The Existentialism of Ecclesiastes

The Old Testament book Ecclesiastes is one of the earliest forms of the Western philosophy of existentialism. The writer of Ecclesiastes has the same critical view of the world of existance similar to that seen within existentialist philosophy of the Twentieth Century. He describes the meaninglessness of human existence and the anxiety that comes from this realization. Like all existentialist after him, he brings to light the possibility that life has no true meaning.

The meaninglessness of life is the central theme in existential philosophy. This concept is often very hard for most people to accept. This is one reason why many scholars have questioned whether Ecclesiastes should have been placed within the Old Testament.

Even the early rabbinic school of Shammai questioned whether it should be regarded as part of the Holy Scriptures, though the more liberal Hillel did accept it. (1.)

However; Frank S. Frick; felt that the inclusion of Ecclesiastes was adopted because; “ The book has an epilogue added in 12:9-14, which softens the hopeless skepticism of the bulk of the book and commends keeping God’s commandments.” (2.). It is this very sharp skepticism that is the primary tone of existentialist philosophy.

The issue of life being pointless becomes the main theme in Ecclesiastes, as the writer faces the inevitability of death and non-being.

Eccl. 5:15

Naked a man comes from his mother’s womb, and as he comes, so he departs. He takes nothing from his labor that he can carry in his hand.

Eccl. 5:16

This to is a grievous evil: As a man comes, so he departs, and what does he gain, since he toils for the wind?

His image of the unavoidable conclusion of life and it’s worth as a struggle against the wind provides the heavy burden of futility. Life is a struggle that cannot possibly be won.

Like all existentialism he describes the subjectivity of the human as characterized by the dread he feels towards the anxiety of nothingness.

Soren Kierkegaard saw the anxiety in the face of the meaninglessness of existence as a universal aspect of the human condition. (3).

We find this same sense of distress in Ecclesiastes by analyzing the way in which he describes his struggles with a life shaped by the harsh realities of suffering.

Eccl. 1:13

I devoted myself to study and to explore by wisdom all that is done under Heaven. What a heavy burden God has laid on men!

He finds himself forced to consider the cruel reality of his condition on earth. This search is not done out of curiosity but out of the anxiety he realizes as a result of the meaninglessness of his existance.

Existentialist similarly hold the position that no matter what external activities we engage in, we will not be able to avoid or suppress our general feelings of death and non-being.

No human instrumentalities or institutions can work to dispel the fear of nothingness or deny the transitoriness of life and the inevitability of death (4).

Even here we see that sense of grief over his knowledge of the pointlessness of life.

Eccl. 1:18.

For with much wisdom comes much sorrow, the more knowledge, the more grief.

Therefore, the more we seek to find meaning in our life the more indifferent and hostile the universe becomes.

Once we consider the meaning of our life we will be forced to realize that our deeds are a practice in egotism. When we are faced with the hardships of life; we are forced to find meaning in these hardships. Often, reason escapes us, and leaves us troubled and perplexed.

I am an example of this striving for the meaning of life. When at the age of twenty-four I was faced with surmounting hardships. I could not understand what I had done to be punished so. It troubled me, so great that I lost my faith in God as well as in myself. Faced with the reality, that nothing I had done had given me pleasure. I came to the conclusion that nothing really mattered. For me it became a trap that I could not escape.

This writer was clearly in a similar trap.

Eccl. 1:3.

What does man gain from all his labor at which he toils under the sun?

He clearly, questions the meaning of his own life.

Eccl. 1:11

There is no remembrance of men of old, and (those who follow will not remember even by those who are yet to come).

Here, he finds himself, faced with the emotional impact of meaninglessness. Thus, we are condemned to a life separated from meaning and value. We are isolated in a world where the future is unknown and the past is quickly forgotten.

What is left for humans to strive for? The author’s answers are the pursuit of simple pleasures. . Life than is to be enjoyed. You are required to find and give life it’s meaning.

The existentialist Friedrich Nietzsche, (1844-1900), comes to a similar conclusion. He also believed that this knowledge would liberate man from the constraints placed on him by repressive religions.

Such a man would judge life meaningful and validate his judgment by living an independent and creative life (5).

Once librated humans would be free to do and think the way they want.

Now, that the author of Ecclesiastes has investigated the meaning of his life, he than questions the importance of man. He concludes that humans are nothing more than animals.

Eccl. 3:18.

I also thought, “As for men, God tests them so that they may see that they are like animals.”

He argues that the fate of beasts is the same as the fate of man. That man is but an animal. Science today has identified humans, and all things as having the same basic building blocks. In this light the author also concludes that all things are made of the same substance.

Eccl 3:20.

All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and turns to dust again.

He even implies that there is no real way to tell the fate of the human soul after death.

Eccl. 3:21.

Who knows if the spirit of man rises upward, and if the spirit of the animal; that which goes down into the earth?

When I was faced with this question I to conclude that there was no real way to answer this question. I also questioned the meaning of God. Unlike me, this author avoids the takes of questioning the existence of God.

He also avoids the temptation, to eliminate the existence of God. Jean-Paul Sartre on the other hand, denies the existence of God.

I live with the terrible knowledge that all meaning…as wholly mine, I stand responsible, answerable for my decisions. I am depraved of counsel in making these selections for God is dead (6).

Sadly, Sartre loses the liberation in God’s ability to provide meaning to our lives.

During my research I realized that many individuals do not question their own beliefs. If we as individuals do not question our own beliefs, we are forced to follow the beliefs of others blindly. Blindly following others beliefs, often leads to oppressive traditionalism.

In my research, I had to first define God and my beliefs about God. Thus, I concluded that God was infinite. I also concluded that the universe was infinite. This then leads me to the conclusion that the universe was just a modern term for God.

By establishing that God is infinite, I than had to search for my meaning of the term infinite to figure out what this meant to me. I quickly realized that nothing could stand outside of the infinite. Everything was contained inside of the infinite. Therefore, everything including myself was inside of God, and could not escape God.

Finally, I came to the realization that hell could not exist. I realized that this is at first hard to understand. Yet if I define God as infinite than I had to realize that infinite meant everything including Hell. Thus, Hell and Satan would have to be apart of God.

I also realized that I defined God as infinite love. Hell is hate and could not reside in the concept of infinite love. Therefore, I came to the conclusion that Hell and Satan could not exist.

Far from condemning, this concept becomes liberating. I think the author of Ecclesiastes came to the same conclusion.

Eccl. 9:1.

So I reflected on all this and concluded that the righteous and the wise and what they do are in God’s hands, but no man knows whether love or hate awaits him.

If you cannot be separated from God than you must learn to see God in everything around you. How liberating to know that you are apart of the whole infinite being of God.

Kiekegaard suggests that we surrender all our beliefs, and abandon all our commitments and, stripped naked and in total crisis, stand at the edge of the abyss. By divesting ourselves of our protective armor and sinking to the very depths of despair, we prepare ourselves to make the leap of faith and choose God. It is only in this choice that solitary individuals can be reclaimed and meaning restored to existance. (7)

This understanding, also applies to ethics. The author of Ecclesiastes implies that a life without meaning requires us to accept our own responsibility for the world and the society we create.

Eccl. 5:9.

All takes the increase from the land: the king himself profits from the field.

This supports the concept of God granting us free will. We are the solution to, and the creators of our own problems.

We as a society are responsible for the society that we create. If we do not change society for the better than we are living in a self created illusion that will only recreate itself for the worse of all mankind.

As Sartre writes, Man is condemned to be free, because he did not create himself, yet, in other respects is free, because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does (8)

So at the dawn, of a new day we must choose carefully how and to what end we as a society are striving to become. Are we going to continue allowing suffering and violence rule our lives?

The author describes this concept with a plea to the rich to help the poor.

Eccl. 5:13.

There is a sore evil, which I have seen under the sun, namely the riches kept for the owners thereof to their hurt.

Eccl. 5:15

Then he states: “As he comes forth of his mother’s womb naked shall he return to go as he came, and shall take nothing of his labor, which he may carry away in his hand.”

Therefore, he asks that we should help others because we cannot take our wealth with us in death. If one person is poor then we as a society are poor.

He continues his ethical debate into the acts of excess.

Eccl. 7:16a.

Do not be over righteous, neither be over wise.

This type of excess leads to the judgment and often hatred of others. Excess further leads to selfishness.

Thus, he argues that truth and wisdom cannot be grasped.

Eccl. 7:23 & 24

All this I proved by wisdom: I said, I would be wise; but it was far from me. That which is far off, and exceedingly deep, who can find it out?

An inability to know the truth should lead you not to judge others.

Many of our current social problems come from judging others. When we place our culture and values above others we are judging our way of life as the only way to live. This has lead to, and continues to lead people to violence over differences in opinion. The past and our current times are filled with violence over religious beliefs, what is so challenging about the beliefs of others.

In summary, the author of Ecclesiastes implies the same concepts that would become known as Existentialism. He gives us, like Existentialist, complete power over our actions. This power however, comes to us with the troubling price of complete responsibility. It is us who must determine the meaning of our lives.