There was a little city, and few men within it; and a great king came against it, besieged it, and built great bulwarks against it. Now a poor wise man was found in it, and he by his wisdom delivered the city; yet no man remembered that same poor man. Then I said, “Wisdom is better than strength.” Nevertheless the poor man’s wisdom is despised, and his words are not heard. The words of the wise heard in quiet are better than the cry of him who rules among fools. Wisdom is better than weapons of war; but one sinner destroys much good.
Show the surrounding paragraph
Ecclesiastes 9:14-18 sits inside this longer paragraph.
I have also seen wisdom under the sun in this way, and it seemed great to me. There was a little city, and few men within it; and a great king came against it, besieged it, and built great bulwarks against it. Now a poor wise man was found in it, and he by his wisdom delivered the city; yet no man remembered that same poor man. Then I said, “Wisdom is better than strength.” Nevertheless the poor man’s wisdom is despised, and his words are not heard. The words of the wise heard in quiet are better than the cry of him who rules among fools. Wisdom is better than weapons of war; but one sinner destroys much good.
Parallel Translations
-
There was a little city, and few men within it; and a great king came against it, besieged it, and built great bulwarks against it.
Now a poor wise man was found in it, and he by his wisdom delivered the city; yet no man remembered that same poor man.
Then I said, “Wisdom is better than strength.” Nevertheless the poor man’s wisdom is despised, and his words are not heard.
The words of the wise heard in quiet are better than the cry of him who rules among fools.
Wisdom is better than weapons of war; but one sinner destroys much good.
-
There was a little city, and few men within it; and there came a great king against it, and besieged it, and built great bulwarks against it:
Now there was found in it a poor wise man, and he by his wisdom delivered the city; yet no man remembered that same poor man.
Then said I, Wisdom is better than strength: nevertheless the poor man’s wisdom is despised, and his words are not heard.
The words of wise men are heard in quiet more than the cry of him that ruleth among fools.
Wisdom is better than weapons of war: but one sinner destroyeth much good.
Show all 3 translations
-
there was a little city, and few men within it; and there came a great king against it, and besieged it, and built great bulwarks against it;
now there was found in it a man poor and wise, and he by his wisdom delivered the city; yet no man remembered that same poor man.
Then said I: 'Wisdom is better than strength; nevertheless the poor man's wisdom is despised, and his words are not heard.'
The words of the wise spoken in quiet are more acceptable than the cry of a ruler among fools.
Wisdom is better than weapons of war; but one sinner destroyeth much good.
Examined in Scripture Analysis
Contradictions (1)
Questions where the Bible appears to say two different things, with the passages on each side set together.
Cross-references (37)
- Ecclesiastes 7:19 (v16) Wisdom is a strength to the wise man more than ten rulers who are in a city.
- Proverbs 24:5 (v16) A wise man has great power; and a knowledgeable man increases strength;
- Proverbs 21:22 (v16) A wise man scales the city of the mighty, and brings down the strength of its confidence.
- Mark 6:2-3 (v16) When the Sabbath had come, he began to teach in the synagogue, and many hearing him were astonished, saying, “Where did this man get these…
- Genesis 40:23 (v15) Yet the chief cup bearer didn’t remember Joseph, but forgot him.
Show all 37 cross-references
- Ecclesiastes 4:13 (v15) Better is a poor and wise youth than an old and foolish king who doesn’t know how to receive admonition any more.
- 1 Corinthians 1:26-29 (v16) For you see your calling, brothers, that not many are wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, and not many noble; but God chose the…
- James 2:2-6 (v16) For if a man with a gold ring, in fine clothing, comes into your synagogue, and a poor man in filthy clothing also comes in, and you pay…
- James 3:17-18 (v17) But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceful, gentle, reasonable, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and…
- Joshua 7:1 (v18) But the children of Israel committed a trespass in the devoted things; for Achan, the son of Carmi, the son of Zabdi, the son of Zerah, of…
- Joshua 7:11-12 (v18) Israel has sinned. Yes, they have even transgressed my covenant which I commanded them. Yes, they have even taken some of the devoted…
- Esther 6:2-3 (v15) It was found written that Mordecai had told of Bigthana and Teresh, two of the king’s eunuchs, who were doorkeepers, who had tried to lay…
- Proverbs 10:15 (v16) The rich man’s wealth is his strong city. The destruction of the poor is their poverty.
- Proverbs 28:23 (v17) One who rebukes a man will afterward find more favor than one who flatters with the tongue.
- Ecclesiastes 9:18 (v16) Wisdom is better than weapons of war; but one sinner destroys much good.
- John 7:47-49 (v16) The Pharisees therefore answered them, “You aren’t also led astray, are you? Have any of the rulers believed in him, or of the Pharisees?…
- Joshua 7:5 (v18) The men of Ai struck about thirty-six men of them. They chased them from before the gate even to Shebarim, and struck them at the descent.…
- Ecclesiastes 9:16 (v18) Then I said, “Wisdom is better than strength.” Nevertheless the poor man’s wisdom is despised, and his words are not heard.
- Isaiah 42:2 (v17) He will not shout, nor raise his voice, nor cause it to be heard in the street.
- John 9:24-34 (v16) So they called the man who was blind a second time, and said to him, “Give glory to God. We know that this man is a sinner.” He therefore…
- 2 Timothy 2:16-18 (v18) But shun empty chatter, for it will go further in ungodliness, and those words will consume like gangrene, of whom is Hymenaeus and…
- 2 Timothy 4:3-4 (v18) For the time will come when they will not listen to the sound doctrine, but having itching ears, will heap up for themselves teachers after…
- James 1:20 (v17) for the anger of man doesn’t produce the righteousness of God.
- 2 Samuel 20:15-22 (v14) They came and besieged him in Abel of Beth Maacah, and they cast up a mound against the city, and it stood against the rampart; and all the…
- 2 Samuel 20:22 (v15) Then the woman went to all the people in her wisdom. They cut off the head of Sheba the son of Bichri, and threw it out to Joab. He blew…
- 2 Kings 6:24–7:20 (v14) After this, Benhadad king of Syria gathered all his army, and went up and besieged Samaria. There was a great famine in Samaria. Behold,…
- 2 Timothy 3:8 (v18) Even as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these also oppose the truth, men corrupted in mind, who concerning the faith are rejected.
- Titus 1:10-11 (v18) For there are also many unruly men, vain talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped: men who…
- Joshua 22:20 (v18) Didn’t Achan the son of Zerah commit a trespass in the devoted thing, and wrath fell on all the congregation of Israel? That man didn’t…
- 1 Samuel 14:28-29 (v18) Then one of the people answered, and said, “Your father directly commanded the people with an oath, saying, ‘Cursed is the man who eats…
- 1 Samuel 14:36-46 (v18) Saul said, “Let’s go down after the Philistines by night, and take plunder among them until the morning light, and let’s not leave a man of…
- 2 Samuel 20:1-2 (v18) There happened to be there a wicked fellow, whose name was Sheba, the son of Bichri, a Benjamite; and he blew the trumpet, and said, “We…
- Ecclesiastes 2:16 (v15) For of the wise man, even as of the fool, there is no memory forever, since in the days to come all will have been long forgotten. Indeed,…
- 2 Thessalonians 2:8-12 (v18) Then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will kill with the breath of his mouth, and destroy by the manifestation of his…
- Hebrews 12:15-16 (v18) looking carefully lest there be any man who falls short of the grace of God, lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and many…
- Genesis 41:33-40 (v17) “Now therefore let Pharaoh look for a discreet and wise man, and set him over the land of Egypt. Let Pharaoh do this, and let him appoint…
- 1 Samuel 7:3-6 (v17) Samuel spoke to all the house of Israel, saying, “If you are returning to Yahweh with all your heart, then put away the foreign gods and…
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this passage (17 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv14–18 Ecc 9:14 [There was] a little city, and few…
Ecc 9:14 [There was] a little city, and few men within it; and there came a great king against it, and besieged it, and built great bulwarks against it:
Ver. 14. There was a little city.] Such as was Lampsacum, besieged by Alexander, and saved by Anaximenes; Rhodes, besieged by the great Turk; Rochelle, by the French king; Geneva, by the Duke of Savoy. This last, a little city, a small people surrounded with enemies, and barred out from all aid of neighbour cities and churches, yet is strangely upheld. {a} Well may they write as they do on the one side of their coin, Deus noster pugnat pro nobis, Our God fights for us. {b}
Read full note →
{a} Brightman.
{b} Scultet.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv14–18 It matters not whether this was a real history,…
It matters not whether this was a real history, or only a parable to represent the common practices of men in such cases.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv14–18 There was a little city, and few men within…
There was a little city, and few men within it,.... Which some take to be a piece of history, a real matter of fact; that as the city of Abel, when besieged by Joab, was delivered by the counsel of a wise woman, Sa2 20:15; so there was a city, which Solomon had knowledge of, which was delivered from the siege of a powerful king, by the wise counsel of a poor wise man: though others think it is only a fiction, fable, or parable; the moral of which is, that political wisdom, even in a poor mean person, is sometimes very useful and serviceable, though it does not meet with its proper merit. Many of the Jewish writers understand the whole allegorically and figuratively; so the Targum, by "the little city", understands the body of man; by "few men in it", the little righteousness there is in the heart of man; though, according to the Midrash, Jarchi, and Alshech, they are the members of the body; by "the great king", the evil imagination, or corruption of nature, which is great to oppress, and besieges the heart to cause it to err; and by "the poor wise man", the good imagination or affection, which prevails over the other, and subdues it, and delivers the body from hell, and yet not remembered; and so the Midrash, and the ancient Jews in Aben Ezra, though he himself understands it according to its literal sense. Some Christian interpreters explain it to better purpose, concerning the church attacked by Satan, and delivered by Christ, who, notwithstanding, is unkindly and ungratefully used: the church is often compared to a city, it is the city of God, and of which saints are fellow citizens; it is but a "little" one in comparison of the world, and, in some periods and ages of the world, lesser than in others; it is little and contemptible in the eyes of the world, and the inhabitants of it are mean and low in their own eyes; they are a little flock, Luk 12:32; and "few" in number that are "within it": some are only of it, but not in it, or are external members only, which sometimes are many; or outward, not inward, court worshippers; they are few, comparatively, that belong to the invisible church, that are chosen, redeemed, called, and saved, Mat 20:16; there are but few able men, especially such as are capable of defending the church against its enemies.
and there came a great king against it; Satan, the prince of devils and of the posse of them in the air, the god and prince of the world of the ungodly, who works in their hearts, and leads them captive at his will who may be said to be "great" with respect to the numbers under him, legions of devils, and the whole world that lies in wickedness, or "in" or "under" the wicked one: and on account of the power he exercises, by divine permission, over the bodies and minds of men; and in comparison of the little city, and few men in it, being stronger than they, Mat 12:24; he comes from the region of the air, where his posse are; or from going to and fro in the earth; or from hell, into which he is cast down: he comes by divine permission; in the manner evil spirits do, by temptation; in a hostile way, against the church and people of God, to destroy and devour them, if possible;
Read full note →
and besieged it; surrounded it on all sides, as the Gog and Magog army trader him will encompass the camp of the saints, and the beloved city, Rev 20:9;
and built great bulwarks against it; such as are called strong holds, Co2 10:4. Satan's first attack was upon the elect of God, in Adam; when he brought them, through sin, under a sentence of condemnation and death, though then they were preserved in Christ; and ever since he has been attacking the church by persecution, in order to take it by storm; and by spreading errors and heresies, such as tend to raze the foundation, and to pull down the superstructure of grace; and by promoting schisms, and laying such large principles of church communion, as tend to take away ordinances and discipline, the fence of the city; and by throwing in hand grenades of strife and contention, to raise a civil war among the citizens themselves; and, by various temptations to sin, to gain deserters: these are some of his bulwarks, batteries, and engines.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv15, 17 Yet - He was soon neglected and his great…
Yet - He was soon neglected and his great service forgotten.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv14, 16, 17, 18 Verse 14. There was a little city, and few…
Verse 14. There was a little city, and few men within it] Here is another proof of the vanity of sublunary things; the ingratitude of men, and the little compensation that genuine merit receives. The little history mentioned here may have either been a fact, or intended as an instructive fable. A little city, with few to defend it, being besieged by a great king and a powerful army, was delivered by the cunning and address on a poor wise man; and afterwards his townsmen forgot their obligation to him.
Those who spiritualize this passage, making the little city the CHURCH, the few men the APOSTLES, the great king the DEVIL, and the poor wise man JESUS CHRIST, abuse the text.
Read full note →
But the Targum is not less whimsical: "The little city is the human body; few men in it, few good affections to work righteousness; the great king, evil concupiscence, which, like a strong and powerful king, enters into the body to oppress it, and besieges the heart so as to cause it to err; built great bulwarks against it - evil concupiscence builds his throne in it wheresoever he wills, and causes it to decline from the ways that are right before God; that it may be taken in the greatest nets of hell, that he may burn it seven times, because of its sins. But there is found in it a poor wise man - a good, wise, and holy affection, which prevails over the evil principle, and snatches the body from the judgment of hell, by the strength of its wisdom. Yet, after this deliverance, the man did not remember what the good principle had done for him; but said in his heart, I am innocent," c.
What a wonderful text has this been in the hands of many a modern Targumist and with what force have the Keachonians preached Christ crucified from it!
Such a passage as this receives a fine illustration from the case of Archimedes saving the city of Syracuse from all the Roman forces besieging it by sea ana land. He destroyed their ships by his burning-glasses, lifted up their galleys out of the water by his machines, dashing some to pieces, and sinking others. One man's wisdom here prevailed for a long time against the most powerful exertions of a mighty nation. In this case, wisdom far exceeded strength. But was not Syracuse taken, notwithstanding the exertions of this poor wise man? No. But it was betrayed by the baseness of Mericus, a Spaniard, one of the Syracusan generals. He delivered the whole district he commanded into the hands of Marcellus, the Roman consul, Archimedes having defeated every attempt made by the Romans, either by sea or land: yet he commanded no company of men, made no sorties, but confounded and destroyed them by his machines. This happened about 208 years before Christ, and nearly about the time in which those who do not consider Solomon as the author suppose this book to have been written. This wise man was not remembered; he was slain by a Roman soldier while deeply engaged in demonstrating a new problem, in order to his farther operations against the enemies of his country. See Plutarch, and the historians of this Syracusan war.
When Alexander the Great was about to destroy the city Lampsacus, his old master Anaximenes came out to meet him. Alexander, suspecting his design, that he would intercede for the city, being determined to destroy it, swore that he would not grant him any thing he should ask. Then said Anaximenes, "I desire that you will destroy this city." Alexander respected his oath, and the city was spared. Thus, says Valerius Maximus, the narrator, (lib. vii. c. iii., No. 4. Extern.,) by this sudden turn of sagacity, this ancient and noble city was preserved from the destruction by which it was threatened. "Haec velocitas sagacitatis oppidum vetusta nobilitate inclytum exitio, cui destinatum erat, subtraxit."
A stratagem of Jaddua, the high priest, was the means of preserving Jerusalem from being destroyed by Alexander, who, incensed because they had assisted the inhabitants of Gaza when he besieged it, as soon as he had reduced it, marched against Jerusalem, with the determination to raze it to the ground; but Jaddua and his priests in their sacerdotal robes, meeting him on the way, he was so struck with their appearance that he not only prostrated himself before the high priest, and spared the city, but also granted it some remarkable privileges. But the case of Archimedes and Syracuse is the most striking and appropriate in all its parts. That of Anaximenes and Lampsacus is also highly illustrative of the maxim of the wise man: "Wisdom is better than strength."
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On v17 Ecc 9:17. The words of wise men — Though…
Ecc 9:17. The words of wise men — Though poor; are heard in quiet — Are uttered with a modest and low voice, and are, or should be, heard by wise men; more than the cry — The clamorous and senseless discourses; of him that ruleth among fools — Of a rich and potent, but foolish man, who has some influence on fools like himself, but is justly neglected, and his words disregarded by wise men. Or, as Aben Ezra interprets the verse, connecting it with the preceding, “The words of the wise are despised by the people when they are in prosperity, but when they are in distress, and silenced by fear and grief, then they listen eagerly and diligently.”
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv14, 18 A parable probably without foundation in fact. Critics who…
A parable probably without foundation in fact. Critics who ascribe this book to a late age offer no better suggestion than that the “little city” may be Athens delivered 480 b.c. from the host of Xerxes through the wisdom of Themistocles, or Dora besieged 218 b.c. by Antiochus the Great.
Ecc 9:16-17 are comments on the two facts - the deliverance of the city and its forgetfulness of him who delivered it - stated in Ecc 9:15.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv14–18 And the siege, &c. Hebrew has only "great bulwarks…
And the siege, &c. Hebrew has only "great bulwarks over or against it." (Haydock)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain On v17 B. In Presence of the Insolence, Bold Assumption and…
B. In Presence of the Insolence, Bold Assumption and Violence of Fortunate and Influential Fools, the Wise Man can only Preserve his Peace of Soul by Patience, Silence and Tranquility
Ecc_9:17 to Ecc_10:20
Read full note →
1. Of the advantage of a wise tranquility over the presumptuous insolence of fools
(Ecc_9:17 to Ecc_10:4)
17The words of wise men are heard in quiet more than the cry of him that ruleth 18 among fools. Wisdom is better than weapons of war: but one sinner destroyeth much good. 1Dead flies cause the ointment of the apothecary to send forth a stinking savour: so doth a little folly him that is in reputation for wisdom and honour. 2A wise man’s heart is at his right hand; but a fool’s heart is at his left. 3Yea also, when he that is a fool walketh by the way, his wisdom faileth him, and he saith to every one that he is a fool. 4If the spirit of the ruler rise up against thee, leave not thy place; for yielding pacifieth great offences.
2. Of the advantage of quiet, modest wisdom over the externally brilliant but inconstantfortune of fools
(Ecc_10:5-10)
5There is an evil which I have seen under the sun, as an error which proceedeth 6from the ruler: Folly is set in great dignity, and the rich sit in low place. 7I have seen servants upon horses, and princes walking as servants upon the earth. 8He that diggeth a pit shall fall into it; and whoso breaketh an hedge, a serpent shall bite him. 9Whoso removeth stones shall be hurt therewith; and he that cleaveth wood shall be endangered thereby. 10If the iron be blunt, and he do not whet the edge, then must he put to more strength: but wisdom is profitable to direct.
3. Of the advantage of the silence and persevering industry of the wise man over the loquacityand indolence of fools
(Ecc_10:11-20)
11Surely the serpent will bite without enchantment; and a babbler is no better. 12The words of a wise man’s mouth are gracious; but the lips of a fool will swallow up himself. 13The beginning of the words of his mouth is foolishness: and the end of his talk is mischievous madness. 14A fool also is full of words: a man cannot tell what shall be; and what shall be after him, who can tell him? 15The labour of the foolish wearieth every one of them, because he knoweth not how to go to 16 the city. Wo to thee, O land, when thy king is a child, and thy princes eat in the 17 morning! Blessed art thou, O land, when thy king is the son of nobles, and thy 18 princes eat in due season, for strength, and not for drunkenness! By much sloth-fulness the building decayeth; and through idleness of the hands the house droppeth through. 19A feast is made for laughter, and wine maketh merry : but money answereth all things. 20Curse not the king, no, not in thy thought; and curse not the rich in thy bed-chamber: for a bird of the air shall carry the voice, and that which hath wings shall tell the matter.
*[Ecc_10:8. גוּמָּצ. A ditch, or pit, Vulg., fovea, LXX. βόθρͅον. The Syriac Version, has the same word. It is, however, no more Aramaic than Hebrew, being rare in both languages, though the verb, signifying to dig, is found in the latter. Its form is unusual in having dagesh after shurek, as is noted in the margin.—T. L.]
*[ Ecc_10:8 גוּמָּץ. A ditch, or pit, Vulg., fovea, 70 βόθρον. The Syriac Version has the same word. It is, however, no more Aramaic than Hebrew, being rare in both languages, though the verb, signifying to dig, is found in the latter. Its form is unusual in having dagesh after shurek, as is noted in the margin.—T.L.]
[Ecc_10:9. יִסָּכֵן; for יִשָׂכֵן, a denominative from שַׂכִּין, “a knife,” and, therefore, having no relation to the verb סכן as found, with quite a different meaning, Job_22:2; Job_33:3; Job_15:3; Isa_22:15, etc. Lit., “shall be cut,” or, “may be cut thereby.” It is another example of variant orthography, showing that the first manuscripts of this work were written from the ear. See remarks on שִׂכְלוּת and similar words, page 116.—T. L.]
[Ecc_10:10. קִלְקַל; the sense of swinging, which Zöckler, Hitzig, and Elster give to this word, is not confirmed by Eze_21:26, to which they refer. Gesenius gives the sense to sharpen, polish, but derives it from the primary idea of light moving, as in the rapid motions of a whet-stone, which is very probable. The accents connect it פנים faces, edges, though the Vulgate and LXX have disregarded it.—T. L.]
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Of the three sections of this division, as we lay them down in essential conformity with Vaihinger, the first compares the entire nature of the wise man with that of the fool, whilst the second draws a parallel between the two regarding the conditions of their happiness; but the third points out the more profound[8] causes of their opposite destinies in two special qualities of both (the loquacity and indolence of fools, and the opposite of these faults in the wise man). This train of thought is less clear on account of the peculiar form of the sentences,—nearly all being proverbs of two lines, concise in extent, and significant and aphoristic in character;—but it must not therefore be disregarded, nor displaced by the acceptance of an incongruity of plan or connection, as if it were a conglomerate of many groups of maxims or of separate proverbs with no internal connection. By an atomistic and disintegrating process, this section has been divided by Hengstenberg into five divisions, by Hahn into eight, and by Elster even into nine; (1) Ecc_9:17 to Ecc_10:1; (2) Ecc_10:2-3; (3) Ecc_10:4; (4) Ecc_10:5-7; (5) Ecc_10:8-10; (6) Ecc_10:11-14; (7) Ecc_10:15; (8) Ecc_10:16-19; (9) Ecc_10:20; we shall present the special refutation of this system in our illustrations of the words and sense of the individual verses.
2. First strophe. Ecc_9:17 to Ecc_10:4. Of the patient and tranquil nature of the wise man in contrast with the arrogant insolence and irascibility of the fool.—The words of wise men are heard in quiet more than the cry of him that ruleth among fools. Observe the connection with the section immediately preceding, Ecc_9:13-16, which shows the superiority of wisdom by a single example. But this verse opens a new section in so far as it begins to treat specifically of tranquility as a characteristic and cardinal virtue of the wise man. He who hears in quiet, proves himself thereby a lover of quiet and tranquility, and therefore a wise man. A quiet attention to wise words is a condition necessary to their practical obedience, and consequently to becoming wise and acting wisely. The counterpart of this is shown by the boisterous and passionate cry of the “ruler among fools,” i.e., not absolutely of the “foolish ruler” (Vaihinger, etc., referring to Psa_54:6; Job_24:13, ff.), but of a ruler who, as he rules over fools, is foolish himself; comp. Ecc_10:16. Elster correctly observes : “Two pictures are here compared, the wise man among his scholars, who receive his teachings with collected attention, and thoughtful quiet, and a ruler wanting in wisdom to control, and who, in undignified and boisterous ostentation, issues injudicious commands to those who execute them quite as injudiciously. Comp. the mild and tranquil nature of the servant of God, with the criers in the streets: Isa_42:2; Mat_12:19.
Ecc_9:18. Wisdom is better than weapons of war; i.e., it is stronger, more effective, and indomitable than the greatest physical strength and warlike preparation, קְרָב poetical, and equivalent to מִלְחָמָה comp. Psa_55:19; Dan_7:21; and therefore, כְּלֵי־קְרָב as elsewhere we have כְּלֵי ,נִלְחַמַה not merely weapons of war (Vulgate: arma bellica; Elster, et al.), but implements of war, warlike instruments, and apparatus, war material in general (LXX σκεύη πολέμου ).—But one sinner destroyeth much good. “One sinner,” i.e., a single one of those coarse miscreants or fools, who can command physical strength, but are destitute of wisdom. There certainly can be no intention to make a special allusion to the “heathen world-monarch,” i.e., the Persian king (Hengstenberg), nor in the expression, “much good” is there any reference to the prosperity of the Persian realm. This expression טוֹבָה הַרְבֵּה can rather be only intended to show what is homogeneous with wisdom and belonging to it, consequently the salutary creations and measures of wisdom, its blessings in the various spheres of the civil, and, especially, of the moral life of men.—Nine manuscripts read וְחֵטְא instead of וְחוטֵא “and one sin destroyeth much good;” but the connection imperatively demands the retention of the Masoretic reading.—
Ecc_10:1. Dead flies cause the ointment of the apothecary to send forth a stinking savour. Literal, “flies of death,” etc. The singular יַבְאִישׁ, with the plural זְבוּבֵי, is to be taken distributively: each individual dead fly can make the ointment stink, as soon as it falls into it. For this construction comp. Hos_4:8; Pro_16:2; Son_2:9; Gesenius, Lehrgebäude, pp. 665, 713. יַבִּיעַ means literally “turns into liquid, causes to bubble up,” i.e., sets into fermentation, and in that way produces the decomposition and rottenness of the ointment. רוֹקֵחַ, dealer in spices. This addition gives us to understand that the valuable ointment of commerce is meant, and by no means a worthless article.—So doth a little folly him that is in reputation for wisdom and honor. [Zöckler’s comment is based upon his translation : “Weightier than wisdom, than honor, is a little folly,” [1] which is essentially different from our English Version.—T. L.]. יקר is here used in its original signification “heavy, weighty,” namely, in the eyes of the dazzled multitude, that is, accustomed to esteem folly, and indeed a very small amoun.t of folly, of more value than all real wisdom and honor. “Wisdom and honor” correspond in this second clause to the costly ointment of the first and the “little folly” [מְעַט] corresponds to the fly, the little dead animal, that nevertheless corrupts the whole pot of ointment; comp. 1Co_5:6.
Ecc_10:2. After Ecc_10:1 has explained and developed the second clause of Ecc_9:18, the author turns back to the illustration of the great advantages of wisdom over folly, that is, to the first clause of Ecc_9:18. A wise man’s heart is at his right hand. That is, it is in the right place, whilst the fool’s is really at the left, i.e., has sinister and perverse purposes. “Heart” is here equivalent to judgment, as in the subsequent verse, and in Pro_2:2; Pro_14:33; Pro_15:28.
Ecc_10:3. Yea also, when he that is a fool walketh by the way, his wisdom faileth him. That is, when he goes out he lets people perceive his want of judgment in various ways—for which reason he would do much better to remain at home with his stupidity.—And he saith to every one that he is a fool. Namely, because he considers himself alone wise, and as a fool he can do no otherwise; for as soon as he should consider himself a fool, he would have made the beginning of his return to the path of wisdom. Knobel, Ewald, and Vaihinger render; “it is foolish.” But סָכָל stands elsewhere only for persons; for the adjective sense it would be necessary to assume the reading סֶכֶל.
Ecc_10:4 is not a specific maxim incidentally dropped, (Elster) but an admonition holding the closest connection with what precedes, and which forms the practical conclusion of the whole discussion (beginning with Ecc_9:17) concerning the relation between wise gentleness and foolish passionateness. For the ruler among fools (Ecc_9:17) here clearly appears again as “ruler;” the “great offences” point back to the “sinner” of Ecc_9:18; and thus also is there made a close connection with Ecc_10:2-3 of this chapter. Hence Luther is correct in his rendering : “Therefore, when the insolence of a mighty one,” etc. If the spirit of the ruler rise up against thee. For the expression רוּחַ תַּעֲלִה עַל in which רוּהַ does not mean spirit (Sept., Vulg., Hengstenberg), but anger, comp. 2Sa_11:12; Psa_78:21; Eze_38:18.—Leave not thy place; i.e., do not be disconcerted, do not become dissatisfied, as this would develop itself in a changed position of thy body in a manner that would entail danger on thee. In this obvious illustration it is not necessary, with Hitzig, to explain מְקוֹמְךָ by “thy condition of soul, thy usual state of mind,”—an interpretation for which the appeal to the soul—“maintain thy place”—in the Arabian story of the “Golden Necklace,” scarcely affords a sufficient reason.—For yielding pacifieth great offences, i.e., prevents them, smothers them in the birth, and does not let them come to light. We find similar sentences in Pro_10:12; Pro_15:1; Pro_25:15.
3. Second strophe. Ecc_10:5-10. Of the apparent but inconstant fortune of fools, and of the superiority of the modest, but effective and sterling influence of wisdom.—For Ecc_10:5, first clause, comp. Ecc_6:1.—As an error which proceedeth from the ruler. By the comparative כְּ in כִּשְׁגָגָה, the evil in the first clause is marked as one that is not simply an error of a ruler, but which only appears as such, manifests itself as such, so as to draw after it much worse evils, (Ewald is correct in translating, “apparently in error”). We can also understand this כְּ as כְּ veritatis, and either leave it untranslated (as Elster, according to Luther and many older authors) or give it through our turn : “there is an evil in respect to an error” (Hitzig); it is then indicated that the particular action in question corresponds to the general idea of an evil (רָעָה); compare 2Sa_9:8.—The explanations of Knobel, Vaihinger, and Hahn are censurable in making כְּ equivalent to the expressions “according to, or in consequence of which;” as are also those of Hengstenberg, who, following the example of Hieronymus and a Jewish adept in Scripture learning whom he questioned, understands the term “ruler” (הַשַּׁלִּיט) to be God, and thence thinks of an act of divine power that seems like a fault, but is none,—an interpretation which is untenable on account of the manifest identity of שַׁלִּיט with מוֹשֵׁל in Ecc_10:4.
Ecc_10:6-7 give two examples of errors of rulers.—Folly is set in great dignity; namely, by the caprice of a ruler who elevates an unworthy person to the highest honors of his realm. נִתֵּן lit., “is given, is set,” comp. Est_6:8; Deu_17:15. The abstract הַסֶּכֶל stands for the concrete הַסָּכָל which the Septuagint, Vulgate, etc., seem to have read directly, but which is not therefore to be put in the place of the Masoretic text, because the latter gives a much stronger thought; it is not simply a fool, it is personified folly.—And the rich sit in low place, i.e., by virtue of those very despotic acts of a despotic ruler,, the rich (i.e., the noble and distinguished, whose wealth is patrimonial and just,) homines ingenuos nobiles (comp. Ecc_10:20, as also the synonym בֶן־חוֹרִים Ecc_10:17) are robbed of their possessions and driven from their high places. Hitzig says: “Sudden and immense changes of fortune proceeding from the person of the ruler are peculiar to the East, the world of despotism, where barbers become ministers, and confiscations of large fortunes and oppression of possessors are the order of the day.”
Ecc_10:7. I have seen servants upon horses, and princes walking as servants upon the earth. A contrast to sitting on horseback, which, among the Hebrews was considered a distinction for the upper classes. Comp. 2Ch_25:28; Est_6:8-9; Jer_17:25; and to this add Justinian 41:3: “Hoc denigue discrimen inter servos liberosque est, quod servi pedibus, liberi non nisi eguis incedunt.” Here also, as in the preceding verse, the persons compared are to be considered as contrasted not merely in their external condition but also in their character; the princes are really princely, and princely-minded persons, but the servants are men with base servile feeling, which qualifies and makes it right for them to serve.
Ecc_10:8-10 show that in spite of this sudden elevation, so easily gained by unworthy and foolish persons, their lot is by no means to be envied; because their fortune is rife with dangers, because the intrigues by means of which they excluded their predecessors from their possessions, can easily overthrow them, and because the difficult tasks that devolve on them in their high offices can easily bring upon them injury and disgrace. Wherefore genuine wisdom, of internal worth and business-like capacity, is far preferable to such externally brilliant but unreliable and inconstant fortune of fools. The close connection between these verses and Ecc_10:5-7 is correctly perceived by Hitzig, Hengstenberg and Hahn, whilst Elster and Vaihinger isolate their contents too much in wishing to find nothing farther in them than a warning against rebellion, or resistance to divine command.—He that diggeth a pit shall fall into it. This is different from Psa_7:15; Pro_26:27; Sir_27:26; it is not a pit for others, but simply a pit, the result of severe exertion of a dangerous character, with the implements for digging. Falling into the pit is not presented as a necessary, but only as a very possible case.—And whoso breaketh a hedge, a serpent shall bite him; namely, in accordance with the well-known and frequently confirmed fact, that serpents and other reptiles nest in old walls; comp. Isa_34:15; Amo_5:19. The breaking of this hedge appears clearly as an action by which one seeks to injure his neighbor.
Ecc_10:9. Whoso removeth stones shall be hurt therewith; and he that cleaveth wood shall be endangered thereby. Hitzig, taking the futures יֵעָצֵב and יִסָּכֵן too much in the mere potential sense, says: “can injure himself.” See Ecc_10:8, second clause. For הִסִּיע, “to break loose, to tear out,” that is stones from the earth (not “to roll away,” as Knobel says), comp. 1 Kings 5:31.—יִסָּכֵן is not equivalent to “endangereth himself” (Sept., Ewald, Knobel and Vaihinger), but is to be derived from שַׂכִּין a knife (from סכה “to cut;”[2] comp. Pro_23:2) and is to be translated in accordance with the vulnerabitur of the Vulgate by, “he will injure or wound himself,” (Hitzig, Elster, Hengstenberg); see Luther also.
Ecc_10:10. If the iron be blunt. (Zöckler translates: “If one has blunted the iron”). Since קֵהָה as piel of קָהָה “to be blunt,” can scarcely mean anything else than to make blunt, we must either consider the indefinite “one,” as the subject, or the wood-chopper of the previous verse. Ewald(“Authors of the O. T.”), Hengstenberg and most ancient authors (also the Vulgate and Luther) say, that קֵהָה is to be taken intransitively, and as equivalent to hebescit, retusum fuit, but this is opposed by the following הוּא before לֹא־פָּנִים, which clearly shows a change of subject, forbidding the thought that iron can be the subject of this clause. The view formerly entertained by Ewald, “one leaves the iron blunt” (Poetical Books, 1 Ed.), he afterwards discarded as incorrect.—And he do not whet the edge. Zöckler translates: “And it is without edge.” Hitzig is correct in saying that לֹא־פּנים is formed as לֹא בָנִים “childless,” 1Ch_2:30; 1Ch_2:32, and is equivalent to saying, “without an edge, or edgeless.” The subsequent קִלְקַל is not to be connected with these words, but with the following ones, especially as, according to the only passage in which it occurs (Eze_21:26,) it does not signify to “polish, to sharpen,” but “to shake, to swing.” (Hitzig and Elster are correct, though in opposition to most modern writers, who translate: “And he has not whet the edge”). Then must he put to more strength; i.e., in splitting the wood he must swing[3] the ax with all his strength.—But wisdom is profitable to direct. Zöckler translates : “But it is a profit wisely to handle wisdom.” Read (with Hitzig and Elster) הַכְשִׁיר instead of הַכְשֵׁיר thus making the infinitive construct, which, with its object חָכְמָה (as predicate to יִתְרוֹן) forms the subject (i.e., it is a profit, an advantage, or, it is the best; comp. the opposite וְאֵין יִתְרוֹן in Ecc_10:11 th. For the phrase הִכְשִׁיר חָכְמָה occurring only here (lit., to make wisdom straight, i.e., to direct it successfully, to handle it skillfully) comp. a similar turn הֵיטִיב חֶסֶד in Rth_3:10. It is usual to retain the infinitive absolute הַבְשֵׁיר as a genitive dependent on ׃יִתְרוֹן “And wisdom is the profit of prosperity” (Knobel); or, “wisdom has the advantage of amendment” (Hengstenberg); or, “and wisdom is the profit of exertion” (?) Ewald); or, “wisdom gives the advantage of success” (Vaihinger). But all these renderings give a thought less clear and conformable to the text than ours. Luther is not exact: “Therefore wisdom follows diligence,” (in harmony with the Vulgate, et post, industriam sequetur sapientia). The rendering of Hahn is nearest to ours: “And the favor of wisdom is an advantage,” wherein the sense of “favor” for הכשיר does not seem quite appropriate. The entire sense of the verse is essentially correct in the following rendering of Hitzig : Whosoever would proceed securely, and not expose himself to the dangers that are inseparable, even from the application of proper means to ends, toils in vain if he undertakes the task in the wrong way (like those fools in Ecc_10:6-9); the direct, sensible way to the end is the best”—namely, that very humble, modest, but effective way of wisdom, which the author had recommended already in Ecc_9:17-18; Ecc_10:2-3, and now in Ecc_10:12 ff., farther recommends.
4. Third Strophe. Ecc_10:11-20.—Of the advantage of the silent, sober, and industrious demeanor of the wise man, over the indolent and loquacious nature of the fool.—Surely the serpent will bite without enchantment.
This sentence in close connection with verse 10 advises to a zealous and dexterous application of the remedies at the command of the wise man; but, at the same time, shows the necessity of such application by an example chosen perhaps with reference to verse 8; thus forming the transition to the warning against empty loquacity and its evil consequences contained in Ecc_10:12-14. Koheleth does not here allude to the charming of spiritual serpents, i.e., of vicious men, by importunate requests (Hengstenberg) but undoubtedly means the actual art of charming serpents; the possibility of which, or rather the actual existence of which he clearly presupposes in possession of wise and skillful persons, just as the author of the 58th Psalm (Ecc_10:4-5), indeed, as Christ himself affirms in Mar_16:18; Luk_10:19. (Comp. also Exo_7:11, and the learned observations of Knobel on the art of charming serpents among the ancients). בְּלֹא לָחַשׁ literally, “without enchantment,” i.e., without that softly murmured magic formula, which, it was pretended, formed the principal agent in expelling poisonous reptiles, if spoken at the proper period, and thus guarded against the danger of being bitten. בַּעַל הַלָּשׁוֹן literally, the “master of the tongue,” i.e., who has the poisonous tongue of the reptile in his power, and knows how to extract the poison, or to prevent its biting; or it may also mean the “ one with a gifted tongue,” who by means of his tongue can produce extraordinary results (Hitzig, Hahn). The latter interpretation is preferable as much on account of the analogy of בַּעַל כָּנָף Pro_1:17, and similar expressions, as on account of the context, which clearly shows that the author has in his eye one of ready tongue not making timely use of his gift, a hero with his tongue, but without energy and promptness in action.
Ecc_10:12. The words of a wise man’s mouth are gracious. Such a one therefore should not be silent, as the slack serpent-charmer in Ecc_10:11, but should speak often and much, because he does nothing but good, and acquires favor everywhere with his “gracious” words (Luther). חֵן here means id quod gratiam seu favorem parit, or graciousness; comp. Pro_31:30; and for the sentence in general Pro_15:2; Pro_15:26.—But the lips of a fool will swallow up himself. Comp. Pro_15:2; Pro_10:8; Pro_10:21; Pro_13:16, etc. Any other reference of the suffix in the verb תְּבַלְּעֶנּוּ than to the logical subject כְּסִים is inadmissible. For the plural form שִׂפָתוֹת comp. Isa_59:3; Psa_59:7.
Ecc_10:13. The beginning of the words of his mouth are foolishness; and the end of his talk is mischievous madness. That is, there is nothing discreet either in the beginning or the end of his foolish twaddle (Hitzig); he remains a fool in everything that he says; comp. Pro_27:22. “The end of his talk” is the end which his mouth makes of speaking, the last and most extravagant of his foolish speeches. Of this it is here affirmed that it is mischievous madness, namely, even for himself injurious and mischievous madness; comp. Pro_18:7; Psa_64:8, etc.
Ecc_10:14. A fool is also full of words. To the error of his silly speech, he adds that of endless loquacity.[4] And he is most apt to prattle gladly and much about things of which, from their nature, he can know the least, namely, about future events. And to this fact there is again reference in what is said in the second and third clauses.—A man cannot tell what shall be. מַה־שֶּׁיּהְיֶה must not be changed into מַה־שֶּׁהָיָה, according to the Septuagint, Symmachus, Vulgate, and Syriac, Vaihinger, etc.; for the subsequent clause does not form a tautology with the present one, even when retaining the Masoretic reading, because there is here denied in the first place only the knowledge concerning the future in itself, and then the actual existence of a foreteller of future events (as a reason for the ignorance of the future).—And what shall be after him who can tell him? As in אַחֲרָיו of Ecc_6:12, (but different from that in וְאַחִַרָיו of Ecc_9:3), the suffix in מֵאַהֲרָיו refers to the subject הָאָדָם, not to מַח־שֶּׁיִּהְיֶה as though there were a distinction here drawn between the near and the remote consequences of the talk of the fool (Hitzig). A restriction of the here mentioned res futuræ to the evil consequences of the thoughtless twaddle of the fool, is quite as inadmissible as defining it to consist of his lofty plans and bold projects (Hengstenberg). There is simply a general mention of coming events, precisely as in the similar passage in Ecc_6:12.
Ecc_10:15. The labor of the foolish wearieth every one. Literal, “the labor of fools:” the plural is used distributively just as in verse 1; comp. Hos_4:8. The author here passes from the empty and annoying loquacity of the fool to his indolence, his downright inertness, and feeble slothfulness, as to qualities forming a close connection with, and mainly the foundation of, this loquacity.—Because he knoweth not how to go to the city. Hitzig less correctly says: “him who knoweth not,” and Ewald “the one who,” etc. But this second clause is rather intended to give the reason of the premature fatigue of the fool, as also of the feebleness and unprofitableness of his exertions. “Not to know how to go to the city,” is doubtless a proverbial expression allied to that in Ecc_6:8 : “to walk before the living,” denoting ignorance in respect to behaviour and general incompetency. The way to the city is here mentioned as that which is the best known, most traveled, and easiest to find (Vaihinger, Hengstenberg), not because it leads to those great lords described in Ecc_10:16-19, whom it avails to bribe [Ewald], but simply in so far as the city is the seat of the rulers, of the officers, whence oppression proceeds, and whence also may come relief for the inhabitants of the land (Hitzig, Elster) Hahn is peculiar, but hardly in accordance with the true sense of the word ׃אֲשֵׁר “The travail which foolish rulers (?) prepare for their subjects makes these latter tired and faint, brings them to despair, so that they do not know regarding their going to the city, whether, or when, or how it must take place, in order not to violate a law.”
Ecc_10:16-19 have so loose a connection with Ecc_10:15, that Hitzig seems to be right when he perceives in them the words of the prattling fool previously described (Ecc_10:12-15), instead of the actual speech of the author. The lament about the idle lavishing of time, and luxurious debauchery of a king and his counsellors in these verses, would be then given as an example of the extreme injudiciousness of a foolish man in his talk, and the following warning against such want of foresight (Ecc_10:20) would then be very fittingly annexed. The whole tendency of the section would then seem directed only against thoughtless and idle loquacity, together with its evil consequences; whilst the indolence and luxury of extravagant nobles (Ecc_10:16; Ecc_10:18-19) form no object of the attack of the author, although he may consider the complaints of the foolish talker as well grounded, and may himself have lived under an authority attended with these vices.[5] For him who will not accept this view, for which the relation between Ecc_10:5-6 of the fourth chapter may be quoted as analogous, there is no other course than, with the great majority of commentators, to see in these verses a farther extension of the theme of indolence, business incapacity and slothfulness of fools, the treatment of which was begun in Ecc_10:15. Ecc_10:16 would then pass from indolent fools in general to indolent, supine and inefficient rulers and nobles in particular. But there would then exist a very imperfect, if, indeed, any, connection with the final warning in Ecc_10:20; indeed the open manner in which complaints are made, in what immediately precedes, regarding the bad conduct of rulers, would seem to be in direct contradiction to this warning about uttering these complaints loudly.—Woe to thee, O land, when thy king is a child!—That is, an inexperienced, thoughtless fool, incapable of governing; comp. 1Ki_3:7 : Isa_3:4; Isa_3:12,—which passages also describe it as a great misfortune to be governed by a child [νήπιος]. Therefore נַעַר is not to be rendered by “servant, slave,” which latter would rather be expressed by עֶבֶד [contrary to Döderlein, Herzfeld, et al.).—And thy princes eat in the morning.—A sign of especially excessive intemperance and gluttony; see Isa_5:11 ff.; Act_2:15, and compare also the classical parallels in Cicero, Phil. 2:40; Catullus, Carm. 47:5, 6; Juvenal, Sat. 2:49, 50.
Ecc_10:17. Blessed art thou, O land, when thy king is the son of nobles.—(בֶּן־חוֹרִים compare בַּת־נָדִיב Son_7:2; Isa_32:8); a noble not merely by birth, but also in disposition, vere nobilis, generosus.—And thy princes eat in due season, for strength and not for drunkenness.—Therefore make that proper use of wine treated of in Psa_104:15; 1Ti_5:23; not that perverted use against which we are warned[6] in Pro_31:4. כִּגִבוּרָה is not “in strength” (Hahn), or “in virtue” (Ewald), but “for strength,” for obtaining strength. The prep. בּ relates to the object on whose account the action occurs, just as in בּאדם Ecc_2:24 (comp. בּם Ecc_3:12).
Ecc_10:18. By much slothfulness the building decayeth.—That is, the edifice of state, that is here compared to a house that is tottering and threatening to fall (comp. Isa_3:6; Amo_9:11). The intent here is to point out the bad effects of the rioting idleness of the great ones who are called to govern a state. עֲצַלְתַּיִם literally: “the two idle” [hands]; comp. Ewald, § 180 a, 187 c. The expression is stronger than the simple form עַצְלָה or עַצְלוּת (Pro_19:15; Pro_31:27); “double idleness,” i.e., “great idleness.”—And through idleness of the hands the house droppeth through.—That is, the rain penetrating through the leaky roof. The words שִׁפְלוּת יָדַים are used as elsewhere רִפְיוֹן־יָדָים “idleness of the hands,” Isa_47:3; comp. Pro_10:4.
Ecc_10:19. A feast is made for laughter.—A return to the description of riotous and ruinous conduct as given in verse 16. לִשְׂחוֹק “for laughter,” as elsewhere בִּשְׂחוֹק with laughter; comp. for this use of לְ 2Ch_20:21; Psa_102:5.—-עשֹׁים לֶחֶם literally, “they make bread;” i.e., they give banquets, have riotous feasts. עָשָׂה לֶחֶם is therefore used here in a sense different from that in Eze_4:15, where it signifies “to prepare bread, to bake bread;” comp. עָשָׂה in Ecc_3:12; Ecc_6:12.—And wine maketh merry.—The suffix is wanting just as in עֹשִׂים the הֵם was left out. Comp. moreover, Psa_104:15, where an innocent and reasonable enjoyment of wine is meant[7] whilst here the allusion is to a perverted and debauching use of it, as in Ecc_7:2 ff.—But money answereth all things.—That is, to these luxurious rioters, who, counting on their wealth, declare in drunken arrogance that “money rules the world,” “for money one can have every thing that the heart desires, wine, delicacies,” etc., etc. For this Epicurean rule of life see Horace, Epis. I., 6, 36–38. עָנָה literally, “to answer, to listen to” (Ecc_5:10), but is here equivalent to “to afford, to grant;” comp. Hos_2:23. Hitzig unnecessarily considers יַעֲנֶה as Hiphil (“makes to hear”).
Ecc_10:20. Concerning the probable connection with the preceding, consult Ecc_10:16-19 above.—Curse not the king, no, not in thy thought.—מַדָּע elsewhere “knowledge,” here “thought,” Sept. συνείδησις. The signification, “study chamber,” given by Hengstenberg, lacks philological authority. For the sentence comp. 2Ki_6:12. Hengstenberg is correct in saying; “We have here a pure rule of prudence (not a formal precept of duty), a tenet that may be simply summed up in the expression of the Lord : γίνεσθε φρόνιμοι ὡς οἱ ὅφεις.”—And curse not the rich in thy bed chamber.—The rich here represents the noble, the prince, or the counsellor of the king (comp. Ecc_5:16).—For a bird of the air shall carry the voice.—That is, in an inconceivable manner, which no one would consider possible, will that he betrayed which thou hast said. See the proverb: “The walls have ears;” also Hab_2:11; Luk_19:14.—And that which hath wings shall tell the matter.—בַּעַל הַכְּנָפִים equivalent to בַּעַל־כָּנָף Pro_1:17. The K’ri would unnecessarily here strike out the article before כְּנָפִים.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
(With Homiletical Hints)
Although the conclusion of the chapter—the warning against injudicious speeches assailing the respect due to kings in Ecc_10:20—may have been written with conscious reference to the relation of Israel to its Persian rulers, the section, taken as a whole, is simply an unambiguous illustration of the relation between wise men and fools. The allegorical conception of Hengstenberg, by virtue of which he sees in Ecc_10:1-3 the idea that the people of God, groaning under the tyranny of the world, will be sustained by reference to the fact that the hostile world, i.e., the Persian world, is given over to folly, and that thus its destruction cannot be far off,—this conception, we say, finds no sufficient support in the text; it is, rather, very decidedly opposed by the exceeding general character of the morally descriptive as well as of the admonitory parts. The contents and the tendency of the section form an eloquent, figurative, vivid and popular illustration of the superiority of wisdom over folly. The theme here treated is that favorite one of the Proverbs—the parallels between wisdom and folly [Pro_1:20 ff; Pro_9:1 ff; Pro_10:1 ff; Pro_14:1 ff; Pro_24:1 ff.]; and simply with the difference that here are more emphatically and accurately described the insolence and haughtiness of fools, as well as their loquacity and indolent levity, in contrast to the corresponding virtues of the wise. See exegetical illustrations above, No. 1. A Homily on the entire Chapter: Of a few dominant qualities and principal characteristics of wisdom and folly.—Or, of genuine wisdom as the only remedy against the vices of pride, levity and arrogance, together with their evil consequences.—Comp. Starke: Three moral precepts: 1. Esteem genuine wisdom (Ecc_10:1-15). 2. Avoid indolence and debauchery (Ecc_10:16-19). 3. Curse not the king (ver.20).
homiletical hints on separate passages
Ecc_9:17; Ecc_10:4. Melanchthon (Ecc_9:17): The words of the wise are heard by the silent—that is, by those who are not carried away by raging lusts, but who seek for things true and salutary. (Ecc_10:10). Good counsels, sound teaching, well ordered methods, are constantly marred and rendered unavailing by trifling meddlers, who are more readily heard, both in courts and by the people, than the more modest and poor, who give right instruction and salutary advice. Lange (Ecc_9:18). He who has learned any thing thoroughly can effect much good thereby, but also much evil, if he wickedly uses what he has learned against the great purposes of God. Cartwright:—Such patient submission calms the most violent tempests of the soul; it makes tranquil the most swollen waves of passion; it turns the lion into a lamb. Let us strive then to be imbued with this virtue by which we may please God as well as men, even those who are the farthest removed from piety and humanity. Starke (Ecc_10:3):—It is difficult to expel folly and instil wisdom; but it becomes still more difficult when man in his folly considers himself wise (Rom_1:22).—(Ecc_10:4). To suffer and patiently commend one’s innocence to God is the best remedy against misused power and the wrong that we have endured, Jer_11:20.
Geier (Ecc_10:5) :—Lofty positions and great power have not the privilege of infallibility. Therefore, the higher one stands, the more careful let him be, entreating God that he may not fall into error and vice.—Hansen (Ecc_10:6-7) :—The want of foresight in rulers ever exerts evil influences in the world. The unworthy are thereby preferred to the worthy, and everything takes a wrong course.—(Ecc_10:10):—It depends more on wisdom and foresight than on physical strength, to carry on the occupations of men with success.—Hengstenberg (Ecc_10:9): He who proceeds with violence in the moral sphere, and thus performs actions that, in respect to this quality, are similar to the breaking of stone or the splitting of wood, will suffer inevitable injury.—(Ecc_10:10). He who in wisdom possesses the corrective whereby he can sharpen the blunt iron of his understanding, must rise, however deep he may be sunken. He who does not possess it must go to ruin, however high he may have risen.
Ecc_10:11-15. Brenz:—There is nothing in man which contributes more to bring him into sin than his tongue. Truth is satisfied with the fewest and simplest words, and the wiser the man, or the more attached to truth, the more sparing is he in his speech. (Ecc_10:15). This teaches that no labor, no diligence, will produce fruit, if one knows not the legitimate use of labor. As the unskilled steward has much toil, with little or no result, if he knows not how to put to use the goods acquired in the proper manner, or does not carry them to market in the city.—Cramer:—The unprofitable babblers prattle about things of no import; but the wise weigh their words with a golden balance, Sir_21:27.—Starke:
Ecc_10:15. That men must painfully toil is a thing of universal necessity since the fall; but to toil in profitless and sinful things is double folly and sin, Isa_57:10.—Zeyss [Ecc_10:15] :—Remember the city of the living God (Heb_12:22) and learn the right way thither, which is indeed narrow and not easy to find (Luk_13:24).—Geier (Ecc_10:16):—In judging a wise man we are not to regard his years, but the power of his mind, and what they manifest, 1Sa_16:17; 1Ti_4:12.—[Ecc_10:17]. A pious and virtuous magistracy we should gratefully recognize as an inestimable gift of God, and heartily pray to him for their preservation.—Zeyss (Ecc_10:18-19):—Beware, above all things, that the house of thy soul be not ruined by neglect, whilst thou art yielding to the flesh and its sinful desires.—Tub. Bib.:—Observe this rule of wisdom: speak no evil of thy ruler, nor of any one else, Jam_4:11.—[Matthew Henry] (Ecc_10:14):—A fool also is fond of words, a passionate fool especially, that runs on endlessly, and never knows when to take up; it is all the same, over and over; he will have the last word, though it be but the same with that which was the first. What is wanting in the strength of his words he endeavors in vain to make up in their number. The words that follow may be taken either (1) as checking him for his vain-glorious boasting in the multitude of his words (in respect to the future), namely, what he will do, and what he will have, not considering what every body knows, that a man cannot tell what shall be in his own time while he lives (Pro_27:1), much less can one tell what shall be after him, when he is dead and gone. Or (2) as mocking him for his tautologies; he is full of words, for if he do but speak the most trite and common thing, such as a man cannot tell what shall be, then, because he loves to hear himself talk, he will say it over again, what shall be after him, who can tell him? like Battus in Ovid:
Sub illis
Montibus (inquit) erant, et erant sub montibus illis. Whence vain repetitions are called Battologies (Mat_4:7).—[Ecc_10:15. The foolish tire themselves in endless pursuit’s, because they know not how to go to the city, because they have not capacity to apprehend the plainest thing, such as the entrance to a great city. But it is the excellency on the way to the heavenly city, that it is “a highway” in which “the wayfaring men, though fools, shall not err” (Isa_35:8); yet sinful folly makes men miss that way.—T. L.]
Footnotes:
[1][The objections to the rendering of Zöckler, Hitzig, Stuart, and others, are 1st: the unusual meaning “heavier” which it gives to יָקָר, a sense existing primarily in the root, and appearing in the Syriac and the Arabic, but having no other example in the Hebrew; 2d, the filling up, or supposed ellipsis (“in the eyes of the ignorant and foolish”), which is required if we give it the more common Hebrew significance of “precious, honorable;” 3d, and chiefly, the singular incongruity that; by either of these authors, is introduced into the comparison: “as the dead fly taints the precious ointment, so a little folly outweighs wisdom,” etc., or, is more precious in the vulgar opinion. It is evidently a comparison in either rendering, though the particle of comparison is omitted, as in many other cases, especially of the concise sententious kind [see the long list in the Grammar of Jona Ben Gannach]. The objection to the common English rendering (which is also that of Geier, Tremellius, and the great critic Glassius) is that it requires a repetition of יבאיש in the second member; but for such ellipsis, especially in proverbial expressions, and when the context evidently favors it, there is good and clear authority. Comp. Pro_13:2; “From the fruit of his mouth a man shall eat good, but the soul of the wicked—folly;” that is, shall eat folly [with ellipsis of תּאֹכַל]. Comp. Pro_26:9; Jer_17:11. A still stronger case is found, Job_24:19, where there is, in fact, a double ellipsis, and yet the comparison and the meaning are both quite clear: “Heat carries off the snow waters, Sheol—have sinned;” that is, so “sheol (carries off those that) have sinned”—שאול חטאו. There is an ellipsis both of the governing verb, and of the relative pronoun. “The dead fly taints the fragrant ointment, so a little folly [taints] one honorable for wisdom,” etc. Nothing could be more apt, or true. This rendering preserves also the analogy between a good name and precious odors, a metaphor common in all languages, and so strikingly introduced Ecc_7:1, and Son_1:3 : Dead flies spoil the fragrant ointment, a little folly the good name. This is in accordance, too, with a common usage in Hebrew, by which the sense of הבאיש is transferred from the literal ill savor to odiousness of character. The preposition מ with the sense of propter, on account of, is also well established: יָקָר מֵחָכְמָה מִכָּבוֹד, “precious,” that is, held in esteem “for wisdom and honor.” The two verbs יביע and יבאיש are to be taken together, or the one as qualifying the other: “make corrupt, make ferment,” or froth, that is, corrupt by fermentation— “with frothy taint.” See Metrical Version.—T. L.]
[2][The meaning given to יסָּכֵן is probably the correct one (see text note), as derived from the noun שַׂכִּין “a knife” (Arabic ׃םה); but שׂכה = סכה, means to see, and is only rendered to cut from its supposed affinity to the Latin seco, and to accommodate it to this word. The sense of סכן “to become poor,” as in Isa_41:20 (pual), and in the Arabic, might perhaps answer here, but it would mar the parallelism.—T.L.]
[3][See Text Note and Metrical Version.—T.L.]
[4] [יַרְבֶּה דְּבָרִים. It is not mere “loquacity” that is here intended. The best explanation is that of Aben Ezra, who refers it to vain predictions, [see note on דברים Ecc_5:5, Eng. Ecc_5:7, p. 91], or rather, boasting assertions in respect to the future: “I will eat and drink, says the fool, but he knows not what shall be in his life or in his death; as is said in another place [Ecc_5:7, Ecc_6:12], there are many words that increase vanity, yet who knoweth what is good for man etc.” So also Rashi: “In his simpleness, the fool is full of words, deciding confidently and saying, ‘to-morrow I will do so and so, when he knoweth not what shall be on the morrow,—or when he would undertake a journey for gain,’ and knoweth not that he may fall by the sword.” Comp. Luk_12:20, Jam_4:13. This is also the interpretation of Martin Geier, at least in relation to the 14th verse. It is strongly confirmed by the immediately following context. In such a rendering ו in וסּכל, has an adversative force: “Though the fool multiply words, yet man knows net, etc.” “For who shall tell him what shall be after him?’ This does not mean the remote future, nor even the future generally, as would be expressed by אחרין, but the near, the immediate, which is the sense given by the preposition in the compound מֵאַהֲרָיו, “from after”—that which comes from, out of or directly after the present,—or, “on the morrow,” according to the language of these Jewish interpreters, and that of St. James. Comp. Fuerst’s derivation of מָחָר (to-morrow), which he regards, not as an independent root, but as a contraction of מַאֲחַר, as he makes it, or מֵאַחַר or מָה־אַחַר (see Marg. Note to Ecc_10:7, p. 91). This shows, too, the direct connection with the verse that follows, and furnishes a key to that obscure expression on which there is so much comment to so little purpose. Our English Version: “The labour of the foolish wearieth every one of them, because he knoweth not how to go to the city,” is hardly intelligible in any sense that can be put upon it. The same may be said of Hitzig’s and Zöckler’s attempts to explain it. The expression, עמל הכסילים is a collective one, “the toil of fools,” equivalent to “a foolish toil,” to be taken as a nominative independent, or what De Sacy styles, in his Arabic Grammar, Vinchoatif, or detached subject. Its separation from the verb following is shown by the change of gender,—the feminine prefix in תְּיַגְעֶנּוּ being used to show that the immediate grammatical subject is the neuter, or indefinite, fact: “Vain toil of fools! it only wearieth him;” the singular objective pronoun in תְּיַגְעֶנּוּ referring, not to כסילים taken distributively, but to the vain predicter in Ecc_10:14, and who is kept in view throughout. “It wearieth him,”—is too much for him—surpasses his knowledge. Then אֲשֶׁר gives the reason: “One who knoweth not ללכת אל עיר, the going to the city”—so plain a fact as that—or “that he shall go to the city;” even this comes not within his knowledge of the future. “How to go,” says our E. V., and that is the idea conveyed by most others; but there is a great difficulty in making any sense out of it, and the grammatical construction does not require it. In the small number of cases in Hebrew where we find ידע followed by the infinitive (whether with or without ל) it is to be determined by the context whether it means a knowing how to do a thing, or a knowledge of the doing, as a fact or event. Thus in Ecc_4:13, it cannot mean, “knows not how to be admonished,” which makes a very poor sense, but, “no longer knows (that is, heeds or recognizes) admonition,” or the being admonished. In Exo_36:1, 2Ch_2:13; 1Ki_3:7; Isa_7:16; Amo_3:10; the context favors the sense of “knowing how.” In Isaiah 47 it is decidedly the other way: ידע שכול does not mean “know how to be bereaved,” but, “know bereavement.” Still more clear, and precisely parallel to this case, is Ecclesiastes 4:17 (Eng. Bib. Ecc_5:1) where אינם יודעים לעשות רע can only mean the fact: “They know not that they are doing evil” in their sacrifices. So Ewald renders it. Hitzig and Stuart find there too the sense of knowing how: “They know not how to do evil,” or, according to the turn they give it, “how to be sad;” a meaning which we do not hesitate to pronounce absurd in itself, and also altogether unsupported by 2Sa_12:18, to which they refer. According to the view we have taken, the whole passage (Ecc_10:14-15) may be thus rendered:—
Predicting words he multiplies, yet man can never know
The thing that shall be; yea, what cometh after who shall tell?
Vain toil of fools! it wearieth him,—this man who knoweth not
What may befall his going to the city.
It is no paraphrase, but only so expressed as to give the spirit of the Hebrew as shown by the general connection, and by the evident reference of the ידע in Ecc_10:15, to the לא ידע האדם in Ecc_10:14. The difference between ידע לכת, and ידע ללכת, is very slight, but the ל makes it correspond more nearly to our English genitive phrase, “to know of a thing,”—that is, as an event or fact. The relative אשר here, has an inferential sense, just as ὅς, sometimes, in Greek and the Latin qui when equivalent to quia: “who knoweth not”=to “seeing he knoweth not,” or (quod) “because he knoweth not.” Such a mention of “going to the city,” as one of the most common and familiar illustrations of human ignorance of the future, suggests immediately Jam_4:13 : “Go to ye who say to-day, or tomorrow, we will go to a certain city, etc., ye who know not (ὅιτινες used exactly as אשר is here) what shall be on the morrow, etc.” It may have been this very passage, thus understood, that suggested the illustration to the Apostle; since his language is almost identical with the very words of Rashi’s interpretation. The great difficulties under which Hitzig and Zöckler labor, and their far-fetched reasons, warrant the offering of the above explanation, as one that deserves attention, to say the least, in clearing up this obscure passage.
We may arrive at the same general idea, even if we render לא ידע ללכת “knows not how to go, etc.;” and such is substantially the conclusion of Aben Ezra in another comment on the 15th verse: “The fool is like one who would pry into things too high or too wonderful for him, when he knows not the things that are visible and familiar, or like a man who purposes to go to a city when he knoweth not the way, and so he gets weary, and fails in his design.” It is the same general lesson, the folly of confident assertions or confident plans respecting the future. Taken in either of these ways, it avoids the exceedingly forced explanations which Zöckler here, and Hitzig in his commentary, give of the passage.
The expression יוֹדֵעַ לַהֲלֹךְ Ecc_4:8, may, perhaps, be cited as a parallel case to ידע לרכת. An answer might be found in the different form of the infinitive לכת, which is used more like a substantive denoting the event, or fact, as the object of knowledge. This reference, however, is at once disposed of by a consideration of the accents, which, in Ecc_6:8, separate the two words, and require the rendering: “What to the poor man who knows,”—or “what to the intelligent poor man, to walk,”—or “that he should walk before the living.” In other words: What profit is his intelligence in his walking before the living? Thus it becomes, according to the usual law of parallelism, an amplification of the thought just above it: “What profit to the wise?” It is another example of the spiritual and critical acuteness that dictated the Masoretic accentuation (see 2d Marginal Note, p. 94). Zöckler thinks the accents here of no authority; but that great critic Ewald holds himself governed by them. The assertion, moreover, that יודֵעַ never has the adjective sense intelligens, is refuted by simply looking into a concordance, and noting the places where it is joined with the participle מבין having a like adjective force. With this view agrees also Aben Ezra, the prince of Jewish critics. It is fortified, too, by the difficulty which all commentators have felt in making any clear sense out of the language: “Who knows how to walk before the living?” The references given by Hitzig, Gen_17:1, and 2Ki_4:13, are not parallel; since the preposition, on which the meaning of the phrase so much depends, is entirely different.—T. L.]
[5][This most absurd and far-fetched view of Hitzig only shows how a false critical theory of division may turn one of the most impressive passages of the book into a fool’s gabble. It all comes from looking for logical connections where they do not exist, and from overlooking the poetical subjective character of the work as a series of meditations, each one prompting the other, but by associations discerned by the feeling rather than the ethical reason. It is the free discursive view of human folly, and of the inefficiency of man’s best wisdom, that brings out the exclamation: O ill-governed land with its weak king and drunken nobles, where folly so abounds; and then this calls up the picture of the higher and purer ideal. He may have thought of the weak son to whom his kingdom was soon to be committed; it may have been a humbling thought of himself and of his own misgovernment, although there is in the way of this that Solomon’s youth was the best part of his life; or it may have been prompted by his general historical experience. View it any way, it is far more expressive in this exclamatory and discursive aspect, than though it were bound together by the closest syllogistic ties. And this appears in what follows. In perfect poetical harmony does this free, contemplative style of thought turn again from the political to the common life—from the revelry and misgovernment of kings and nobles to the slothfulness, luxury, and mercenary spirit that are found in the lower plane. Yet “revile not the ruler,”—that is the next thought that arises. Obedience and reverence are still due to authority, since evils abound in all ranks. Things are described as they are, and to find here an authority for wine drinking is about as rational as to seek an excuse for sloth and shiftlessness.—T. L.]
[6][As drunkenness is condemned here, or, rather, excess of any kind, revelling, or high banqueting, which is the predominant meaning of שְׁתִי [comp. מִשְׁתֶּה convivium], whilst not a word is said about any moderate drinking, this remark must be regarded as rather gratuitous. What makes it more than gratuitous is the fact that in Pro_31:4, instead of a mere warning against perverted use,” there is enjoined upon “kings and princes” total abstinence from “all wine and strong drink,” as something only fit to be given to persons in extremis, in great pain or debility [the perishing, the מָרֵי נֶפֶש or “bitter in soul”], and therefore unfit for those in health, and especially for all who have responsible duties to perform.—T. L.]
[7][In Psa_104:15 a certain effect of wine is mentioned; nothing is said about either its innocent or its immoral use. All such remarks are gratuitous.—T. L.]
[8][These ethical and logical divisions are not easy to trace. The different methods adopted by different commentators, warrant a strong suspicion of their reality. There is, doubtless, a connection in the thought, but it is poetical rather than logical, suggestive rather than formally didactic. In the Metrical Version there is an attempt to group into separate cantos the thoughts that seemed to have the nearest relation to each other; but these might, perhaps, be differently arranged, and with equal effect. The mind of the author may be regarded under different aspects. And so, too, of the reader, it may be said, that the division for him may depend very much on his own spiritual state; for it is the very nature of all such musing, emotional writing, to suggest more to one mind than to another. It may even give a wider and higher train of thought to the reader than the writer himself possessed; and that too legitimately, or without any violence to the text; for there is a spirit in words witnessing with our spirits, and, under favorable spiritual circumstances, there may be seen a light in our author's language which he did not see, or but dimly saw, himself. And this we may suppose to have been the very design of the higher or divine author, in giving such a dramatic or representative work a place in His holy written revelation. The whole book is a meditation, or a series of meditations. The thoughts do not, indeed, follow each other arbitrarily; but, like our best thinking, are connected more by emotional than by logical bands. Place ourselves in the same subjective state—read it as poetry, not as a formal didactic ethical treatise—and we shall readily see what there is in each part, in each verse, in a single word sometimes, that makes the writer think of what follows, though all logical, or even rhetorical criticism might fail to find it. (See remarks p.176). Take, for example, these verses of the 9 and 10 chapters, as apparently the most disconnected of any in the whole poem. The ever-recurring, or underlying thought is wisdon in its two apparently contradictory aspects of preciousness and vanity—wisdom, of such inestimable value in itself as compared with folly, and yet, through folly, rendered so unavailing. The episodalmention of “the poor wise man” leads on the general train of thought, but it immediately (ver.7) how one sinner (one fool) may destroy its effect upon a community. This prompts the parallel thought, how, in the individual, too, a little folly taints all his better acquisitions,—the mode of expressing this being, doubtless, a favorite proverbial form commending itself less for its nicety than for its exquisite appositeness. This again makes him think how readily the fool exposes his folly: as the most striking example of which there occurs to the mind the rashness with which such bring upon themselves the displeasure of the ruler. Then comes readily up the folly of rulers themselves,—then examples of it in subverting the proper relations of life. A pause, perhaps, occurs: some links pass silently through the mind, but the chain of thought still shows itself. It is transferred from the higher to the more ordinary avocations of life. It is still the unavailingness of human wisdom. With all our care, and all our skill, there is danger everywhere, liability to mistakes and mishaps in every business, and in evey act. Another pause; it is the same thought but it takes a different form—the unavailingness of eloquence, or the gift of speech (that splendid evil, ὁ κόσμος τῆς ἀδικίας, Jam_3:6, or “ornament of unrighteousness”). Here, too, there is to be traced the influence of the proverbial association: “the serpent bites without enchantment;” so is the gift of speech to its possessor when misemployed in vain babbling or in slander. In such a tracking of ideas and emotions, the transitions may seem slight and even fanciful; but they are more natural, more sober, more impressive, we may say, in their moral and didactic effect, than those formal, logical divisions which commentators so confidently propose, and in which they so greatly differ. Other readers may be differently affected, so that they discover in it other associations of thought [for there are various ways, lying below the soul's direct consciousness, in which our spiritual movements link themselves together] but such diversity of view, it may be said, arises from the very nature of this kind of subjective writing, and is evidence of excellency in it rather than of a defect. It comes from its very suggestiveness, and shows the rich fertility inherent in its germs of thought.—T.L.]
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv14–18 (Sa2 20:16-22).
(Sa2 20:16-22).
bulwarks--military works of besiegers.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv14–18 14. Little city… great king — It is not…
14. Little city… great king — It is not known of what city or of what king this is told. There were nations and cities within the limits of the Persian empire that steadily and successfully defied the king’s power. The case of a city thus hemmed in, so that, in the long run, the choice of fate would be between famine and the sword, would be very desperate.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv14–18 14. there was a little city] The city has…
14. there was a little city] The city has been identified by one commentator (Hitzig) with Dora, which was besieged unsuccessfully by Antiochus the Great in b.c. 218 (Polyb. 9:66). Josephus describes it, in his narrative of its siege by Antiochus Sidetes (Ant. xiii. 7, § 2), as “a city hard to be taken,” but we know nothing of any special incidents corresponding to the allusion in this passage. The term “great king” fits in with the hypothesis, as also does the fact that the siege was raised, but that is all. The spiritualising interpretations which have found favour with Jewish and Christian commentators, in which the history represents something like the attack of Satan on the town of Mansoul (as in Bunyan’s Holy War), must be rejected as altogether arbitrary and fantastic.
and built great bulwarks against it] The “bulwarks,” as in the Old Testament generally, are the out-works of the besiegers, the banks or mounds from which missiles were thrown into the city (comp. Deu_20:20; 2Sa_20:15; 2Ch_26:15).
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On v14 (14) Idle attempts have been made to find a…
(14) Idle attempts have been made to find a historic reference in this passage. What is here told is so like the story (2 Samuel 20) of the deliverance of Abel-beth-Maachah by a wise woman, whose name, nevertheless, has not been preserved, that we cannot even be sure that the writer had any other real history in his mind.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv14–18 There was a little city. The substantive verb is,…
There was a little city. The substantive verb is, as commonly, omitted. Commentators have amused themselves with endeavoring to identify the city here mentioned. Thus some see herein Athens, saved by the counsel of Themistocles, who was afterwards driven from Athens and died in misery (Justin., 2:12); or Dora, near Mount Carmel, besieged unsuccessfully by Antiochus the Great, B.C. 218, though we know nothing of the circumstances (Polyb., 5:66); but see note on ver. 13. The Septuagint takes the whole paragraph hypothetically, "Suppose there was a little city," etc. Wright well compares the historical allusions to events fresh in the minds of his hearers made by our Lord in his parable of the pounds. (Luk_19:12, Luk_19:14, Luk_19:15, Luk_19:27) So we may regard the present section as a parable founded on some historical fact well known at the time when the book was written. A great king. The term points to some Persian or Assyrian potentate; or it may mean merely a powerful general. (see 1Ki_11:24; Job_29:25) Built great bulwarks against it. The Septuagint has carakav megalouv, "great palisades;" the Vulgate, Extruxitque munitiones per gyrum . What are meant are embankments or mounds raised high enough to overtop the walls of the town, and to command the positions of the besieged. For the same purpose wooden towers were also used. (see Deu_20:20; 2Sa_20:15; 2Ki_19:32) The Vulgate rounds off the account in the text by adding, et perfects est obsidio, "and the beleaguering was completed."
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On vv14, 17 There was a little city, and few men within…
Ecc_9:14-18
There was a little city, and few men within it.
Read full note →
The little city and the poor wise man
The little city, as first introduced to our notice, is in sore straits. The legion of the foe seem innumerable, while the garrison is reduced to a mere handful. They are fast being brought to extremities, and in a few short hours the unfortunate little city will be, in all human probability, subjected to all the horrors of capture by storm, and will be ultimately razed to the ground. At first sight it may seem rather paradoxical to compare this great world of ours, with its almost innumerable inhabitants, its vast area, its enormous resources, to the little city with few men within it. But do we not, comparatively speaking, take too exalted a view of this little world? For relatively little it is, after all--but an insignificant fraction of Gods great universe. But further, inasmuch as the city spoken of here is represented as being ultimately delivered from its peril, we are hardly justified in applying the figure to humanity at large, for whom indeed deliverance has been provided, but has not by it been accepted. The little city joyfully accepting the benefit of deliverance is a much fitter type of the spiritual Church of Christ, viewed in the foreknowledge of God as a complete whole, redeemed and delivered by the wisdom and love of the poor wise man who has cast in his lot with her: and this is indeed a little city, and few men within her. So that the parallelism thus limited is by no means strained or unintelligible. Now, we know nothing of the circumstances to which the little city owed its danger--it may or may not have been its own fault; but we do know the cause of the peril in which the human family has been involved, and that the blame rests entirely with ourselves. Man has rebelled against the sovereign will of God; the defiant cry of humanity through the long dark ages has still been, We will not have this Man to reign over us. The result of all has been that we have forced God into the position of a foe, although He is in His heart our best and truest friend. God would be false to His own position in the universe were He to permit rebellion against His authority: He would be practically abdicating His throne, and this He will never do. Do you know what it is to have reached the point of self-despair? have you found yourself surrounded by the mighty bulwarks? have you felt what it is to have no escape? Not until then, believe me, will you be disposed to value the deliverance procured by the poor wise man. To him we will now turn our attention. He was but a poor man; but he had a patriots heart and a wise mans head; and, moved doubtless by love for his compatriots, by some extraordinary and unlooked-for effort of wisdom, he delivered the city. How did he do it? Here again we have no information, but it is suggestive to notice that an incident very similar to the one described here actually took place in the time of Solomons father, and must in all probability have made so deep an impression on his own mind that it is scarcely possible that his mind did not recur to it as he wrote these words, though in this case the humble deliverer was a woman, not a man (2Sa_20:15). The guilt of one man here had involved the whole town in peril, because his guilt was imputed to them; but at the suggestion of the wise woman, the guilt was laid on the head of one, himself the guilty party, and one man died for the people, and the whole city perished not. But our Wise Man, Himself the Innocent, offered Himself, with a wisdom which was the child of love, that the guilt of our city might first be imputed to Him the Innocent, and that further His innocence might be imputed to our city, so that by His own voluntary self-sacrifice one man might die for the city, and the city itself might be safe. The wise woman saved the city at the cost of anothers life; but our poor Wise Man has saved His Church at the cost of His own; and in the moment of our despair we see the hostile bulwark withdrawn, the engines of war removed. We too are saved by the interposition of One who, though He was rich, yet for our sakes became poor, that we through His poverty might be made rich. He too was found in the city with no outward distinction of rank or title. He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not. Born in a remote province, in an obscure town, brought up in retirement as a peasants son, what was He to the Caesars and Herods of His day? But now I hasten on to the sequel, for I am speaking to the delivered ones to-day. What became of the poor wise man? Did they make him king or governor? Did he continue to be the most prominent figure in the little commonwealth which he had saved? Nay, but he disappears again into his old obscurity, he retires to the back street--to his cellar or his garret. No man remembered that same poor man. Ah, blood-bought souls, ye ransomed from ruin by the death of the Deliverer, is this true of any of us? Having been delivered from impending ruin by the Christ, have we learned to forget the Deliverer, and to live very much as if we had delivered ourselves? (W. H. M. H. Aitken, M. A.)
The poor wise man
A very remarkable case this is indeed. Here is a little city, with few inhabitants, in a weak defenceless condition, and a powerful army at the gates; which is rescued out of the hands of its enemies, and snatched from the jaws of destruction just opened to devour it: war and slavery are driven far away, and peace and liberty at once restored. And all this is ejected by one poor wise man. What would the behaviour of the people be in such a case? Would not their hearts overflow with gratitude toward their deliverer? Would they not render to him all their service who had rendered to them all his; and vie with each other who should do him most honour? Nothing less I they did not so much as thank him. Nay, after the thing was over, he did not even enter into their thoughts--No man remembered that same poor man. This is a very affecting story, considered only in itself: but if we can find an interest in it, and make the case our own, it will be much more so. Let us ask, then, what is to be understood by the city, the great king that besieged it, and the poor wise man that delivered it? The first thing we meet with is a little city with few men in it. Is not this a description which suits well with the Church, or society of believers? (Mat_5:14; Heb_11:10; Psa_87:3). And few and weak indeed we are, in comparison of those that besiege and encompass us round about to destroy us. Who these are, we are next to consider. There came a great king against it, and besieged it, and built great bulwarks against it. That the Christian state, of which this besieged city is a picture, is a state of warfare is known and acknowledged, when it is called the Church militant; and who it is that attacks it we all declare at our baptism, when we promise to fight manfully against sin, the world, and the devil. Sin and the world are but two instruments in this war: it is the devil who uses them; and, therefore, he is the great king that besieges this city and builds bulwarks against it. The bulwarks are raised; the city is ready to fall; and the enemy is about to enter: when lo, there is found in the city a poor wise man; and who is he? If we are the city, he that saves the city must be he that saves us; even our Lord Jesus Christ; than whom none ever was poorer or wiser: He was made poor for our sakes; and in Him were all the treasures of wisdom. This is He who by His wisdom delivers the city; who places Himself in the breach, as Moses did. At the sight of Him the infernal host was in an uproar; and for a time they seemed to overwhelm Him; they shouted for victory, and were hasting forward to the prey: the enemy of Israel, the spiritual Pharaoh, said, I will pursue, I will overtake, etc. And here, except the Lord had kept the city, the watchman had waked but in vain. Had he been an earthly conqueror, the day had been lost. For, to the everlasting confusion of His enemies, He who lay down in his grave the poor wise man, the despised and afflicted Galilean, arose from the dead the Lord mighty in battle; and of the subject of death became the King of Glory. And now, would you think it possible that after all this no man should remember that same poor man? that they should entirely forget him? that they should all forget him? Who at the hearing of this monstrous act of ingratitude is not filled with indignation? Yet we have done all this: we have had this mighty deliverance vouchsafed to us--and we have forgotten it! We have forgotten Him, who so remembered us that He forgot Himself, and made no account of all those sorrows and sufferings, from His birth in the manger to His death upon the cross, which He underwent for us men and our salvation. The first thing we ought; to remember and confess is this, That we got not the land in possession by our own sword, etc. You have now seen how well this parable of Solomon bears an application to the salvation of us citizens of the Church by Jesus Christ; and how it agrees with the same in every particular. There is another ease of the kind, in which the event was quite contrary; and the case of the one city should never be thought of without the other. You have seen the example of a city saved by a poor wise man. I can tell you of another city lost for want of him. The city of Jerusalem fell into the condition of our city in the parable. A great king came against it and encompassed it with armies, and built great bulwarks against it, and prevailed so as to overthrow it to its very foundations, and scatter all its inhabitants. There was found in it none to save; no poor wise man to prevent its destruction. There had been one; but they had cast him out, and refused to he saved by him: for the sake of his poverty they had despised his wisdom; so their destruction was inevitable. And so will it be of all those who east out their Saviour: yea, the time will come when the whole world shall perish for want of Him. (W. Jones, M. A.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv16–17 the poor man's wisdom is despised
the poor man's wisdom is despised
This can be stated in active form. AT: "people despise the poor man's wisdom" (See: Active or Passive)
Read full note →
his words are not heard
this can be stated in active form. AT: "they do not listen to what he says" or "they do not take his advice" (See: Active or Passive)
translationWords
wise
strength
word
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On v18 9:18–10:1 one sinner can destroy . . . a…
9:18–10:1 one sinner can destroy . . . a little foolishness spoils: Sin and foolishness can undo a lot of good in a very short time.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.