Introduction
In this section of the chapter, King Solomon summarizes the great accounting he conducted with himself. He examined everything this world has to offer - the pleasures of the eye, the joy of the heart, buildings, vineyards, treasures, and wisdom - and arrived at a single conclusion: "All is vanity and chasing after wind, and there is no profit under the sun." We will follow the order of the verses to see how the commentators explain them, and what practical lesson emerges for our lives.
"Whatever my eyes desired, I did not withhold from them" - How Far He Went
וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר שָׁאֲלוּ עֵינַי לֹא אָצַלְתִּי מֵהֶם, לֹא מָנַעְתִּי אֶת לִבִּי מִכָּל שִׂמְחָה, כִּי לִבִּי שָׂמֵחַ מִכָּל עֲמָלִי, וְזֶה הָיָה חֶלְקִי מִכָּל עֲמָלִי׃ - And whatever my eyes desired, I did not withhold from them; I did not keep my heart from any joy, for my heart rejoiced in all my labor, and this was my portion from all my labor.
Midrash Rabbah explains: "Whatever my eyes desired" - this refers to women. Solomon had a thousand wives, and whatever his eyes desired among women he did not deny himself, taking from all of them. And what is "I did not keep my heart from any joy"? Seemingly one cannot say this refers to the joy of wives - for if a person struggles to manage with one wife, what joy could there be with a thousand? Therefore, some explain that this joy refers to the joy of wealth, an entirely different matter. However, the Midrash also offers another explanation: that "joy" indeed refers to the joy of wives, for he rejoiced in his wives.
"And this was my portion from all my labor" - His Staff and His Jug
On the words "and this was my portion from all my labor," the Gemara cites a dispute between Rav and Shmuel: one said his staff, and one said his cloak (and some read it as his jug). "His staff" - his walking stick, and presumably not the royal scepter, for had he held the royal scepter everyone would have immediately recognized him as King Solomon, yet no one recognized him. "His cloak" - some say this was a type of garment; and according to the reading of "his jug" (mikdo) - a mikda is an earthenware vessel, like a washing cup or a large mug.
And so Chazal relate: when Solomon was deposed from his throne and an angel in his likeness sat upon it - meaning Ashmedai - he would wander among the synagogues, study halls, and homes of the Torah leaders of Israel, saying, "I, Kohelet, was king." They would strike him with a reed and set before him a bowl of grits. They would strike him with a stick, meaning they thought: this man is mad; are there not plenty of people convinced they are a king, a minister, or a prime minister? People chase them away. Yet, on the other hand, they saw a poor, hungry man, so they would set a bowl of grits before him. This is "his staff and his jug" - the blows I take for saying I am Solomon, and the bowl of grits given to me out of pity. He whose table was a magnificent royal feast where thousands dined - this is all that remained of all his toil.
The Gra's Explanation: The Two Ordinances That Remained
There is a wonderful explanation of "his staff and his jug" cited in the book Divrei Ben Shlomo by Jacobson in the name of one who quoted it from the Vilna Gaon, a well-known interpretation sweeter than honey. A person's true portion from all his toil is not what he leaves behind in this world - for over what is left behind here, Solomon will yet lament, as who knows what successors will do with it - but rather the eternal portion, what he takes with him to the heavenly realm above. Solomon says: When I look back at what I accomplished in my lifetime, I see two things in which I instituted major ordinances, as Chazal taught that Solomon instituted two things: eiruvei chatzeirot (communal courtyard boundaries for Shabbat) and netilat yadayim (ritual washing of the hands). "His staff" - this is the post (lechi) set up for an eiruv, which resembles a staff; "his jug" - this is the washing cup used for netilat yadayim. Solomon says: If I wish to know what remains for me of everything - it is these two mitzvot that I instituted for all of Israel for generations to come; this is my portion from all my labor.
And indeed, there are profound allusions in these two ordinances. Eiruvei chatzeirot - although you have a separate house and I have a separate house, and seemingly I cannot carry from my domain to yours, the eiruv comes and unites us, declaring: we are all one. Thus, eiruvei chatzeirot symbolize unity. And netilat yadayim - the hands are constantly involved in worldly affairs, and washing them symbolizes clean hands, that a person should be honest in business transactions and pure of heart. Through these two ordinances, I helped establish the Kingdom of Heaven in the world: I brought people to unity and purity, fostering merit both between man and God and between man and his fellow. That is why the Gemara in Shabbat 14b states that when Solomon instituted eiruvin and netilat yadayim, a Heavenly voice emerged and proclaimed: "My son, if your heart is wise, my heart will rejoice also" and "Be wise, my son, and bring joy to my heart, so that I may respond to him who taunts me." This shows that in Heaven as well, Solomon's ordinances were endorsed.
We also learn an additional lesson here: Solomon wrote Kohelet, Mishlei (Proverbs), and Shir HaShirim (Song of Songs), and yet he did not view his true portion from all his toil as the sacred writings of the Torah he left for future generations, but specifically in the ordinances he established for the benefit of the community. We see from this that study is not the essential thing, but action, and how immense is the value of what a person establishes and accomplishes for the benefit of the public.
Rashi: "I Did Not Withhold" - I Did Not Separate Myself
Rashi explains "I did not withhold from them" - I did not distance myself to separate from them, in the sense of "and He took of the spirit" (Bamidbar 11:25), like a menorah from which many candles are lit without its own light being diminished in the least. So too here: I did not distance myself or separate myself from anything my eyes saw. And "this was my portion" - out of everything, nothing remained for me except my portion in all my toil, his staff and his bowl, as the Gra explained.
Imrei Shefer: Perfection in the External and the Internal
The *Imrei Shefer* explains that "whatever my eyes desired I did not withhold from them" refers to external matters - the pools he made for himself, the vineyards he planted, and the houses he built. "I did not keep my heart from any joy" refers to internal matters: engagement in Torah, wisdom, and spiritual attainments. Shlomo says: I achieved perfection both internally and externally, so what more do I need?
"For my heart rejoiced in all my toil" - in internal pleasures, for whenever I ate my fill of meat and wine and all royal delicacies, my heart rejoiced in this, content. There is a person who eats and is not satisfied, because his eyes seek more; he always wants more. Shlomo says: I did not demand more than what I had. This is not quite "being content with little" - being happy with one's lot is said of someone whose lot is small and he rejoices in it - but we know that realistically, "he who has one hundred wants two hundred," and one might have expected Shlomo to continually crave more and more. To this he says: No. Whatever I had, I rejoiced in it, and I did not walk around feeling that I needed to acquire more, take more, and receive more. I rejoiced in everything.
Kol Ephraim: Two Types of Joy - The Effortless and the Toiled
The *Kol Ephraim* explains that there are two kinds of joy. There is a joy that is easily achieved, almost without trouble and toil - eating and drinking; and although we saw earlier that building houses and planting vineyards require toil, that is the labor of servants. And there is a second joy that cannot be achieved except through great toil and exertion, and cannot easily be acquired through others - this is spiritual joy. A person cannot attain spiritual perfection without immense exertion in Torah, closeness to God, and divine service. Although the *Mesillat Yesharim* writes that holiness begins with labor and ends as a gift, it certainly begins with labor; in all spiritual matters, great exertion is required.
According to this: "Whatever my eyes desired I did not withhold from them" - the eyes always seek to see interesting and beautiful things, unique scenery, intriguing sights. Why does a person fly abroad? What is he lacking? Rather, he seeks to see things that give pleasure to his eyes, and for this he goes to great lengths and travels far. Shlomo says: Even in this I did not hold back; I made the effort to feast my eyes upon even the most fascinating things. "And I did not keep my heart" - this is the second part, what the heart desires: the spiritual realm, understanding all kinds of science, wisdom, and perception of the Divine. In this too, I did not hold my heart back. And this study is difficult study, for one cannot send emissaries to do it - you yourself must delve into the wisdom, reflect upon it, and immerse yourself in it, and this requires immense effort. Concerning such joy, it is fitting to say, "my heart rejoiced in all my toil," for it is attained only through toil. Without "all my toil," one will not truly reach joy and comprehension. But "what my eyes desired" - these are coarse, external pursuits that require no personal toil. In contrast, the joy of the heart, which comes through resolving doubts - and there is no joy like the resolution of doubts - and the joy of engaging in Torah, is a profound and powerful joy that demands toil and exertion.
"And Behold, All Was Vanity and Frustration of Spirit"
וּפָנִיתִי אֲנִי בְּכָל מַעֲשַׂי שֶׁעָשׂוּ יָדַי וּבֶעָמָל שֶׁעָמַלְתִּי לַעֲשׂוֹת, וְהִנֵּה הַכֹּל הֶבֶל וּרְעוּת רוּחַ וְאֵין יִתְרוֹן תַּחַת הַשָּׁמֶשׁ׃ - Then I turned to all the works that my hands had made, and the toil that I had labored to do, and behold, all was vanity and frustration of spirit, and there was no profit under the sun.
The *Pesikta Zutreta* explains: "In all my works that my hands had made" - that I toiled in Torah; "and the toil that I had labored to do" - these are the sciences and books in which I exerted myself and labored. And I saw that all was vanity and frustration of spirit. But how can such a thing be said of Torah and wisdom? The Midrash explains: Just like this cup that is filled in its time and emptied in its time, so too all the Torah that Shlomo learned in its time was lost, as it is written, "And Shlomo did evil." Awful! Like a cup that is filled, but then used - washing hands with it, rinsing with it - so it fills and empties. In the same way, Shlomo says: All the Torah I learned and invested in, where did it go in the end? To vanity and frustration of spirit. Through the wives he married, who turned his heart, it is said, "And Shlomo did what was evil in the eyes of the Lord." This does not mean, Heaven forbid, that he forgot all his Torah or became foolish - nothing of the sort is written - but rather that the Torah was, as it were, drained away from him, grew distant from him, and was no longer at the forefront of his mind; he was emptied of those immense, lofty attainments he once had. Chazal, of course, state that it does not mean he personally did evil, but that he failed to protest against his wives; yet certainly, according to Shlomo's stature, this was a severe indictment. If so, "there was no profit under the sun" applies to everything under the sun; real profit exists only in the Torah, which is above the sun, and not in all those worldly attainments Shlomo achieved, which ultimately led him astray.
Malbim: "The Work of My Hands" Versus "The Work of Your Fingers"
In his Biur HaMilot (Exposition of Words), the Malbim explains the phrasing "in all my works that my hands had wrought." On the one hand, we find "the work of Your fingers" and "it is the finger of God" - so what is the difference? "The work of my hands" does not necessarily mean that I performed it myself; even if I dispatched emissaries or appointed laborers and servants, it is still referred to as the work of my hands. In contrast, "the work of Your fingers" refers to one's actual fingers. Even today, someone who wishes to emphasize personal effort says: "I made this with my own ten fingers." "The work of Your fingers" expresses an action performed directly by one's own hands. That is why the magicians said, "It is the finger of God" - nature operates at Hashem's command, as His agent, but here it was not nature at work, but the Holy One, blessed be He, Himself, without intermediaries. Therefore here, "And I turned to look on all my works that my hands had wrought" does not mean with his own ten fingers, for Shlomo himself did not engage in manual labor, but rather it was accomplished through his servants, which is why it is called "my works that my hands had wrought."
Imrei Shefer: Laboring for Perfection Even in Material Matters
The Imrei Shefer explains that here Shlomo turns to address the second part: "in all my works that my hands had wrought" - referring to the houses, vineyards, and treasures. Earlier he spoke of the toil of the heart, the toil of wisdom, which requires strenuous effort; and here he speaks of the houses, vineyards, treasures, royal properties, upper chambers, and halls, saying: I labored over all of them, striving with all my might to do things properly. Naturally, a person of elevated stature does not toil over physical matters, but rather over spiritual ones to ensure they are perfected, whereas in material things he is content with whatever comes - one room more, one room less, either way is fine. Shlomo says: With me it was not so; rather, every labor I undertook and every act I performed was carried out with the utmost precision, meticulousness, and effort, and I poured all my strength and soul into everything.
There is no doubt that Shlomo's craftsmanship was an absolute marvel. Regarding his throne, it is written, "Nothing like it had ever been made for any kingdom" (I Kings 10), and we see how kings coveted that throne and tried to duplicate it, but could not succeed. And those who attempted an imitation faced the consequences: the throne made for Achashverosh, and Pharaoh Necho who was maimed (necheh) when he tried to ascend Shlomo's throne. This shows that when Shlomo invested his efforts, he did so with the highest level of devotion, supreme wisdom, and immense labor, accomplishing what no one else could replicate. It is written that it was a throne of complex mechanisms, built with extraordinary sophistication, where a touch in one spot triggered another, all operating through mechanical marvels.
Shlomo says: I hoped that throughout all the years of construction, once everything was completed, I would reach my ultimate purpose - a person exerted himself and toiled so hard and finally reached rest and inheritance. Yet suddenly I see that it is all vanity, and not merely vanity, but also "re'ut ruach" (vexation of spirit). And what is "re'ut ruach"? It is related to hitro'e'a, meaning to be broken, as in "the earth is utterly broken" (eretz hitro'a'ah). I see that it is all heartbreak and crushing of spirit. And why? Because the more you toil, exert yourself, and labor, the more your heart aches knowing that you must leave it all behind to someone else - and who knows how he will manage it, how he will use it, or whether he will squander it entirely. How many wealthy people are plagued by this: What will become of my wealth? What I spent seventy years building, my son might squander on gambling in two years! The person who worked and labored is plagued by what he leaves behind.
"And There Is No Advantage Under the Sun" - There Is No Advantage in Harm
What is meant by "and there is no advantage under the sun"? The Imrei Shefer previously explained that "yitron" (advantage or superiority) is used for something that is of greater value than something else. One can say that the Written Torah has an advantage over the Oral Torah, in that it is of supreme sanctity and directly from Hashem; one can say that the Rishonim have an advantage over the Acharonim, having been greater and endowed with a broader heart in Torah. Something of genuine worth and virtue is termed an advantage. But one cannot speak of harm or deficit in terms of an advantage. For instance, would anyone say that a pain in the finger has an advantage over a toothache? Both are bad! One might say that one pain is worse than the other, that a toothache hurts more than a finger ache, but there is no "advantage" here - there is only deficiency, only pain. Thus Shlomo says: There is no advantage under the sun. All matters of this world are painful, all entail loss and harm, and one does not speak of an advantage regarding harm. All the examples of advantage mentioned are spiritual: the Written Torah over the Oral Torah, one tzaddik over another, earlier generations over later ones, a fully righteous person over one who is incomplete. In spiritual matters one can speak of an advantage; but in material matters, in anything under the sun, there is no real advantage of one thing over another - there is only less damaging and more damaging, less bad and worse.
Kol Ephraim: The Joy in Doing Comes to an End
The Kol Ephraim explains: "I looked upon all the works that my hands had wrought" - while engaged in the work, I experienced great joy, but once the labor was finished, there was no enduring advantage under the sun from the work itself. And this is clearly seen in reality: when a person is building and creating, he experiences the thrill of creation and the joy of action, and there are people who remodel their entire house every two years just for that feeling. For once the project is finished - that is it, the excitement is gone, the air deflates from the balloon. Now he starts looking at what the neighbors have: "Too bad we didn't do it like this," "Let's replace the flooring," "Let's redo it differently." All sorts of whims based on what he sees by others, and he never finds rest. But once the work is done, there is no lingering advantage from the labor itself.
"And upon the labor that I had labored to do" - these are the houses and vineyards that I built and planted, and I saw that all was vanity and vexation of spirit. And why? Because "what can the man do who comes after the king" - someone can come and destroy in a single moment everything for which I toiled; someone can arrive and undo everything I worked so hard to create. And indeed, that is what happened: his labors went into captivity because of the sins of his descendants, as it is said, "And Yeshayahu said to Chizkiyahu: Hear the word of Hashem of hosts: Behold, the days are coming when all that is in your house, and which your fathers have laid up in store until this day, shall be carried to Babylon; nothing shall be left, says Hashem." If so, what advantage is there to all this, if after I finish, someone will come, take it all, and exile everything? Nothing remains of it.
The Story of the Dresser
A man once related that while abroad, he witnessed a competition among carpenters: who could build the most extraordinary dresser. One carpenter crafted an ingenious dresser with hidden drawers and buttons that opened secret compartments, and it won first prize. A wealthy magnate bought it for a fortune. Years later - perhaps thirty years - that same man visited a shoemaker and was astonished to see the very same dresser the wealthy man had purchased: battered, worn out, three-quarters of its mechanisms no longer functioning, with the shoemaker hammering nails into it and storing shoe soles inside. That very same magnificent, costly dresser! Over this Shlomo grieves and says: Everything I toiled to do - all is vanity and vexation of spirit, and there is no advantage under the sun. What remains of it? Nothing that one acquires in this world lasts.
"And I turned to consider wisdom"
וּפָנִיתִי אֲנִי לִרְאוֹת חָכְמָה וְהוֹלֵלוֹת וְסִכְלוּת, כִּי מֶה הָאָדָם שֶׁיָּבוֹא אַחֲרֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ אֵת אֲשֶׁר כְּבָר עָשׂוּהוּ׃ - And I turned to consider wisdom, madness, and folly; for what can the man do who comes after the king, regarding that which has already been done?
The Midrash explains: "And I turned to consider wisdom" - this refers to when I sought to outsmart the words of the Torah, convincing myself that I understood the mind of the Torah. Therefore, I said: I will multiply wives, and the wives I marry will not turn my heart astray. I was certain - after all, I had amassed great wisdom, and I understood the underlying rationale of the Torah, that the entire concern was lest they turn his heart away, and with me this concern did not apply. Regarding this, Kohelet says: that attitude was "madness and folly." The notion of saying that I understand the rationale of the Torah and that in my case there is no concern - that is a wisdom of madness and folly. And why? "For what can the man do who comes after the king" - who is man that he may question the attributes and decrees of the King of kings, coming along to say: this decree was made because of such-and-such a concern, but in my case the concern does not apply? Who is man that he should come after the King, interpret His deeds and intent, and based on that permit for himself what the Holy One, blessed be He, prohibited?
And do not think this applies only to Shlomo. The Midrash speaks even of Moshe Rabbeinu, peace be upon him, to whom the Holy One, blessed be He, said: "And I know that the king of Egypt will not let you go" - meaning He informed him in advance: take into account that it will not be easy. Yet Moshe did not keep this in mind, says the Midrash, and attempted to second-guess the decrees of the Holy One, blessed be He, beginning to ask: "Why have You brought harm upon this people?" - but you were told in advance, so why are you complaining? For this, the Attribute of Justice sought to strike Moshe, to such an extent. But because he spoke out of anguish for the suffering of Israel, Hashem relented and dealt with him through the Attribute of Mercy. What do we learn from this? That no man may come after the King to assign intentions and explanations to His deeds, or to raise objections against His ways; and even if it seems to you like "wisdom," know that this line of thinking is nothing other than madness and folly.
Pesikta Zutreta: Who Can Say "This Would Be Better"?
The Pesikta Zutreta explains: "And I turned to consider wisdom" - superior wisdom, for he attained insights that no man had ever reached, being wiser than all men. "And madness and folly" - madness refers to heresy, and folly refers to foolishness, and I applied my heart and mind to discern between them. "For what can the man do who comes after the king" - after the deeds of the King of kings, "regarding that which has already been done" - meaning, who can say: if it had been done like this or that, it would have been much finer?
Just as a person might look at a building and say: if only the pillars were taller, how magnificent it would be; and then a second designer comes and says, I also have design critiques, if only the pillars were different it would be truly extraordinary. But regarding the handiwork of the Holy One, blessed be He, who can say, this would be finer or that would be nicer? Who can come after the King and say: if Hashem had done it this way, it would have been better? In the words of Rashbi: a person might say, if only he had three eyes, how wonderful it would be - a person might say: it is a pity Hashem created only a pair of eyes; if there were three, it would be so much better.
Where Would You Put a Third Eye?
We once discussed this topic. Someone was once asked: if you were given an extra eye, where would you place it? The instinctive answer for most people is: in the back of the head. After all, when you drive in reverse, you struggle with the mirrors, but here you would have an eye in the back and you would be all set. But that person said: in my opinion, an eye in the back of the head is not a good idea; if you are already asking, I would ask to place it at the tip of my finger. Why? Because an eye in the back of the head can only see behind you, and to look around you still have to turn your head; but an eye on a finger is a mobile eye - if you want to see what is behind you, you reach your hand back; what is happening under the table, you slip your finger underneath; what is inside a container, you stick your finger inside; what is under the bed, you reach your finger in to see if the shoes are there. You have total control everywhere.
Yet in truth, both suggestions are deeply flawed, for if you were offered an additional eye, you ought to say: thank you very much, but I am not interested - neither on my head nor on my finger. The idea of an eye on a finger is foolish: imagine if a person had an eye on his finger, could he ever use his hand? Not for anything. You go to pick up a stone, a cinderblock, a grocery bag - do you realize what it would take to protect that eye from injury? The hand would become useless. Moreover, even an eye behind the head - do you really need to see everything? Why did the Holy One, blessed be He, not place an eye behind our heads? Because He wanted to teach you: when you do not wish to see something, you turn your head the other way, and you do not have to look. Thus, the fact that we were not given an additional eye stems from the wisdom of the Creator, blessed be He. Therefore, the very question, "If I were given another eye, where would I put it?" is misguided: if I were offered another eye, I would decline it, for had I needed another eye, Hashem would have given it to me, and since He did not, it is a sign that it is best for me not to have another eye.
And this is what Rashbi says: a person might say, if only he had three eyes, how wonderful it would be - but who said that would be good? On the contrary, it would be far worse! It is much better that I have a pair of eyes, using them when I wish, and when I do not wish, I turn away and do not look. Regarding this, the verse says: who can come after the King - who can come after what the King of the Universe created and raise objections, asking why He made it this way and not another, or claiming that another way would have been better? What Hashem made is the best possible thing for man, and nothing could be better.
Another Explanation: Following the King on the Paved Path
Another explanation: "For what can man do" - what is there for man to do, other than to "follow after the King," after the kingship of the Torah. That is, "what is man" means: what is man's purpose in this world? To follow after the King of the Universe. This matter is stated here in the manner of mussar: what is your role? To follow after the King. "That which has already been done" - and if a person asks, in what manner should I serve Hashem properly? Scripture answers him: "That which has already been done." Come and see the early tzaddikim who served Hashem properly and attained great spiritual heights - Avraham, Yitzchak, Yaakov, Moshe, and Aharon. You are not asked to forge a new path. Avraham, it is true, was in quite a dilemma: in his day, everyone was an idolater, and he had to discover his own path and determine whether his way was right, until the Master of the palace looked down upon him. But we are already walking on a path paved in advance. And so, if you ask, what is the way to follow after the King? Walk in the path that has already been trodden: see what the early tzaddikim did, follow in their footsteps, and thus you will surely succeed.
In summary:
Shlomo HaMelech examined everything - the pleasures of the eye, the joy of the heart, houses, vineyards, and treasures - and saw that of all his toil, nothing remained except "his staff and his bowl": according to the peshat, the beatings and the bowl of groats he received when he was deposed from his throne; and according to the Gra, the two eternal enactments he instituted for Klal Yisrael - eiruvin, which allude to unity, and netilat yadayim, which alludes to clean hands. From this we learn that study is not the primary thing, but action, and that a person's true portion is what he rectifies for future generations, not what he leaves behind in this world. External joy comes without toil and does not endure; internal joy, the joy of Torah and the resolution of doubt, is acquired only through toil, which is why "my heart rejoiced from all my toil." And everything under the sun has no profit at all - just as one does not speak of profit when dealing with damages - and man has nothing to do but follow after the King, along the path that the early tzaddikim have already paved before him, knowing that what the Holy One, Blessed is He, has made is the very best, and there is no room to come after the King and say, "It would have been better done this way."