Read an Excerpt

Abingdon Old Testament Commentaries

Ecclesiastes

Abindon Press

COMMENTARY

ECCLESIASTES 1:1-2

Making Introductions: The Speaker and His Theme

1:1 Introducing Qohelet

The book of Ecclesiastes begins with two important pieces of information — an identification of its author and an encapsulation of its contents — yet each does more to pique curiosity than to satisfy it.

Qohelet (NRSV "Teacher" [see introduction]) is introduced as speaker of the words to follow. He is further identified in a way that suggests a royal identity, and a specific one at that. Though the patronymic "son of David" might refer to any descendant in David's line, Qohelet's own self-announcement in verse 12 points to the figure of Solomon, and the ensuing first-person report is reminiscent of the biblical image of that king (1:12–2:11). Still, the text of 1:1 stops short of naming the name. This is noteworthy, for no such restraint is seen in the ascriptions of the books of Proverbs and Song of Songs, which include explicit attributions to Solomon. In fact, the name Solomon is found nowhere in the book of Ecclesiastes. More to the point, the royal identity adopted here does not seem to play a role after the first two chapters. In the remainder of the book Qohelet speaks from the perspective of a subject, not a ruler (e.g., 4:1; 8:2-4; 10:4, 16-17), and at the conclusion of the book, where he is once again spoken of in the third person, he is eulogized as a wise man, not a king (12:9-10). These factors suggest that the royal identity sketched at the opening of the book is a kind of guise adopted for rhetorical effect — Qohelet plays a role to argue a point — which is then shed after it has served its purpose in the opening two chapters (see 1:12–2:26).

1:2 All Is Vapor!

Verse 2 offers a motto or summary of Qohelet's teaching in the form of a quotation. The theme word here, Hebrew hebel, traditionally translated as "vanity," occurs thirty-eight times within the book of Ecclesiastes. These attestations account for over half the word's occurrences in the entire Old Testament! The literal meaning of the Hebrew word is "mist, vapor, breath." Strikingly, however, it is used in its concrete sense in just one instance (see Isa 57:13). Otherwise the word is most often used metaphorically throughout the Old Testament, with connotations that derive in some fashion from the physical properties of vapor.

The fact that this word is chosen to exemplify Qohelet's central motif is most intriguing. It does not seem to have a precise significance that the book's ancient audience would easily recognize, at least so far as the biblical evidence will take us. While the term in context often has negative connotations, such as futility and even deception (presumably drawing upon vapor's insubstantial properties), it can also matter-of-factly refer to the impermanence of things and the transient nature of human existence (see Excursus). The malleability of the term is one reason commentators have come to such markedly different conclusions about the tonality of the book (see introduction).

As for its first occurrence here in the prelude to the book, the status of vapor as theme word is heralded with a fivefold repetition. The construction of the Hebrew phrase is a superlative and might be rendered, "Utter vapor ... utter vapor. All is vapor." This motto is repeated almost verbatim at the conclusion of Qohelet's words (12:8), thus serving as a frame for them. Yet, as noted, the import of the declaration "All is vapor" is far from self-evident! Thus the statement functions as a tantalizing lure, urging the reader further into the contents of the book.

Excursus:Vaporin the Old Testament and in Ecclesiastes

Vapor in the Old TestamentVapor is predominantly used as a metaphor in the Old Testament. Its connotations may be, broadly speaking, divided into two categories: that which is insubstantial and that which is transient, though the division is somewhat artificial in some instances (see Miller 1998, 445–48).

Vapor as Insubstantiality in the Old Testament

Miller has characterized this category as "a matter of expectation versus reality" (1998, 446). This quality leads to such connotations as ineffective and useless, as in Isaiah 30:7, where Egypt's military assistance for Judah is pronounced "[vapor] and empty." In a similar vein it is used to connote futile exertion, as in Isaiah 49:4: "I said, for emptiness I have labored, for nothing and vapor I have spent my strength" (AT; see Job 9:29; Ps 39:6 [Heb. 7]). In a meaning that is related to the sense of inefficacy, the word can suggest deception, something illusory, as in Job 21:34: "How then will you comfort me with [vapor]? There is nothing left of your answers but falsehood" (cf. Zech 10:2). Vapor is employed in several places as an epithet for false gods (e.g., Deut 32:21; Jer 8:19; 16:19), a use that derives from its associations with inefficacy and that which is illusory or deceptive.

Vapor as Transience in the Old Testament

This dimension is seen in a few passages, primarily from the Psalms, where the term is used to connote the transience of human existence. The psalmist prays: "You have made my days a few handbreadths, and my lifetime is as nothing in your sight. Surely everyone stands as a mere breath [vapor]" (Ps 39:5 [Heb. 6]). The image of humans as vapor — a mere breath — is a means of expressing the definitive demarcation between creator and creature, divine and mortal. In Psalm 144:3-4 the poet exclaims: "O LORD, what are humans that you regard them, or mortals that you think of them? They are like a breath [vapor]; their days are like a passing shadow." In these and similar meditations vapor is part of a matrix of images (such as "breath," "cloud," and "shadow") that convey the condition of human finitude (see further Pss 39:11; 62:9 [Heb. 10]; Job 7:16).

Vapor in Ecclesiastes

In keeping with biblical convention, Qohelet, too, employs the term metaphorically. But Qohelet is quite unique in one respect. In other biblical contexts the connotations of the term are constant within a given literary setting. By contrast Qohelet may employ the term with differing connotations within a given passage; the question of which is at play is informed by the immediate context in which it is found. The malleability of the image is demonstrated in chapter 11. In verse 8 vapor is associated with the state of death: "Even if a man lives many years, let him rejoice in them all. Let him remember that the days of darkness will be many. All that comes is vapor" (AT). In verse 10, however, it is applied to the days of youth. Here a young man is addressed and urgently encouraged to savor life to the fullest, for (translating literally) "youth and dawn are vapor." Obviously vapor cannot carry the same import in these two instances. In the latter case the reference is to the fleeting nature of youth. In the case of 11:8, however, vapor appears to function as an elaboration on "the days of darkness," hence it is the shadowy, obscuring qualities of vapor that are at play. Thus we see that within the span of a few verses Qohelet employs the image with different connotations, though both are in some way related to the qualities of vapor (see also 6:11-12).

Qohelet's use of the metaphor shares common ground with other biblical tradents in that he often uses it to connote transience and insubstantiality. Yet, as is evident from 11:8 (where vapor is related to the days of darkness, or death), Qohelet is also exploiting other inherent possibilities for the metaphor. Vapor is, in fact, a versatile image for Qohelet, thus presenting a challenge for interpreters as its meaning must be gleaned from clues in the context.

It is helpful to begin, however, with some examples that follow more typical biblical usage.

Vapor as Insubstantiality in Ecclesiastes

In some passages Qohelet uses vapor to convey that which is insubstantial. In this domain vapor can refer to things or actions that are ineffectual, futile, trivial, or ultimately lacking in any satisfactory result. In chapter 5 vapor characterizes the talk of a fool: "As a host of vaporous dreams, so are many words; instead fear God" (5:7 [emended]). In chapter 6 it applies to superfluous speech in general: "The more words, the more [vapor], so how is one the better?" (6:11).

Vapor as Transience in Ecclesiastes

In other passages vapor's impermanence and transience are at play, as seen in 11:10, where the young man is encouraged to enjoy life while there is still time. This aspect is evident in 6:4, where vapor conveys the ephemeral existence of a stillborn child: "For it comes in vapor and goes into darkness, and in darkness its name is covered" (based on NRSV). In 6:12 it characterizes the fleeting nature of human existence in general: "For who knows what is good for mortals while they live the numbered days of their vapor lives, which they pass like a shadow?" (based on NRSV). Compare also 7:15 and 9:9.

The Ambiguity of Vapor in Ecclesiastes

There are, however, other places in Ecclesiastes where the nuances of vapor are outside of the associations typically found elsewhere in the Old Testament (see Seow, "Beyond Mortal Grasp: The Usage of Hebel in Ecclesiastes," ABR 48 [2000]: 10–14). To make matters more challenging, Qohelet most often applies vapor to situations, or a constellation of circumstances. Because the vapor assessment is applied to scenarios, the precise target of the evaluation may be in question, a matter that impacts the question of vapor's nuance: "Again, I saw vapor under the sun: one man, and no companion; nor does he have a son or a brother. And there is no end to all his toil. Moreover his eyes are not satisfied with wealth. 'For whom am I toiling,' he asks, 'and depriving myself of pleasure?' This also is vapor and an unhappy business" (4:7-8, AT). What is the vapor of this scenario? Is it the desolate solitude of the man (cf. 4:9), the absence of any heir (cf. 2:1819), the fact that he toils compulsively (cf. 2:11), the unquenchable desire for more (5:10 and 6:7), or the sum of all these? Does vapor convey a hollow existence, futile striving, the illusion of wealth as a means of fulfillment, or all of the above? The passage well illustrates the inherent ambiguity in the metaphor, as well as in Qohelet's application of the vapor assessment. There is in fact a riddle-like quality to vapor in Ecclesiastes. We as readers are exercised to ponder the image in its relationship to the situations put before us.

The NRSV follows the King James Version in rendering vapor with the abstract term "vanity." The consistent translation of vapor with a single abstract term is not unique to the NRSV and King James Version; this is in fact the most common route taken in translations and commentaries. Proposals offered have included "meaninglessness," "futility," "transience," and "incomprehensibility," to name a few. Yet due to the pliant nature of the image in Ecclesiastes, such terms founder at one point or another when they are inserted for every occurrence of vapor. No single word fits all occurrences of vapor in Ecclesiastes. The problem, however, is not just with the constricting nature of a single term, but with the constriction inherent in the use of an abstract term for a poetic image: as with any key poetic image, it cannot be glossed without losing a play of meaning. Throughout his discourse Qohelet wields words with a poet's sensibility; his use of vapor is no exception (see Miller 1998, 444–45). It is best to allow vapor to stand as is, as a poetic image or metaphor in which various qualities or dimensions of the entities vapor/breath shift and move to the fore, depending upon the literary context (compare Miller 1998, 437–54).

Even at this, we may suggest that Qohelet's repetition of the word in a wide array of settings pushes at the bounds of its metaphorical possibilities, suggesting the status of a coded term — a word that draws on traditional usage, but for which Qohelet is forging additional ramifications. When Qohelet considers that humans and animals both share the fate of death, he deems this vapor (3:19-21). One cannot take this simply as a matter-of-fact observation on creaturely transience, for when Qohelet dwells upon this shared essence between humans and animals without acknowledging any distinction at all, he is countering biblical traditions on the orders of creation (compare, e.g., Ps 8:39 and Gen 1:27-31). Moreover his sense of affront is palpable. He dwells at length on the fact, stating it first one way, and then another, as if he cannot quite fathom it: "They all have the same breath, and humans have no advantage whatsoever over the animals; indeed all is vapor. For both go to one place; both are from dust, and both turn to dust again" (3:19b-20, AT).

A similar tone is found in his comparison of wisdom to folly in 2:1216. Qohelet acknowledges wisdom's relative advantage over foolishness — "The wise have eyes in their head, but fools walk in darkness" (2:14) — but is aghast at the fact that both suffer the same fate of death and moreover are consigned to oblivion: "Then I said to myself, 'What happens to the fool will happen to me also; why then have I been so very wise?' And I said to myself that this also is [vapor]" (2:15). Again in chapter 8, Qohelet's indignation is at its height as he observes that sometimes it is in fact the righteous who meet an untimely end and the wicked who enjoy long days (8:14; cf. 12-13). The situation presented is an affront to the most fundamental of wisdom principles: that the righteous and the wicked will ultimately receive their due justice from God (Prov 10:27; 11:4; 13:9, etc.). That such an inversion should occur is beyond comprehension, something Qohelet cannot "get his head around," so to speak. Qohelet underscores the vapor of this situation by hemming it round with the verdict: "There is a vapor that takes place on earth ... I said that this also is vapor."

The passages cited have to do with a fundamental dissonance between who a person is and what befalls him or her. Too often things are not as they should be. Qohelet covers the gamut of disappointments in his observations on life, from that of corrupt persons accorded public recognition and honors at their death (8:10) to the individual who toils earnestly with skill and wisdom, only to lose all to one who has done nothing to deserve it (2:21). Speaking broadly, the refrain of vapor in Ecclesiastes becomes a kind of cipher for disillusionment — the fundamental disparity between human hopes and expectations for what life should be, and life as it is. Such disparities boggle the mind of the sage steeped in traditional wisdom teachings. To speak of these as disappointments is not adequate. The effect is one of profound disorientation, a disorientation that Qohelet allows the readers to see (see introduction).

While allowing that the various translations proposed for vapor offer illumination at one point or another, it should be reiterated that to translate all occurrences with any single abstract term will invariably prove a misfit at one point or another, given its nature as metaphor. The ultimate effect of translating the metaphor with a single abstract term is to reduce the variegated shades of this work to a monochromatic tone. Given the nature of vapor as a metaphor, which clearly encompasses multiple valences for Qohelet, the concrete term should be preserved. It may be argued, moreover, that the widely favored and long venerated translation of "vanity" is particularly unhelpful. In modern English usage the word conveys something without value, or emptiness as well as futility (something done "in vain"). Also included is the meaning self-conceit, a more common connotation in popular usage, perhaps the first that comes to mind for the average reader.

Reading Ecclesiastes with "vanity" as the theme word has had undue influence on popular interpretations of the book. In general such a reading tends to locate the source of the flawed world observed by Qohelet in the shortcomings of humanity. Though Qohelet does indeed bemoan the misdirected strivings of humans (e.g., 4:7-8; 5:10-11, 13-17) as well as (more rarely) the role of self-conceit and pride in human effort (e.g., 2:4-9; 4:4), these are minor concerns as compared with his larger preoccupation — that is with the way in which human desire for meaning and coherence is thwarted at most every turn. Qohelet's musings are not, then, in the vein of pious chidings from above. His sympathy is squarely cast with his fellow earthlings, who thirst for meaning and understanding in the face of divinely set limitations.

---

Excerpted from Abingdon Old Testament Commentaries by Julie Ann Duncan. Copyright © 2017 Abingdon Press. Excerpted by permission of Abindon Press.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

---