Charles Ellicott Commentary Ecclesiastes 5

In the Hebrew division, this is the last verse of the preceding chapter; but clearly here a new section begins, containing proverbs in the second person singular, which has not until now been used. There is no obvious connection with what has gone before; possibly, the precepts introduced here were traditionally known to have been part of Solomon’s teaching.

They consider not.—The most natural translation of this clause would be, “They know not how to do evil,” i.e., are incapable of doing evil. This would force us to understand the subject of the clause to be, not the fools, but those who are ready to hear. The Authorised Version exhibits one of the expedients resorted to in order to get a better meaning. Another translation is, “They are without knowledge, so that they do evil.”

Few.— Sirach 7:14; Sirach 18:22.

There is here a clear recognition of the passage in Deuteronomy. (Consult the passage; compare to Sirach 18:23.)

No pleasure in fools. —Compare to Isaiah 62:4.

The angel. —It has been proposed to translate this word as “messenger,” or ambassador of God, and understand “the priest” ; and it has been regarded as one of the notes of a later date in this book that the word should be used in such a sense. But even in the passage of Malachi, there is no trace that the word “angel” had then become an ordinary name for the priest, such as would be intelligible if used in that sense without explanation from the context.

Nor, again, is there reason for supposing that the priest had power to dispense with vows alleged to have been rashly undertaken. The power given him (Leviticus 27) is of a different nature. I therefore adhere to the obvious sense, which suggests that the real vow is observed and recorded by a heavenly angel. It falls in with this view that the phrase is “before the angel.” If an excuse pleaded to a priest was intended, we should have, “Do not say to the priest.”

Error. —The word is that which describes sins of ignorance (Numbers 15). The tacit assumption in this verse, that God interposes to punish when His name is taken in vain, clearly expresses the writer’s real conviction, and shows that such a verse as Ecclesiastes 9:2 is only the statement of a speculative difficulty.

This verse presents some difficulties of translation arising from textual corruption, but these do not affect the general sense; in which the many words that belong to the dreams and vanities of paganism are contrasted with the fear of the only God.