Copyright © 1985 by
RIGHTEOUSNESS AND WICKEDNESS IN
ECCLESIASTES 7:15-18
WAYNE A.
BRINDLE
Good and evil, righteousness and wickedness,
virtue
and vice--these are common subjects in the
Scriptures. The poetical
books, especial1y, are much concerned with the acts
of righteous
and unrighteous persons. Qoheleth,
in Ecclesiastes, declares that
"there is nothing better....than to rejoice and to do good in
one's
lifetime" (
warning that "God will bring every act to
judgment, everything
which is hidden, whether it is good or evil" (
But how righteous should one try to be, and for
what purpose?
Qoheleth sets forth what appears to be a strange
answer in Eccl
7:15-18:
I have seen everything during my lifetime of
futility; there is
a righteous man who
perishes in his righteousness, and there is a
wicked man who prolongs his
life in his wickedness. Do not be
excessively righteous, and do not
be overly wise. Why should you
ruin yourself? Do not be
excessively wicked, and do not be a fool.
Why should you die before your time? It is good
that you grasp
one thing, and also not let
go of the other; for the one who fears
God comes forth with both of them. (NASB)
1. Common Interpretations of Ecclesiastes
7:15-18
Walter C. Kaiser contends that "few verses
in Ecclesiastes are
more susceptible to incorrect interpretations than
7:16-18."1 In
fact, interpreters of Ecclesiastes tend to view the
argument of
18
in a variety of ways, depending upon whether they are willing
to attribute to the author a sense of relativity
and "moderation" in
moral conduct.2
1Walter C.
Kaiser, Jr., Ecclesiastes: Total Life (
2The Jewish Targum seems to interpret the word "righteous"
here in
a
technical sense as an admonition to judges not to be too severe in their
judgments,
243
244
The
Golden Mean
Kaiser has also observed that "for many,
Solomon's advice
is the so-called golden mean; it is as if he had
said: 'Don't
be too holy and don't be too wicked. Sin to a moderate degree!' "3
Indeed,
almost every commentator speaks directly or indirectly of
Qoheleth's
"doctrine of the golden mean."4 Those commentators
who understand the author of Ecclesiastes to be
advocating the idea
of this sort of "golden mean" between
virtue and vice usually date
the book quite late, since the concept of a
"mean" by which to
guide one's life is thought to have gained popularity
during the
time of Aristotle, or even of the Stoics.5
To many, Qoheleth's
apparent failure to exhort his readers to
totally righteous behavior seems to leave him
open to the charge of
teaching immorality and misconduct.6
They believe that he was
advocating a "middle way" between
righteousness and wickedness,
because, as stated by R. N. Whybray,
"(i) his [Qoheleth's]
experience
had taught him that neither necessarily has any
effect on men's
but
this is a minority view and is certainly not consistent with the context; cf.
A. D.
Power, Ecclesiastes or The
Preacher (London, Eng., 1952), p.94; Christian D.
Ginsburg, Coheleth (1861; reprint,
3Kaiser, p. 85;
the arguments and conclusions presented here are valid regardless
of
one's view of the authorship of Ecclesiastes, as long as one accepts the unity
and
positive
perspective of the book; this latter problem is important, but cannot be
discussed
in this article.
4R.
Wisdom: Theological and Literary Essays in Honor
of Samuel Terrien, ed. John G.
Gammie (New York, 1978), p. 203, n. 4.
5See n. 2,
above; cf. Robert Gordis, Koheleth:
The Man and His World, 3d ed.
(New York, 1968), pp.
178, 276. Aristotle said, "Virtue lies in a mean
between
opposite
extremes" (Nicomachean Ethics,
2.6.7), a golden mean that was constantly
advocated
by Greek and Latin writers (see Power, pp.94-95). Confucius also
advocated
a type of "common sense" which resembled the Aristotelian mean (see
Harold H. Watts, The
Modern Reader's Guide to Religions [
p.540). Buddha recommended his "
extremes
of self-indulgence and self-mortification; this "
eightfold
path toward detachment from life, the elimination of desire, and thus
the
cessation of suffering (see
Religions [
6Whybray, p.
191.
ECCLESIASTES 7:15-18 245
fortunes in terms of divinely imposed reward or
punishment"; and
"(ii)
it had also taught him that extremes of any kind are in
practice more likely to lead to disaster than is
moderation."7
Is this what Qoheleth
is urging? Is he suggesting that since
personal righteousness is no guarantee of long
life or happiness
(
course between right and wrong? Or is he warning
against
becoming "too goody-goody or too impossibly
naughty"?9
G. A. Barton, who concludes that Qoheleth's warning against
"extreme righteousness" is a reproof of the excessive
legal obser-
vances of the "Chasidim,"
states further that "some interpreters…
hesitate to admit that Qoheleth
really implies that one may sin
to a moderate degree. That, however, is what he
undoubtedly implies."10
Loyal Young takes the meaning of the passage to
be that if
"one would avoid premature death, let him be neither too
righteous
nor too wicked"; he refers to a number of
Hebrew and Christian
martyrs, on the one hand, and to the inhabitants
of
were too righteous for their own safety--the last
class were too
wicked to be spared. This seems to be the only
satisfactory explana-
tion of the verses."11
He adds, however, that "every man, judging
for himself, is consoled in his shortcomings by the
supposition
that those more godly or more moral than he are too
righteous,"
and that the true explanation seems to be that
"if there is no future
world, let us make the best we can of this, avoiding
the extremes of
too much zeal for God, and too much wickedness."12
Some commentators who recognize the "golden
mean" in Eccl
7:15-18
do so because they believe that the author is speaking as a
mere "man under the sun." Samuel Cox, for
example, concludes
7Ibid.
8Ibid.,
p. 102, n. 3.
9Power, p. 95.
10George A. Barton,
A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Book of
Ecclesiastes, ICC (New
York, 1908), p. 144.
11Loyal Young, A Commentary on the Book of Ecclesiastes (
1865), p. 170.
12Ibid.,p.171.
246
that the author permits a "temperate indulgence
both in virtue and
in vice, carrying neither to excess (ver. 18)--a doctrine still very
dear to the mere man of the world."13
J. N. Coleman suggests that the word
"saying" belongs at the
end of
man who prolongs his life through his iniquity
(saying), 'Be not
righteous overmuch, neither make yourself overwise; why should
you destroy yourself?' "14 Coleman
thus declares that "this worldly
maxim is the counsel of the wicked man, not the maxim
or
teaching of Solomon"; and consequently, the
inspired reply of
Solomon,
then, is at vs. 17: "Do not be overmuch wicked"--that is,
do not add to original sin actual rejection of God
and his will.15
R. B. Y. Scott contends that the
"mean" of
from the assertion in
deserts."
It is therefore ''as unprofitable for men to exhaust them-
selves in struggling for moral perfection as it is to
hasten their
demise through folly"; and while wisdom is
important, he says, no
one can be perfect.16 On the other hand,
Robert Gordis interprets
the passage as a warning that "both extremes
of saintliness and
wickedness lead to unhappiness"; what is best
is a moderate course
between both extremes.17
According to C. D. Ginsburg, it is impossible to
make the
passage conform to orthodoxy.18 The
author teaches that one
should be ''as moderate in the indulgence of sin"
as he should be
"temperate in the practice of virtue."19
Ginsburg adds, however,
that this viewpoint is not the final opinion of the
author; that
opinion comes later, at the end of the book, and
it should not be
anticipated in this passage.20
13Samuel Cox, The Book of Ecclesiastes, The Expositors'
Bible, ed. W. Robert-
son
Nicoll (
14John N.
Coleman, Ecclesiastes (
15Ibid.,
p. 38.
16R. B. Y. Scott,
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, AB (Garden City, N.Y., 1965), p. 237. He
attributes
the Greek maxim, "nothing too much," to Solon (ca. 600 B.C.).
17Gordis,
p. 179.
18Ginsburg, p.
379.
19Ibid.,
p. 380.
20Ibid.
ECCLESIASTES 7:15-18 247
Fanaticism
and Legalism
Other commentators, while perhaps acknowledging
an exhort-
tation to moderation in Eccl
7:15-18, see the author as warning
especially against fanaticism. Edgar Jones, for
instance, says that
the passage is “reporting that the fanatical
extremist does run into
trouble.”21 And Franz Delitzsch holds a somewhat similar opinion,
declaring that the author teaches that one should
not exaggerate
righteousness; for “if it occurs that
a righteous man, in spite of his
righteousness, perishes, this
happens, at earliest, in the case in
which, in the practice of righteousness, he goes
beyond the right
measure and limit."22
Certain other commentators see in all of this a
reference to the
legalism of the Pharisees. A. D. Power, for
example, suggests that
possibly “religious" would be a better
understanding of the word
“righteous” here, “for K. might have been thinking of the
Pharisees
who paid tithe of mint and anise and cummin, but overlooked
such matters as judgment, mercy and faith (cf. Matt
perhaps the writer here meant religious or
ritualistic, like the
Pharisees who strained at a gnat and swallowed a
camel.
..."23
This view understands the words of Qoheleth to refer to an
excessive concentration on legal observance or
pious practices.
H.
C. Leupold describes them as referring to “a
righteousness that
is beginning to go to seed, a righteousness that
will flourish in its
most distorted form in the days of Jesus, in regard
to which Jesus
will be moved to say: ‘Except your righteousness
shall exceed the
righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees,
etc.' (Matt
Whybray states that scholars
have suggested two possible
reasons for the giving of such advice:
(i) Such striving after perfection is not a virtue, but
rather a sin:
that of pride or blasphemy.
(ii) Such excessive behavior is not
required by God, and is to be
avoided: for on the one hand its
21Edgar Jones, Proverbs
and Ecclesiastes, Torch Bible Commentaries (New
(
22Franz Delitzsch, Commentary on the Song of Songs and
Ecclesiastes (Grand
Rapids,
23Power
p. 95.
24H. C. Leupold, Exposition of Ecclesiastes (Columbus, Ohio,
1952), p. 164.
248
goal is beyond man's capacity and so it can achieve
nothing; and
on the other hand it makes life joyless, leading
to narrowness and
bigotry. So, in one way or another, the striving
after perfection
produces misery.25
Overreaction
to Truth
R. W. DeHaan and
Herbert Vander Lugt explain Eccl 7:16-17
as a warning against overreactions to the truth of
First,
some conclude that everyone who goes to an early
grave somehow must have
fallen short of doing what pleases the Lord.
Therefore they set about to make up this lack in
their own lives
by extreme legalism,
ascetic practices, or some other form of
works-righteousness. . . .
The second wrong
reaction is that of going down the road of
lustful living, giving oneself
over to unbridled sensuality…
Many who see apparently good people suffer
adversity or die
young go down the pathway of
a false and artificial works-
religion while others go down
the road of unrestrained wicked-
ness. Both courses will lead
to disaster.26
This viewpoint explains the context (both
in concord with the rest of Scripture. The command
not to be
"overly wise" (
overreaction to the failure of
wisdom to provide the full answer to
life (do not devote yourself fully to wisdom as if
it were the only
solution to life, but do not reject it to become
a fool either).
Self-righteousness
An increasingly common interpretation has been
to see in the
word "righteous" a reference to hypocrisy,
and to understand the
author to be referring to
"self-righteousness" rather than genuine
righteousness.27 As Power puts it:
"It may be he [Qoheleth] had in
mind those excessively religious people who spend
all their time
seeking out wickedness in others and have no
time for real religion
25Whybray, p.
191.
26Richard W. DeHaan and Herbert Vander Lugt, The Art of Staying Off Dead-
end
Streets (Wheaton, Ill., 1974), pp. 107-108.
27A. F. Harper,
"Ecclesiastes," in the Beacon Bible Commentary (
ECCLESIASTES 7:15-18 249
themselves; another translation therefore might
read as an injunc-
tion not to be
self-righteous."28
According to Kaiser, what most commentators miss
is that
"verses 16-17 are not cautioning against possessing too much
real righteousness." Rather, the danger is that
men might delude
themselves and others through "a multiplicity
of pseudoreligious
acts of sanctimoniousness; ostentatious showmanship
in the art of
worship; a spirit of hypercriticism against
minor deviations from
one's own cultural norms, which are equated with
God's righteous-
ness; and a disgusting conceit and supercilious,
holier-than-thou
attitude veneered over the whole mess."29
He states, further, that
the real clue to this passage is that the second
verb in
wise") must be rendered reflexively, as
"to think oneself to be
furnished with wisdom."30
G. R. Castellino, in a
careful analysis of the Hebrew forms,
comes to a similar conclusion: namely, that
oneself off as righteous"
(self-righteousness) and "passing oneself
off as wise” (intellectualization). Vs. 18 then
urges the reader to
"grasp true wisdom" and not to let go of "the
avoidance of
foolishness," both of which are achieved
through the fear of God.31
Whybray argues from the
structure, grammar, and meaning
of the passage as a whole that what is in view is
"the state of
mind which claims actually to have achieved
righteousness or
perfection."32 He advances the
following arguments:
1. In
(‘al-t ehi saddiq--"do
not be overly righteous") instead of the cognate verb
‘al-tisdaq is not due to chance or to purely stylistic
considerations,
but has a deliberate purpose: in order to give some
special meaning
to the word saddiq
which could not be conveyed by the use of the
verb. The phrase "refers to the self-righteous
man, the would-be
saddiq, the Inan who claims to be, or sees himself as, exceptionally
righteous."33
28Power, p. 95.
29Kaiser, pp.
85-86.
30Ibid.,
p. 86.
31George
R. Castellino, "Qohelet
and His Wisdom," CBQ 30 (1968): 24.
32Whybray"
p. 191.
33Ibid.,
pp. 192-195.
250
2. The word saddiq
("righteous") has an ethical sense, and
the author recognizes that in the strict sense
there is no saddiq
in existence (7:20). He does not distinguish
between "righteous"
and "perfect," but uses the same term for
both. Whybray concludes,
therefore, that in 7:16 he must be using the term
in an ironical sense:
"Do
not be a self-styled saddiq."34
3. The word harbeh
(
very," etc., and does not express any
value-judgment such as "too
great, or too much." The word is best taken as
qualifying the whole
preceding phrase. Qoheleth
thus "uses the qualifying adverb harbeh
to indicate that he recognizes a tendency in human
nature towards
self-righteousness." His meaning is
"Do not allow self-righteousness
to become your dominating characteristic." It
is "a gentle warning
which takes account of human weakness."35
4. In 7:16b the phrase
"be overly wise" is simply the hithpael
of the verb hkm. Whybray contends that of the meanings generally
attributed to the hithpael,
only three would make any sense at all here:
"to conduct oneself in a particular way"; "to
imagine/set oneself up to
be"; or "to pretend to be." The
first possibility would mean "Do not
act with great wisdom," which cannot be what
the author is saying.
The
last two options have a similar meaning: "Having first warned his
readers against setting themselves up to be, or
pretending to be,
absolutely righteous, Qoheleth
now warns them against similar
pretensions to wisdom."36
5. Vs. 17 states, "Do not be very
wicked." Here again the
word harbeh is a concession
to human frailty. Qoheleth adds a
warning not to go to the other extreme and throw
off all restraints
and all striving towards these virtues, abandoning
oneself to a life
of folly.
But "he knows that one cannot entirely avoid either wickedness
or folly (cf. vs. 20), and so he adds the word harbeh: what is to be
avoided is the carrying of them to
extremes." It is not an encouragement
to immorality, but merely a recognition of the
frailty and inherent
sinfulness
of man.37
34Ibid.,
p. 195.
35Ibid.,
p. 196.
36Ibid.
37Ibid.,
p. 197.
ECCLESIASTES 7:15-18 251
Charles Bridges likewise
understands Qoheleth' s words as a
warning against
self-righteousness: "To whom then, and to what,
does the admonition apply?
We have seen that it does not warn
us against true
righteousness. But it is a wholesome caution
against the 'vain affectation
of it.' Every right principle has its
counterfeit.”38
2. Exegesis of
Ecclesiastes 7:15-18
In Eccl 6:8, Qoheleth introduces the question, "What advantage
does the wise man have over
the fool?" Throughout the second half
of the book he deals with
the futility, benefits, and limitations of
wisdom, focusing especially on
the issue, "Who knows what is
good for a man during his
lifetime?" (
In chap. 7, the author
points out that no one can really
understand the work or the ways of
God, or of the future. "Who is
able to straighten what He
has bent?" he asks (7:13b). God has
made adversity as well as
prosperity, and both must be accepted
from him (
what the future holds for
them during their lifetime.
What Qoheleth
Has Seen-7:15
At this point a question
surely enters Qoheleth's mind: "I
have already said that in
place of righteousness there is wickedness
[
from God [
teousness brings blessing
[prosperity], and wickedness brings
cursing [adversity]? Is that
principle invalid?"
This question clearly
relates closely to the central problems of
the Book of Job. Qoheleth has neither the problem with God's
justice that Job had, nor the
faulty view of reality that Job's friends
demonstrated. He sees clearly (with
Job) that the principle of
righteousness®prosperity is only a general principle
and has
many exceptions. Qoheleth thus states from his experience: "There
is a righteous man who
perishes in his righteousness, and there is a
wicked. man
who prolongs [j`rx--"lengthen,"
"prolong"] his life
1960), p. 163.
252
in his wickedness" (
some men die young. And in
spite of their wickedness, some evil
men live long, prosperous
lives.
The Law stated time
after time that those who obeyed God and
lived righteously would
"prolong" (j`rx) their days and receive
blessing (Deut
Solomon in his wisdom had also made similar
promises (cf. Prov
28:16). But the problem of exceptions persisted.
Job recognized the same
problem when he asked, "Why do
the wicked still live,
continue on, also become very powerful?"
(Job 21:7). They have many children, safe
houses, prosperity,
and many days of rejoicing
(21 :8-12). "They spend their days in
prosperity," Job complains (
suffering or dying.
The psalmist also
"saw the prosperity of the wicked" (Ps 73:3),
and it nearly caused him to
stumble (73:2). He complains: "Behold,
these are the wicked; and
always at ease, they have increased in
wealth. Surely in vain I have
kept my heart pure, and washed my
hands in innocence" (Ps
73:12-13). This was very "troublesome" to
him (73:16), until he went
to God's sanctuary and finally under-
stood the end of the wicked
(73: 17). God would destroy them,
sooner or later (73:18-20).
The psalmist's solution is to focus all his
desires on God: "Whom have
I in heaven but Thee? And besides
Thee, I desire nothing on earth. . . . God is
the strength of my heart
and my portion forever. . .
as for me, the nearness of God is my
good" (Ps 73:25-28; cf.
Matt
Qoheleth himself explains the
problem and its principle more
in detail in the following
chapter (Eccl 8). The general principle is
valid, he says, that "it
will not be well for the evil man and he will
not lengthen his days like
a shadow, because he does not fear God"
(
be well for those who fear
God, who fear Him openly" (
However, judgment for
evil does not come quickly; and because
of that, many are inclined
to give themselves over to do evil (
Qoheleth declares further that
"there are righteous men to whom it
happens according to the deeds
of the wicked," and, on the other
hand, "there are evil
men to whom it happens according to the
deeds of the righteous. I say
that this too is futility" (
ECCLESIASTES 7:15-18 253
This is the same problem
that he relates in
does not necessarily
bring prosperity, and,wickedness does not
necessarily bring suffering and
death.
Qoheleth's Advice-7:16-17
The following two verses
must therefore be understood as
Qoheleth's counsel in the light of
vs. 15. It is here that the two
major exegetical problems of
the passage arise: (1) Do the expres-
sions "excessively
righteous" and "overly wise" really refer to self-
righteousness and pretended wisdom,
as Kaiser, Whybray, Castel-
lino, and others contend? Or
do these expressions imply, instead,
an exaggerated
"striving after" righteousness and wisdom? (2) Does
Qoheleth in
(on the part of some)
to the statement in
does not guarantee
prosperity, nor wickedness death (i.e., deciding
to strive fanatically for
perfection or to slide cynically into foolish
immorality)? Or does he instead
begin a new, unrelated section,
discussing the nature of true
righteousness and true wisdom, in
order that the reader might
be able to evaluate inner character?
Before embarking on a
detailed consideration of these ques-
tions, the unusual structure
of this passage must be noted:
7:16a hBer;ha
qyDica yhiT;-lxa
do not be
excessively righteous
7:16b rteOy MKaHat;Ti-lxav;
and do not be wise
to excess
7:1
MmeOw.Ti
hm.AlA
why should you
cause yourself desolation?
7:17a
hBr;ha
fwar;Ti-lxa
do not be excessively wicked
7:17b lkAsA
yhT;-lxav;
and do not be a fool
why should you die before your time?
Each verse consists of
three parts, each of which begins with
the same word: lxa, lxav;,
and hm.AlA, respectively. Each verse begins
with a pair of
negative warnings ("do not"), these four warnings
254
generally containing a negative particle
(lxa), a verb or verbal
clause, and an adverb (the
adverb is lacking in 7:17b). The third
part of each verse consists
of an interrogative sentence introduced
by the word hm.AlA followed by a verb. And in each case, the
interrogative sentence implies a
positive concept or result.39
At this point, several
of the more controversial words in the
passage must be defined.
Lexically, the word qyDica in 7:16a means
“just" or
“righteous" in conduct and character, either toward God
or, ethically, toward
others. Nothing more than this can be read
into the statement from the
term itself. The form hBer;ha is the hiphil
infinitive absolute of the verb hbArA, (“to be many, much, great"), and
is here used adverbially
to mean “greatly," “exceedingly."40 It is
used, for instance, in Neh 2:2: “Then I was very much afraid." In
Eccl 7:16a, this word modifies the adjective
“righteous," so that the
sentence should read, “Do not be
exceedingly righteous." The
meaning of the statement will
depend on the nuance which the
context gives to the
expressions “exceedingly" and “righteous." If
“righteous" refers
to inward character, then an inordinate striving
for perfection may be in
view. If, however, “righteous" refers to
outward conduct, then the
warning probably has to do with
excessive occupation with some
sort of Pharisaic externalism.
In 7:16b, MKaHat;Ti is the hithpael form of the verb MkaHA (“to be
wise"), and, according
to Whybray, means “to pretend to be wise"
or “to make great
pretensions to wisdom."41 In the Brown-Driver-
Briggs Lexicon, it is rendered as “make
or show thyself wise."42
A. B. Davidson states that the hithpael is reflexive of piel43 (in this
case, “to make wise,"
“to teach wisdom"). Thus, the hithpael
would mean “to make oneself
wise" or “to teach oneself wisdom."
But Davidson adds that “it very often implies
that one shows
himself as, or gives himself
out as, performing the action of the
39Whybray,
p. 192. Another interesting aspect of this structure is the fact that
there
is a 3:2:2 decrescendo in the meter of vs. 16, followed by a 2:2:4 crescendo in
the
meter of vs. 17, indicating, perhaps, the comprehensive, yet parallel, nature
of
the
passage.
40Francis
Brown, S. R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs, eds., A Hebrew
and English
Lexicon
of the Old Testament (
cited
as BDB.)
41Whybray,
pp. 196-197.
42BDB,
s.v. MkaHA,
p. 314.
43A.
B. Davidson, An Introductory Hebrew Grammar, 25th ed. (
1962), p. 107.
ECCLESIASTES
7:15-18 255
simple verb."44 In this
case, the verb in Eccl 7:16b could mean "to
show oneself to be
wise," or perhaps even "to pretend to be wise."
Several factors argue
against the latter meaning of the word in
the passage at hand. First,
there is absolutely no reason from the
context to understand the verb
as a reference to pretense. Second,
grammatically the hithpael
form may just as easily mean "to make
oneself
the only other use of the hithpael of MkaHA is in Exod
refers to wise conduct--"Let
us deal wisely with this people"-and
there is no reason to treat
it in any other way in Eccl 7:16. (The
appeal made by some exegetes
to Prov 3:7 ["Do not be wise in your
own eyes"] is invalid,
since the reference there has the modifying
expression [“in your own
eyes"] spelled out; and, moreover, the
verb is not hithpael, but rather "to be" with an adjective.)
The word rteOy (Eccl 7:16b) is common in Ecclesiastes, usually
meaning
"superiority," "advantage," or "excess."45 As an
adverb it
means "to excess,"
or perhaps "to a superior degree."
It is used in
Eccl 2:15, where Qoheleth
asks himself, "Why then have I been
extremely wise?” In 7:16b, he is apparently saying that there
is no
need for anyone to try to
become the wisest person on earth. It is
not worth the trouble.
In 7:16c, the verb MmeOw.Ti is the hithpael form
of MmewA, which
means "to be
desolated.” As a reflexive, the word
means "to cause
oneself desolation or
ruin."46
Qoheleth asks, "Why should you
cause yourself ruin by such
extreme reactions?" This cannot refer
primarily to either a divine
judgment or societal sanctions, as
Whybray suggests,47 since the reflexive makes the ruin
self-caused.
The verb fwar;Ti in 7:17a is simply the Qal imperfect of the verb
fwarA ("to be wicked," "to act
wickedly"). It is important to note
that on this negative side
of the coin, no process is in view (such as
was the case with
"make yourself excessively wise"). The word
simply looks on the actions of
wickedness.
It is perhaps obvious by
now that Whybray's interpretation of
the passage depends almost
entirely upon a highly questionable
44Ibid.;
Ginsburg, p. 380, notes, however, that the wisdom under consideration
must
be real, since the antithesis speaks of real, not affected, foolishness. He
thus
concludes
that the piety referred to is also sincere and genuine piety.
45BDB,
s.v. rteOy,
p. 452.
46BDB,
s.v. MmewA,
p. 1030.
47Whybray,
p. 198.
256
meaning of one word in
the passage: MKaHat;Ti (7:16b). Having con-
cluded that this word refers
to "pretensions of wisdom," he reasons
that 7:16a is parallel and
that it should therefore read, "Do not
pretend to be righteous" or
"Do not be self-righteous." This is an
unwarranted leap.
Whybray's solution fits neither
the context nor the details of
the passage. He is forced
to conclude that
connected from
for the problem of 7: 15.48 He is also forced to treat the questions of
7:16c and 7:17c as extremely vague references to
a possible future
calamity, and in the process he
violates his own explanation of the
hithpael/hithpoel form. In addition, Whybray
completely boxes in
7:16-18 as a separate passage almost totally
unrelated to the rest of
the chapter,49
since he has divorced himself from any sort of correct
contextual meaning.
What, then, is the
conclusion of the matter? (1) The expres-
sions "excessively righteous"
and "make yourself overly wise" are
best understood as an
exaggerated striving and seeking after perfec-
tion and super-wisdom. Qoheleth's point is that these things are
not really of value; he had
discovered that himself-both experien-
tially and through
observation. (2) Vss. 16 and 17, therefore, have a
very close relationship to
vs. 15. As DeHaan
and Vander Lugt
suggest, if the principle that
righteousness brings prosperity does
not always hold (
everything that man needs to know
for his life (
people would have one of two
types of reaction: (a) They might
decide that if they could
reach perfection in character and knowl-
edge, their problems would
be solved; or (b) they might decide that
God is unfair and simply devote themselves to
immorality and
foolish living as the best they
can get out of life. Qoheleth warns
them against both of these
options, since both of them lead to
disaster. The best life, he
says, depends on the fear of God.
The Spiritual Conclusion-7:18
Following the negative
admonitions of
describes positively a
"good" in life. Though neither righteousness
nor wisdom can guarantee
prosperity or unlock the mystery of the
future, they are nevertheless
good and necessary. It is good to hold
48Ibid.,
p. 202.
49Ibid
ECCLESIASTES 7:15-18 257
on to righteousness, and
not to let go of wisdom. Both wickedness
and foolishness lead to
disaster.
Both righteousness and
wisdom are achieved through the fear
of God. It is through trust in, and obedience to, God
that righteous-
ness and wisdom can actually
be balanced and made worthwhile.
3. Conclusion
In Eccl 7:15-18, Qoheleth discusses the problem of the value
and balance of righteousness
and wisdom. He has concluded that
human wisdom cannot really
explain all of life nor the future
(
prosperity h;lS
many exceptions (
that some righteous people
die in spite of their
righteousness, and
some wicked people live long
lives in spite of their wickedness.
How would a concerned
human react to this admission of
reality? Many would tend to
overreact either toward striving harder,
or toward ending all
efforts and slipping into identity with those
who do not know God. Qoheleth offers some helpful counsel: Do
not strive for exaggerated
righteousness or try to make yourself the
wisest person on earth, for
these are not really worthwhile goals;
and in the end, such
striving will ruin your life. Likewise, do not
turn to immorality or act
like a fool, since God's principles do still
operate and you will put
yourself in danger of premature death.
God is still in control.
What then of
righteousness and wisdom? What good are they?
Qoheleth answers that they are
both of great benefit. Grasp them
both. If you learn to fear
God (which is the important thing),
you
will come out right in both
areas.
This material is cited with gracious
permission from:
SDA Theological
Berrien Springs
http://www.andrews.edu/SEM/
Please report any errors to Ted
Hildebrandt at: