Ecclesiastes · Chapter 6

And it weighs heavily on man. It is prevalent among mankind. — Notes: (1) It causes distress upon mankind.

"There is an evil" — [The word] "rav" in the sacred tongue (leshon ha-kodesh) is used in four senses. The first: rav that is the opposite of "few" (me'at), meaning "many" — as in "tarbu et nachalato" (you shall increase his inheritance) (cf. Numbers 26:54). The second: "rav et yotzro" (he who strives with his Maker) (Isaiah 45:9), from the language of riv (strife, contention). The third: rav from the language of shooting [arrows] — though it is one of the geminate verbs (po'alei ha-kefel, doubled-root verbs) — as in "hishmi'u el bavel rabbim" (proclaim against Babylon, [its] archers) (Jeremiah 50:29), and the word that follows it there ["all who bend the bow"] proves this about it. It follows the pattern of dalim, rakim (poor, soft/tender), and the past-tense verbal form from rakim is "ya'an rakh levavkha" (because your heart was soft) (2 Kings 22:19). Likewise, "u-verakim rav vayehumem" (and He shot forth lightning-bolts and discomfited them) — the beginning of that verse proves this about it: "vayishlach chitzav vayefitzem" (he sent out his arrows and scattered them) (Psalm 18:15). The fourth: [rav means] "great" — as in "moshi'a ve-rav vehitzilam" (a savior and a mighty one, and he delivered them) (Isaiah 19:20); "al kol rav beito" (over all the officers of his house) (Esther 1:8); "kiryat melekh rav" (the city of a great king) (Psalm 48:3), which refers to David, similar to "kiryat chanah David" (the city where David encamped) (Isaiah 29:1). Some commentators say that it [in Psalm 48:3] refers to the Omnipresent, but this is not correct, because [Scripture] did not make the reference clear, and [in that case] the surrounding words would have to apply to "the great King" [as a title for God] — so that in the plural we would expect "rabbei ha-melekh" (the king's nobles), and in the feminine, "rabbah." [Here, in our verse,] "rabbah" (great) applies to man.

Behold, here he relates the evil character trait found in some people whom Hashem made wealthy so that they would gain merit and be established through charity, yet they do not do so; instead they set their whole intent on enriching their children after them and do not give charity. This is like one who kills himself through hunger in order to feed a stranger: so too, whatever a person gives to charity in his lifetime — then at his departure from the world, it is he himself who is fed by it; but what he leaves to his children is like giving it to someone else. As Solomon himself said in the verse, "Do not weary yourself to grow rich, etc." (Proverbs 23:4), and as Monbaz said, "My fathers stored up for others, and I have stored up for myself." And this is what is meant by "There is an evil I have seen under the sun" — that is, with respect to what is above the sun, it is good, for Hashem above intended it for good; only that man himself perverts it, and this evil is great upon man. It is: "a man to whom God has given riches, etc." — God gave it to him because He knew that through it he would gain merit for his own path, if he chooses the good; and "he lacks nothing for his soul" — meaning for its perfection, through the preparation of his wealth for all that the aforementioned God desires that a person do in order to perfect himself, for that is His, blessed be He, desire, since everything is made ready before him. And we have seen with our own eyes that God does not give him power to eat of it himself — that is, through charity, to feed himself — for it is a stranger, his heir, who will eat it; and behold, this is hevel (vanity): he fed his children and not himself. And should you ask, why does God not give him power to perform charity? Therefore it says, "and it is an evil disease" — for it was not for nothing that Hashem withheld this power from him; rather, this person has the disease of an evil eye, and that is why Hashem did not give him power to do good for himself. Or he speaks of the wealthy people of the land who restrict themselves like a poor and destitute man, and safeguard treasures that belong to one who did not toil for them — such as their heirs, or the one who marries their widow, and so on — and he gives the reason for the matter. And this is what it says: "there is an evil, etc." — spoken of the many, for many stumble in it. And it is: "a man to whom God has given riches, wealth, and honor." And since the preservative of wealth is diminishing it (through giving), yet this man does not diminish anything at all of his estate in order to preserve and sustain it through charity, for the sake of his soul — this is what is meant by "yet he lacks/diminishes nothing for his soul" of all that God desires, as mentioned, that he should perform charity, which is why He enriched him. And "yet God does not give him power to eat of it" — measure for measure: since he did not wish to feed others, he too will not eat of it. Or it means that it will not remain his; rather, it will grow wings and fly away from him to another, as is stated in Midrash Rabbah: "The Holy One, blessed be He, does not mint coins; rather, He takes from one and gives to another." Or it means that He will not allow him to eat of it, by placing in his heart a cruelty toward himself, so that he will not eat or spend, until another comes — his heir, or the one who marries his widow — and takes it in its entirety, for it was like a deposit in his keeping, and he never ate of it. And this too is measure for measure: he did not feed his own soul, which is a portion of God from above, so God likewise does not give him power to feed his body, and places in his heart the desire to starve himself. And behold, this is hevel (vanity) — something a person ought to take to heart, for it is easy to understand, yet it is an evil disease that brings no recovery, for there is no cure for it.

"And it is heavy [great]" — this evil is great upon man and causes him much distress.

"ve-rabbah" (and heavy) — "great," as in "over all the chief of his household [rav beito]" (Esther 1:8).

Wealth [and] possessions. Its simple explanation, is its apparent meaning. Yet God does not give him the power to eat thereof. That he should be happy with his portion to find satisfaction in his wealth, for he strives to oppress and to accumulate much wealth, as the matter is stated, “and he is like death and is never satisfied,” and also He does not give him the power to perform charity, from which to eat in the future, but a stranger will take that money and perform charity and he will benefit from it. However, the Midrash Aggadah explains it as referring to Torah study. — Notes: (2) Chavakuk 2:5. (3) According to Targum, the verse is dealing with a person who dies on account of his sins without leaving heirs. His wife marries a stranger who enjoys the estate that he left. Wealth, possessions and honor. Scripture, Mishnah, and Aggadah. Does not give him the power. Because he did not achieve [knowledge of] Gemara, he consequently has no benefit from his studies in any practical decision making. For instead a stranger will enjoy them. The one who is versed in Gemara.

"A man" — There are commentators who explain "nekhasim" (possessions) like "rekhush" (property). The word "chaser" (lacking) and the word "male" (full) follow one pattern, and both of them are intransitive verbs (po'alim omedim), even though they require a construct/dependent phrase (semikhut). The matter is: when a speaker says "so-and-so is chaser (lacking)," he must go on to specify what he lacks — whether in wisdom, in wealth, or in greatness. Do you not see [an expression like] "chasar meshuga'im ani" (I am wanting as compared to madmen) — it is in construct, and its meaning is "lacking in all the desire of his soul." In the heavier verb-conjugations (binyanim kevedim, i.e. the causative forms) it is a transitive verb (po'al yotze), as in "vatechasrehu me'at me-Elohim" (yet You have made him lack but little from God) (Psalm 8:6), meaning: he died lacking but a little from [the level of] God. And whoever says that it is transitive to two objects errs, for we find, from the heavier added form, "vehamam'it lo hechsir" (and he who gathered little did not lack) (Exodus 16:18), meaning: he did not bring about a lack. And behold, it is [simply] transitive, like "he'edif" (he had more) (Exodus 16:18).

"A man," etc. — meaning, I have seen a man, etc. "And honor" — from other people, and this is a thing that broadens the heart and gladdens it. "So that he wants nothing for his soul" — he lacks nothing for his soul of all that he desires; meaning, he is able to fulfill the desire of his soul in everything that he craves, for he lacks nothing at all. "Yet God gives him not power" — but God did not give him dominion and the ability to enjoy the riches, for He inclined his heart to be stingy. "A stranger" — one foreign to him, who is not fit to inherit from him, will eat the riches, for it will come into his possession and he will enjoy it. "This is vanity" — the gathering of the wealth was without benefit, and it is a grievous pain when he sees that someone other than himself enjoys what he gathered.

If a man begets a hundred [children]. Children. — Notes: (4) “A hundred” is figuratively speaking, it is an expression used to denote “many.” (Ibn Ezra) So that the days of his years are many. (and much wealth and all goodness during the days of his life) His; וְרַב is an expression meaning “sufficient,” [i.e.,] a sufficient [=וְרַב degree of all goodness. — Notes: (5) Alternatively, ורב means “and honorable” (Metsudas Dovid). Or, “the length of his life is greater [=ורב] than the average.” (Ibn Ezra) And his soul is not sated. From that goodness, for he is not happy with his portion, to be satisfied with what is his. — Notes: (6) According to the Midrash, this phrase refers to the soul which comes from Above and is not sated with physical pleasures. Rather, its needs are spiritual, e.g., studying Torah, performing mitzvos and doing good deeds. And moreover he has no burial. Sometimes he is slain, and dogs devour him. All these happened to Achav, he begot many children, and he had great wealth, but he coveted [the property of] others and was not satisfied with his wealth, and [after he was killed] dogs devoured him. — Notes: (7) According to the Midrash, only Achav’s blood was not buried, as Scripture states in I Melochim 22:38, “the dogs licked it up,” but his body was buried in Shomron [Ibid. Verse 37]. Alternatively, he did not have a proper burial, e.g., he was buried without burial shrouds (Ibn Ezra). Or, he was involved and focused on accumulating wealth to such a degree that one might think he would live forever and need “no burial.” (Ateres Shmuel) Better off than he is the stillborn child. [The stillborn] of a woman, for the stillborn came in vanity and went, he neither saw good nor desired it; so he does not need to be distressed.

"If he begets" — if he begets many children. It is the way of the sacred tongue to mention "ten," "a hundred," and "a thousand," because they are round, summary numbers (kelal cheshbon). Do you not see that in completing the ten, one begins again from one? Also "seven" is mentioned, and I will explain it in its place. "and lives many years" — until he becomes an elder (yashish). "and [it is] great, that the days of his years are many" — [this is] according to the ordinary way of the world. "and moreover no burial" — [this refers to] the shrouds (takhrichin) in which the dead is buried. "and the stillborn (nefel)" — it is a woman's miscarried child.

Behold, the general point of all the verses stated [thus far] is that wealth is not [true] completeness — for one who merits olam haba (the world to come), his being wealthy is a gift from God; but on the contrary, he is destined to be ruined by it, as is written in the preceding verses. Now he says that it is not wealth alone, but that together with the aforementioned wealth — which is his sustenance — there are joined also children and length of life. That is: 'if a man begets a hundred' and also lives — for he lives many years — and also a great matter is added to him, namely, that his hundred sons remain in being throughout the many days of the years that he lives, so that he does not see the death of any one of them — yet 'his soul is not satisfied,' etc. — [even so] he has no completeness. For 'I say that the stillborn is better than he.' And this is because he has established above that [true] happiness consists in one's meriting to endure through it and 'rejoice at the last day' — namely, that at the time of their death [the righteous] are shown the reward that is given to them, and through this they are joyful and their soul is satisfied, and their bodies sleep and do not [truly] die in the grave, but stand whole like sleepers until one hour before the resurrection of the dead — as in the incident concerning Rabbi Achai bar Yoshiah and Rabbi Elazar the son of Rabbi Shimon. And this is what he means: what benefit is it to a man that he has in this world sons, life, and sustenance, if he is not among those whose soul is satisfied when they sleep [in death] — this being because he did not gather mitzvot, so that his soul is not satisfied by the goodness that is shown to him, for they show him nothing, and also his body was not like one sleeping in the grave. And this is [the meaning of] 'and moreover he has no burial' — meaning, not [a resting place] for himself alone, but also for the worm and the maggot that are with him, and for the forces of impurity that cling to him there, since he is not like one sleeping. Or, [alternatively], he had no burial in the sense of a permanent home for him until one hour before the resurrection, but rather [his grave] becomes emptied of him, as the flesh and bones decompose within a short time. I have said that the stillborn is better than he, for the stillborn has rectified (tikkun) his soul somewhat from the state of corruption it was in before it was formed in the womb, through this reincarnation (gilgul) of his. But as for one who, with all his goods in this world, did not increase and gather mitzvot beyond what his soul possessed beforehand — the stillborn is better than he. And not only a stillbirth that occurred in a fit manner through a righteous man — the stillborn being the soul of a righteous person who came [into this gilgul] to undergo one [instance of] karet (excision) that remained for it to be purified from — but even the stillborn that comes about through hevel (vanity/breath), by transgression, whose mother miscarried it so that it would not be felt, and it was not purified, but rather 'he shall go in darkness' — and not one merely light of soul [i.e., a minor transgressor], but heavy with iniquity — so that even after it goes in darkness, its name will be concealed in Gehinnom, it being among those wicked ones of whom it is said in the Zohar that their name is forgotten in Gehinnom. But this does not include a life that went out into the air of the world alive and saw the sun, like an eighth-month [infant] that lives, as is known — for there is some [degree of] rectification for one who goes out into the air [of the world], above all else, in that he does go out — but not so the stillborn, who never saw the sun. And also, [this comparison applies] not only to the stillborn who, while in the womb, was taught the Torah, as our Rabbis, of blessed memory, said concerning 'when His lamp shined above my head' (Job 29:3), but also to one who was not taught it, since he had not yet reached that stage. And if you should ask: if so, then, since you speak of such a stillborn, how can you say that he to whom no good was shown [is judged] as one who did not perform mitzvot? For what did he gain by his coming into the world — any contentment (nachat) beyond what came before? He explains this further, saying: '[even] if he had lived a thousand years,' etc. — meaning: needless to say if he did not live long, for even if he lived a thousand years, and not [only] once, but times — that is, he was reincarnated twice and lived a thousand years each time — and yet saw no good, in that he did not perform a mitzvah the second time, in such a way that the goodness shown to him at death he did not see — was it not then for nothing that he came [again into the world]? For behold, to the very same place to which he went the first time, everything goes — his body, his soul, and his spirit — so what contentment would be added to him beyond the former [life]? Unlike the stillborn, who, through the pain of his reincarnation, in which he came and became a stillborn, was cleansed of his transgressions, and so has contentment beyond what he had at first.

"A hundred" — meaning, a hundred sons, [a number] that gladdens the heart of the one who begets them. "And [lives] many," etc. — in greatness and honor, such that the days of his years shall be many. "But his soul" — yet his soul was not sated with good, for he did not fulfill its desire with anything. "He has none" [no burial] — for the beasts of the field devoured him. "Better than he" — one to whom such things happened — the stillborn child of a woman is better than he.

"ve-rav" (and many) — "great," meaning "honored." "ha-nefel" (the untimely birth) — this is the term for a child born dead (stillborn).

"for it comes in vanity (hevel)" — and it is necessary that its name be hidden and not remembered.

"For it comes in vanity" — this stillborn child, when it first came into the world, came without attaining any benefit; and when it went to the grave it went in darkness — meaning, no one saw it and no one knew of it, [so] afterward its name is not remembered, as though its name were covered in darkness with no one to see it in order to mention it. This is a figure of speech (melitzah), for in truth no name was ever given to it.

"moreover the sun" — this refers back to the stillborn. And he says: behold, the stillborn, who did not see the light of the world and knew nothing, had ease (nachat), because he did not labor in the affairs of the world. But this owner of wealth, who did see the light of the world, knew that he had no rest, but only labor without reward, and no pleasure in either of the two worlds [this world and the world to come].

"Has not seen [the sun]" — this stillborn child. "Nor known it" — it never knew the satisfaction that comes from one thing more than from another; and since this is so, it has no reason to grieve over what it lacked of the good, for it never saw good and never desired it. But the man who begot a hundred [children], etc., knows what good is, and because it is withheld from him his grief is great.

"nachat" (gratification) — meaning "contentment of spirit" (nachat ruach).

Though he live. And if he had lived two thousand years, what advantage would he have, since he did not experience any pleasure. Will he not ultimately return to the dust like all the poor people? — Notes: (8) Alternatively, one million years [אלף פעמים=1000 x1000]. (Ibn Ezra)

"ve-ilu (and though) he lived" — this word (ve-ilu) is like "ve-ilu la-avadim ve-la-shefachot" (and though for menservants and for maidservants) (Esther 7:4). And there is a commentator who said that it is compounded from "im" (if) and "lu" (would that). And [as for] "a thousand times (pa'amim)" — [this is] "a thousand thousand," just as "twenty times" would be four hundred. "to one place" — it is the grave.

"And if he lives" — and if he were to live. "Twice" — two times a thousand, which is two thousand. "He has not seen good" — meaning, he did not delight in good. "Do not all go to one place?" — meaning, what enjoyment did he find in the length of his days? For at his death he will return to the dust like the rest of mankind, since everyone goes to one place, namely the grave, and he is like them.

All man’s labor. Is for his mouth, that he should benefit and eat in this world and in the next, but this one had no benefit in his life. Yet his appetite is never filled. This is a question; i.e., but this one, did he not even gratify his desire with a small pleasure? This is similar to, “I will satisfy תִּמְלָאֵמוֹ my lust with them,” an expression of attaining a desire. And since this is so — — Notes: (9) Shemos 15:9.

"all labor" — he expresses wonder at the fool who has not seen good, for behold, the essential point of all labor is so that a man may eat and not die. And the meaning of "and yet the soul (nefesh) is not filled" — that it is not satisfied, even if it possessed all the wealth in the world and ate [all] the wheat [in the world]. And the meaning of "also" (gam) refers back to the mouth (peh), which is not filled, because the food goes down from it immediately.

In the manner of a disputant, as is his way — have I not spoken disparagingly of wealth in all the preceding verses, saying that its harm outweighs its benefit unless it comes as a gift of Hashem? But is there not a difficulty against this? Namely: is it not so that one who enjoys his labor — 'the labor of his hands, for he eats' — when will he ever do something for his soul? For behold, since all of man's toil is 'for his mouth,' to put into his mouth for eating, even the appetite (nefesh) is not filled — how much more so the body, which is led to the grave. But even the nefesh, whose essential reward is that of the commandments, belongs to it, as in the saying of Rabbi Yosef: 'Rejoice, my soul: for you did I recite Scripture, for you did I study Mishnah' — even so, it is not filled. For behold, 'what more' (mah yoter) — that is, what advantage there is for attaining perfection and the life of the soul — belongs to the wise man over the fool, who is devoid of the wisdom through which perfection is attained. And this the poor man cannot attain, for what use is it to a poor man to possess wisdom for walking toward life, so that his aim would be to attain eternal life, since it is through wisdom that this attainment comes, and he, in his poverty, cannot attain wisdom? That is to say: therefore wealth is necessary for attaining perfection. And not only that, but when a man is poor he grows slack in the service of Heaven. This is [the meaning of] 'better is the sight of the eyes,' etc. [6:9] — for one of the things that weaken the hands of the servants of Hashem is that the evil inclination (yetzer hara) pays out immediately: one transgresses a sin, tastes its taste, robs, extorts, and eats and feeds his children from it. But in serving Hashem, one's reward is on credit, for the world to come — for 'today is to do them, and tomorrow to receive their reward.' Therefore the heart of the righteous man who serves Hashem grows embittered, when in his house there is no bread and no garment, while, in contrast, the house of the worthless man (ish beliya'al) is full of silver and gold. For behold, an inclination close at hand says to him: 'Come to me, and I will pay you at once' — rather than to the one who delays your payment. And this is [the meaning of] 'better is the sight of the eyes' — that a man should see his reward before him — than 'the wandering of the soul' (halech nefesh), which is when a man says to his own soul, 'Wander on, soul, until you reach your resting-place — for then you shall receive your reward.' That is to say: it would therefore be very good for Him, may He be blessed, to show a man his [reward in this] world during his lifetime, so that he act wisely, rather than have everything be on credit — in such a way that the poor man grows embittered on seeing that he has nothing at all in hand. Yet this is not a sufficient argument, for this too is hevel (vanity). For indeed it is better for a man to receive his reward in the great and holy world [of the hereafter] than in this world, which offers only physical good; but nevertheless there remains a vexation of spirit and soul (re'ut ruach) in the enticements of one's inclination, which finds room to seduce him — how much more so for the poor man, who sees no good. And should you say: what fool would turn aside to such folly and pay it no heed, seeing that He, may He be blessed, is a holy God (Elohim kedoshim), and his reward is with Him, and his recompense awaits him in the world above? — to this he answers, 'that which has been' (mah shehayah), etc. [6:10] — meaning: who can stand before the might of the evil inclination? For a weak argument would serve it as little more than a help, like the 'cart rope' [that draws sin along, cf. Isaiah 5:18], to make one sin. For who among us is holy, and almost wholly spiritual, and great and greatly esteemed before Him, may He be blessed, and yet could not stand before the evil inclination, until it made him sin? And this is [the meaning of] 'that which has been' — namely, that which is the very essence of existence and the purpose of the whole work of creation (ma'aseh bereishit): his name was already created beforehand, for he is one of the seven things that preceded the world — namely Yinon, for 'before the sun, his name is Yinon' [Psalms 72:17] — he is the Messiah-King. And it is known that he is Adam, for Yinon is Adam ha-Rishon (the first man), for 'Adam' [is an acrostic for] Adam-David-Mashiach. Behold, then, that the purpose and essence of existence is Adam, and it is upon him that the world was founded, namely the Messiah, the ultimate hoped-for good — and therefore his name was called before the world [was created]. All this indicates the greatness of his stature, lofty and holy. And nevertheless he could not contend and do battle with the one mightier than he — the evil inclination — for it defeated him and brought death upon him. What, then, can the rest of mankind do, seeing that there is a helper arrayed against him to seduce him, and it can overpower him? There are many things in the world that increase hevel; they are many contrivances that increase man's being drawn after hevel — such as, for instance, seeing the prosperity of the wicked, and the like. 'What more is there for man' (mah yoter la-adam) — what advantage is there in being called adam, the perfected one who is called adam, which is the greatest of the titles of the [human] species? And what advantage does he have, in being righteous [and] called adam, that he should trust not to pay heed to the prosperity of the wicked, seeing that he himself is poor and needy, prone to sin? And should you say: will he not look ahead and judge the ultimate outcome from the good fortune of the wicked, reasoning a fortiori (kal va-chomer): 'if it goes well in this world for those who transgress His will, how much more so for those who do His will' — and thereby find comfort for what he lacks in this world, and continue to do good? To this he answers: that which I have said — that there are many things that increase hevel — means let it not be said that he will reason such a kal va-chomer on his own. For 'who knows what good is destined for man'? Who is it that knows this while he is yet alive, so that he would be drawn after it accordingly? And this is [the meaning of] 'who knows...' etc., 'in life' (ba-chayim). And that man will be foolish not only regarding his youth and its squandering, but regarding the very count of the days of his fleeting life (yemei chayei hevlo) — treating them as a shadow. This is because, although the days are hevel and there is no substance in them, one who engages in Torah and mitzvot acquires through them a quality of holiness and an enduring existence — and these are what draw near at the time of his death, as is said in the Zohar on the verse 'and the days of Israel drew near [to die]' (Genesis 47:29), etc. And this is [the meaning of] 'the days of his hevel' becoming, instead of mere hevel, like a shadow (tzel) — that there be, within them, deeds that produce enduring existence, so that he may take shelter beneath them as beneath a shade. For who can tell a man what will happen to his soul after him, after his death — whether it will go well with him or not — while he is still here under the sun? For he does not know until his soul departs at his death. Therefore it would be very good for him to have a sight of his eyes during his lifetime, to see some of the good, so that he would labor on the eve of Shabbat for what he will eat on Shabbat. Therefore he answers and says, 'A good name is better than good oil,' etc. [7:1] — meaning that He, may He be blessed, shows that a good name is better than the good oil of a king anointed with oil, who has greatness in this world. For behold, the day of death — when a man is shown then his true fortune — is better than the day of his birth; and then the onlooker recognizes, in the joy of the righteous man, the possessor of a good name, on the day of death. And it is as though, in this world, he is granted a 'sight of the eyes' of the good that the Beneficent One bestows — as they mentioned in Bereishit Rabbah on the verse 'And Abraham died,' etc. — and how many righteous people whose souls rejoiced in what they were shown of the giving of their reward.

"All the labor" — that for which a man labors to gather wealth is so that he will have something to put into his mouth, to eat and to drink. "And yet the appetite" — he should take care that it not be cut off; meaning, that he should give charity from his wealth in order to bring merit to the soul.

"timmale" (is filled) — its meaning is "cutting" and "piercing," as in "can you pierce [ha-temalle] his skin with barbed irons" (Job 40:31).

What advantage. [What advantage does he have] with his wisdom, over what he would have if he were a fool. What disadvantage has the poor man. Over the rich man who has no satisfaction. He too knows how to go along with the living. Another explanation: Yet his appetite is never filled. For the World to Come, for he did not perform good deeds in his lifetime.

"for what advantage has the wise" — if the wise man seeks wealth without end, yet his soul is not filled, just like the soul of the fool, what advantage does he have? And the meaning of "what [advantage has] the poor man who knows" — the poor man who knows and understands, what [benefit is there] for him in walking in the way of fools? "before the living" — "living" (chayyim) here is an adjective (shem ha-to'ar), as in "chayyim kulkhem" (all of you are alive) (Deuteronomy 4:4).

"For what advantage" — what advantage does the wise man have over the fool, except that he pays heed to the poor man, to know his want and to keep him alive in his hunger, so that he too may walk alongside the living and be like them.

"neged" (before) — its meaning is "comparison" and "likeness"; likewise, "and I will go alongside you [le-negdekha]" (Genesis 33:12).

Better is what the eyes actually see than the imagination of the soul. It would have been better and more proper for this one to gaze upon his wealth [to enjoy] what his eyes see, than [by investing his wealth] in food and drink that nourish the soul. Another explanation: Better is what the eyes actually see than the imagination of the soul. It would have better and more proper for this one to follow his eyes, to rob and to oppress, rather than [being mindful of] the course of his soul, that he did not care where his soul will go when he dies. — Notes: (10) Alternatively, it would be better for a person to actually see where the soul of the righteous goes and where the soul of the wicked goes after their death. He would realize the difference and mend his ways. (Metsudas Dovid) This too is vanity. It is what is given to the wicked.

"better" — he says: what [advantage is there] to the wise man that his soul should wander in the way of the fools, whose soul is not filled? What is present and seen by the eye should be enough for him, even though what is seen [is limited], and what arises in the thought of the soul is vanity (hevel). Another explanation: that "the sight of the eyes" is better than "the matters of the living" (divrei ha-chayyim) — similar to the matter [stated], "and what advantage is there to its owner except the sight of his eyes" (Ecclesiastes 5:11).

"Good is the sight of the eyes" — It would be good if a person could see with his own eyes the journey of the soul after death — to which place the soul of the righteous goes and to which place the soul of the wicked goes — for then he would know the difference, and through this he would straighten his way. "this too is vanity" — But in truth, this too is vanity, without benefit, for then he would serve the Omnipresent in order to receive a reward and to be saved from punishment, whereas it is better to serve Him not for the sake of receiving a reward. "and a striving after wind" — In this matter he would have a striving after wind, for then he would serve the Omnipresent not willingly, but out of love of reward and fear of punishment — which is not so when he serves out of love of the Omnipresent, for then he serves of his own free will.

Whatever has been has already been named. The stature and greatness that had been established during his lifetime, “has already been named,” i.e., it already was and passed, he already had attained fame, and now it has passed, and it was made known that he was a man and not god, and his end was that he died, and he was unable to strive with the angel of death, who is more powerful than he. — Notes: (11) According to the Midrash, this refers to Adam. Note that the gematria (numerical value) of ‘מה’ [=45] is equal to ‘אדם’ [=45], man.

"whatever has come to be" — its name has already been called, and it is known that he is such-and-such a man. Why then should he seek the wandering of the soul, wishing to become like so-and-so, when it is possible that he will not attain it? It is not fitting for a man of understanding (sekhel) to contend with one who is mightier than he. Therefore it is not fitting for him to seek what the living seek, and to act this way in competition with them, [wishing] to be like them.

"Whatever has been" — The greatness that a person had — his name was already called by a great name while he was still alive — as if to say: what has passed is no more. "and it is known" — But at his death it becomes known to all that he was only a mortal man, and it was not in his power to enter into judgment with one mightier than he — namely, the angel of death, who is stronger than he — and he cannot prevent his soul from being taken through legal argument.

"she-hetkif" (that is mightier) — an expression of "strength" and "force," as in "if one prevails against him [yitkefo]" (above, 4:12).

For there are many things. With which he occupied himself during his lifetime, such as the games of the kings, [e.g.,] monkeys, elephants and lions. They increased vanity for him, and what remains for him after he dies.

"for there are many things" — besides the wandering of the soul after the desires of the world — such as gathering wealth, seeking power (serarah), and matters of desire (chesheq) — all of these, and things like them, increase vanity (hevel); they add to a man's [share of] vanity, when it is already enough for him that it is vanity. This verse, too, refers back to the poor man who knows, that it is fitting for him to guard against all vanity, for what more advantage does he have?

"For there are" — In truth there are many matters that this person accomplished wondrously in his greatness while he was yet alive, but all of these increase vanity, since they are not eternal. "what advantage is there to man" — What advantage of eminence comes to man in that he is a man endowed with understanding more than all living creatures?

For who knows. For who knows good deeds and what man should do during his life, so that it will bring him goodness in the hereafter. In the counted days of his vanity. Which are limited in number Which he spends. Those deeds, in the limited time that he lives, for this time is as short as the shadow of a passing bird, and although Shlomo said, “like a shadow,” in general, and did not specify whether the shadow of a palm tree, or the shadow of a wall, which are permanent, his father Dovid had already explained it, “his days are like a passing shadow,” this is the shadow of a flying bird. It is thus expounded in this manner in the Midrash. — Notes: (12) Alternatively, “that he may do them [ויעשם] like a shadow,” i.e., while alive, a person should never rest, just as a shadow moves constantly as a result of the sun’s angle, so should a person constantly be on the move and be performing these good deeds constantly. (Metsudas Dovid) (13) Tehillim 144:4. (14) This is deduced in the following manner. A shadow has no permanency so when Scripture states “passing shadow,” it seems superfluous. Obviously, the “passing shadow” is a description of the object that is casting the shadow, e.g., a flying bird that passes [=flies] by. For who can tell a man. How will the wealth that he gathered from oppression remain for his children after him, under the sun.

"for who" — this too refers back to the matter of the poor man who knows: that man does not know what is good for him in life, whether wealth or poverty; and the days of his vain life are numbered. It is fitting that he treat them like a passing shadow, and not seek the wandering of the soul to the point of forsaking money — for it will not profit him at all whatever he forsakes, since he does not even know what will be done with his money after him. And the meaning of "and he should spend them like a shadow" — that he should consider in his mind that just as a shadow does not stand still for even a single moment, so too his days go and pass — and they are the essential thing (ha-ikkar), all the more so whatever happens to them, whether good or bad, wealth or poverty. And another explanation [relates this] to the verse, "and the fool increases words" (Ecclesiastes 10:14).

"For who knows" — That is to say, few are those who have the wisdom to know what is good for a man to do in his life, during the number of the days of his vain life that were allotted to him from Heaven. "and he does them" — In order to do these deeds while he is still alive, at all times, and not rest like this shadow, which does not rest at any time, for it is always shifting from place to place because of the movement of the sun. And this refers back to what was said above, meaning: since not many attain the wisdom to understand this, therefore no advantage of eminence comes to man in that he is a man endowed with understanding. "who can tell man" — That is to say, it is not merely that man does not know some rational matter of what to do in his life — for even a tangible matter that will be behind his back is not known to him in this world, and he needs someone to tell him what it is.