Bonaventure

In his own words on Ecclesiastes

• Ecclesiastes 1:1

  This entire book is divided into three parts: into the title or proem and the treatise, which begins there: "Vanity of vanities" etc.; and the epilogue, which begins there: "And since Ecclesiastes was most wise." In the title the efficient cause is made manifest, in the treatise the material and formal causes, in the epilogue the final cause. In the title, therefore, the author is made manifest with respect to wisdom, with respect to goodness, and with respect to royal power. By reason of wisdom he says: "The words of Ecclesiastes," supply: what follows are the words of Ecclesiastes; because Ecclesiastes means "preacher," and one cannot be a preacher unless he is wise, because it is said in Proverbs twenty-six: "As if a thorn should grow in the hand of a drunkard, so unfitting is a parable in the mouth of fools"; whence Proverbs seventeen: "Eloquent words do not befit a fool." With respect to goodness it is made manifest when it says: "Son of David." For David was holy, and sons by imitation are holy; whence in Scripture it is a name of kindness and gentleness: Matthew fifteen: "Have mercy on me, Son of David." With respect to royal power, when it says: "King of Jerusalem," because Jerusalem was the most noble city and the capital of the whole kingdom, below: "I, Ecclesiastes, was king of Israel in Jerusalem," because there he chiefly dwelt. Here a question arises: since Solomon composed three books, why is it that he prefixes a title to the book of Proverbs and to this one, in which his name is expressed, but does not prefix one in the Song of Songs? I respond: it must be said that in the book of Proverbs Solomon himself is introduced speaking as a wise man to a disciple, whence he calls his hearer "son": similarly here he is introduced as a man who has experienced various things; but in the Song of Songs it is the bride and bridegroom who speak. Lest therefore it should seem that they were the words of Solomon to his wife, but rather they are of Christ to the Church, he does not prefix his name there. But here, because he was for the most part speaking in his own person, and in the book of Proverbs, therefore he prefixes a title in which his name is specified and disclosed. Likewise it is asked why in the book of Proverbs he says "parables," but here he says "words." If you say that there he speaks parabolically and figuratively, but here openly: then I ask, why here and there he employs a different manner of proceeding. I respond: it must be said that there is a certain mode of speaking that is proper and open, and another that is parabolic: and this latter is twofold: one through parables and open similitudes, another through hidden and profound ones. Since therefore Solomon in the book of Proverbs speaks to the little ones and the unlearned, he therefore speaks parabolically and openly: but since in Ecclesiastes he speaks to those who are advancing, therefore openly and properly: but in the Song of Songs, since he speaks to the perfect, whose food is solid food, therefore parabolically and hiddenly. The question is: why in the title of Proverbs does he call himself by his own name, but here he calls himself Ecclesiastes? I respond: it must be said that, as Jerome says, Solomon had three names, which indeed suited him according to the threefold scripture which he produced. For he was called Solomon, called Ecclesiastes, and Jedidiah. Solomon, the peaceful one, because he possessed the entire kingdom in peace: whence he also handed down the teaching of proverbs to all. Ecclesiastes, the preacher, because he speaks in the persons of various people. Jedidiah means the same as beloved of the Lord. Therefore he calls himself Ecclesiastes, because in this book he brings forward the opinions of various persons and accordingly persuades in diverse ways. He was called Jedidiah in the title of the Psalm Eructavit, which is about him according to the literal sense. Likewise it is asked: why here does he call himself "son of David" and "king of Jerusalem," but in Proverbs he calls himself "king of Israel"? I respond: one reason is taken from the side of the author, because, according to what the Hebrews believe, this book was written by Solomon when he was doing penance and humbling himself. And therefore in Proverbs he does not name himself from another, but rather manifests the power of his entire kingdom: here however he humbles himself: therefore, naming himself from another, he indicates not the whole power but a part. Another reason was from the side of the work, because in Proverbs he leads to the knowledge of things to be done, but here to the contempt of present things. And because very many are those who wish more to be wise than to despise present things: therefore there he calls himself king of Israel, but here king of Jerusalem, because despisers of the world are citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem, who do not have here an abiding city, but seek the future one. And from this the solution to that question which can be raised is clear: why here he does not express the end, as in Proverbs. Because the end of Proverbs is wisdom, which attracts one to listen: the end of this book is contempt of the world, about which few wish to hear. From these things it is clear why he said "words," why he said "Ecclesiastes," why "of the son of David," why "king of Jerusalem," and why he also did not add anything about the usefulness of the teaching of this book, as in Proverbs.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:1

  Concerning the efficient cause: it has been said that the efficient cause was Solomon. That it is not fitting, however, for such a person to be the author, appears from the following: Because he was a sinner and carnal: but when a carnal man preaches spirituality, he causes scandal rather than edification: therefore this book is more apt to generate scandal than edification. Likewise, in the Psalm it is said: "But to the sinner God said: Why do you declare my justices?" Therefore if Solomon was a sinner, then he was sinning by declaring the divine justice. Furthermore, a good author produces credibility, whence the argument from authority has its force; therefore a bad author produces no credibility: but the books of Sacred Scripture are for generating faith. To this it must be responded that, as Jerome says, according to the tradition of the Hebrews, this book was written by Solomon while doing penance: and because God does not reject the penitent, but rather accepts them, accordingly Solomon was not in a blameworthy state when he wrote this book. It can also be responded otherwise, that the Holy Spirit speaks true and good things not only through the good, but indeed also through the wicked: whence the Lord himself says in the Gospel: "Do what they say, but do not do what they do": whence also through Balaam he prophesied most expressly, and so also through Solomon, even though carnal, he said many good things. As to what is objected, therefore, that he was sinning: it must be responded that to him the gift of wisdom was entrusted most especially among all others: and because he was bound not to hide the talent of the Lord, he was obliged to teach the people of the Lord both by word and by writing, especially since he was appointed to their governance. Whence he was not sinning in this, that he taught, but in this, that he did not duly dispose himself. As to what is objected, that the book is not to be believed, since the author is not worthy of credence: I respond: just as we believe the Prophets, that they spoke not of themselves but through the Holy Spirit: so also in all the books of Scripture, that they were produced at the dictation of the Holy Spirit: whence the goodness of the person does not contribute to greater or lesser credibility, presupposing that he spoke through the Spirit. And because it is established for us that Solomon was filled with the spirit of wisdom, as is clear from 3 Kings 3; therefore the Church without doubt receives his books.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Introductory Questions

• Ecclesiastes 1:2

  Concerning the purpose of the book of Ecclesiastes: it is said that the purpose of the book is contempt of the world. That it is so determined, is proved by that which is said in James 4: "The friendship of this world is enmity with God": but everything that is hostile to God, it is good to despise. Likewise, 1 John 2: "Do not love the world, nor the things that are in the world." But on the contrary: Praise of the work redounds to the craftsman, therefore contempt of the work also redounds to the same, therefore whoever despises the world despises God: therefore either this world was not made by God, or it is not to be despised. Likewise, Proverbs 16: "The Lord has made all things for himself," therefore all things are ordered to God; but what is ordered to an end is not to be despised, but to be accepted and loved: therefore this world, and the things that are in it, are to be loved. I respond: it must be said that, as Augustine and Hugh maintain, this world is like a certain ring given by the bridegroom to the soul itself: but the bride can love the ring bestowed upon her by the bridegroom in two ways, namely, with chaste love and with adulterous love. Chaste love is that by which she loves the ring in memory of the bridegroom and on account of love for the bridegroom: adulterous, that by which she loves the ring more than the bridegroom: and the bridegroom cannot but regard this as evil. For just as love is twofold, so hatred or contempt is twofold, because "as often as one of the opposites is spoken of, so also the other." Contempt of the ring, as though it were a small and worthless gift, redounds to the bridegroom: but contempt of the ring, as though it be reckoned as nothing in comparison with the love of the bridegroom, this is to the glory of the bridegroom: and concerning this contempt it is said in Song of Songs, the last chapter: "If a man should give all the substance of his house for love, he shall despise it as nothing." Of this contempt is the discourse here: and thus the objections are resolved.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Introductory Questions

• Ecclesiastes 1:2

  Here begins the treatise: and because "the end imposes necessity upon those things which are ordered to the end," since the end of this book is the contempt of all things and the fear of God alone, therefore in all things he intends to show vanity. And because he proceeds as a preacher by persuading and proving, therefore this treatise has three parts: because first he proposes what he intends to prove, namely that there is vanity in all things; second he proves it, there: "What more does man have from his labor," etc.; third he concludes it as proven near the end: "Vanity of vanities," etc. He therefore proposes a threefold vanity in things, namely of penality, of iniquity, of mutability. As to the vanity of penality: "Vanity of vanities, said Ecclesiastes," that is, he proposed. Concerning this, below in the second chapter: "All his days are full of labors, nor does his mind rest at night: and is this not vanity?" As to the vanity of iniquity he says again: "Vanity of vanities"; whence Jeremiah 10: "Their works are vain and worthy of ridicule: in the day of their visitation they shall perish." As to the vanity of mutability he says: "and all is vanity," because all things are subject to mutability; Romans 8: "The creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly"; and below in the third chapter: "All things are subject to vanity, and all go to one place." Therefore it is not a repetition of words when he says "vanity" three times, but a wondrous distinction of intelligible things. And it should be noted that this threefold vanity follows in sequence, and one arises from another: because the vanity of iniquity arises from the vanity of mutability, although that is not the whole cause; but the vanity of penality arises from the vanity of iniquity. He therefore arranges these vanities in a reverse resolutory order, and pursues them in the opposite order in what follows. And because that twofold vanity has its origin from another vanity, but the third does not, therefore he says "vanity of vanities" twice, and afterwards only "vanity." It should also be noted that this threefold vanity is found in man, because he is the one upon whom falls punishment and fault: and on account of this it is said in the Psalm: "Every living man is altogether vanity." For there is in him the vanity of nature, the vanity of fault, and the vanity of punishment. Concerning the vanity of nature, in the Psalm: "Man is made like unto vanity; his days pass away like a shadow." Concerning the vanity of fault, likewise in the Psalm: "The Lord knows the thoughts of men, that they are vain." Concerning the vanity of punishment, Job 14: "Man born of a woman, living for a short time, is filled with many miseries." It should also be noted that Solomon himself speaks of himself as if of another, just as John, in the twenty-first chapter: "This is that disciple who bears witness concerning these things"; and similarly Moses. Now a threefold reason can be assigned for this: one is on the part of the first efficient cause, because the Holy Spirit himself is the author of Scripture, not Solomon or another; therefore, when he is introduced in sacred Scripture, Scripture ought to speak of him as if of another, just as Balaam said in Numbers, the twenty-fourth chapter: "The hearer of the words of God said," etc. Another reason is taken from the part of the immediate efficient cause: because Scripture shuns all pride and displays humility; and therefore no teacher in it ought to speak of himself as of himself, but for the sake of humility, as if of another. The third reason: when Scripture intimates great and wondrous things, it ought to show them as if from afar; whence Hugh says: "This manner of speaking, as often as it is employed in Scripture, is done either for the sake of humility or of wonder. For we ought both to remove great things from ourselves on account of humility, and to show wondrous things as if from afar on account of wonder." An example is found in Paul and John.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:2

  Concerning the subject matter of the book of Ecclesiastes: it is said that here the treatment is of vanity. But on the contrary: Every science treats of the good and the true: but the vain is deprived of goodness and truth: therefore there is no science of it. Furthermore, it seems that there is no vanity in things, because it is said in Genesis 1: "God saw all things that he had made, and they were very good": therefore if all things are very good, nothing is vain. Furthermore, that is vain and futile which is not ordered to an end, just as, if someone were to bathe himself so that the sun might be eclipsed, he would labor in vain, because the former is not orderable to the latter: but all creatures tend toward the highest good in their own way, as Dionysius says, and Boethius, that all things desire the good, and also the Philosopher: therefore nothing vain is found among all things. Furthermore, if vanity is found, and this science is founded upon it as upon its subject: and what is founded upon the vain is vain: therefore this science is vain. I respond: for the understanding of the foregoing, it can be said in one way thus, that vain is said in two ways: in one way absolutely, and thus it deprives of the true and the good, and such a thing does not exist in the universe. In another way something is vain by comparison to its initial origin, because it is from nothing: and thus it is not incompatible with the good; indeed one and the same thing is both good and vain: but good, because from the good and toward the good; vain, because from nothing and left to itself it tends toward nothing; and such vanity possesses goodness subject to knowledge, and therefore concerning such there can be knowledge and doctrine. And by this all objections can be resolved, because they proceed as if they were about the vain absolutely. But this solution does not resolve the matter, because Ecclesiastes does not treat of things insofar as they are from nothing, but rather insofar as they are desired by men: and moreover it treats of the vanity of fault, which is a privation: therefore it is necessary to speak otherwise. One must therefore respond otherwise and say that just as the true is said in three ways, so also the vain, which is opposed to it, by the rule stated above. In one way the true is said insofar as it is convertible with being, and thus it is said that every being is true; and thus the vain, opposed to the true, is called non-being, just as we say that a chimera is a non-being. In another way the true is said insofar as beyond entity it adds an ordering to operation and end, just as true wine is said to be that which has the true operation of wine, so a true man is one who has the operation proper to man, and this is the operation of virtue; and thus the vain is said through privation of ordering to an end, and thus all sins and abuses are vain. In another way the true is said insofar as it adds above being a freedom from admixture with non-being, which in no way has potency toward that: and thus that is said to have true being which has immutable being: and in this way the vain, opposed to the true, is that which is mutable and changeable. And thus every creature is vain, because subject to vanity, that is, to mutability. Thus therefore, with the vain being said in three ways: in one way through privation of being absolutely, in another way through privation of ordered being, in a third way through privation of unchangeable being: concerning the first, there is in no way knowledge or doctrine, unless perhaps it has being in a cause and according to that can be known and taught: and thus it is not vain: but insofar as it is vain, there is knowledge of it neither per se nor per accidens. Concerning the second way, there is no knowledge per se, but per accidens. For just as medicine is the knowledge of the healthy and the sick, of the healthy indeed per se, but of the sick per accidens, as the Philosopher holds; so concerning fault or sin there is theoretical knowledge, but by reason of virtue. Concerning the third way, namely concerning the mutability of the creature, there is knowledge per se, as is evident concerning the motion of the sun and the spheres and other things. In this book, therefore, the subject treated is the vanity of mutability or of nature, because it is fair and fitting, and the vanity of fault: the other vanity, namely that of total privation, is not treated, because of that there is neither knowledge nor doctrine. To the first objection, therefore, that every science concerns the good and the true: this is true per se, but there can also be science of the vain by reason of the true; and he who knows true principles also knows false ones: and it is similar with the sick and the healthy, and likewise in the matter at hand. To the objection that creatures are not vain, because they are very good and ordered to an end: it must be answered that they are not called vain through a defect of goodness or order, but through a defect of immutable being: and thus every creature is vain, yet it is not so vain that it lacks truth and goodness; and therefore knowledge and doctrine concerning it is true.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Introductory Questions

• Ecclesiastes 1:2

  Wisdom and love are the principal fruits. And that which is most opposed to them is vanity. For this reason, the Canticle speaks of a loving wisdom. No one, indeed, can say that the words of the Canticle are without wisdom and love, nor that they are not far removed from vanity. Wherefore before this book there comes Ecclesiastes where vanity is shown in these words: "Vanity of vanities! All things are vanity!" This proposition is true and is proved by the whole book. It is fitting, then, to pass over from all things into truth, so that there be no other pleasure than in God.

  Collations on the Hexaemeron, Collation 19

• Ecclesiastes 1:2

  Again, civil war is the temptation of the world. Indeed, every creature is a trap. Hence the saying: Vanity of vanities! All things are vanity! What profit has man from all the labor which he toils at under the sun? Vain and worthless is anything of which nothing remains to man after death: wherefore all things are vanity. The Psalm reads: Turn away my eyes from seeing what is vain.

  Collations on the Hexaemeron, Collation 17

• Ecclesiastes 1:3

  Again, civil war is the temptation of the world. Indeed, every creature is a trap. Hence the saying: Vanity of vanities! All things are vanity! What profit has man from all the labor which he toils at under the sun? Vain and worthless is anything of which nothing remains to man after death: wherefore all things are vanity. The Psalm reads: Turn away my eyes from seeing what is vain.

  Collations on the Hexaemeron, Collation 17

• Ecclesiastes 1:3

  Above he proposed what he intends to prove; here he begins to prove it. And just as a threefold vanity was proposed to exist in things, so also a threefold vanity is proved to exist. Whence this part has three parts. For first he shows there to be in things the vanity of mutability; second, the vanity of iniquity; third, the vanity of punishment. "The first is natural and fitting, as Hugh says; the second is culpable, because perverse; the third is penal and miserable." Now mutability in things is considered in two ways: in one way by reason of change, in another way in comparison to the measure of a definite time. Therefore mutability is first shown in the existence of creatures. And because creatures have a threefold being, namely in the Word, by reason of exemplarity; in the universe, by mode of materiality; in the human mind, by mode of abstraction—the first being is unfailing and immutable, whence it has no vanity; but in the others there is vanity. Therefore, as to the rational creature, namely man, he shows there to be mutability, from which one can be delivered by no labor; on account of which he says: "What more does man have from all his labor, with which he labors under the sun?" Supply: except vanity and mutability, as if to say: nothing. Concerning this labor it is said in Job 5: "A bird is born to fly, and man to labor"; and Genesis 3: "Cursed is the earth in your work; in labor you shall eat from it all the days of your life." Here a question arises concerning what he says: "What more does man have," etc. This seems to be a heretical opinion and to agree with that which says that "vain is" everyone "who serves God." Likewise in the Psalm it is said: "The patience of the poor shall not perish in the end": therefore something remains. Likewise Proverbs chapter twelve: "He who works his land shall be satisfied with bread": therefore it is good to work and to labor. I respond: as Hugh says, emphasis must be placed on this, that he says: "In which he labors under the sun": "for it is the same as if he were to say: under time." On account of which it should be noted that certain things come to be with time, such as those whose origin time did not precede, as the angelic nature and prime matter. Certain things come to be in time, which began after the origin of time but do not have their setting in time, such as the soul of Peter. Certain things come to be in time and under time, which begin after the origin of time and are terminated in time, of which kind are mutable things. And such things are twofold: for some come to be for time and under time, and such things pass away in act and in fruit; some for eternity, and such things pass away in act but remain in root and in fruit, because the good will remains to be rewarded for eternity. When therefore he says that man has nothing but vanity from all his labor with which he labors under the sun: this is understood insofar as labor is under time with respect to act and intention; and then it has no place among good things.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:4

  And that he has nothing more than vanity, he shows when he adds: "A generation passes away, and a generation comes." Therefore there is change and succession both in man and in his works. Sirach 14: "Some things are generated, and others are cast down; so is the generation of flesh and blood: one ends, and another is born," according to what is said in James 4: "What is your life but a vapor appearing for a little while"? But when they are corrupted, they do not pass into nothing, but into something, because into earth; whence it was said to Adam: "You are dust, and to dust you shall return." Therefore he adds: "But the earth stands forever," as it were the matter into which dissolution takes place. Psalm: "Who founded the earth upon its stability"; and Proverbs 8: "When he was weighing the foundations of the earth." Likewise, there is a question concerning what he says: "The earth stands forever." To the contrary: Matthew twenty-four: "Heaven and earth shall pass away": therefore the earth does not stand. Likewise, Apocalypse twenty-one: "I saw a new heaven and a new earth," therefore the earth grows old: therefore it does not stand. I respond: it must be said that "the earth standing" is twofold: either with respect to substance, or with respect to figure or disposition; I say that the earth stands forever with respect to substance, but passes away with respect to figure: First Corinthians seven: "The figure of this world passes away." But men are generated and corrupted with respect to substance, so that they are rightly called not "men" but "the dead." Or "eternal" is said in multiple ways: in one way, that which does not have an end prescribed in Scripture: thus the land of promise was given to the children of Israel as an eternal possession. In another way, that which has an end, but not in time: thus "time" is said to be eternal. In the third way, that whose signification is never ended. In the fourth way, that whose substance is never ended. In the fifth way, that whose substance neither ends nor began. In this last way, God alone; in the fourth way it applies to the earth with respect to substance, in the third way with respect to signification, in the first two ways with respect to figure.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:5

  Here secondly he shows mutability in the celestial nature, as is evident in the sun, which never rests, but when it rises, it tends toward setting, whence it does not remain in its rising. Therefore he says: "The sun rises and sets," so that it does not remain in the place of rising nor even in the place of setting; thence he adds: "And it returns to its place." Nor does it remain there, whence he also adds: "And there being born again it circles through the south." Nor does it remain even in the middle place; therefore he adds: "And it bends toward the north." This can be explained with respect to the diurnal motion, or also the annual. With respect to the diurnal, Hugh says: "The sun rises daily, when it is presented to human sight. It sets when, descending to the lower parts, it withdraws itself from our eyes. It returns to its place, because, driven by the rotation beneath, it again returns to its place. But rising again it circles through the south, because by an oblique course it ascends from the east to the meridian line; then it turns toward the north, because, descending toward the west, it again inclines toward the north by an oblique progression." With respect to the annual motion, thus: "The sun rises when through the vernal equinox it ascends to our pole. It sets when, passing through the autumnal equinox, it descends to the lower regions. It circles through the south when it lingers in the winter signs. It turns toward the north when it revolves in the summer signs, which are nearer to the northern pole." And thus the sun does not stand still by nature, but only by miracle, as is read in Joshua 10: "Sun, stand still over Gibeon, and moon, over the valley of Ajalon." Spiritually, this sun is Christ, concerning whom Malachi four: "The Sun of Justice shall rise upon you who fear my name." This sun rises in the nativity to illuminate: Isaiah sixty: "Arise, be illuminated, Jerusalem": and John one: "He was the true light, which illuminates every man." This sun sets in the passion to redeem: Amos eight: "The sun shall set at midday," that is, in the vehement love of charity. This sun returns to its place in the ascension: Luke nineteen: "A certain man went into a far country." This sun circles through the south, that is, in the fervent love of the Saints: Song of Songs one: "Show me, O you whom my soul loves, where you feed, where you lie down at midday": and John fourteen: "If anyone loves me," afterwards: "We will come to him and make our abode with him." This sun turns to the north in the final judgment: Jeremiah one: "From the north shall all evil be spread." Likewise it is asked, since other luminaries likewise rise, why he speaks more of the sun than of others. I respond: it must be said that once mutability has been established in the sun, which is the noblest and most luminous among the heavenly bodies, it is sufficiently given to be understood in the others. Likewise, he seems to proceed in a disordered manner, because he says that it sets before he says that it circles through the south: for it circles before it sets. I respond: it must be said that he does not arrange them according to progression, but according to dimensions or the limits of dimensions. Therefore, because east and west are opposites, they are immediately ordered together; likewise, because south and north are opposites, they are similarly placed immediately in the manner of a cross. But there is a doubt about what he says: "It returns to its place," because in the firmament no one place of the sun is more its place than another. If you say that it returns to the place from which it began its course: this is manifestly false, because the sun is always moved by its own motion either ascending or descending; therefore it never returns to the same place. Likewise, what does he mean when he says: "Turning toward the north." For if the sun is moved by diurnal motion with the motion of the firmament, and the firmament moves uniformly and similarly, then it does not turn more toward the arctic pole than toward the antarctic, or conversely. If you say that this is understood of its proper motion: but the sun according to its proper motion ascends and descends in the zodiac, and when it ascends, it approaches the north; when it descends, it draws near to the south; therefore it does not turn more toward the north than toward the south. I respond: it must be said that one can speak of the motion of the sun as diurnal and annual. If we speak of the annual motion, it is true that the sun returns to its place, because it began to move from there. But if we understand this of the diurnal motion, it does not return to its place from which it began to move according to the truth, but according to our estimation, since it does not make a sphere but a spiral. To the second it must similarly be said that if we speak of the annual motion, it holds true according to the four seasons, as was said above, because it rises in spring, sets in autumn, circles through the south in winter, and turns toward the north in summer. But if you understand this of the diurnal motion, this does not hold true except according to our estimation. For we see the firmament moving, and we imagine its poles to the right and to the left; but it is not so, rather one pole is as if above our heads, namely the northern; the other as if beneath our feet. When therefore the sun revolves according to the poles of the firmament, it does not go directly above our heads and beneath our feet, but as if transversally; and because we see according to the level plane, it seems to us that by day it inclines toward the south and by night toward the north.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:5

  Ecclesiastes shows these four when he says: "The sun riseth, and goeth down, and returneth to his place: and there rising again, maketh his round by the south, and turneth again to the north." Marvelous was the origin: how the supersubstantial radiation was united to humanity in the womb, came forth from the womb; how He dwelled in the world, alive, shining and inflaming; how in death He condescended to die; how later He rose from the nether world, first into [His] body and then into heaven; and how He shall come back for the judgment. There was a marvelous duration of eternity in the union of the Godhead with humanity. For it is impossible to have a greater separation, short of the denial of God's existence: since it would be easier to separate an angel from its essence. The breadth of charity came about in death; the marvelous sublimity of power, in the ascension; the marvelous depth of wisdom will come about in the judgment. These are wondrous [realities] by which the soul is placed, so to speak, outside of itself.

  Collations on the Hexaemeron, Collation 23

• Ecclesiastes 1:5

  In the allegorical sense, the sun signifies Christ. "The sun rises and the sun goes down." It rises in the nativity, it goes down in death; it orbits through noon in the ascension; it is inclined to the north in the judgment.

  Collations on the Hexaemeron, Collation 13

• Ecclesiastes 1:6

  Here is touched upon the mutability in elemental nature, and first with respect to air. With respect to air, he touches upon the mutability in spirit or in wind, which is either the motion of air according to some philosophers, or according to Aristotle the motion of vapor in the air, by whose motion the air is also moved. On account of which he says: "Surveying all things, the spirit goes about in a circuit," that is, the wind circuits by surveying all things. "Spirit" is said to mean "wind": Exodus 15: "Your spirit blew, O Lord, and the sea covered them"; and in the Psalm: "Fire, hail, snow, ice, the spirit of storms." This "goes about in a circuit," because it arises from the four regions of the earth: Zechariah 2: "Flee from the land of the north, for I have scattered you to the four winds of heaven"; and Ezekiel 37: "Come from the four winds, O spirit." For there are four principal winds and eight collateral ones. And "it returns to its circuits," because the wind ceases when that vapor comes to rest and returns to the earth whence it arose. And because that cause is hidden, therefore it is said in the Psalm: "Who brings forth winds from his treasuries," that is, from hidden places. Or, as the Gloss explains, this can be understood of the sun with respect to the annual motion, which surveys all things and returns in the circles of the zodiac; and the sun is called "spirit" because it is the principle and cause of all life, whence it causes all other things to breathe. Spiritually, this surveying spirit is the Holy Spirit, who is therefore said to survey, because he makes us search all things: First Corinthians two: "The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God." He is said to go in a circuit, because he makes us go around: whence Wisdom chapter seven: "The spirit of wisdom is mobile"; likewise also going around, because he makes us consider the circuit of misery: Job chapter one: "Naked I came forth from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither." Likewise the circuit of grace, concerning which John chapter sixteen: "I came forth from the Father and came into the world, and again I leave the world and go to the Father." Likewise of glory, Ezekiel chapter one: "This was the appearance of splendor round about, and this was the likeness of the glory of the Lord." The Spirit of God makes one consider this: Second Corinthians chapter three: "We with unveiled face shall behold the glory of the Lord." This circuit consists in the consideration that all things are from God and unto God. And Dionysius says that the Angels are moved circularly around the throne.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:6

  Ecclesiastes shows these four when he says: "The sun riseth, and goeth down, and returneth to his place: and there rising again, maketh his round by the south, and turneth again to the north." Marvelous was the origin: how the supersubstantial radiation was united to humanity in the womb, came forth from the womb; how He dwelled in the world, alive, shining and inflaming; how in death He condescended to die; how later He rose from the nether world, first into [His] body and then into heaven; and how He shall come back for the judgment. There was a marvelous duration of eternity in the union of the Godhead with humanity. For it is impossible to have a greater separation, short of the denial of God's existence: since it would be easier to separate an angel from its essence. The breadth of charity came about in death; the marvelous sublimity of power, in the ascension; the marvelous depth of wisdom will come about in the judgment. These are wondrous [realities] by which the soul is placed, so to speak, outside of itself.

  Collations on the Hexaemeron, Collation 23

• Ecclesiastes 1:7

  It is written in Ecclesiastes: "All rivers go to the sea, yet never does the sea become full. To the place where they go, the rivers keep on going:" and it is the same with all the spiritual meanings that flow from divine Scripture. The spiritual meanings are called rivers — and also those men who understand in a spiritual manner — because they have their origin from the Scriptures and are confirmed by the Scriptures, and because, from these spiritual meanings, other meanings are derived.

  Collations on the Hexaemeron, Collation 13

• Ecclesiastes 1:7

  Here mutability is touched upon with respect to visible elemental nature, namely water, because there is no stability there: for all waters move toward the sea; whence he says: "All the rivers enter into the sea," namely the great ocean, concerning which it is said in Job thirty-eight: "Who shut up the sea with doors, when it burst forth, as if proceeding from a womb"? And this motion is not terminated, because the sea is not filled: therefore he adds: "And the sea does not overflow." And because this seems wonderful, therefore he gives the cause of this: "To the place whence they go forth, the rivers return," not so that they may rest there, but "so that they may flow again." The rivers go forth secretly, they return openly, because they go forth through subterranean channels and certain filtrations. And thus all things are carried in a circuit and are subject to vanity. Hugh: "Behold how all things are carried in a circuit and are subject to vanity: and we know that a circle has no end: those things therefore that run in a circuit run indeed, but do not arrive at an end. What rest therefore can be hoped for, where there can be no stability? And therefore it is said of the impious: 'The head of their circuit'; and again: 'The impious walk in a circuit'; and again: 'My God, make them like a wheel.'" Spiritually, these are the rivers of graces, concerning which John chapter seven: "He who believes in me, as the Scripture says, rivers shall flow from his belly." The sea, from which the rivers have their origin, is the immensity of divine generosity, which is neither increased nor diminished: "For great is our Lord and great is his power, and of his wisdom there is no number." To this sea the rivers of thanksgiving return, so that they may flow again: John chapter four: "Whoever drinks of this water which I shall give him, it shall become in him a fountain of water springing up unto eternal life." From this they go forth: James chapter one: "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above." And just as rivers cease to exist and dry up when they cease to flow and are still, so also with the gifts of graces: the Psalm: "You broke open fountains and torrents," through generosity; "you dried up the rivers of Ethan," through the severity of judgment. It is asked about what he says: "The rivers go forth from the sea." Against: The sea is bitter, and rivers are sweet; but contraries do not have their origin from one principle, nor one from another; therefore neither does the sea come from rivers, nor rivers from the sea. I respond: it must be said that all water by nature is sweet or tasteless, as the Philosopher says; but it becomes bitter accidentally, either through the evaporation of the subtle parts, with the earthly parts remaining, or through the admixture of earthly parts. Conversely, that water, just as it was accidentally made bitter, can return to sweetness through refinement, as is shown by the experiment of an earthen vessel placed in the sea. Since therefore rivers, even though they return to the sea in great abundance, nevertheless flow out secretly and underground and through a certain filtration, the water is refined and turned to sweetness. As to the objection, then, that one of two contraries does not have its origin from the other: it must be said that water is not contrary to water; and if it has a contrary disposition, it has this not by nature but by accident, as is evident in hot and cold water. Nor is the origin of rivers from the sea by reason of property, because sweetness is prior by nature in water, but with respect to outflow, as the drawing of wine from a cask: because that place contains an abundance of waters, from which emanation ceaselessly occurs.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:7

  On that passage of Ecclesiastes: "To the place whence the rivers go forth, they return:" Bernard says that "the origin of fountains is the sea; the origin of virtues and knowledge is Christ." He says therefore: "To the place whence the rivers go forth," namely of graces, "they return, that they may flow again." For just as a fountain has no duration unless it maintains a continuous connection with its source, nor indeed does light, so the grace of the Holy Spirit cannot flourish in the soul except through its return to its original principle.

  Collationes de Septem Donis, Collation 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:8

  Above, the vanity in things was determined according to the being which they have in the universe: here vanity is determined according to the being which they have in the human intellect: and vanity is shown in them in three ways: first, because they are not evident; second, because they do not satisfy; third, because they do not endure. They are not evident for interpreting or teaching; they do not satisfy so as to refresh and quiet the learner; they do not endure for remembering. And these three correspond to a threefold power in us: the interpretive, the cognitive, and the memorative. First, therefore, it is noted that they are not evident for explaining; thus he says: "All things are difficult," namely for discovering their reason; whence Wisdom 9: "With difficulty we estimate the things that are on earth, and we find with labor the things that are before us"; below in chapter 8: "I understood that man can find no reason for the works of God"; and therefore, because they are difficult, "man cannot explain them in speech": Job 38: "Who shall declare the reason of the heavens"? Sirach 43: "We shall say much and shall fall short in words: the consummation of words is he himself." Here in the second place it is touched upon that they do not fill so as to refresh the learner; and because we learn most by two senses, namely sight and hearing, he shows that in neither is there satiety; and therefore he says: "The eye is not satisfied with seeing": Proverbs twenty-seven: "For the eyes of men are insatiable." "Nor is the ear filled with hearing," since there is an itching to hear new and curious things: Second Timothy four: "They will heap up to themselves teachers according to their own desires, having itching ears." And the reason for this is that that in which there is true satiety, neither has the eye seen nor has the ear perceived: First Corinthians two: "Neither has the eye seen, nor has the ear heard." It is asked concerning what he says: "All things are difficult." On the contrary: There are many things whose knowledge is common to us and to brutes; therefore it is not difficult for man to know what a beast knows. Likewise, there are certain things in which it does not happen to err, as in the knowledge of sensible things, because the sense is not deceived regarding its proper object, and of intelligible principles, such as axioms, and such things are easy to know. Likewise, what does he mean when he says: "Man cannot explain them in speech"? It is easier for man to speak than for any creature to operate easily; therefore if it is easy for any creature to operate, then it is easy for man to explain its operation. I respond: it must be said that there is knowing incompletely, as when something is known according to its accidents, or according to some operation. There is again knowing perfectly, and he knows perfectly who fully knows the substance, power, and operation, and the causes and reasons of these. And because power is hidden, and substance is remote from the senses, therefore all things are difficult for us. As to the objection that we know some things in common with brute animals, this is true in a certain way, as that this is bitter; but a brute animal knows nothing fully. Similarly the second is clear: because insofar as something is sensible, it is manifest. Through this the following is also clear: because to "say" something and to "explain" it differ: for to "explain" is to draw out hidden reasons that are inwardly wrapped up; and no one can do this unless he understands; and this is arduous and belongs to few. Likewise, there is a question about what he says: "The eye is not satisfied with seeing." It is asked why he does not adduce the other senses, since it is similarly possible to know through them. Likewise, what does he mean when he says: "Is not satisfied"? For one is said to be "satisfied" when he no longer desires more of what he was desiring; but it sometimes happens that a man does not want to see or hear more, but rather to rest. Likewise, if it is not satisfied, then their desire never rests; therefore since a desire that has no rest is frustrated of its end, and every such thing is vain, therefore the desire of sight is vain. I respond: it must be said that he mentions only these two senses because he speaks of the senses insofar as they are a way into knowledge and are referred to sensual delight. And the word by which we recognize all things is twofold: namely the divine word and the human word. The divine word is every creature, because it speaks God: this word the eye perceives. The human word is the uttered voice, and this the ear perceives. Or because knowledge is twofold: through discovery and teaching; for the first regards sight, while the second regards hearing. As to the objection about satisfaction: I say that he speaks of the satisfaction of these insofar as they are organs of the heart and of the will or appetite; and because the heart is not satisfied, neither are these two senses. Hence Hugh: "All beauty, all delight, all sweetness of created things can affect the human heart, but cannot satisfy it—only that sweetness alone, for which it was made, can satisfy it." As to the objection about being frustrated: this is false, because it is terminated elsewhere. As to the objection that one does not want more: this is because one grows weary and is disgusted, not because one is satisfied.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:8

  If moreover we consider the delight, we shall perceive the union of God and the soul. For every sense seeks its fitting sensible object with desire, finds it with joy, and returns to it without weariness, because the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor is the ear filled with hearing. In this manner also, the sense of our heart, whether it be the beautiful, the harmonious, the fragrant, the sweet, or the soothing, ought to seek with desire, find with joy, and return to without ceasing.

  On the Reduction of the Arts to Theology

• Ecclesiastes 1:9

  And that one cannot be refreshed in these earthly things, he shows, because the eye and ear wish to perceive new things; but nothing remains in newness; therefore the ear and eye are filled by nothing. He supposes the major premise, and it is made manifest in Acts seventeen: "The Athenians spent their time in nothing else but either saying or hearing something new"; but here he proposes the minor, because nothing has newness, neither with respect to being nor with respect to becoming. Therefore he says: "What is it that has been?" He asks and he himself responds: "The same that shall be"; therefore by simple conversion: what shall be has been. Similarly it follows: "What is it that has been done?" He responds: "The same that is to be done"; therefore by simple conversion: what is to be done has been done. And from this he concludes: "Nothing is new under the sun, nor can anyone say: Behold this is recent"; therefore neither to say nor to hear anything new. And he repeats the proof: "For they have already gone before in the ages that were before us": Second Peter three: "Since our fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they are." Likewise, there is a question about what he says: "Nothing is new under the sun." The contrary seems to be the case: Jeremiah thirty-one: "The Lord will make a new thing upon the earth." Likewise, Apocalypse twenty-one: "I saw a new heaven and a new earth." Likewise, from this statement the error seems to be confirmed that there is a circulation in things according to procession, such that the same things exist which formerly existed, and this through the following text: it has "already preceded in the ages that were before us"; and thus that error seems to be verified which posits that after the great year, which contains fifteen thousand years, all things are renewed. I respond: it must be said that there is an operation of creation, of conservation, of reparation, and of glorification. Each of these operations is above nature, and therefore will not be under the sun or under time, but above it, except for propagation; hence he understands only of this. On this it should be noted that he calls "new" that whose likeness has not preceded; and thus there is nothing new according to propagation, because there always like comes from like. But the objector objects as if he were speaking of the numerically same thing; and that is impossible to understand in this way, because if every form that is corrupted and generated again differs numerically, it cannot be understood of the numerically same thing.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:9

  The times of origin consist in the first seven days; the times of symbolism, in the span between the beginning of the world and Christ, when a new time begins, although Solomon said: "Nothing is new under the sun" — which is true in the order of nature, but this is above nature. The times of grace then come later. Moses began from the times of origin, and he was bound to do so, for Scripture, like a germinating soil, had to bring forth the seeds at first, then the symbolic trees, and finally the fruit.

  Collations on the Hexaemeron, Collation 16

• Ecclesiastes 1:10

  He shows that nothing remains in newness, neither with respect to being nor with respect to becoming. Therefore he says: "What is it that has been?" He asks and he himself responds: "The same that shall be." Similarly it follows: "What is it that has been done?" He responds: "The same that is to be done." And from this he concludes: "Nothing is new under the sun, nor can anyone say: Behold this is recent"; therefore neither to say nor to hear anything new. And he repeats the proof: "For they have already gone before in the ages that were before us": Second Peter three: "Since our fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they are." On this it should be noted that he calls "new" that whose likeness has not preceded; and thus there is nothing new according to propagation, because there always like comes from like.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:11

  In the third place it is touched upon here that things do not endure so as to be remembered, because all things are delivered to oblivion; whence he says: "There is no remembrance of former things," namely among us who come after: Wisdom two: "Our name shall receive oblivion through time, and no one shall have remembrance of our works." And so it is in things past and in things future; whence he adds: "But neither indeed shall there be remembrance of those things that are to come hereafter among those who shall be in the last time," that is: later generations shall not be mindful of former things, and this on account of time, which brings on oblivion; below in chapter two: "Future times shall cover all things with oblivion." Likewise, there is a question about what he says: "There is no remembrance of former things." On the contrary: It is said in the Psalm: "I remembered your works, O Lord." I respond: to this some say that it is understood of evil things, not of good things. But this is still false, because many evil things are also in memory. And therefore it must be said that this proposition is not to be understood as universally true, but as true in most cases, because there is more forgetfulness than remembrance; nevertheless, very many of the things that have been done are in our memory.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:12

  Here from the consideration of the mutability of things he reproves his own curiosity. And first he manifests his curiosity; second, he reproves his curiosity on account of vanity, in the second chapter. First he manifests his curiosity, first indeed in the works of prudence or philosophy; second, of the curiosity of opulence or mechanical art, at: "I magnified my works." Therefore the suitability of the one considering is noted, when he says: "I, Ecclesiastes": because in him there was wisdom, therefore he calls himself Ecclesiastes, that is, a preacher; there was also power, whence he says: "I was king"; there was also peace, whence he adds: "in Jerusalem," which is interpreted as "vision of peace": Ecclesiasticus forty-seven: "Solomon reigned in days of peace": First Chronicles twenty-two: "The son who shall be born to you shall be a peaceful man"; and because he possessed this, therefore nothing held him back from consideration.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:13

  Here curiosity itself is touched upon, because he wished to know all things and to investigate them subtly. Therefore he says: "And I proposed in my mind to seek," namely from another, "and to investigate wisely," by myself; and this is curiosity; Romans twelve: "Not to be wise more than it behooves one to be wise, but to be wise unto sobriety"; whence Proverbs twenty-five: "You have found honey; eat what is sufficient for you, lest perhaps being sated you vomit it up." "Concerning all things that are done under the sun." Behold, a greater curiosity, because concerning all things: Ecclesiasticus three: "Do not search into superfluous things in many ways, and do not be curious about his many works; for many things beyond the understanding of men have been shown to you." "This most wretched occupation." Here the severity of divine judgment is touched upon: because by divine judgment, on account of the sin of the first parent, it came about that our rational faculty so readily indulges itself in the knowledge of earthly things. On account of which he says: "This most wretched occupation," because it is not only blameworthy but also penal; "God gave to the sons of men," that is, he permitted it to be given; or by reason of its penal character he gave it in a just manner; "that they might be occupied in it," and thereby be forgetful of their salvation. Whence it should be noted that there is an evil occupation, which is from weakness: concerning this, Ecclesiasticus forty: "A great occupation is created for all men, and a heavy yoke upon the sons of Adam, from the day of their going out of their mother's womb even to the day of their burial into the mother of all." There is a worse occupation, which is from ignorance, concerning which Job three: "Let darkness and the shadow of death obscure it; let a mist occupy it, and let it be wrapped in bitterness." The third is from curiosity, and this is the worst, and of this he speaks here. And it should be noted that "occupation, as Hugh says, is a distraction of the mind which turns away and distracts and ensnares the soul, so that it cannot think about the things that pertain to salvation." Curiosity, however, is the lustful prostitution of the human intellect, indiscriminately embracing any truth whatsoever and committing adultery with it, because the First Truth alone is the spouse. But here it is asked concerning what he says: "This most wretched occupation." Against: This is sin: therefore God gave sin. If you say: "He gave," that is, He permitted it to be given; but similarly He permitted stealing: therefore it would be rightly said that God steals. I respond: "Sins that are midway between the first apostasy and the final punishment are both punishment and fault"; but some express more the character of fault, and some more the character of punishment: those which express more the character of punishment are attributed to the just judgment of God, and such is occupation and blindness of this kind.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:14

  Here is touched upon the discovered vanity, because he profited nothing more, except that in his consideration he found vanity. And therefore he says: "I saw all things that are done under the sun," that is, I considered all things. "And behold, all is vanity," that is, vanity openly appears in them, because, as the Apostle says in Romans 8, "the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly"; and not only vanity, but indeed also "affliction of spirit."

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:15

  But because not all see this, and because they thus labor in vain and do not perceive their affliction: to this tacit question he responds saying: "The perverse are corrected with difficulty": whence Proverbs 18: "A fool does not receive words of prudence, unless you say those things which revolve in his heart." "And the number of fools is infinite," namely on account of their multitude: and to consider this is not only vanity, but indeed also affliction: whence it is said in the Psalm: "I saw the transgressors, and I pined away"; and again: "My zeal has made me pine away." Man is perverted through evil thought: Wisdom 1: "Perverse thoughts separate from God: but proven virtue corrects the foolish." Through evil affection: Proverbs 17: "He who is of a perverse heart shall not find good, and he who turns his tongue shall fall into evil." Through evil speech: Proverbs 10: "The lips of the just consider what is pleasing, and the mouth of the wicked, perverse things"; Proverbs 2: "That you may be delivered from the man who speaks perverse things." Through wicked action: Proverbs 2: "They rejoice when they have done evil, and exult in the worst things"; Isaiah 1: "Cease to act perversely." Likewise, there is a question concerning what he says: "The perverse are corrected with difficulty": because it is easy for someone to become perverted; but perversion is against nature; therefore, if it is most easy to return to nature, since vice is against nature, it is most easy to be corrected. I respond: the reason is taken both from the side of the evil work, because "good exists in one way, but evil in every way"; and from the side of the operating power, which is rendered weak through fault, and therefore cannot engage in strenuous work; and from the side of the opposition of good to evil according to privation, because it is most easy to recede from a habit to privation, but difficult, or altogether impossible, to return.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:16

  Here he similarly shows his curiosity in the consideration of moral matters. For first is noted his transition from natural things to moral matters; second, the discovery of affliction; third, the turning to the enjoyment of delightful things; fourth, the return to the consideration of evils. First, therefore, his transition to considering moral matters is intimated, and this after he had considered the natures of things. On account of which he says: "I have spoken in my heart," namely through thought, "saying: Behold, I have become great," in fame, "and I have surpassed all in wisdom who were before me in Jerusalem"; Third Kings, chapter four: "And the wisdom of Solomon surpassed the wisdom of all the Orientals and the Egyptians, and he was wiser than all men"; Ecclesiasticus, chapter forty-seven: "He was instructed in his youth, and was filled with wisdom as with a river." And he had this knowledge partly through revelation; whence he says: "My mind has contemplated many things wisely," namely illuminated by God; and partly also through his own diligence; whence he adds: "And I have learned"; Proverbs, chapter four: "I was a tender son of my father and an only one in the sight of my mother, and he taught me"; Proverbs, the last chapter: "The vision with which his mother instructed him." Considering therefore that he had this wisdom in the investigation of natural things, because "he discoursed from the cedar of Lebanon to the hyssop," according to what is said in Third Kings, chapter four, he wished to transfer himself to moral matters.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:17

  Whence he says: "And I gave my heart to know prudence," with respect to things to be done, "and learning," with respect to things to be known, "and errors," against prudence, "and folly," against learning; because nothing is known perfectly unless its opposite is known. And it is useful to know these things when they are investigated in the proper manner; whence Proverbs, chapter eight: "Receive instruction and not money; choose learning rather than gold." Here the discovery of spiritual affliction in the consideration thereof is touched upon: because the better a man knows good and evil, the more he is afflicted when he errs. On account of which he says: "And I knew that in these things also there was labor and affliction of spirit," that is, in the knowledge of useful things: "labor," namely in acquiring; Psalm: "I thought that I might know this, it is labor before me"; "affliction of spirit," after acquisition, either on account of the detestation of fault, or because it is an occasion of pride and impatience, since "knowledge puffs up."

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:18

  "Because in much wisdom there is much indignation," either of contrition, against fault, or of impatience from pride, because great clerics, when they do not have what they want, are most easily indignant: whence it is said in Job thirty-two that Elihu was indignant, and this because he considered himself wise. And therefore it follows: "He who adds knowledge adds also sorrow," because an impatient man sustains many sorrows, since there is no one for whom all things turn out according to his wish. And with this exposition agrees another translation of Jerome: "I knew that in these things there was a feeding on wind," and therefore rightly there is labor and affliction of spirit. Whence Hugh: "Curiosity drove it to inquiry, pride to ostentation: and therefore it was fitting that labor should press down the swollen, and occupation dissipate the curious." It can also be understood of the affliction of contrition, because even where there is much wisdom, there is much indignation against sin: Jeremiah thirty-one: "After you showed me, I struck my thigh." "And he who adds knowledge adds also sorrow," namely of penance: Job last chapter: "Now my eye sees you: therefore I reprove myself and do penance in dust and ashes."

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1

• Ecclesiastes 1:18

  Third, gratuitous knowledge is called the knowledge of the Saints, because it has a zeal for all holiness. Whence in the book of Ecclesiastes: "In much wisdom there will be indignation; he who adds knowledge adds sorrow." A man knowing his own defects has the sorrow of compunction for himself, the sorrow of compassion for his neighbors, and the sorrow of zeal for the honor of God.

  Collationes de Septem Donis, Collation 4

• Ecclesiastes 2:1

  The world also, by displaying sweetness, inflames to lust, just as wine by its sweetness draws to gluttony and through this to lust: whence in 3 Esdras 3: Wine, which prevails over all who drink it, seduces the mind. Likewise of the king and of the orphan it makes the mind vain, and this by inflaming to lust, according to that passage in Ephesians 5: Be not drunk with wine, wherein is lust. To this vanity the world drew Solomon; Ecclesiastes 2: I said: I will go and abound in delights and enjoy good things; and I saw that this also was vanity.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Prooemium

• Ecclesiastes 2:1

  "I said in my heart" etc. Here the third point is touched upon, namely the turning to pleasure on account of the weariness of contemplation. For since in contemplating there was labor and affliction, he therefore thought to abandon this and turn himself to delights, in which there is pleasure. On account of which he says: "I said in my heart," that is, I came to this consideration on account of the spiritual affliction in contemplating. Whence the word is a consideration not of wisdom, but of sloth, which, not finding rest within, seeks it without. "I said" therefore: "I will go and abound in delights and enjoy good things." "I will go," by withdrawing from the true good: Psalm: "Man has become a spirit going forth and not returning." "I will abound in delights," as regards the multitude of pleasures, namely carnal ones as opposed to spiritual: Song of Songs 7: "How beautiful you are, dearest, in delights." From these he departed to carnal ones: Isaiah 22: "The Lord called to weeping and mourning" etc., and after: "Behold joy and gladness, slaughtering rams" etc. "And I will enjoy good things," as regards rest: for one enjoys that in which the appetite finds rest: Wisdom 2: "Come, let us enjoy the good things that are, and let us use creation as in youth swiftly"; and Proverbs 7: "Come, let us enjoy the desired embraces." But because this consideration was blameworthy and reprehensible, he therefore rebuked himself, because present pleasure is not true pleasure, but deception: therefore he adds: "And I saw that this also was vanity:" because it neither endures nor refreshes, but fails and deceives.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:2

  On account of which he says: "I counted laughter an error," because it leads man astray: "and to joy I said: why are you vainly deceived?" because namely the one rejoicing in it is deceived. Laughter is outward, and joy is inward. Laughter deceives, because it offers good and in the end evil; Proverbs 14: "Laughter shall be mingled with sorrow, and mourning takes hold of the ends of joy": and James 4: "Let your laughter be turned into mourning," because Luke 6: "Woe to you who laugh, for you shall weep." This laughter is the laughter of the frenzied, because it is erroneous and momentary. Likewise also inward joy deceives: Job 21: "They rejoice at the sound of the organ: they spend their days in good things and in a moment they descend to hell": and Job 20: "The joy of the hypocrite is but for a moment."

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:3

  "I thought in my heart" etc. Here the fourth point is touched upon, namely the return to the consideration of useful things, and this by returning from pleasure to sobriety. On account of which he says: "I thought in my heart to withdraw my flesh from wine," because it inclines in a wondrous manner toward pleasure; whence Ephesians 5: "Be not drunk with wine, wherein is luxury"; and Proverbs 20: "Wine is a luxurious thing, and drunkenness tumultuous: whoever delights in these things shall not be wise." Therefore he thought to abandon the incitement to pleasure, "that I might transfer my mind to wisdom," that is, to the consideration of wise things, and that I might abandon the consideration of foolish things, such as was the preceding consideration; whence he says: "And that I might avoid foolishness:" and this toward the exhortation of wisdom; Proverbs 1: "How long, O little ones, will you love childishness, and fools desire those things that are harmful?" And this not only on account of one's own benefit, but the common benefit; therefore he says: "That I might see what is useful for the children of men:" and this in the present life, whence he also adds: "What deed is needful," that is, what is opportune to do, "under the sun during the number of the days of their life." This he saw and declared at the end of the book: "Fear God and keep his commandments: this is the whole of man." This is useful: to keep the commandments of God, because it is said below in chapter eight: "He who keeps the commandment shall experience no evil"; and Proverbs 19: "He who keeps the commandment keeps his soul; but he who neglects his way shall die." The remission of iniquity: 2 Timothy 2: "If anyone shall cleanse himself from these, he shall be a sanctified vessel, useful to the Lord, prepared for every good work." The instruction of truth: 2 Timothy 3: "All doctrine divinely inspired is useful for instructing in justice," so that man may be just. The exercise of piety: 1 Timothy 4: "Exercise yourself unto piety: for bodily exercise is profitable for little, but piety is profitable for all things." Useless things: the proud transgression of the law of God: 2 Chronicles 24: "Why do you transgress the commandment of the Lord, which will not profit you?" Wisdom without teaching: Ecclesiasticus 20: "Hidden wisdom and an unseen treasure, what profit is there in both?" Teaching without life: Luke 14: "Salt is good; but if the salt lose its savor, wherewith shall it be seasoned" etc. Contentious disputation: 2 Timothy 2: "Do not contend in words: for it is profitable for nothing."

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:4

  He expresses his curiosity with respect to the possession of stable things, namely houses for dwelling, vineyards and gardens for eating, and pools for irrigating. Therefore he says: "I made my works great," that is, I made great things: 3 Kings 10: "King Solomon was made great above all the kings of the whole earth." And he expresses individually: "I built myself houses," because he built many: whence 3 Kings 9: "After Solomon had built two houses: the house of the Lord and the house of the king," he built a house for the daughter of Pharaoh; and that was of curiosity and reprehensible: whence Isaiah 5: "Woe to you who join house to house." "I planted vineyards," namely for drink: Genesis 9: "Noah planted a vineyard, and drinking the wine was made drunk." Spiritually this Solomon, who magnified his works, is Christ the Lord, who is the peaceful king, whose works are great; whence in the Psalm: "How magnificent are your works, O Lord; you have made all things in wisdom," etc. Christ, moreover, magnifies his spiritual works, inasmuch as he makes servants great and many, both with respect to the active life and with respect to the contemplative life. For contemplatives, that they may be great in their state, have many things conferred upon them by Christ the Lord: houses, namely quiet consciences; Proverbs 24: "Do not lie in wait and seek wickedness in the house of the just, nor lay waste his rest." In this house one must rest, not in another's; since on the contrary, Ecclesiasticus 21: "The foot of the fool is quick into the house of his neighbor." Vineyards, that is, affections of devotion, from which wine is drawn; Judges 9: "Can I forsake my wine?"

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:5

  "I made gardens and orchards and planted them with trees of every kind," for food: Song of Songs 6: "I went down into my garden to see the fruits of the valleys and to look whether the vineyard had flourished and the pomegranates had budded." Spiritually, gardens, that is, exterior enclosures; Song of Songs 4: "A garden enclosed, a fountain sealed, my sister, my spouse." Orchards, that is, honorable and renowned works: Job 9: "My days have passed like ships carrying fruit," which, namely, leave behind a good fragrance: 2 Corinthians 2: "We are the good fragrance of Christ to God."

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:6

  And because these things needed to be irrigated, he therefore adds: "And I built for myself pools of water," that is, places in which there is a collection of waters; and this, so that "I might irrigate the forest of sprouting trees," namely through irrigation, because it is said in Job 12: "If he withholds the waters, all things will be dried up." Such pools were necessary in the land of promise on account of the scarcity of water; Deuteronomy 11: "The land which you shall enter to possess is mountainous and level, awaiting rains from heaven." Spiritually, forests, that is, various virtues: Numbers 24: "How beautiful are your tabernacles, O Jacob, like wooded valleys." Pools, that is, many tears: Song of Songs 7: "Your eyes are like the pools in Heshbon"; Jeremiah 9: "Who will give water to my head and a fountain of tears to my eyes?"

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:7

  "I possessed servants." Here is touched upon secondly the curiosity regarding the multitude of those serving, because in both sexes; whence he says: "I possessed servants and handmaids;" and also in every age; whence: "And I had a great household;" 3 Kings 10: "The queen of Sheba, seeing the wisdom of Solomon and the foods of his table, the dwellings of his servants and the ranks of his ministers, had no more spirit in her." "Herds also." Here is touched upon thirdly the curiosity regarding the gathering of livestock and animals, both great and small, when he says: "Herds also and great flocks of sheep," supply: I had; "beyond all who were before me in Jerusalem." And that he had many is evident, because he consumed many; whence 3 Kings 4: "The food of Solomon for each day was ten fat oxen and twenty pasture oxen and a hundred rams, besides the hunting of stags, roe deer," etc. Just as Christ magnified his works in contemplatives, so also in actives, for whom more things are necessary: menservants and maidservants, through humility; Luke 17: "When you have done all that was commanded you, say: we are unprofitable servants." Herds of oxen, through the vigor of works, because it is not for oxen to rest but to plow: Job 1: "The oxen were plowing": Sirach 7: "Do not hate laborious works." Sheep, through simplicity of intention: Matthew 10: "Behold, I send you as sheep in the midst of wolves"; 1 Peter 2: "As newborn infants, desire milk."

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:8

  "I heaped up for myself." Here is touched upon fourthly the curiosity regarding the heaping up of minerals, when he says: "I heaped up for myself gold and silver," as regards metals, "and the wealth of kings and provinces," as regards precious stones and gems; 3 Kings 10: "Each one brought gifts to Solomon: vessels of silver and gold, garments and weapons of war," and afterwards: "And he made it so that there was as great an abundance of silver in Jerusalem as of stones." He shows his excessive diligence in preparing such delectable things, both with respect to hearing and with respect to sight. By reason of hearing he says: "I made me singers, men and women," that is, of both sexes, and this for the sake of delights: whence he says: "And the delights of the sons of men," and this with respect to hearing. With respect to sight he also made beautiful vessels: whence he says: "cups and pitchers, for pouring wines," that is, "I made," and this for the sake of delights. Whence he was very diligent, and this is reprehensible; whence Amos 6: "Woe to you who are wealthy in Zion"; and afterwards: "You who sing to the sound of the psaltery, drinking wine in bowls." Spiritually, gold, through charity; Daniel 2 says of that statue that "its head was of the finest gold," because charity is the head of the virtues. Silver, through the sweetness of speech, because it has a sweet sound; whence in the Psalm: "The words of the Lord are pure words, silver tried by fire"; and Sirach 6: "A sweet word multiplies friends and appeases enemies." The treasures of kings, through the generosity of munificence: Sirach 13: "Good is the substance to which there is no sin in conscience." It is asked, since to take such delight in these songs is a sin, to what genus of sin is it reduced? If you say that it is reduced to lust, it is asked: since hearing is one sense, just as taste and touch, it seems that there ought to be a capital sin pertaining to hearing, just as there is pertaining to touch; or if not, I ask the reason. Likewise I ask whether to take delight in songs of this kind is a sin. That it is not, seems evident: because the Saints instituted singing for the glory of God. But that it is a sin: Augustine in the Confessions: "As often as the singing pleased me more than the words, I confess that I have sinned gravely." I respond: it must be said that to take delight in songs of this kind is either on account of interior devotion, and this seeks nothing but upright singing and the words; or on account of interior pleasure and wantonness; or on account of a certain curiosity. In the first way it is not a sin, but a merit; in the second way it is a sin connected to lust proximately; in the third way it is a sin of curiosity connected to lust remotely. As for what is asked, namely why there is not a capital sin pertaining to this sense, as there is pertaining to touch and taste: I respond, because the corruption and the delight are not so great.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:9

  "And I surpassed in riches" etc. Here the second point is touched upon, namely the power to accomplish, because a poor man, even if he could begin such artful delights, could not however bring them to completion: but he himself could, being rich. Therefore he says: "And I surpassed in riches all who were before me in Jerusalem." For he exceeded all: 3 Kings 3: "I have given you riches and glory, so that no one among all kings in days past has been like you." "Wisdom also" etc. Here the third point is touched upon, namely prudence for ordering, when he says: "Wisdom also persevered with me," by which, that is, he ordered those things which he had made; 3 Kings 10: "The queen of Sheba, seeing the wisdom of Solomon and the ranks of those serving, their garments also and the cupbearers etc., had no more spirit in her"; and 3 Kings 4: "The wisdom of Solomon surpassed the wisdom of all the Orientals and the Egyptians, and he was wiser than all men." It is asked concerning what he says: "And I surpassed in riches all who were before me in Jerusalem." What does this mean? What he says seems to be no great distinction, because before him none reigned except only his father, since he himself went up and captured it and expelled the Jebusite. To this some say that he speaks not only with respect to the kings of Israel, namely David and Saul, but also with respect to the judges. But this was not a great thing. On account of this it is said that before him there were kings in Jerusalem from Canaan, and they indeed were wealthy and great, and he speaks with respect to them. Or the text can be read such that the qualification "in Jerusalem" refers to the riches which he possessed in Jerusalem, not to the kings, so that the sense would be: "I surpassed in riches in Jerusalem all who were before me," because none before him was like him. Likewise it is asked concerning what he says: "Wisdom also persevered with me." On the contrary: "The wisdom of doctrine is according to his name," Ecclesiasticus 6: therefore no one is wise except he to whom things are savory as they ought to be; but they were not savory to Solomon, because he despised eternal goods and loved temporal ones; therefore he was not wise, but foolish. I respond: it must be said that wisdom in one way denotes cognition alone, and thus it is called "wisdom, the knowledge of things divine and human"; in another way it denotes taste and the savor of the affections and order, and thus wisdom is said to derive from savor. In the first way, to be wise belongs to the good and the wicked alike, who have an intellect illuminated to see many truths about God and creatures; in the second way it belongs only to the good. In the first way he persevered, because he did not lose his understanding; in the second way he lost it, when he sinned and became foolish.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:10

  "And all things which they desired" etc. Here the fourth point is touched upon, namely his pleasure in fully enjoying those delectable things which he had prepared; and because there is a certain pleasure which has its origin from without, and a certain one from interior conception, he notes both in himself. With respect to the first he says: "And all things which my eyes desired," that is, seeing outwardly, "I did not deny them," nay rather, he indulged them to his own fault; whence Lamentations 3: "My eye has despoiled my soul"; and Jeremiah 9: "Death has climbed through my windows." As for interior pleasure he says: "Nor did I forbid my heart," that is, the concupiscence of the heart, from "enjoying every pleasure and delighting itself in those things which I had prepared;" against that passage of Sirach 18: "Son, go not after your concupiscences, and turn away from your own will." And because affection often perverts the judgment of reason, a perverted judgment follows; whence he adds: "And I reckoned this my portion," that is, I judged it to be better for me "if I should enjoy my labor," namely in the present. And this is the judgment of the Epicureans, who expect no other good nor any other portion; on the contrary, the Saints do not have their portion in the present, but in the future; whence in the Psalm: "My portion, O Lord, let it be in the land of the living"; and again: "The Lord is the portion of my inheritance and of my cup," etc. Here the question is raised concerning what he says: "And I considered this my portion, if I should enjoy my labor." Therefore it seems that Solomon held the opinion of the Epicureans, who hold that there is no other joy except in the present; and this is heretical. Likewise, if he was wise and understanding and held this position, then it should be presumed that this was true. I respond: it must be said that there is a twofold judgment in us: one of reason deliberating and comparing, another of estimation. I say that Solomon by the judgment of reason deliberating and comparing never considered this nor held this opinion, but only by estimation, just as every sinner estimates that it is good for him to sin; hence there is not there an error of infidelity, but rather an error of deviation from the good. The Epicureans, however, not only estimate this, but assert with certitude that there is no other good; and therefore they are heretics and infidels. To the objection that he was wise, etc.: it must be said that, although he was wise, nevertheless in this he acted unwisely, and therefore he is not to be imitated, just as David was good, yet he did not act well when he had Uriah killed; nor does he say this for imitation, but for reproof.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:11

  He reproves his own curiosity on account of the vanity he discovered, which consists in mutability. He found therefore vanity and affliction in the works which he had done with curiosity, on account of diligent consideration; for which reason he says: "And when I turned to all the works which my hands had made," that is, had diligently considered, according to that word of the Apostle in Galatians 6: "But let each one prove his own work." "And to the labors in which I had sweated in vain," therefore in vain, because he had not done them for God, and therefore had labored to no purpose; Wisdom 3: "Their hope is empty, and their labor without fruit." "I saw in all things vanity and affliction of spirit, and that nothing endures under the sun:" therefore they were vain and afflictive, because unstable. For by the fact that they do not endure, they are vain; by the fact that they are lost and do not endure, they are afflictive: Sirach 40: "The substance of the ungodly shall dry up like a river, and shall resound like a great thunder in rain"; whence 1 John 2: "The world passes away and its concupiscence": and therefore: "Her grace is deceitful, and beauty is vain."

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:12

  He indicates the diligence of his consideration in treating those things in which he had studied. For this reason he says: "I passed over to contemplate wisdom," as regards things to be chosen: "and errors and folly," as regards things to be avoided. "I passed over," I say, from pleasure: whence Sirach 24: "Come over to me, all you who desire me," etc.; but although there was in him diligence, there was nevertheless not sufficiency: whence he adds: "What, I say, is man, that he could follow the King, his maker?" As if to say: he is insufficient for considering and seeing those things which the Lord foresees. "What is man?" As if to say: something small and insufficient: the Psalm: "What is man, that you are mindful of him?" "That he could follow the King, his maker," that is, God the creator: Isaiah 64: "And now, O Lord, you are our father, and we indeed are clay; and you are our maker, and we are all the works of your hands." Him no one can follow; Job 11: "Can you perhaps comprehend the footsteps of God, and find the Almighty unto perfection?" It is asked: "What is man, that he can follow God?" On the contrary: Ecclesiasticus 23: "It is a great glory to follow the Lord." Likewise, Job 23: "My foot has followed his steps." I respond: it must be said that there is a following by equality, and this has been given to no creature; and because Satan wanted this, he fell. There is again a following by subjection and obedience, and this indeed man can do, but not just anyone—only those to whom it has been given by God through grace, and whom he himself draws; and therefore no one can do it by himself without God's help.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:13

  "I saw that wisdom excels folly as much as light differs from darkness." Therefore wisdom is light: light, I say, descending from above from the Father of lights, from whom is every best gift and every perfect gift. This light descends to illuminate our cognitive power, to gladden our affective power, and to strengthen our operative power. It descends from the most high God into the intellect, from the intellect into the affection, and even to the lowest, namely operation.

  Collationes de Septem Donis, Collation 9

• Ecclesiastes 2:13

  Here the second point is noted, namely the discovered preeminence of wisdom over folly, because it surpasses it, as it were, beyond all proportion. For which reason he says: "And I saw that wisdom so far exceeded folly," that is, was nobler, "as light differs from darkness." And this comparison is fitting, since wisdom illuminates, and folly blinds or darkens. That wisdom indeed illuminates, Wisdom 6: "Love the light of wisdom, all you who rule over peoples"; whence also Christ, the wisdom of God, calls himself light; John 8: "I am the light of the world."

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:14

  "The eyes of the wise man are in his head," namely for directing: "the fool walks in darkness," as though he had no eyes in his head. That wisdom indeed illuminates, Wisdom 6: "Love the light of wisdom, all you who rule over peoples"; whence also Christ, the wisdom of God, calls himself light; John 8: "I am the light of the world." On the contrary, folly is darkness: Isaiah 5: "Woe to you who call good evil and evil good, who put darkness for light and light for darkness"; whence John 1: "The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it"; therefore, because they neither knew nor understood, therefore they walk in darkness; John 3: "For they loved darkness more than light." Here the third point is touched upon: the equality of the wise man and the fool both in death and after death. As regards the equality in dying, he says: "And I learned that the destruction of both was one:" one, that is, alike, because no one escapes the sentence of death on account of his wisdom: whence 2 Kings 14: "We all die, and like waters that flow down into the earth, which do not return." Just as the fool takes nothing away, so neither does the wise man: Job 1: "Naked I came forth from my mother's womb, and naked I shall return."

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:14

  "The eyes of the wise man are in his head," that is, in Christ: "the fool walks in darkness." In Christ is the consummation of every good.

  Collationes de Septem Donis, Collation 9

• Ecclesiastes 2:14

  The fourth aspect of the zeal of wisdom is the elevation of desire. This gives worth to other endeavors, so that forgetting what is behind, we strain forward to what is before. "The wise man has eyes in his head. — The heart of a wise man is in his right hand." Now, the zeal of wisdom consists in this, that our endeavor be directed toward nothing but God who is "all delight."

  Collations on the Hexaemeron, Collation 19

• Ecclesiastes 2:15

  And on account of this equality he despised wisdom; therefore he says: "And I said in my heart: if one and the same downfall shall befall both the fool and me, what does it profit me that I have devoted greater effort to wisdom?" as if to say: nothing, as regards death: Ecclesiasticus 40: "The Day of Union, that is, of death, from the one who sits" etc. "And I spoke with my mind," that is, I considered inwardly, and "I perceived that this also was vanity," namely, to devote greater effort to wisdom than the fool. There is a question about what he says: "What does it profit me, that I devoted greater effort to wisdom?" Because according to this it seems that he dissuades from study, the contrary of which he often urges; and Proverbs 27: "Apply yourself to wisdom, my son," etc. I respond: it must be said that devoting effort to wisdom can be in two ways: for the advantage of the present life, or for the reward of eternal glory. For the advantage of the present life, wisdom profits before death, because it directs man in his works; but in death it profits nothing, because the learned man dies just as the unlearned, nor is his life prolonged. But if for the advantage of eternal life, thus he does not die, but rather lives. It is useful for the working of good: Sirach 21: "Wise doctrine is a golden ornament," etc. It is useful for the avoidance of evil: Sirach 3: "A wise and understanding heart will abstain from sins." It is useful for the increase of grace: Proverbs 4: "She will give to your head increases of graces." It is useful for the increase of glory: Proverbs 3: "The wise shall possess glory." Thus therefore he discourages studying wisdom for present advantage and curiosity, but rather for eternal salvation; and therefore he reproves himself, because he had labored for curiosity and worldly vanity.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:16

  Not only is there equality in death, but also after death: whence he also adds: "And I spoke with my mind," that is, I considered inwardly, and "I perceived that this also was vanity," namely, to devote greater effort to wisdom than the fool, because there is no more memory of him than of the fool. Therefore he says: "For there shall not be memory of the wise man any more than of the fool forever;" and the reason is added: "And future times shall equally cover all things with oblivion." Whence above in the first chapter it was said: "There is no memory of former things, nor indeed of those things which shall be hereafter": Wisdom 2: "And our name shall receive oblivion through time, and no one shall have memory of our works"; Job 13: "And your memory shall be compared to ashes, and your necks shall be reduced to clay." From this kind of equality discovered, he concludes vanity in his pursuit and reproof of himself; whence he repeats the equality, saying: "The learned dies similarly as the unlearned," and thus they are equal. There is a question about what he says: "There will be no remembrance of the wise man like that of the fool." Against this: Proverbs 10: "The memory of the just is with praises, and the name of the wicked shall rot." Likewise, Sirach 39: "His memory shall not depart, and his name shall be sought out," etc. I respond: to this some say that he speaks in the person of the carnal man, whence he says what is simply false, but true according to the estimation of carnal men. But this does not fully resolve the matter, because he ought not to assert the position of carnal men, but rather to refute it. Therefore it must be said that one can speak of the memory of the wise man and the fool either with respect to God, or with respect to men. If we speak with respect to God, there is certainly a remembrance of the good wise man, who devotes himself to wisdom for the glory of God; but with respect to men, the memory of both the good and the evil passes away, for the most part, because men remember few things. But if of the evil wise man and vain one, there is no memory, neither with respect to God nor with respect to men, indeed his name passes away like the name of the fool: and therefore it is foolish to labor in wisdom for the sake of the fame of one's name. But Ecclesiastes speaks of the vain wise man, who has his eye on earthly things, and he speaks of human memory, not divine.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:17

  And from this he concludes: "Therefore I was weary of my life," as if he refused to live on account of weariness, as Job 10: "My soul is weary of my life": on account of occasions of sin: Genesis 27, Rebecca said: "I am weary of my life because of the daughters of Heth." On account of labors: Numbers 21: "The people began to be weary of the journey and the labor, and they spoke against the Lord" etc. On account of tribulations: 2 Corinthians 1: "We were burdened beyond measure, so that it wearied us even to live." On account of the delay of future glory: Job 10: "My soul is weary of my life." On account of impending temptation: Psalm: "My soul has slumbered from weariness, strengthen" etc. On account of the horror of impending death: Mark 14: "Jesus began to fear and to be weary." "Seeing that all things under the sun are evil, and all is vanity and affliction of spirit:" Wisdom 9: "The body, which is corrupted, weighs down the soul, and the earthly habitation depresses the mind that thinks upon many things"; therefore frequent meditation of the flesh is affliction. An inquiry is made concerning what he says: "My life wearied me as I beheld all evils under the sun." Against this: Genesis 1: "God saw all things that he had made, and they were very good:" therefore they are not evil; indeed, this is heretical. I respond: it must be said that, as the Apostle says in Romans 7: "The law is holy, and the commandment holy," yet by occasion the commandment was deadly to those not having grace and wrought death: just as creatures are very good for the just and those who love God and "work together unto good" and are good in themselves, yet for the impious, sinners, and the foolish, all things are turned into evils by occasion: whence Wisdom 14: "The creatures of God are for a temptation and a snare to the feet of the unwise:" and Sirach 39: "All these things shall be turned into evils for the impious and sinners."

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:18

  He reproves his own curiosity concerning the works of human industry directed toward wealth. He argues first that he was curious about acquiring earthly things on account of the uncertainty of good offspring, because he himself could not always possess those things and feared having a useless successor. Therefore he says: "Again I detested all my industry," that is, my curious diligence, "with which I most studiously labored under the sun," namely to increase these goods: Jeremiah 6: "From the least even to the greatest, all are given to avarice."

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:19

  And the reason for the loathing is introduced: "Who shall have an heir after me, whom I know not whether he will be wise or foolish." Literally, Solomon had as heir Rehoboam, a foolish son, who, following the counsel of the young men, caused the kingdom to be divided, 3 Kings 12. "And he shall have dominion over my labors, in which I toiled," as regards the body; "and was solicitous," as regards the soul. Concerning this toil, Genesis 3: "In the sweat of your face you shall eat your bread"; concerning solicitude, Matthew 6: "Be not solicitous for your soul, what you shall eat, or for your body, what you shall put on." And that is exceedingly vain; whence he says: "And is there anything so vain?" Supply: as to labor solicitously for a fool and an idler, as if to say: no.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:20

  From the consideration of this vanity, therefore, he ceased from curiosity; whence he says: "Wherefore I ceased, and my heart renounced laboring under the sun," that is, for temporal goods. "I ceased," in deed; "and my heart renounced," in will. But the miser does not cease on this account, below in chapter 4: "There is one alone, and he has not a second, and yet he does not cease to labor."

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:21

  And he repeats the reason why he ceased: "For when another labors in wisdom," in the heart; "and in doctrine," in the mouth; "and in solicitude," in deed; "he leaves what was acquired to an idle man." And from this he concludes vanity: "and this therefore is vanity and a great evil:" vanity indeed, because riches are left to a useless man, but a great evil; whence Hugh says: "It is a great evil that what one man is worn down by in labor, another should abuse idly and illicitly"; evil, because to a squanderer; Jeremiah 51: "Their works are vain," etc.; Deuteronomy 28: "Let there be no strength in your hand; let a people whom you know not eat the fruit of your land and all your labors."

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:22

  The world is vain also because it does not give rest to the one who labors, and therefore he who labors for worldly things labors in vain: Ecclesiastes 2: What does it profit a man from all his labor, by which he labors under the sun? All his days are full of labors and sorrows, nor does his mind rest at night: and is this not vanity? because he labors in vain, because he does not rest. This world cannot give rest, because it itself does not endure, but rather always revolves: therefore those who cling to it must needs go around in circles. Therefore it is said in the Psalm: The wicked walk round about.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Prooemium

• Ecclesiastes 2:22

  "What does it profit a man of all his labor," in body, "and affliction of spirit," in mind, "by which he is tormented under the sun?" As if to say: nothing; whence Proverbs 23: "Labor not to become rich, but set bounds to your prudence." It does not profit, namely him who labors for the sake of possessing these visible things. Whence Bernard says: "With others are the fruits of riches, but to the rich fall only the name and the solicitude"; and therefore it does not profit; whence below in chapter 5: "What does it profit the possessor, except that he beholds riches with his eyes?"

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2

• Ecclesiastes 2:23

  Not only does it not profit, but rather it harms: whence he adds: "All his days are full of labors and sorrows," outwardly: "nor does his mind rest at night," inwardly. Therefore it is said in Job 7: "I have numbered empty months and wearisome nights for myself"; and Proverbs 15: "All the days of the poor are evil. A secure mind is like a continual feast." And from this he concludes that to labor thus is vain, because it is useless: therefore he says: "And is not this also vanity?" As if to say: indeed: below in chapter 5: "He who loves riches shall reap no fruit from them: and this therefore is vanity," because they harm. Whence in the same place: "There is another infirmity which I have seen under the sun, riches gathered up" etc.

  Commentary on Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2