Ecclesiastes Rabbah - Passages From The Babylonian Talmud

Passages From The Babylonian Talmud

The author of the Midrash Ḳohelet of course frequently consulted the aggadah of the Jerusalem Talmud. At the same time, it may be assumed that various passages were taken directly from the Babylonian Talmud; and this assumption would prove the relatively later date of Ḳohelet Rabbah, though the end of the midrash, which is taken from Ḥag. 5a, must be considered as an addition.

A further characteristic indication of the late composition of the work is the fact that in the comments on Eccl. v. 5 and vii. 11 passages from Pirḳe Abot are quoted, with a reference to this treatise (comp. Wayiḳra R. xvi.), and in the comment on v. 8 several smaller treatises are mentioned. In the same comment on v. 8, at the beginning of a proem in Wayiḳra Rabbah xxii., a modification of the passage in the latter is made which gives ample proof that the Midrash Ḳohelet was written at a later time than the other midrashic works mentioned. In Wayiḳra Rabbah the passage reads: "Even what is superfluous on the earth is a part of the whole; and also the things which thou regardest as superfluous to the revealed Torah, as the prescriptions relating to fringes, phylacteries, and mezuzah, they also belong to the idea of the revealed Torah." In the Midrash Ḳohelet it reads: "The things which thou regardest as superfluous to the Torah, as the tosafot of Rebbi's school and those of R. Nathan and the treatise on proselytes and slaves, they also were revealed to Moses on Mt. Sinai, and treatises like 'Hilkot Ẓiẓit Tefillin u-Mezuzot' belong to the sum total of the Torah."

As Zunz assumes (G. V. p. 266), the Midrash Ḳohelet belongs to the time of the middle midrashim. On the other hand, the author of Midrash Ḳohelet must not be charged with "proceeding entirely in the spirit of later compilers" merely because, in connection with certain Bible texts, he repeats accepted or approved passages which were written upon the same or similar texts. Such repetitions are frequently found in the earlier midrashim. In Midrash Ḳohelet the same comments are found on Eccl. i. 2 as on vi. 12; on i. 3 as on xi. 9; on i. 13 as on iii. 10; on iii. 16 as on x. 4; on vi. 1 as on ix. 13; and on vii. 11 as on ix. 10; etc. Verses ii. 24, iii. 13, v. 17, viii. 15 receive the same explanation; and it is interesting to note that the Epicurean and hedonistic view expressed in them—that for all of man's troubles his only compensation is the gratification of the senses: eating, drinking, and taking pleasure—is interpreted allegorically and given a religious significance:

Wherever eating and drinking are spoken of in this way, the pleasure is meant which the study of the Bible and the performance of good works afford; as it is written (ch. viii. 15): 'it accompanies him בעמלו, which must be interpreted as בעולמו ': not eating and drinking accompany man to the grave, but the Torah and the good works which he performs.

The following connected passage on Eccl. ii. 4-8 may serve to indicate the manner in which in this midrash the allegorical interpretation is connected with the simple literal interpretation; it also shows how the author, in order to explain a passage, has fused the material collected from different sources, and illustrates his use of stories and of foreign words (the Bible text of Ecclesiastes is shown in bold):