Kaznodziei 2:8 Komentarz

Solomon having pronounced all vanity, and particularly knowledge and learning, which he was so far from giving himself joy of that he found the increase of it did but increase his sorrow, in this chapter he goes on to show what reason he has to be tired of this world, and with what little reason most men are fond of it. I. He shows that there is no true happiness and satisfaction to be had in mirth and pleasure, and the delights of sense (Ecc 2:1-11). II. He reconsiders the pretensions of wisdom, and allows it to be excellent and useful, and yet sees it clogged with such diminutions of its worth that it proves insufficient to make a man happy (Ecc 2:12-16). III. He enquires how far the business and wealth of this world will go towards making men happy, and concludes, from his own experience, that, to those who set their hearts upon it, "it is vanity and vexation of spirit," (Ecc 2:17-23), and that, if there be any good in it, it is only to those that sit loose to it (Ecc 2:24-26).

INTRODUCTION TO ECCLESIASTES 2 Solomon, having made trial of natural wisdom and knowledge in its utmost extent, and found it to be vanity, proceeds to the experiment of pleasure, and tries whether any happiness was in that, Ecc 2:1. As for that which at first sight was vain, frothy, and frolicsome, he dispatches at once, and condemns it as mad and unprofitable, Ecc 2:2; but as for those pleasures which were more manly, rational, and lawful, he dwells upon them, and gives a particular enumeration of them, as what he had made full trial of; as good eating and drinking, in a moderate way, without abuse; fine and spacious buildings; delightful vineyards, gardens, and orchards; parks, forests, and enclosures; fish pools, and fountains of water; a large retinue, and equipage of servants; great possessions, immense riches and treasure; a collection of the greatest rarities, and curiosities in nature; all kinds of music, vocal and instrumental, Ecc 2:3; in all which he exceeded any that went before him; nor did he deny himself of any pleasure, in a lawful way, that could possibly be enjoyed, Ecc 2:9. And yet on a survey of the whole, and after a thorough experience of what could be found herein, he pronounces all vanity and vexation of spirit, Ecc 2:11; and returns again to his former subject, wisdom; and looks that over again, to see if he could find real happiness in it, being sadly disappointed in that of pleasure, Ecc 2:12. He indeed commends wisdom, and prefers it to folly, and a wise man to a fool; Ecc 2:13; and yet observes some things which lessen its value; and shows there is no happiness in it, the same events befalling a wise man and a fool; both alike forgotten, and die in like manner, Ecc 2:15. And then he takes into consideration business of life, and a laborious industry to obtain wealth; and this he condemns as grievous, hateful, and vexatious, because, after all a man's acquisitions, he knows not to whom he shall leave them, whether to a wise man or a fool, Ecc 2:17. And because a man himself has no rest all his days, nothing but sorrow and grief, Ecc 2:22; wherefore he concludes it is best for a man to enjoy the good things of this life himself; which he confirms by his own experience, and by an, antithesis between a good man and a wicked one, Ecc 2:24.

I gathered me also silver and gold,.... In great quantities: the weight of gold which came to him in one year was six hundred threescore and six talents; see Kg1 9:14; and the peculiar treasure of kings and of the provinces; whatsoever was valuable and precious, such as is laid up in the cabinets of kings, as jewels and precious stones; and everything rare and curious, to be found in all provinces of the earth, or which were brought from thence as presents to him; the Targum is, "and the treasures of kings and provinces, given to me for tribute:'' wherefore, if any pleasure arises from these things, as do to the virtuosi, Solomon enjoyed it. Moreover, among the treasures of kings were precious garments of various sorts, as were in the treasury of Ahasuerus (l); and when Alexander took Shushan, he found in the king's treasures, of Hermionic purple, to the value of five thousand talents, which had been laid up there almost two hundred years (m); and to such treasure Christ alludes, Mat 6:19; I got me men singers and women singers; the harmony and music of whose voices greatly delight; see Sa2 19:35; the Targum interprets it both of instruments of music for the Levites to use in the temple, and of singing men and women at a feast: and such persons were employed among other nations (n), on such occasions, to entertain their guests; and are called the ornaments of feasts (o); as were also "choraules", or pipers (p); and the delights of the sons of men; as musical instruments, and that of all sorts; such as David his father invented; and to which he might add more, and indeed got all that were to be obtained; see Amo 6:5. The two last words, rendered "musical instruments, of all sorts", are differently interpreted; the Targum interprets them of hot waters and baths, having pipes to let out hot water and cold; Aben Ezra, of women taken captive; Jarchi, of chariots and covered wagons; the Septuagint, Syriac, and Arabic versions, of cup bearers, men, and women, that pour out wine and serve it; and the Vulgate Latin version, of cups and pots, to pour out wine. It seems best to understand it of musical instruments, or of musical compositions (q); sung either with a single voice, or in concert; which, according to Bochart (r), were called "sidoth", from Sido, a Phoenician woman of great note, the inventor of them or rather from giving unequal sounds, which, by their grateful mixture and temperament, broke and destroyed (s) one another. (l) Targum Sheni in Esther vi. 10. (m) Plutarch. in Alexandro, p. 686. Vid. Homer. Iliad. 24. v. 224-234. (n) Vid. A. Geli. Noct. Attic. l. 19. c. 9. Homer. Odyss. 8. v. 62, 73, 74. & 9. v. 5-7. (o) Homer. Odyss. 21. v. 430. (p) Vid. Gutberleth. Conjectanea, &c. p. 162, &c. (q) Vid. Gusset. Comment. Heb. p. 832. (r) Hierozoic. par. 2. l. 6. c. 13. col. 847. (s) Buxtorf. in voce See Weemse's Christian Synagog. p. 144.

If therefore something brings no benefit to those who pursue it, whether in terms of beauty or of physical wellbeing or of the relief of pains, for what reason is it pursued? And what is the affection of those who have set their heart on the stuff, when they come to be aware of such a possession? Do they congratulate themselves because they have gained something? If someone were to ask them whether they would welcome the chance to have their nature changed into it, and themselves to become what is honored among them with such affection, would they choose the change? [Would they choose to be] transformed from humanity into gold and be proved no longer rational, intelligent or able to use the sense organs for living, but yellow and heavy and speechless, lifeless and senseless, as gold is? I do not think that even those who set their desire passionately on the stuff would choose this. If, therefore, for rightthinking people it would be a kind of curse to acquire the properties of this inanimate stuff, what is the mindless frenzy over the acquisition of things whose goal is futility, so that for this reason those who are driven mad with the desire for riches even commit murders and robbery? And not only these things, but also the pernicious idea of interest which one might call another kind of robbery or bloodshed without being far from the truth. What is the difference between getting someone else’s property by seizing it through covert housebreaking or taking possession of the goods of a passerby by murdering him and acquiring what is not one’s own by exacting interest?… If someone takes someone else’s money by force or steals it secretly, he is called a violent criminal or a burglar or something like that. But the one who advertises his felony in financial agreements, and who provides evidence of his own cruelty, and who enforces his crime by contracts, is called a philanthropist and a benefactor and a savior and all the worthiest of names. And the profit from thieving is called loot, but the person who strips his debtor naked by this kind of compulsion gives his harshness the euphemism philanthropy. This is what they call the damage done to those in distress. “I gathered for me both silver and gold.” Yes, but the reason why the one who trains humankind wisely includes this also in the lists of things confessed is that human beings may learn, from one who has formed the judgment from experience, that this is one of the things condemned as wrong, and may guard before the experience against the onslaught of evil.

What hope is there, that someone who lives amid so much gold will thereby become wise, sagacious, reflective, learned, a friend of God, prudent, pure, passionfree, detached and aloof from all that draws him toward evil? Or, alternatively, physically strong, pleasant to look at, extending life for many centuries, free from aging, disease and pain, and all the things sought for in the life of the flesh? But nobody is so absurd or so unobservant of our common humanity as to think that these things would come to human beings, if only money were poured out before everyone in vast quantities on demand. Even now one may see many of those already better endowed with much wealth living in a pitiful state of health, so that if their servants were not at hand they would not be able to go on living. If, therefore, the abundance of gold proposed in our argument offers no benefit in body or in soul, it is far more likely that when it is available on a small scale it will prove useless to those who possess it. What benefit would there be to its owner in the substance itself, which is inert to taste and smell and hearing and which feels to the touch of the same value as all its rivals? Let nobody put as an objection the food or clothing obtained by purchase with gold. For someone who buys bread or clothes with gold gets something useful in exchange for something useless and lives because he has made bread his food, not gold. But if a person gathers this stuff for himself through such transactions as these, what joy does he have of his money? What practical advice does he get from it? What training in public affairs? What prediction of the future? What comfort for the pains of the body? He gets it, he counts it, he stows it away, he stamps it with his seal, he refuses it when asked, he even swears by it when disbelieved. That is the blessedness, that is the object of endeavor, that is the benefit, that is the extent of the happiness.

What is more harmful than gold mixed with earth in those locations where the Creator had originally placed it? What is more advantageous for you than the earth’s bounty which the Creator has made? Do not fruit trees contribute to your nourishment? Then why do you violate the bounds of authority? Show what the Creator has bestowed upon you such as mining, digging, burning and gathering what you have not scattered. This is not an accusation against gathering metal from the earth to manufacture money but since the mind cannot be free of avarice, Ecclesiastes adds “The special treasures of kings and princes.” Kings gather wealth from provinces, a clear indication that they impose burdens, collect taxes and take money from their subjects. And so Ecclesiastes says that he gathers gold and silver. But whether or not this is true, I know that a great benefit lies in store for the person who collects such material possessions. Let us exchange neither a mina, drachma or talent with avaricious persons; instead, let us hasten to turn everything into gold. As soon as possible let us exchange the earth, sand, mountains plains and vales for this material. What contribution do these have for happiness? If one sees in the universe what he now beholds on a small scale, how can such wealth benefit the soul or body? How can gold make a person wise, ingenious, contemplative, skilled, dear to God, pure, lacking passion and free from evil? Or if this is not the case, what good is there in being strong in body or in seeing one’s life prolonged for many years and free from illness and harm? However, no one is so vain nor inattentive to human nature to realize that these benefits are available for men even though a great amount of money is available for everyone. We now observe many wealthy persons living pitiful lives; if it were not for people capable of healing them, they would not deem life worth living. If neither body nor soul benefits from our opinion of gold’s abundance, then how much more futile is it to prove gold’s value to persons who possess it! For what material advantage is our lack of taste, smell, hearing or the sense of touch? As for me, let no one offer food or clothing in exchange for gold. The person who gives bread or clothing for gold exchanges a benefit for something useless in order to live, whereas anyone who takes nourishing food instead of gold lives. What profit, advice, lesson, warning or consolation for bodily pains can we derive from such material aggrandizement? A greedy person counts money, stores it up, signs documents, seals them, denies requests and swears falsely to another unfaithful person. Such is his happiness, the goal of his efforts and pleasure, as long as prosperity fuels his false oaths.

Is there any beautiful object worth pursuing which brings neither health to the body nor relief to pain? And what about deceived persons who cling to gold with their whole heart even though such possessions trouble their consciences? What do they promise themselves when they have something of so great a value? If they could change gold’s substance, would they also desire to change their humanity into gold, a substance which lacks reason, intelligence and sensation as well as being pale in color, heavy, speechless and without soul and feeling? I do not think they would choose these things nor crave after gold. If people of sound mind curse the properties of inanimate nature, what insanity makes them commit murder and steal to possess such a useless object? Not only do they carry this out, but they fail to see how it differs from the fruit [tokos] of evil thoughts, robbery or murder. How does a burglar differ from other robbers when he establishes himself as lord by committing murder or when he possesses what does not belong to him through usury [tokos]?… Anyone who forcefully takes or steals provisions is a violent and rapacious person, but the person who reveals in public the injustice he committed in contracts and so bears bitter witness to the distress it caused and who acknowledges his transgression is loving, kind, a guardian and the like. Gain which results from stealing is called theft, a euphemism for the bitter deprivation of a debtor. Such miserable persons are indeed despicable: “I collected for myself both silver and gold,” but a wise person learns from what Ecclesiastes has listed and enumerated. In this way we may learn from his experience of the need to guard against evil before its assault and not to be associated with thieves and harmful beasts by taking heed of such dangers before they occur.

"I amassed even silver and gold for myself, and the treasure of kings and the provinces; I provided myself with various singers and musical instruments, and with every human luxury- chests and chests of them." Divine scripture always places silver and gold above speech and meaning. The dove in the sixty-seventh Psalm represents this too, which is interpreted as a spirit, and is more noticeable because of its silver wings, so that it hides the underlying significance of the pallor of gold. But he gathers the treasures of kings and of the provinces or kingdoms into the Church of believers. He refers to those kings about whom the psalmist writes "the kings of the earth were there and the chiefs gathered together" [Ps. 2, 2.]. And he refers to those kingdoms to which the Saviour orders us to raise our eyes [Cfr John 4.], since now they burn with fear. The treasures of kings can be called both the doctrines of philosophers and also secular knowledge [Cfr I Cor. 1.], which Ecclesiastes understands well: he takes hold of the wise men in their wisdom, and squanders the wisdom of the wise, and reproves the discretion of the prudent. The choirboys and girls are those who sing with vitality and with intelligence. A male singer sings like a man who is both strong and spiritual about heavenly matters. But a girl flits about the matter, which the Greeks call "hulen". Nor is she able to raise her voice loudly into the air. Therefore wherever a woman is mentioned in the Scriptures and the weaker sex, we are to translate it according to an understanding of the context. Pharaoh does not want the male children to be allowed to live for example, but only the females in this matter. [Cfr Ex. 1, 16.] And another point is that none of the saints is said to have had a daughter [Cfr Num. 26,32 ; 27, 3.], and it is only Salphaat, who died for his sins, that had all girls. Jacob is the father of one daughter amongst the twelve patriarchs, but is endangered by her. [Cfr Gen. 30, 21 ; 34.] The pleasures also of mankind over wisdom must be understood, which have many fruits and desires like paradise. We are admonished against them, saying, "take delight in the Lord and he will give you the request of your heart" [Ps. 36, 4.], and in another place, "you will drink them as the torrent of your desire". [Ps. 35, 9.] (I had wanted to shun reference to the female sex, and even now use the distinction of the male, because the Latin language does not take readily to this.) Aquila explains about the wine-pourers, male and female, in a manner very different to the fashion written here. For Solomon is not naming the sexes of man, clearly either male or female, but types of dish, and he calls them "kulikion" and "kulikia", which is written in Hebrew as "sadda "and "saddoth". Then Symmachus, who was not able to express the idea word for word, translates this in a similar way: "types of table and equipment". Therefore Solomon is believed to have had either pitchers, wine goblets, or bowls arranged in chests, and which were ornate with gold and with jewels. And he drank from a "kulikio" in one, (that is, a bowl) and from "kilikiois" in other places, which are clearly smaller dishes; and the crowd of drinkers received wine at the hands of his servants. Because we explain Ecclesiastes as being Christ, therefore wisdom, having mingled her wine (as it says in Proverbs) calls out to those who wander to come to her. [Cfr Prov. 9, 2.3.] Now we must see the body of the Lord as a very great bowl, in which is not pure divinity as there is in heaven, but there God is blended with humanity on account of us, and wisdom is then poured out by the apostles to smaller "kulikia", small goblets and bowls held by believers throughout the world.

In many places of the divine teaching the Spirit and spiritual things are expressed by the image of gold, the spoken word and its virtue by the image of silver. “The tongue of the righteous is choice silver,” that is, his spoken word and everything which he teaches by this spoken word. In the same way the following saying is to be understood: "The promises of the Lord are promises that are pure, silver refined in a furnace on the ground.” But the spirit is gold.

As the choir directors assign a place and a pitch to each male and female member of the choir so that a harmony of sound emerges, so those who sing to God and do so in harmony have the Savior himself as choir director. Or the [choir director could also be the] wise man, who here is Solomon, if we understand him in his role as wise man.

(Ecc. 2:1-26) I said . . . heart-- (Luk 12:19). thee--my heart, I will test whether thou canst find that solid good in pleasure which was not in "worldly wisdom." But this also proves to be "vanity" (Isa 50:11).

(Kg1 10:27; Ch2 1:15; Ch2 9:20). peculiar treasure of kings and . . . provinces--contributed by them, as tributary to him (Kg1 4:21, Kg1 4:24); a poor substitute for the wisdom whose "gain is better than fine gold" (Pro 3:14-15). singers--so David (Sa2 19:35). musical instruments . . . of all sorts--introduced at banquets (Isa 5:12; Amo 6:5-6); rather, "a princess and princesses," from an Arabic root. One regular wife, or queen (Est 1:9); Pharaoh's daughter (Kg1 3:1); other secondary wives, "princesses," distinct from the "concubines" (Kg1 11:3; Psa 45:10; Sol 6:8) [WEISS, GESENIUS]. Had these been omitted, the enumeration would be incomplete.

"I heaped up for myself also silver and gold, and the peculiar property of kings and of countries; I gat me men singers and women singers, and the delights of the children of men: mistress and mistresses." The verb כּנשׁ כּנס, συνάγειν, is common to all Semitic dialects (also the to Assyr.), and especially peculiar to the more recent Heb., which forms from it the name of the religious community συναγωγή, כּנסת; it is used here of that which is brought together merely for the purpose of possession. Segūllah (from sagal, Targ., to make oneself possess), properly possession, and that something which specially and peculiarly belongs to one as his property; the word is here meant collect., as at Ch1 29:3 : that which only kings and individual countries possess. The interchange of melachim, which is without the article, with the determ. hammedinoth, is arbitrary: something special, such as that which a king possesses, the specialities which countries possess, - one country this, and another that. The hammedinoth are certainly not exclusively the regions embraced within the dominion of Solomon (Zckl.), as, according to Est 1:1, the Persian kingdom was divided into 127 medinoth. Solomon had a fleet which went to Ophir, was in a friendly relation with the royal house of Tyre, the metropolis of many colonies, and ruled over a widely-extended kingdom, bound by commerce with Central Asia and Africa. - His desires had thus ample opportunity to stretch beyond the limits of his own kingdom, and facilities enough for procuring the peculiar natural and artistic productions which other lands could boast of. Medinah is, first of all, a country, not as a territory, but as under one government (cf. Ecc 5:7); in the later philosophical language it is the Heb. word for the Greek πολιτεία; in the passage before us, medinoth is, however, not different from ארצות. From the singing men and singing women who come into view here, not as appertaining to the temple service (vid., the Targ.), with which no singing women were connected, but as connected with the festivities of the court (Sa2 19:36; cf. Isa 5:12), advance is made to shiddah veshiddoth; and since these are designated by the preceding ותענגות (not ותענגּות) bene hāādam, especially as objects and means of earthly pleasure, and since, according to Heb 2:7, sexual love is the fairest and the most pleasant, in a word, the most attractive of all earthly delights (Solomon's luxus, also here contradicting the law of the king, Deu 17:17, came to a height, according to Kg1 11:3, after the example of Oriental rulers, in a harem of not fewer than one thousand women, princesses and concubines), of necessity, the expression shiddah veshiddoth must denote a multitude of women whom the king possessed for his own pleasure. Cup-bearers, male and female (Syr., lxx), cannot at all be understood, for although it may be said that the enumeration thus connects itself with the before-named בּיּין, yet this class of female attendants are not numbered among the highest human pleasures; besides, with such an explanation one must read שׁרה ושׁדות, and, in addition, שׁדא (to throw, to pour to, or pour out), to which this Heb. שׁדה may correspond, is nowhere used of the pouring out of wine. Rather might שׁדה, like שדא, hydria, be the name of a vessel from which one pours out anything, according to which Aq. translates by κυλίκιον καὶ κυλίκια, Symmachus, after Jerome, by mensurarum (read mensarum) (Note: Thus, according to Vallarsi, a Cod. Vat. and Cod. Palat. of the first hand.) species et appositioines, and Jerome, scyphos et urceos in ministerio ad vina fundenda; but this word for kelē mashkēh, Kg1 10:21 (= Ch2 9:20), is not found. Also the Targ., which translates by dimasaya uvē venavan, public baths (δημόσια), and balneae, vindicates this translation by referring the word to the verb שׁדא, "with pipes which pour out (דּשׁרין) tepid water, and pipes which pour out hot water." But this explanation is imaginary; שׁדּה occurs in the Mishna, Mikwaoth (of plunge-baths) Ecc 6:5, but there it denotes a chest which, when it swims in the water, makes the plunge-bath unsuitable. Such an untenable conceit also is the translation suggested by Kimchi, כלי זמר, according to which the Event. σύστεεμα καὶ συστήματα (in a musical sense: concentus), and Luther: "all kinds of musical instruments;" the word has not this meaning; Orelli, Sanchuniathon, p. 33, combines therewith Σιδών, according to the Phoenician myth, the inventress of the artistic song. The explanation by Kimchi is headed, "Splendour of every kind;" Ewald, Elster, and Zckler find therein a general expression, following taanugoth: great heap and heaps = in great abundance [die Hlle und Flle]. But the synon. of כבוד, "splendour," is not שׁד, but עז; and that שׁדד, like עצם, is referred to a great number, is without proof. Thus shiddah veshiddoth will denote something definite; besides, "a large number" finds its expression in the climactic union of words. In the Jerus. Talm. Taanith Ecc 4:5, shiddah must, according to the gloss, be the name of a chariot, although the subject there is not that of motion forward, or moving quickly; it is there announced that Schn, not far from Sepphoris, a place famed also for its pottery, formerly possessed 80 such shiddoth wholly of metal. The very same word is explained by Rashi, Baba kamma ix. 3, Shabbath 120a, Erubin 30b, Gittin 8b, 68a, Chagiga 25a, and elsewhere, of a carriage of wood, and especially of a chariot for women and distinguished persons. The combination of the synonyms, shiddah uthivah umigdal, does not in itself mean more than a chest; and Rashi himself explains, Kethuboth 65a, quolphi dashidah of the lock of a chest (argaz); and the author of Aruch knows no other meaning than that of a repository such as a chest. But in passages such as Gittin 8b, the shiddah is mentioned as a means of transport; it is to all appearance a chest going on wheels, moved forward by means of wheels, but on that very account not a state-chariot. Rashi's tradition cannot be verified. Bttcher, in the Neue Aehrenlese, adduces for comparison the Syr. Shydlo, which, according to Castelli, signifies navis magna, corbita, arca; but from a merchant ship and a portable chest, it is a great way to a lady's palanquin. He translates: palanquin and palinquins = one consignment to the harem after another. Gesen., according to Rdiger, Thes. 1365b, thinks that women are to be understood; for he compares the Arab. z'ynat, which signifies a women's carriage, and then the woman herself (cf. our Frauenzimmer, women's apartment, women, like Odaliske, from the Turk. oda, apartment). But this all stands or falls with that gloss of Rashi's: 'agalah lemerkavoth nashim usarim. Meanwhile, of all the explanations as yet advanced, this last of splendid coaches, palanquins is the best; for it may certainly be supposed that the words shiddah veshiddoth are meant of women. Aben Ezra explains on this supposition, shiddoth = shevuyoth, females captured in war; but unwarrantably, because as yet Solomon had not been engaged in war; others (vid., Pinsker's Zur Gesch. des Karaismus, p. 296), recently Bullock, connect it with shadim, in the sense of (Arab.) nahidah (a maiden with swelling breast); Knobel explains after shadad, to barricade, to shut up, occlusa, the female held in custody (cf. bethulah, the separated one, virgin, from bathal, cogn. badal); Hitzig, "cushions," "bolsters," from shanad, which, like (Arab.) firash, λέχος, is then transferred to the juncta toro. Nothing of all that is satisfactory. The Babyl. Gemara, Gittin 68a, glosses ותען וגו by "reservoirs and baths," and then further says that in the west (Palestine) they say שׁדּתא, chests (according to Rashi: chariots); but that here in this country (i.e., in Babylon) they translate shiddah veshiddoth by shēdah veshēdathin, which is then explained, "demons and demonesses," which Solomon had made subservient to him. (Note: A demon, and generally a superhuman being, is called, as in Heb. שׁד, so in the Babyl.-Assyr. sîdu, vid., Norris' Assyrian Dictionary, II p. 668; cf. Schrader, in the Jena. Lit. Zeit. 1874, p. 218f., according to which sîdu, with alap, is the usual name of Adar formed like an ox.) This haggadic-mytholog. interpretation is, linguistically at least, on the right track. A demon is not so named from fluttering or moving to and fro (Levy, Schnhak), for there is no evidence in the Semitic langauge of the existence of a verb שוד, to flee; also not from a verb sadad, which must correspond to the Heb. השׁתחוה, in the sense of to adore (Oppert's Inscription du palais de Khorsabad, 1863, p. 96); for this meaning is more than doubtful, and, besides, שׁד is an active, and not a passive idea-much rather שׁד, Assyr. sîd, Arab. sayyid, signifies the mighty, from שׁוּד, to force, Psa 91:6. (Note: Vid., Friedrich Delitzsch's Assyr. Theirnamen, p. 37.) In the Arab. (cf. the Spanish Cid) it is uniformly the name of a lord, as subduing, ruling, mastering (sabid), and the fem. sayyidat, of a lady, whence the vulgar Arab. sitti = my lady, and sîdi = my lord. Since שׁדד means the same as שׁוד, and in Heb. is more commonly used than it, so also the fem. form שׁדּה is possible, so much the more as it may have originated from שׁדה, 5 שׁיד = שׁד, by a sharpening contraction, like סגּים, from סיגים (Olsh. 83c), perhaps intentionally to make שׁדה, a demoness, and the name of a lady (donna = domina) unlike. Accordingly we translate, with Gesen. and Meyer in their Handwrt.: "lady and ladies;" for we take shiddoth as a name of the ladies of the harem, like shēglath (Assyr. saklâti) and lehhenath in the book of Daniel, on which Ahron b. Joseph the Karaite remarks: shedah hinqaroth shagal. The connection expressing an innumerable quantity, and at the same time the greatest diversity, is different from the genitival dor dorim, generation of generations, i.e., lasting through all generations, Psa 72:5, from the permutative heightening the idea: rahham rahhamathaim, one damsel, two damsels, Jdg 5:30, and from that formed by placing together the two gram. genders, comprehending every species of the generic conception: mash'ēn umash'enah, Isa 3:3 (vid., comm. l.c., and Ewald, 172b). Also the words cited by Ewald (Syr.), rogo urogo, "all possible pleasures" (Cureton's Spicil. p. 10), do not altogether accord with this passage for they heighten, like meod meod, by the repetition of the same expression. But similar is the Arab. scheme, mal wamwal, "possession and possessions," i.e., exceeding great riches, where the collective idea, in itself according by its indetermination free scope to the imagination, is multiplied by the plur. being further added. After Koheleth has enumerated all that he had provided for the purpose of gratifying his lusts, but without losing himself therein, he draws the conclusion, which on this occasion also shows a perceptible deficit.