are matters of ob!!ervation which must.strike any thinker. Is the doctrine concerning the. dissolution.of ID,8,n's compound being at death derived from Lucretius P Ecclesiastes says ,that men and beasts have one destiny; they have a living principle, and, when this is withdrawn, their bodies C1'11mble into dust. He learned this great fact from his own sacred books; if Greek philosophers taught it, they evolved the idea from their own minds and obser- vation, or it was a traditionary Jrnowledge handed down from antiquity. But Koheleth sees a difference between the spirit of man and that of the lower animals, in that the former goeth, as he holds, upward (eh. iii. 21), returns to God (eh. xii. 7), the latter goeth downward to the earth. He is here not tpinking of the .absorption of man's spirit in the anima mundi; he has bee:n taught that God breathed into Adam the breath of life, and that at death that'.' breath," the living soul, goes back to its source, not losing its identity, bat coming more immediately in connection with its Creator, retaining its personality, and, as the Targum paraphrases, "returning to stand in ,judgment before him who gave it." Concerning the ignorance of what comes after death, our author is quite in accord with the reticence:ot the Old Testament, and has not learned from a Greek school to speak in this 9autious manner. But it is in regard to the enjoyment of life that Ecclesiastes is said to have chiefly borrowed from Epicurean teaching. That, ,as some have supposed, he recommends a coarse sensuality needs no refutation; but even the" modified Epicurean.ism" which some read in his pages has no :place there; the misconception arises from a false interpretation of certain phrases, especially as taken in con- nection with their context. There is one which often occurs, e.g. "It is good and comely for one to eat,and to drink, and to enjoy the good of all his labour that he taketh -q.nder the sun all the days of his life" ( eh. v. 18 ; comp. eh. ii. 24; iii. 22; viii. 15). This expression," to eat and drink," had not, to the ears of a Hebrew, simply the lower meaning which it carries now, as if it ~mplied only the enjoyment of the pleasures of the fable. Reproaching Shallum for his declension from righteous ways, Jeremiah (xxii. 15) asks, "Did not thy father eat and drink, and do judgment and justice, and then it was well with him ? " D~es the prophet signify that Josiah pleased God by his Epicurean life? Is it not evident that the phrase is a metaphor for prosperity, ease, and comfort? When Kobeleth inquires (eh. ii. 25), "Who can eat, or who can have enjoyment, more than I P " he means that no one bas had better opportunities than he for enjoying life generally. One would have thought it scarcely necessary to insist on the extended signification of this metaphor. The bountifulness of Jehovah is thus expressed: "The Lord is the Portion of mine inheritance and of my cup;" "Thou preparest a table before me" (Ps. xvi. 5; xxiii. 5); and the joy11 of heaven e.re adumbrated by terl!ls appropriate to a glorious banquet: "I appoint unto you a kingdom," said Christ (Luke xxii. 29), '' that ye may eat and drink at my. t.ab1€, in my kingdom;" "Blessed is he that shall eat b1·ead in tho kiugdom of God," cri,d one, in reference to the 1.xviii 1N1'ROtmOTION TO
life of glory beyond the grave (Luke xiv. 15; comp. Rev. xix. 9). In thia and similar phrases used by the Preacher, such as "to rojoice," "to see good," etc., the idea intended is not to encourage the selfish sensuality of the voluptuary, but a well-regulated contentment with and enjoyment of the good which God gives. Nothing more than this is in man's power, and to this he ought to confine his aim; that is, he ought to make the best of the present, knowing that he is not the at'chitect of his own happiness, but that this is the gift of God, to be thankfully accepted as a boon from heaven, whenever and in whatever fashion it may come. It is true that the good and the evil often seem to be and are treated in the same manner ( eh. ix. 1, 2) ; but this is no reason for despair and inaction; nay, as the present life is the only time for work, it behoves us to use it in the best way: "Whatsoevel' thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might." Here is no counsel of Epicurean d.rapa[{a., a passionless tranquillity which disturbs itself about nothing, but rather a call to an active performance of duties as the best guarantee of happiness. The only other passage which seems to favour licence and immorality is one towards the end (eh. xi. 9): "Rejoice, 0 young man, in thy youth; and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes." These words at first sight, and taken by themselves, do seem to encourage youth to give free scope to its passions; but they must not be separated from their solemn conclusion : " But know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment." And the advice really comes to this : youth is the time for enjoyment, while the senses are keen, and the taste is unimpaired, and you do well to make the best of this time; this is your portion and lot given by God; but in all that you do, remember the end, remember the account which you will have to give; take your pleasure with this thought always before you. That Ecclesiastes cannot be justly accused of scepticism has been already shown incidentally. This and such-like errors are imputed by readers who regard isolated expressions divorced from the context, and neglect the general tone prevalent in the treatise. The idea is supported by such passages as eh. i. 8, 12-18; iii. 9; and viii. 16, 17, in which~_Koheleth professes man's inability to understand God's doings, and the uselessness of wisdom in satisfying human aspirations. He does not affirm that man can know nothing, apprehend nothing; he is not a disciple of agnosticism- that mean excuse for declining to assent to revealed truth-he asserts that human reason cannot fathom the depth of God's designs. Reason can receive facts, and compare and arrange and argue from them; but it cannot explain everything; it has limits which it cannot pass ; perfect intellectual satisfaction is beyond mortals' attainment. Is this equivalent to denying to man the power of gaining any certitude or mastering any verity? Again, when he intimates the vanity of wisdom and knowledge, he is stating the truth that the course of events is beyond man's control, that no human wisdom can secure happines11, which is absolutely the gift ECCLESIASTES; OR, THE PREACHER. itxix