Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Ecclesiastes 3:21
Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?
21. Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward ] The words imply a strictly sceptical rather than a negative answer. They do not actually deny, still less do they affirm, as some have thought, that the spirit of man does ascend to a higher life, while that of the brute returns to dust. This would indeed be inconsistent with the whole context, and the consensus of the LXX., the Vulgate, the Targum, and the Syriac versions, all of which give “Who knoweth whether the spirit of man goeth upward?” is practically decisive. It is not till nearly the close of the book, with all its many wanderings of thought, that the seeker rests in that measure of the hope of immortality which we find in ch. Ecc 12:7. Here we have the accents, almost the very formula, of Pyrrhonism (Diog. Laert. ix. 11, . 73), as borrowed from Euripides:
,
.
“Who knoweth if true life be found in death,
While mortals think of what is death as life?”
Once more Lucretius echoes the phase of thought through which the Debater was passing:
“Ignoratur enim quae sit natura animai,
Nata sit an contra nascentibus insinuetur,
Et simul intereat nobiscum morte dirempta,
An tenebras Orci visat vastasque lacunas.”
“We know not what the nature of the soul,
Or born, or entering into men at birth,
Or whether with our frame it perisheth,
Or treads the gloom and regions vast of death.”
De Rer. Nat. i. 113 116.
So far, however, as scepticism is a step above denial, we may note this as an advance. There is at least the conception of a spirit that ascends to a life higher than its own, as a possible solution of the great enigma presented by the disorders of the world.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 21. Who knoweth the spirit of man] I think the meaning of this important verse is well taken by the above able writer: –
The nobler part of man, ’tis true, survives
The frail corporeal frame: but who regards
The difference? Those who live like beasts, as such
Would die, and be no more, if their own fate
Depended on themselves. Who once reflects,
Amidst his revels, that the human soul,
Of origin celestial, mounts aloft,
While that of brutes to earth shall downward go?”
The word ruach, which is used in this and the nineteenth verse, has two significations, breath and spirit. It signifies spirit, or an incorporeal substance, as distinguished from flesh, or a corporeal one, 1Kg 22:21-22, and Isa 31:3. And it signifies the spirit or soul of man, Ps 31:6; Isa 57:16, and in this book, Ec 12:7, and in many other places. In this book it is used also to signify the breath, spirit, or soul of a beast. While it was said in Ec 3:19, they have all one breath, i.e., the man and the beast live the same kind of animal life; in this verse, a proper distinction is made between the ruach, or soul of man, and the ruach, or soul of the beast: the one goeth upwards, the other goeth downwards. The literal translation of these important words is this: “Who considereth the ruach) immortal spirit of the sons of Adam, which ascendeth? it is from above; ( hi lemalah😉 and the spirit or breath of the cattle which descendeth? it is downwards unto the earth,” i.e., it tends to the earth only. This place gives no countenance to the materiality of the soul; and yet it is the strongest hold to which the cold and fruitless materialist can resort.
Solomon most evidently makes an essential difference between the human soul and that of brutes. Both have souls, but of different natures: the soul of man was made for God, and to God it shall return: God is its portion, and when a holy soul leaves the body, it goes to paradise. The soul of the beast was made to derive its happiness from this lower world. Brutes shall have a resurrection, and have an endless enjoyment in a new earth. The body of man shall arise, and join his soul that is already above; and both enjoy final blessedness in the fruition of God. That Solomon did not believe they had the same kind of spirit, and the same final lot, as some materialists and infidels say, is evident from Ec 12:7: “The spirit shall return unto God who gave it.”
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
It might be objected, that the conditions of men and beasts are vastly differing, because mans spirit goeth upward to God, Ecc 12:7, but the spirit of a beast goeth downward, together with its body, and perisheth with it. To this he answers, Who knoweth this? which is not to be understood as if no man did know it, or as if the thing were utterly uncertain and unknown, for he knew it, and positively affirms it, Ecc 12:7; but that few know it; as the same manner of expression is understood, Pro 31:10, Who can find? Isa 53:1, Who hath believed? &c.; which note the scarcity or difficulty, but not the nullity or impossibility of the thing. Besides, he seems here to speak not so much of a speculative as of a practical knowledge, as such words are most commonly used. Who considers or regards this, or layeth it to heart? True it is, there is such a difference, which also is known and believed by wise and good men; but the generality of mankind never mind it; their hearts are wholly set upon this life, and upon present and sensible things, and they place all their hopes and happiness in them, and take no thought nor care for the things of the future and invisible world. And as to them with whom Solomon hath to do in this matter, the argument is strong and good, being, as logicians call it, an argument to the man; and there is no considerable difference between sensual men and beasts, because their affections are set upon the same objects, and both of them are partakers of the same sensual satisfactions, and subject to the same sensual pains and miseries, and their hopes and felicity perish together, to wit, at death, and therefore such men are no more happy than the beasts that perish. Others understand it thus, Who knoweth this? to wit, by sense or experience, or merely by his own reason, or without the help of Divine revelation. But, with the leave of so many worthy interpreters, and with submission to better judgments, the former seems to be the truer sense.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
21. Who knowethNot doubtof the destination of man’s spirit (Ec12:7); but “how few, by reason of the outwardmortality to which man is as liable as the beast and which is theground of the skeptic’s argument, comprehend the wide differencebetween man and the beast” (Isa53:1). The Hebrew expresses the difference strongly, “Thespirit of man that ascends, it belongeth to on high; but the spiritof the beast that descends, it belongeth to below, even to theearth.” Their destinations and proper element differ utterly[WEISS].
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward?…. There is indeed a difference between a man and a beast; though they have one breath, they have not one spirit or soul; man has a rational and immortal soul, which, when he dies, goes upwards to God that gave it; to be judged by him, and disposed of by him, in its proper apartment, until the day of the resurrection of the body;
and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth? when the beast dies, its spirit goes down to the earth, from whence it came, and is resolved into it, and is no more. But who is it that sees, or can see and know with the eyes of his body, the difference of these two spirits, or the ascent of the one, and the descent of the other?, Or who knows by the dint of reason, by the strength of his own understanding, without a divine revelation, that man has an immortal soul which goes upwards at death, when that of a beast goes downwards? No man, clearly and fully, as appears from the doubts and half faith of the wisest Heathens concerning it: or rather who knows and considers this difference between the spirit of a man and the spirit of a beast, and thinks within himself what a precious and immortal soul he has, and is concerned for the salvation of it? Very few; and hence it is they live and die like beasts, as they do. The Midrash interprets this of the souls of the righteous that go up to heaven, and of the souls of the wicked that go down to hell.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
“Who knoweth with regard to the spirit of the children of men, whether it mounteth upward; and with regard to the spirit of a beast, whether it goeth downward to the earth?” The interrogative meaning of and is recognised by all the old translators: lxx, Targ., Syr., Jerome, Venet., Luther. Among the moderns, Heyder ( vid., Psychol. p. 410), Hengst., Hahn, Dale, and Bullock take the h in both cases as the article: “Who knoweth the spirit of the children of men, that which goeth upward … ?” But (1) thus rendered the question does not accord with the connection, which requires a sceptical question; (2) following “who knoweth,” after Ecc 2:19; Ecc 6:12, cf. Jos 2:14, an interrogative continuance of the sentence was to be expected; and (3) in both cases stands as designation of the subject only for the purpose of marking the interrogative clause (cf. Jer 2:14), and of making it observable that ha’olah and hayoredeth are not appos. belonging as objects to and . It is questionable, indeed, whether the punctuation of these words, and , as they lie before us, proceeds from an interrogative rendering. Saadia in Emunoth c. vi., and Juda Halevi in the Kuzri ii. 80, deny this; and so also do Aben Ezra and Kimchi. And they may be right. For instead of , the pointing ought to have been (cf. , Job 13:25) when used as interrog. an ascendens; even before the compens. lengthening of the interrog. ha is nowhere certainly found
(Note: For is to be read with a Pattach in Jdg 6:31; Jdg 12:5; Neh 6:11; cf. under Gen 19:9; Gen 27:21. In Num 16:22 the of is the art., the question is not formally designated.
instead of the virtual reduplication; and thus also the parallel is not to be judged after , Lev 10:19, , Eze 18:29, – we must allow that the punctation seeks, by the removal of the two interrog. ha ( ), to place that which is here said in accord with Ecc 12:7. But there is no need for this. For does not quite fall in with that which Lucretius says (Lib. I):
“Ignoratur enim quae sit natura animai,
Nata sit an contra nascentibus insinuetur?
An simul intereat nobiscum morte diremta?”
It may certainly be said of mi yode’a , as of ignoratur , that it does not exclude every kind of knowledge, but only a sure and certain knowledge resting on sufficient grounds; interire and are also scarcely different, for neither of the two necessarily signifies annihilation, but both the discontinuance of independent individual existence. But the putting of the question by Koheleth is different, for it discloses more definitely than this by Lucretius, the possibility of a different end for the spirit of a man from that which awaits the spirit of a beast, and thus of a specific distinction between these two principles of life. In the formation even of the dilemma: Whether upwards or downwards, there lies an inquiring knowledge; and it cannot surprise us if Koheleth finally decides that the way of the spirit of a man is upwards, although it is not said that he rested this on the ground of demonstrative certainty. It is enough that, with the moral necessity of a final judgment beyond the sphere of this present life, at the same time also the continued existence of the spirit of man presented itself to him as a postulate of faith. One may conclude from the desiderium aeternitatis (Ecc 3:11) implanted in man by the Creator, that, like the instincts implanted in the beasts, it will be calculated not for deception, but for satisfaction; and from the , Pro 15:24 – i.e., the striving of a wise man rising above earthly, temporary, common things, – that death will not put an end to this striving, but will help it to reach its goal. But this is an indirect proof, which, however, is always inferior to the direct in force of argument. He presupposes that the Omnipotence and Wisdom which formed the world is also at the same time Love. Thus, though at last, it is faith which solves the dilemma, and we see from Ecc 12:7 that this faith held sway over Koheleth. In the Book of Sirach, also, the old conception of Hades shows itself as yet dominant; but after the , 17:25, we read towards the end, where he speaks of Elias: , 48:11. In the passage before us, Koheleth remains in doubt, without getting over it by the hand of faith. In a certain reference the question he here proposes is to the present day unanswered; for the soul, or, more correctly, according to the biblical mode of conception the spirit from which the soul-life of all corporeal beings proceeds, is a monas, and as such is indestructible. Do the future of the beast’s soul and of man’s soul not then stand in a solidaric mutual relation to each other? In fact, the future life presents to us mysteries the solution of which is beyond the power of human thought, and we need not wonder that Koheleth, this sober-minded, intelligent man, who was inaccessible to fantastic self-deception, arrives, by the line of thought commenced at Ecc 3:16, also again at the ultimatum.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
A DIFFERENCE IN MAN AND BEAST
Verse 21 contrasts the difference between .the man under the sun and the beast. It is not a question of uncertainty, but a statement of fact, later repeated by the preacher in Ecc 12:7. The spirit of man goeth upward and the spirit of the beast goeth downward to the earth.
Verse 22 affirms Solomon’s perception that God who distinguishes between man and beast, endowing man with eternal existence, has wisely purposed that man should work for his earthly subsistence, and should rejoice in the portion allowed him, Ecc 9:10; Gen 3:19; Pro 13:11; 2Th 3:10. See also comment on Ecc 2:24.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(21) The LXX., followed by a great body of interpreters, ancient and modern, translate, Who knoweth whether the spirit of man goeth upward? &c, and this agrees better with the context of this paragraph. The sceptical thought is, We see that death resolves into dust (Gen. 3:19; Ecc. 12:7; see also Sir. 41:10) the bodies of men and animals alike; and if it be alleged that there is a difference as to what becomes of their spirits, can this be asserted with the certainty of knowledge? The writer here seems to have read both Psa. 49:14 and Pro. 15:24.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
21. Who knoweth, etc. Let us bear in mind that this is the language of a distressed man, who certainly finds no comfort in what his eyes can see. Shall consolation be found in the invisible? This verse is of the nature of a challenge. Who can show that the spirit of man takes after death any course different from that taken by the spirit of a beast? Or, if we render it, as Hebrew questions are often rendered, by the opposite declaration, “No man knoweth,” etc., we need not be alarmed. At this stage of the inquiry, the affirmation of a future life would be out of place. We shall by and by see it in its place.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Ecc 3:21. Who knoweth the spirit of man, &c. Who knoweth the breath of the sons of man, whether it ascendeth upward; and the breath of a brute, whether it descendeth downward to the earth? We have, from Ecc 3:18 to the present, the 2nd corollary. The being of a God, his attributes, and supreme sway of his providence, are clearly evinced from the very complication of human affairs, which none but an infinite understanding could ever prevent from falling into an irretrievable confusion. But the higher we rise in our conceptions of that great Being, the lower we must descend in the notions that we have of our own worth and dignity; for our so-much-boasted-of reason, when left to itself, is incapable of ascertaining a difference in men’s favour with respect to a future dispensation between themselves, and what they call the brutish part of the creation. “So dark and intricate are the ways of Providence in this world!”By this interpretation the passage is sufficiently vindicated from any suspicion of the Sadducean heresy. The only point insisted on, and for which no philosopher who is free from prejudice will think it worth his while to quarrel with Solomon, is, that the difference between the fate of brutes and men is not to be known with certainty by the mere light of reason, unassisted by revelation. Now this differs from the heresy above-mentioned as much as the humble confession of one who owns himself to be in the dark, does from the assuming asseveration of another who talks of nothing but full evidence and certainty. See the text fully justified in this light in Desvoeux’s Dissertation on the Ecclesiastes, p. 53, 54. We may just observe, that Tremellius renders the beginning of the 18th verse, I said in my heart, according to human reason, &c. See Peters on Job, p. 323.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Ecc 3:21 Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?
Ver. 21. Who knoweth the Spirit? ] q.d., Who but a man that is spiritually rational, and rationally spiritual? Who but he that hath “the mind of Christ?” 1Co 2:16 that hath seen the insides of nature and grace? Whether Plato and Cicero believed themselves in what they wrote touching the immortality of the soul, is a great question.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
spirit. Hebrew. ruach. App-9.
of man. Hebrew “of the sons of Adam”. See notes on verses: Ecc 3:3, Ecc 3:10, Ecc 3:13; Ecc 1:13.
that goeth, &c. This is mentioned as one of the emendations of the Sopherim, though it is not included in the official lists (see App-33). The primitive Text read the letter He (= H) as an interrogative, “whether it go” (Compare Ecc 2:19; Ecc 6:12). The Chaldee, Septuagint, Syriac, Vulgate, Luther, Geneva, and Revised Version follow this reading. Another school took the He (= H) as the article pronoun and read “that goeth”, &c, thus avoiding a supposed objection to its public reading. This was followed by Coverdale, the Bishops’ Bible, and the Authorized Version. It is therefore the Figure of speech Erotesis (App-6), leaving the question to he answered at the end of the book (Ecc 12:7).
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
knoweth: Ecc 12:7, Luk 16:22, Luk 16:23, Joh 14:3, Act 1:25, 2Co 5:1, 2Co 5:8, Phi 1:23
of man that goeth upward: Heb. of the sons of man that is ascending
Reciprocal: Gen 2:7 – nostrils Psa 49:19 – He Ecc 3:20 – go Ecc 8:8 – is no
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
3:21 Who {k} knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?
(k) Meaning, that reason cannot comprehend that which faith believes in.