Ecclesiastes 5:9

Solomon had shown the vanity of pleasure, gaiety, and fine works, of honour, power, and royal dignity; and there is many a covetous worldling that will agree with him, and speak as slightly as he does of these things; but money, he thinks, is a substantial thing, and if he can but have enough of that he is happy. This is the mistake which Solomon attacks, and attempts to rectify, in these verses; he shows that there is as much vanity in great riches, and the lust of the eye about them, as there is in the lusts of the flesh and the pride of life, and a man can make himself no more happy by hoarding an estate than by spending it.

I. He grants that the products of the earth, for the support and comfort of human life, are valuable things (Ecc 5:9): The profit of the earth is for all. Man's body, being made of the earth, thence has its maintenance (Job 28:5); and that it has so, and that a barren land is not made his dwelling (as he has deserved for being rebellious, Psa 68:6), is an instance of God's great bounty to him. There is profit to be got out of the earth, and it is for all; all need it; it is appointed for all; there is enough for all. It is not only for all men, but for all the inferior creatures; the same ground brings grass for the cattle that brings herbs for the service of men. Israel had bread from heaven, angels' food, but (which is a humbling consideration) the earth is our storehouse and the beasts are fellow-commoners with us. The king himself is served of the field, and would be ill served, would be quite starved, without its products. This puts a great honour upon the husbandman's calling, that it is the most necessary of all to the support of man's life. The many have the benefit of it; the mighty cannot live without it; it is for all; it is for the king himself. Those that have an abundance of the fruits of the earth must remember they are for all, and therefore must look upon themselves but as stewards of their abundance, out of which they must give to those that need. Dainty meats and soft clothing are only for some, but the fruit of the earth is for all. And even those that suck the abundance of the seas (Deu 33:19) cannot be without the fruit of the earth, while those that have a competency of the fruit of the earth may despise the abundance of the seas.

II. He maintains that the riches that are more than these, that are for hoarding, not for use, are vain things, and will not make a man easy or happy. That which our Saviour has said (Luk 12:15), that a man's life consists not in the abundance of the things which he possesses, is what Solomon here undertakes to prove by various arguments.

1. The more men have the more they would have, Ecc 5:10. A man may have but a little silver and be satisfied with it, may know when he has enough and covet no more. Godliness, with contentment, is great gain. I have enough, says Jacob; I have all, and abound, says St. Paul: but, (1.) He that loves silver, and sets his heart upon it, will never think he has enough, but enlarges his desire as hell (Hab 2:5), lays house to house and field to field (Isa 5:8), and, like the daughters of the horse-leech, still cries, Give, give. Natural desires are at rest when that which is desired is obtained, but corrupt desires are insatiable. Nature is content with little, grace with less, but lust with nothing. (2.) He that has silver in abundance, and has it increasing ever so fast upon him, yet does not find that it yields any solid satisfaction to his soul. There are bodily desires which silver itself will not satisfy; if a man be hungry, ingots of silver will do no more to satisfy his hunger than clods of clay. Much less will worldly abundance satisfy spiritual desires; he that has ever so much silver covets more, not only of that, but of something else, something of another nature. Those that make themselves drudges to the world are spending their labour for that which satisfies not (Isa 55:2), which fills the belly, but will never fill the soul, Eze 7:19.

2. The more men have the more occasion they have for it, and the more they have to do with it, so that it is as broad as it is long: When goods increase, they are increased that eat them, Ecc 5:11. The more meat the more mouths. Does the estate thrive? And does not the family at the same time grow more numerous and the children grow up to need more? The more men have the better house they must keep, the more servants they must employ, the more guests they must entertain, the more they must give to the poor, and the more they will have hanging on them, for where the carcase is the eagles will be. What we have more than food and raiment we have for others; and then what good is there to the owners themselves, but the pleasure of beholding it with their eyes? And a poor pleasure it is. An empty speculation is all the difference between the owners and the sharers; the owner sees that as his own which those about him enjoy as much of the real benefit of as he; only he has the satisfaction of doing good to others, which indeed is a satisfaction to one who believes what Christ said, that it is more blessed to give than to receive; but to a covetous man, who thinks all lost that goes beside himself, it is a constant vexation to see others eat of his increase.

3. The more men have the more care they have about it, which perplexes them and disturbs their repose, Ecc 5:12. Refreshing sleep is as much the support and comfort of this life as food is. Now, (1.) Those commonly sleep best that work hard and have but what they work for: The sleep of the labouring man is sweet, not only because he has tired himself with his labour, which makes his sleep the more welcome to him and makes him sleep soundly, but because he has little to fill his head with care about and so break his sleep. His sleep is sweet, though he eat but little and have but little to eat, for his weariness rocks him asleep; and, though he eat much, yet he can sleep well, for his labour gets him a good digestion. The sleep of the diligent Christian, and his long sleep, is sweet; for, having spent himself and his time in the service of God, he can cheerfully return to God and repose in him as his rest. (2.) Those that have every thing else often fail to secure a good night's sleep. Either their eyes are held waking or their sleeps are unquiet and do not refresh them; and it is their abundance that breaks their sleep and disturbs it, both the abundance of their care (as the rich man's who, when his ground brought forth plentifully, thought within himself, What shall I do? Luk 12:17) and the abundance of what they eat and drink which overcharges the heart, makes them sick, and so hinders their repose. Ahasuerus, after a banquet of wine, could not sleep; and perhaps consciousness of guilt, both in getting and using what they have, breaks their sleep as much as any thing. But God gives his beloved sleep.

4. The more men have the more danger they are in both of doing mischief and of having mischief done them (Ecc 5:13): There is an evil, a sore evil, which Solomon himself had seen under the sun, in this lower world, this theatre of sin and woe - riches left for the owners thereof (who have been industrious to hoard them and keep them safely) to their hurt; they would have been better without them. (1.) Their riches do them hurt, make them proud, secure, and in love with the world, draw away their hearts from God and duty, and make it very difficult for them to enter into the kingdom of heaven, nay, help to shut them out of it. (2.) They do hurt with their riches, which not only put them into a capacity of gratifying their own lusts and living luxuriously, but give them an opportunity of oppressing others and dealing hardly with them. (3.) Often they sustain hurt by their riches. They would not be envied, would not be robbed, if they were not rich. It is the fat beast that is led first to the slaughter. A very rich man (as one observes) has sometimes been excepted out of a general pardon, both as to life and estate, merely on account of his vast and overgrown estate; so riches often take away the life of the owners thereof, Pro 1:19.

5. The more men have the more they have to lose, and perhaps they may lose it all, Ecc 5:14. Those riches that have been laid up with a great deal of pains, and kept with a great deal of care, perish by evil travail, by the very pains and care which they take to secure and increase them. Many a one has ruined his estate by being over-solicitous to advance it and make it more, and has lost all by catching at all. Riches are perishing things, and all our care about them cannot make them otherwise; they make themselves wings and fly away. He that thought he should have made his son a gentleman leaves him a beggar; he begets a son, and brings him up in the prospect of an estate, but, when he dies, leaves it under a charge of debt as much as it is worth, so that there is nothing in his hand. This is a common case; estates that made a great show do not prove what they seemed, but cheat the heir.

6. How much soever men have when they die, they must leave it all behind them (Ecc 5:15, Ecc 5:16): As he came forth of his mother's womb naked, so shall he return; only as his friends, when he came naked into the world, in pity to him, helped him with swaddling-clothes, so, when he goes out, they help him with grave-clothes, and that is all. See Job 1:21; Psa 49:17. This is urged as a reason why we should be content with such things as we have, Ti1 6:7. In respect of the body we must go as we came; the dust shall return to the earth as it was. But sad is our case if the soul return as it came, for we were born in sin, and if we die in sin, unsanctified, we had better never have been born; and that seems to be the case of the worldling here spoken of, for he is said to return in all points as he came, as sinful, as miserable, and much more so. This is a sore evil; he thinks it so whose heart is glued to the world, that he shall take nothing of his labour which he may carry away in his hand; his riches will not go with him into another world nor stand him in any stead there. If we labour in religion, the grace and comfort we get by that labour we may carry away in our hearts, and shall be the better for it to eternity; that is meat that endures. But if we labour only for the world, to fill our hands with that, we cannot take that away with us; we are born with our hands griping, but we die with them extended, letting go what we held fast. So that, upon the whole matter, he may well ask, What profit has he that has laboured for the wind? Note, Those that labour for the world labour for the wind, for that which has more sound than substance, which is uncertain, and always shifting its point, unsatisfying, and often hurtful, which we cannot hold fast, and which, if we take up with it as our portion, will no more feed us than the wind, Hos 12:1. Men will see that they have laboured for the wind when at death they find the profit of their labour is all gone, gone like the wind, they know not whither.

7. Those that have much, if they set their hearts upon it, have not only uncomfortable deaths, but uncomfortable lives too, Ecc 5:17. This covetous worldling, that is so bent upon raising an estate, all his days eats in darkness and much sorrow, and it is his sickness and wrath; he has not only no pleasure of his estate, nor any enjoyment of it himself, for he eats the bread of sorrow (Psa 127:2), but a great deal of vexation to see others eat of it. His necessary expenses make him sick, make him fret, and he seems as if he were angry that himself and those about him cannot live without meat. As we read the last clause, it intimates how ill this covetous worldling can bear the common and unavoidable calamities of human life. When he is in health he eats in darkness, always dull with care and fear about what he has; but, if he be sick, he has much sorrow and wrath with his sickness; he is vexed that his sickness takes him off from his business and hinders him in his pursuits of the world, vexed that all his wealth will not give him any ease or relief, but especially terrified with the apprehensions of death (which his diseases are the harbingers of), of leaving this world and the things of it behind him, which he has set his affections upon, and removing to a world he has made no preparation for. He has not any sorrow after a godly sort, does not sorrow to repentance, but he has sorrow and wrath, is angry at the providence of God, angry at his sickness, angry at all about him, fretful and peevish, which doubles his affliction, which a good man lessens and lightens by patience and joy in his sickness.

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Ecc 5:9 Moreover the profit of the earth is for all: the king [himself] is served by the field.

Ver. 9. Moreover, the profit of the earth is for all,] viz., For all sorts of men, and for all kind of uses. Alma mater, terra ferax. "Then shall the earth yield her increase; and (therein) God, even our own God, shall bless us." {Psa 67:6} "Can any of the vanities of the heathens give rain," or grain? No, neither. {Jer 14:22} Can the earth bring forth fruit of herself? {a} So, indeed, our Saviour seems to say, "First the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear"; {Mar 4:28} but then it is after the good husbandman hath sowed it, and God by his blessing given the increase. The drift of the Preacher here is to set forth the excellence of tillage first, and then to show the vanity of it. Tillage is the life and blood of a commonwealth; it is beyond all pecuniary possessions. Jacob had money and other fruits of the earth, and yet if Egypt, the world’s granary, as one calls it, had not supplied them with grain, he and his might have perished. {Gen 43:1-2}

The king himself is served by the field.] Not the lion, dragon, unicorn, &c. But the plough aud the ship are the supporters of a crown. Some read it thus: Rex agro servit, The king is a servant to the field. {b} It concerns him to have care of tillage, plantation of fruits, breeding of cattle, &c., or else all will soon run to wrack and ruin. King Uzziah loved husbandry, and used it much. {2Ch 26:10} In Amo 7:1, we read of "the king’s mowings." And Pliny hath observed that grain was never so plentiful, good and cheap at Rome as when the same men tilled the land that ruled the commonwealth, Quasi gauderet terra laureato vomere scilicet et aratore triumphali.

{a} αυτοματως.

{b} Rex agro fit servus. - Ar. Montan.

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.

Ecc 5:9. The profit of the earth is for all — The fruits of the earth are necessary and beneficial to all men. The wise man, after some interruption, returns to his former subject, the vanity of riches; one evidence whereof he mentions in this verse, that the poor labourer enjoys the fruits of the earth as well as the greatest monarch, and that the richest man in the world depends as much upon them as the poorest. The king himself is served by the field — Is supported by the fruits of the field.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

"The profit (produce) of the earth is (ordained) for (the common good of) all: even the king himself is served by (the fruits of) the field" (Ch2 26:10). Therefore the common Lord of all, high and low, will punish at last those who rob the "poor" of their share in it (Pro 22:22-23; Amo 8:4-7).

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 9. The profit of the earth is for all] The earth, if properly cultivated, is capable of producing food for every living creature; and without cultivation none has a right to expect bread.

The king himself is served by the field.] Without the field he cannot have supplies for his own house; and, unless agriculture flourish, the necessary expenses of the state cannot be defrayed. Thus, God joins the head and feet together; for while the peasant is protected by the king as executor of the laws, the king himself is dependent on the peasant; as the wealth of the nation is the fruit of the labourer's toil.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(9) Is served by.—Or, is servant to. Many eminent interpreters connect this verse with what precedes, and translate, “and on the whole the profit of the land is a king devoted to agriculture,” an observation which it is hard to clear of the charge of irrelevance. I prefer, as in our version, to connect with the following verses, and the best explanation I can give of the connection of the paragraph is that it contains a consideration intended to mitigate the difficulty felt at the sight of riches acquired by oppression, namely, that riches add little to the real happiness of the possessors.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

9. Moreover the profit of the earth is for all] The verse is difficult and has been very variously interpreted. The most satisfactory renderings follow: But the profit of a land every way is a king for the field under tillage, or, as some take the words, a king devoted to the field. In either case the main sense is the same. The writer contrasts the misery of the Oriental government of his time with the condition of Judah under the model kings who gave themselves chiefly to the development of the resources of the country by agriculture, such e.g. as Uzziah who “loved husbandry” (2Ch_26:10). This gives, it is obvious, a much better sense than the rendering that “the king is served by the field” or “is subject to the field,” i.e. dependent on it. Assuming the Alexandrian origin of the book, we may perhaps see in the maxim a gentle hint to the Ptolemy of the time being to improve his agricultural administration and to foster the growing export-trade in corn.

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.

Moreover, the profit of the earth is for all,.... Or, "the excellency of the earth in" or "above all things is this" (y); that God most high rules over all the earth, and is higher than the kings of it, and all oppressors in it; or in all respects there is a preference, a superior excellency in the country as opposed to the city, especially in this, that there are not so many tumults, riots, and oppressions there; though this is mostly understood of the preference and superior excellency of agriculture, or tillage of the earth. So the Targum,

"the excellency of the praise of tilling the earth is above all things:''

and to the same purpose Jarchi and Aben Ezra; and the profit arising from it is enjoyed by all; it is for all, even the beasts of the field have grass from hence, as well as man has bread corn, and all other necessaries;

the king himself is served by the field; his table is served with bread corn, and flesh, and wine, and fruits of various sorts, the produce of the earth, which spring from it, or are nourished by it; were it not for husbandry the king himself and his family could not subsist; and therefore it becomes kings to encourage it, and not oppress those who are employed in it: or "the king is a servant to the field" (z); some kings have addicted themselves to husbandry, and been great lovers of it, as Uzziah was, Ch2 26:10; and some of the Chinese emperors, as their histories (a) show; and the kings of Persia (b): Vulcan, in the shield of Achilles, represented the reapers, gatherers, and binders of sheaves at work in the field, and a king standing among the sheaves with a sceptre in his hand, looking on with great pleasure, while a dinner is prepared by his orders for the workmen (c); many of the Roman generals, and high officers, were called from the plough, particularly Cincinnatus (d); and these encouraged husbandry in their subjects, as well as took care of their own farms. There is another sense of the words given, besides many more;

"and the most excellent Lord of the earth (that is, the most high God) is the King of every field that is tilled; (that is, the King of the whole habitable world;) or the King Messiah, Lord of his field, the church, and who is the most eminent in all the earth (e).''

The Midrash interprets it of the holy blessed God.

(y) "et praestantia terrae in omnibus ipsa", Montanus; "porro excellentia terrae prae omnibus est", Vatablus; "et praecellentia terrae in omnibus est", Gejerus. (z) "rex agro sit servus", Montanus, Piscator, Gejerus; "rex agro servit", Mercerus, so some in Drusius. (a) Vid. Martin. Sinic. Histor. l. 2. p. 36. & l. 4. p. 92. & l. 3. p. 287. (b) Xenophon. Oeconom. p. 482. (c) Homer. Iliad. 18. v. 550-558. (d) Flor. Hist. Roman. l. 1. c. 11. (e) So Schmidt Rambachius.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

The king himself is served by the field - Rather, the king is subject to the field, i. e., is dependent on its cultivation. The higher ranks, if they oppress the lower, lose thereby their own means of subsistence.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Money. Avarice is like a dropsy, (Calmet) or poison, infecting all the person. (Sallust.) --- The miser is the slave, and not the possessor, of his riches, (St. Chrysostom) like Tantalus, who could not drink, though in the midst of waters. (Horace, i. Sat. 1.) --- Nescis quo valeat nummus, quem præbeat usum.

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).

The profit of the earth, the fruits procured from the earth by the skill and labour of the husbandman, is for all; are necessary and beneficial to all men whatsoever. The wise man, after some interruption, returns to his former subject, to discourse of the vanity of great riches, one argument or evidence whereof he seems to mention in this verse, to wit, that the poor labourer enjoyeth the fruits of the earth as well as the greatest monarch, and that the richest man in the world depends as much upon them as the poorest.

Is served by the field; is supported by the fruits of the field; or, as many others render it, serves or is a servant to the field, depends upon it, is obliged to see that his fields be tilled and dressed, that he may have subsistence for himself, and for his servants and subjects.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

9. Profit of the earth is for all — It would seem as if Koheleth had adopted the maxim subsequently expressed by Solon, that “A damage to the meanest citizen is a damage to the whole State.” This difficult verse — at least the first part is difficult — should be, The advantage of a country is, that it concerns all. That is, the country is the common concern of all its inhabitants. The king and the tiller of the field are bound together by real interests, and this gives stability and advantage to the institutions of the land. As long as the sense of this unity of interests can be maintained in a land, it is safe and prosperous, and it is the basis of popular government, “for the people and by the people.” When any class is restricted from the enjoyment of the good allowed to other classes, “The land becomes to hastening ills a prey.”

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

It has been much debated whether this verse should be connected with the preceding or the following paragraph. The Vulgate takes it with the preceding verse, Et insuper universae terrae rex imperat servienti; so the Septuagint; and this seems most natural, avarice, wealth, and its evils in private life being treated of in vers. 10 and many following.

Moreover the profit of the earth is for all: the king himself is served by the field. The writer seems to be contrasting the misery of Oriental despotism, above spoken of, with the happiness of a country whose king was content to enrich himself, not by war, rapine, and oppression, but by the peaceful pursuits of agriculture, by cherishing the natural productions of his country, and encouraging his people in developing its resources. Such was Uzziah, who" loved husbandry"; (2Ch_26:10) and in Solomon"s own time the arts of peace greatly flourished. There is much difficulty in interpreting the verse. The Vulgate rendering, "And moreover the King of the whole earth rules over his servant," probably means that God governs the king. But the present Hebrew text does not support this translation. The Septuagint has, Kaisseia ghv eJpi ejsti basileunou, which makes more difficulties. "Also the abundance of the earth is for every one, or upon every thing; the king (is dependent on) the cultivated land, or, there is a king to the land when cultivated," i.e. the throne itself depends on the due cultivation of the country. Or, removing the comma, "The profit of the land in everything is a king of the cultivated field." The Hebrew may safely be rendered, "But the profit of a land in all things is a king devoted to the field," i.e. who loves and fosters agriculture. It is difficult to suppose that Solomon himself wrote this sentence, however we may interpret it. According to the Authorized Version, the idea is that the profit of the soil extends to every rank of life; even the king, who seems superior to all, is dependent upon the industry of the people, and the favorable produce of the land. He could not be unjust and oppressive without injuring his revenues in the end. Ben-Sirs sings the praises of agriculture: "Hate not laborious work, neither husbandry., which the Most High hath ordained" (Ecc_7:15). Agriculture held a very prominent position in the Mosaic commonwealth. The enactments concerning the firstfruits, the sabbatical year, landmarks, the non-alienation of inheritances, etc., tended to give peculiar importance to cultivation of the soil. Cicero"s praise of agriculture is often quoted. Thus ("De Senect.," 15. sqq.; "De Off.," 1:42):" Omninm return, ex quibus aliquid acquiritur, nihil est agricultura melius, nihil uberius, nihil dulcius, nihil heroine libero dignius.

The earth and man.

Whatever obscurity may attach to the interpretation of this verse, in any case it represents the dependence of the inhabitants of earth upon the produce of the soil.

I THE FACT OF THE BOUNTEOUSNESS OF THE FRUITFUL EARTH.

1. Man"s body is fashioned out of its dust. Whatever may have been the process by which the animal nature of man was prepared as the lodging and the vehicle of the immortal spirit, there is no question as to the fact that the human body is a part of nature, that it is composed of elements of a nature similar to those existing around, that it is subject to physical law. All this seems implied in the statement that the human frame was formed of the dust of the ground.

2. Man"s body is supported by its produce. Directly or indirectly, man"s corporeal nature is nourished by the material substances which exist in various forms upon the surface of the earth. The vegetable and animal creation minister to man"s needs and growth.

3. Man"s body is resolved into its substance. "Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." The earth provides man with his food, his raiment, his dwelling, and his grave.

II THE UNIVERSALITY OF THE BOUNTEOUSNESS OF THE EARTH.

1. The least is not overlooked, the poorest is cared for, fed, and sheltered.

2. The greatest is not independent. All men share the same nature, and sit at the same table: "The king himself is served by the field.

LESSONS.

1. We have to learn our dependence upon what is lower than ourselves. Whilst we are in this earth, whilst we share this corporeal nature, the material ministers to bodily needs, and must not be disdained or despised.

2. We should rise to an apprehension of our real dependence upon Divine providence. "The earth is the Lord"s, and the fullness thereof." It is ordered by God"s wisdom that the earth should be the instrument of good to all his creatures, even to the highest. And the enlightened and thoughtful will not fail to ascend from the instrument to him that fashioned it, from the abode to him that built it, from the means of well-being to him who appointed and provided them all, and who intended the earth and all that is in it to teach his intelligent creatures something of his glorious character and gracious purposes. T.

A well-ordered state.

In contrast with the evils produced by an administration in which all the officials, from the lowest to the highest, seek to enrich themselves, our author now sets the picture of a well-governed community, in which the efficient cultivation of the land is a matter of the first consideration, and all classes of the population, up to the king himself, share in the consequent prosperity. (The verse has been differently rendered, but the translation of both our Revised and Authorized Versions is probably the best reproduction of the original words.) From the kings who wasted the resources of the lands over which they ruled in carrying on bloody wars, and in the indulgence of their capricious tastes, he turns to those who, like Uzziah, encouraged agriculture, and under whose beneficent rule Judah enjoyed the blessings of peace and prosperity. (2Ch_26:10) "The profit of the earth is for all." All are dependent upon the labors of the husbandman for the supply of the necessaries of life. By the judicious cultivation of the soil wealth is accumulated, by which comforts and luxuries are to be procured, so that even "the king himself is served by the field." The king, indeed, is more dependent upon the husbandman than the husbandman upon the king; without his labors there would be no bread for the royal palace, and no luxuries could make up for the absence of this necessary of life. We have, surely, in this consideration a strong proof of the dignity and value of the humblest labor, and in the fact of the mutual dependence of all classes upon each other an argument for the necessity of mutual forbearance and co-operation. A very striking illustration of the teaching here given is afforded in an incident which took place at Heidelberg in the reign of Frederic I (1152-1190). "This prince invited to a banquet all the factious barons whom he had vanquished at Seekingen, and who had previously ravaged and laid waste great part of the palatinate. Among them were the Bishop of Mentz and the Margrave of Baden. The repast was plentiful and luxurious, but there was no bread. The warrior-guests looked round with surprise and inquiry. "Do you ask for bread?" said Frederic, sternly; "you who have wasted the fruits of the earth, and destroyed those whose industry cultivates it? There is no bread. Eat, and be satisfied; and learn henceforth mercy to those who put the bread into your mouths (quoted in "Sketches of Germany," by Mrs. Jameson). J.W.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Profit - The fruits of the earth. For all - Necessary and beneficial to all men. The wise man, after some interruption, returns to his former subject, the vanity of riches, one evidence whereof he mentions in this verse, that the poor labourer enjoys the fruits of the earth as well as the greatest monarch. Is served - Is supported by the fruits of the field.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

The author, on the other hand, now praises the patriarchal form of government based on agriculture, whose king takes pride, not in bloody conquests and tyrannical caprice, but in the peaceful promotion of the welfare of his people: "But the advantage of a country consists always in a king given to the arable land." What impossibilities have been found here, even by the most recent expositors! Ewald, Heiligst., Elster, Zckl. translate: rex agro factus = terrae praefectus; but, in the language of this book, not עבד but מלך עשׁה is the expression used for "to make a king." Gesen., Win., de Wette, Knobel, Vaih. translate: rex qui colitur a terra (civibus). But could a country, in the sense of its population in subjection to the king, be more inappropriately designated than by שׂדה? Besides, עבד certainly gains the meaning of colere where God is the object; but with a human ruler as the object it means servire and nothing more, and נעבּד

(Note: Thus pointed rightly in J., with Sheva quiesc. and Dagesh in Beth; vid., Kimchi in Michlol 63a, and under עבד.)

can mean nothing else than "dienstbar gemacht" made subject to, not "honoured." Along with this signification, related denom. to עבד, נעבד, referred from its primary signification to שׂדה, the open fields (from שׂדה, to go out in length and breadth), may also, after the phrase עבד האדמה, signify cultivated, wrought, tilled; and while the phrase "made subject to" must be certainly held as possible (Rashi, Aben Ezra, and others assume it without hesitation), but is without example, the Niph. occurs, e.g., at Eze 36:9, in the latter signification, of the mountains of Israel: "ye shall be tilled." Under Ecc 5:8, Hitzig, and with him Stuart and Zckler, makes the misleading remark that the Chethı̂b is בּכל־היא, and that it is = בּכל־זאת, according to which the explanation is then given: the protection and security which an earthly ruler secures is, notwithstanding this, not to be disparaged. But היא is Chethı̂b, for which the Kerı̂ substitutes הוּא; בּכּל is Chethı̂b without Kerı̂; and that בּכל is thus a modification of the text, and that, too, an objectionable one, since בכל־היא, in the sense of "in all this," is unheard of. The Kerı̂ seeks, without any necessity, to make the pred. and subj. like one another in gender; without necessity, for היא may also be neut.: the advantage of a land is this, viz., what follows. And how בּכּל is to be understood is seen from Ezr 10:17, where it is to be explained: And they prepared

(Note: That כלה ב may mean "to be ready with anything," Keil erroneously points to Gen 44:12; and Philippi, St. Const. p. 49, thinks that vǎkol ǎnāshim can be taken together in the sense of vakol haanashim.)

the sum of the men, i.e., the list of the men, of such as had married strange wives; cf. Ch1 7:5. Accordingly בכל here means, as the author generally uses הכל mostly in the impersonal sense of omnia: in omnibus, in all things = by all means; or: in universum, in general. Were the words accentuated מלך לשדה נעבד, the adject. connection of לשׂ נע would thereby be shown; according to which the lxx and Theod. translate τοῦ αγροῦ εἰργασμένου; Symm., with the Syr., τῇ χώρα εἰργασμένη: "a king for the cultivated land," i.e., one who regards this as a chief object. Luzz. thus indeed accentuates; but the best established accentuation is מלך לשדה נעבד. This separation of נעבד from לש can only be intended to denote that נעבד is to be referred not to it, but to מלך, according to which the Targ. paraphrases. The meaning remains the same: a king subject (who has become a servus) to the cultivated land, rex agro addictus, as Dathe, Rosenm., and others translate, is a still more distinct expression of that which "a king for the well-cultivated field" would denote: an agriculture-king, - one who is addicted, not to wars, lawsuits, and sovereign stubbornness in his opinions, but who delights in the peaceful advancement of the prosperity of his country, and especially takes a lively interest in husbandry and the cultivation of the land. The order of the words in Ecc 5:8 is like that at Ecc 9:2; cf. Isa 8:22; Isa 22:2. The author thus praises, in contrast to a despotic state, a patriarchal kingdom based on agriculture.

Keil & Delitzsch — Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament (1861–1891) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API. (Old Testament only.)

Whoever loves silver will not be sated with silver Whoever loves the commandments will not be sated with them.

and he who loves a multitude of many commandments.

without increase and none of them has a specific and recognizable commandment, such as the building of the Temple or a synagogue, or a beautiful Sepher Torah.

this too is vanity So are these two verses expounded upon in the Midrash, and there are other suitable interpretations, but I stated this one first because it is related to the matter of (verse 7): “and there are higher ones over them,” which Scripture juxtaposed to them.

Another explanation: [8] And the loftiness of the earth is over everything The reward for tilling the soil is esteemed over everything, for even the king must be subservient to the field; if the earth produced fruits, he will eat, but if not, he dies from hunger.

[9] Whoever loves silver will not be sated with silver He will not eat money,

and he who loves a multitude—of money...

without grain that he does not gather for himself produce—this too is vanity.

Another explanation: [8] And the loftiness of the land is in everything The reward of Israel is in all words of Torah, both in Scripture, in Mishnah, and in Gemara.

the king is subservient to the field If he is [well-versed] in Scripture and in Mishnah, he must still be subservient to the one well-versed in Gemara, because he arranges before him the practical decisions of prohibition and permissibility, uncleanness and cleanness, and laws of jurisprudence.

[9] Whoever loves silver Whoever loves Torah, will not be sated with it.

and he who loves a multitude of Torah.

without grain [He] who has [knowledge of] Scripture and Mishnah, but has no [knowledge of] Gemara, what use does he have? All these are in Leviticus Rabbah (23:13).

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.