ שֶׁיֹּלֵךְ בְּיָדוֹ, ume'umah lo-yissa va'amalo sheyolekh beyado)—absolutely nothing from his toil goes with him.
This verse provides Scripture's starkest memento mori regarding possessions: we arrive empty-handed and depart empty-handed, rendering accumulation's ultimate futility undeniable. The repetition of 'naked' (arom) and the double negative me'umah lo ('nothing not') emphasize absolute destitution at death. Paul echoed this: 'We brought nothing into the world, and we cannot take anything out' (1 Timothy 6:7). Yet the verse isn't counseling passivity—it's exposing idolatry. What we 'carry away' isn't material but spiritual: 'Lay up treasures in heaven' (Matthew 6:20). The only eternal investments are Kingdom works, transformed character, and souls won for Christ.
This verse provides Scripture's starkest memento mori regarding possessions: we arrive empty-handed and depart empty-handed, rendering accumulation's ultimate futility undeniable. The repetition of 'naked' (arom) and the double negative me'umah lo ('nothing not') emphasize absolute destitution at death. Paul echoed this: 'We brought nothing into the world, and we cannot take anything out' (1 Timothy 6:7). Yet the verse isn't counseling passivity—it's exposing idolatry. What we 'carry away' isn't material but spiritual: 'Lay up treasures in heaven' (Matthew 6:20). The only eternal investments are Kingdom works, transformed character, and souls won for Christ.
And this also is a sore evil, that in all points as he came, so shall he go: and what profit hath he that hath laboured for the wind?
View commentary
And this also is a sore evil (וְגַם־זֹה רָעָה חוֹלָה, vegam-zoh ra'ah cholah)—repeating verse 13's phrase, 'a grievous evil.' That in all points as he came, so shall he go (כָּל־עֻמַּת שֶׁבָּא כֵּן יֵלֵךְ, kol-ummat shebba ken yelekh)—'exactly corresponding to how he came, thus he goes,' emphasizing precise symmetry of arrival and departure. And what profit hath he that hath laboured for the wind? (וּמַה־יִּתְרוֹן לוֹ שֶׁיַּעֲמֹל לָרוּחַ, umah-yitron lo sheya'amol laruach)—employing yitron, the book's signature term for 'profit' or 'gain.'
The 'sore evil' is the absurdity itself: entrance equals exit, making intervening accumulation meaningless from eternity's perspective. The phrase 'laboured for the wind' (ya'amol laruach) is bitterly poetic—one cannot grasp wind, store wind, or profit from wind; it's the ultimate symbol of futility. Hosea used similar imagery: 'They sow the wind and reap the whirlwind' (Hosea 8:7). Yet Ecclesiastes' answer isn't nihilism but redirected ambition: labor for what endures. 'Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life' (John 6:27).
The 'sore evil' is the absurdity itself: entrance equals exit, making intervening accumulation meaningless from eternity's perspective. The phrase 'laboured for the wind' (ya'amol laruach) is bitterly poetic—one cannot grasp wind, store wind, or profit from wind; it's the ultimate symbol of futility. Hosea used similar imagery: 'They sow the wind and reap the whirlwind' (Hosea 8:7). Yet Ecclesiastes' answer isn't nihilism but redirected ambition: labor for what endures. 'Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life' (John 6:27).
All his days also he eateth in darkness, and he hath much sorrow and wrath with his sickness.
View commentary
All his days also he eateth in darkness (גַּם כָּל־יָמָיו בַּחֹשֶׁךְ יֹאכֵל, gam kol-yamav bachoshekh yokhel)—literally 'all his days in darkness he eats,' suggesting joyless consumption, isolation, or depression. The Hebrew choshekh (darkness) often symbolizes spiritual/emotional gloom, not just physical absence of light. And he hath much sorrow and wrath with his sickness (וְכָעַס הַרְבֵּה וְחָלְיוֹ וָקָצֶף, vekha'as harbeh vecholyo vaqatsef)—abundant vexation, his illness, and anger.
This verse paints the psychological portrait of the wealth-hoarder from verses 13-16: his entire existence becomes shadowed by worry, marked by joyless eating (contrast verse 18's enjoyment), multiplied grief (ka'as harbeh, 'much vexation'), physical illness (cholyo), and rage (qatsef). Darkness here represents the spiritual state of one whose life centers on perishing riches—he eats but cannot taste, possesses but cannot enjoy, lives but finds no light. This is the rich fool syndrome (Luke 12:19-20) lived out over decades. Contrast this with Proverbs 15:15: 'All the days of the afflicted are evil, but the cheerful of heart has a continual feast'—disposition matters more than possessions.
This verse paints the psychological portrait of the wealth-hoarder from verses 13-16: his entire existence becomes shadowed by worry, marked by joyless eating (contrast verse 18's enjoyment), multiplied grief (ka'as harbeh, 'much vexation'), physical illness (cholyo), and rage (qatsef). Darkness here represents the spiritual state of one whose life centers on perishing riches—he eats but cannot taste, possesses but cannot enjoy, lives but finds no light. This is the rich fool syndrome (Luke 12:19-20) lived out over decades. Contrast this with Proverbs 15:15: 'All the days of the afflicted are evil, but the cheerful of heart has a continual feast'—disposition matters more than possessions.
Behold that which I have seen: it is good and comely for one to eat and to drink, and to enjoy the good of all his labour that he taketh under the sun all the days of his life, which God giveth him: for it is his portion. It is good: Heb. there is a good which is comely, etc all the days: Heb. the number of the days
View commentary
Behold that which I have seen: it is good and comely (הִנֵּה אֲשֶׁר־רָאִיתִי אָנִי טוֹב אֲשֶׁר־יָפֶה, hinneh asher-ra'iti ani tov asher-yafeh)—'Behold what I have seen: it is good, it is beautiful.' The doubled affirmation (tov and yafeh) emphasizes positive discovery after the gloom of verses 13-17. For one to eat and to drink, and to enjoy the good of all his labour (לֶאֱכוֹל וְלִשְׁתּוֹת וְלִרְאוֹת טוֹבָה בְּכָל־עֲמָלוֹ, le'ekhol velishto velir'ot tovah bekhol-amalo)—to eat, drink, and see good in all his toil.
After exposing accumulation's futility, Qoheleth offers the counter-vision: present enjoyment of God's gifts in the labor itself, not hoarding for an uncertain future. This isn't hedonism—the phrase which God giveth him (שֶׁנָּתַן־לוֹ הָאֱלֹהִים, shenatan-lo ha'elohim) frames enjoyment as receiving divine provision with gratitude. For it is his portion (כִּי־הוּא חֶלְקוֹ, ki-hu chelqo)—echoing 3:22, recognizing God's apportioned gift. Paul later taught similar contentment: 'Having food and clothing, with these we shall be content' (1 Timothy 6:8). This is covenantal contentment—enjoying God's daily bread rather than anxiously hoarding.
After exposing accumulation's futility, Qoheleth offers the counter-vision: present enjoyment of God's gifts in the labor itself, not hoarding for an uncertain future. This isn't hedonism—the phrase which God giveth him (שֶׁנָּתַן־לוֹ הָאֱלֹהִים, shenatan-lo ha'elohim) frames enjoyment as receiving divine provision with gratitude. For it is his portion (כִּי־הוּא חֶלְקוֹ, ki-hu chelqo)—echoing 3:22, recognizing God's apportioned gift. Paul later taught similar contentment: 'Having food and clothing, with these we shall be content' (1 Timothy 6:8). This is covenantal contentment—enjoying God's daily bread rather than anxiously hoarding.
Every man also to whom God hath given riches and wealth, and hath given him power to eat thereof, and to take his portion, and to rejoice in his labour; this is the gift of God.
View commentary
Every man also to whom God hath given riches and wealth (גַּם כָּל־הָאָדָם אֲשֶׁר נָתַן־לוֹ הָאֱלֹהִים עֹשֶׁר וּנְכָסִים, gam kol-ha'adam asher natan-lo ha'elohim osher unekhasim)—recognizing God as the source of material blessings, not personal achievement. And hath given him power to eat thereof (וְהִשְׁלִיטוֹ לֶאֱכֹל מִמֶּנּוּ, vehishlito le'ekhol mimmennu)—literally 'empowered him to eat from it,' acknowledging that enjoyment capacity itself is divinely granted. This is the gift of God (מַתַּת אֱלֹהִים הִיא, matat elohim hi)—the emphatic conclusion.
Verse 19 nuances verse 18: wealth isn't automatically evil, but only blessing when: (1) recognized as God's gift, not personal achievement, (2) enjoyed rather than hoarded, and (3) received with contentment as one's chelqo (portion). The phrase 'power to eat thereof' is crucial—wealth without the ability to enjoy it is the 'sore evil' of verses 13-17, but wealth received gratefully becomes matat elohim (God's gift). This anticipates James 1:17: 'Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above.' The key difference isn't amount but attitude—stewardship versus ownership, gratitude versus entitlement.
Verse 19 nuances verse 18: wealth isn't automatically evil, but only blessing when: (1) recognized as God's gift, not personal achievement, (2) enjoyed rather than hoarded, and (3) received with contentment as one's chelqo (portion). The phrase 'power to eat thereof' is crucial—wealth without the ability to enjoy it is the 'sore evil' of verses 13-17, but wealth received gratefully becomes matat elohim (God's gift). This anticipates James 1:17: 'Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above.' The key difference isn't amount but attitude—stewardship versus ownership, gratitude versus entitlement.
For he shall not much remember the days of his life; because God answereth him in the joy of his heart. For: or, Though he give not much, yet he remembereth, etc
View commentary
For he shall not much remember the days of his life (כִּי לֹא הַרְבֵּה יִזְכֹּר אֶת־יְמֵי חַיָּיו, ki lo harbeh yizkor et-yemei chayav)—'for not much will he remember the days of his life.' This can mean either he won't dwell on past troubles, or life passes quickly when enjoyed. Because God answereth him in the joy of his heart (כִּי הָאֱלֹהִים מַעֲנֶה בְּשִׂמְחַת לִבּוֹ, ki ha'elohim ma'aneh besimchat libbo)—literally 'because God occupies/answers him with the joy of his heart.'
The Hebrew verb ma'aneh is fascinating—it can mean 'answers,' 'occupies,' or 'keeps busy.' The sense is that God fills the person's attention with present joy, crowding out anxious rumination about past or future. The contrast with verse 17 ('he eateth in darkness... much sorrow') is stark: same brevity of life, opposite experience. The difference is God's simchat libbo (heart-joy)—not circumstances but divine grace producing contentment. This anticipates Paul's 'the joy of the Lord is your strength' (Nehemiah 8:10) and 'rejoice in the Lord always' (Philippians 4:4). When God grants contentment, life's transience becomes less burdensome because the present moment becomes sufficient.
The Hebrew verb ma'aneh is fascinating—it can mean 'answers,' 'occupies,' or 'keeps busy.' The sense is that God fills the person's attention with present joy, crowding out anxious rumination about past or future. The contrast with verse 17 ('he eateth in darkness... much sorrow') is stark: same brevity of life, opposite experience. The difference is God's simchat libbo (heart-joy)—not circumstances but divine grace producing contentment. This anticipates Paul's 'the joy of the Lord is your strength' (Nehemiah 8:10) and 'rejoice in the Lord always' (Philippians 4:4). When God grants contentment, life's transience becomes less burdensome because the present moment becomes sufficient.