Chapter 4 of Kohelet opens with a difficult observation. At the end of the previous chapter, Shlomo concluded: "There is nothing better than that a person should rejoice in his deeds, for that is his portion" - it is good for a person to be happy with what he has here in this world. Now he returns and re-examines the matter, discovering that reality complicates this advice: the world is full of oppression, and therefore joy here is not so simple. We will follow the order of the verses and examine the words of the Midrash, Rashi, the Ibn Ezra, the Imrei Shefer based on the foundation of the Malbim, and the Kol Ephraim.
וְשַׁבְתִּי אֲנִי וָאֶרְאֶה אֶת־כָּל־הָעֲשֻׁקִים אֲשֶׁר נַעֲשִׂים תַּחַת הַשָּׁמֶשׁ וְהִנֵּה דִּמְעַת הָעֲשֻׁקִים וְאֵין לָהֶם מְנַחֵם וּמִיַּד עֹשְׁקֵיהֶם כֹּחַ וְאֵין לָהֶם מְנַחֵם׃ - And I returned and saw all the oppressions that are perpetrated under the sun, and behold, the tears of the oppressed, and they have no comforter; and from the hand of their oppressors there is power, and they have no comforter.
The Midrash disputes who these "oppressed" are. One opinion says: these are the young children taken from life due to the iniquity of their fathers - infants who died in their youth, who were, as it were, robbed of life because of their parents' sin. Another says: these are those executed by the ruling authorities (harugei malchut), who were likewise robbed of life in this world. Another says: these are hypocrites in Torah - people whom the public presumes to be Torah scholars, but who deceive others. The public is exploited by them: people believe in them, give them money, rely on them, and approach them for blessings - yet they are charlatans. The tears of the oppressed are the tears of those defrauded by them. Another says: this refers to the Jewish people among the nations. And another says: these are mamzerim (children born of forbidden unions) - for what did they sin? Their parents sinned and are gone, yet the child is born unfortunate and a mamzer. Rabbi Yehuda ben Pazi said: nevertheless, they enter the World to Come, as it is stated, "And behold, the tears of the oppressed, and they have no comforter" - here they have no comforter, but in the World to Come the Holy One, Blessed be He, will comfort them.
Rashi explains that "And I returned and saw" was spoken through Ruach HaKodesh (Divine inspiration) - not physical sight, but spiritual perception. And why was Ruach HaKodesh needed here? Because according to Rashi, this refers to those who are oppressed in Gehennom, and how else could Shlomo see them if not through Ruach HaKodesh? And in what way were they oppressed? "Tachat hashemesh" (under the sun) - "tachat" in the sense of "in place of," as in "an eye for an eye" (ayin tachat ayin). The sun represents the Torah, and "under the sun" means that they spent their days in vanity instead of dedicating them to the holy Torah and the fulfillment of its mitzvot; therefore, they are tormented in Gehennom by the very deeds they committed.
"And behold, the tears of the oppressed" - Rashi explains that they weep over their souls that are tormented at the hands of cruel angels of destruction. As Scripture says, "Passing through the valley of weeping, they make it a spring" (Tehillim 84:7), which Chazal expounded as referring to those who descend to Gehennom, who shed tears like a flowing spring. "And from the hand of their oppressors there is power" - a person cannot free himself from the hand of his oppressor, meaning the destructive angels that seize him and assault him forcefully. This is like the incident recorded in the Zohar regarding Rabbi Akiva, who met a scorched man in the desert and called out to him several times to stop, but he did not stop until Rabbi Akiva placed a decree upon him. The man then told him: "The reason I did not stop earlier was that it was not within my power - I was in the grip of the angel of destruction, who would not allow me to break free." From this we learn that "from the hand of their oppressors there is power": those who rule over them possess the power to oppress them.
Ibn Ezra explains that "veshavti" (and I returned) does not merely mean "I returned," but rather "I retracted" - turning back from what he had previously thought. And from what did he turn back? From the conclusion at the end of the previous chapter, "there is nothing better than that a person should rejoice in his deeds." Regarding this, he immediately says: and I returned and saw - I re-examined the matter, and saw that this is unrealistic. To rejoice here in this world is exceedingly difficult, for I see how much oppression and robbery exist under the sun: whether one is oppressed by a king, a judge, a bribe-taker, or a thief. Who has any insurance? "And from the hand of their oppressors there is power" - the oppressors possess real power. And what is left for a person? Only to weep. And lest one suggest that weeping helps - regarding this it is said, "and they have no comforter." And the repetition, explains Ibn Ezra, is because he weeps and weeps again, yet there is no one to comfort him.
The Imrei Shefer follows the same line: what I previously thought - that it is good for a person to rejoice in his deeds - would be true if one were actually able to enjoy the fruits of his labor properly. But a person toils and works, and then others come and rob him of what he labored for. And when I returned to contemplate the ways of the world, I saw all the oppressions that are perpetrated under the sun.
This is explained based on a fundamental principle of the Malbim. In the Book of Joshua (chapter 7), and in several other places, the Malbim explains that there is a difference between a punishment of active providence and a punishment that results from the removal of providence. There is a punishment that the Holy One, blessed be He, brings through direct, active providence, and there is a punishment that occurs because Hashem leaves man in the hands of circumstance - "And I will hide My face from them." The Holy One, blessed be He, is not actively supervising the affliction, but so to speak leaves him on his own. If a person leaves his young child in the middle of a bustling, dangerous thoroughfare, he does not need to harm the child himself - the very abandonment is enough. This is a punishment that occurs through circumstance, as a result of the withdrawal of divine providence.
The practical difference is this: when punishment comes through the withdrawal of providence, upright people are also harmed, because Hashem has left the collective to the forces of nature and chance. This is the very example that occurred with Achan: he trespassed regarding the consecrated spoils, and the Holy One, blessed be He, said, "There is something banned in your midst, O Israel; I will not continue to be with you" - meaning, I am withdrawing My providence, and immediately Israel fell in battle. Thus, when Hashem withdraws His providence, even those who did not sin personally are harmed. In contrast, when punishment comes through direct providence, the Holy One, blessed be He, oversees each and every individual so that they receive exactly what they deserve, measured precisely according to the infraction they committed.
Based on this, he explains: since so many people rebel against Hashem, nature itself rebels against them and divine providence is, as it were, withdrawn from them. Then, all become oppressed "under the sun" - under the rule of nature. One is oppressed by fire, another by water; one in his body, another in his wealth, and another in his household. No one escapes the oppression of nature. And because of this, "the tears of the oppressed, and they have no comforter": if there were some who were oppressed and others who were not, those who were spared could comfort the oppressed. But when providence is withdrawn and everyone is oppressed, who can comfort whom? People who were, God forbid, in the Holocaust and persecuted across Europe - who could comfort whom? Who was safe? Even someone who converted was caught and rounded up. When the tragedy is collective, there is no comforter, for everyone is caught in the midst of the affliction.
And there is another type of oppression: until now we spoke of those oppressed by the hand of nature, when Hashem leaves them to the mercy of circumstance. Yet there is another reality - those who oppress by brute force, as it were, contrary to the Creator's will. Concerning them, too, it is said, "and they have no comforter," because who can stand against them? "And the man of arm, the earth is his" - everyone fears a powerful tyrant, and no one possesses the courage to fight him. Who will stand up against them to rescue the oppressed? Here, then, is another dimension of oppressed people who have no comforter, due to those who oppress through brute force.
וְשַׁבֵּחַ אֲנִי אֶת־הַמֵּתִים שֶׁכְּבָר מֵתוּ מִן־הַחַיִּים אֲשֶׁר הֵמָּה חַיִּים עֲדֶנָה׃ - And I praised the dead who have already died, more than the living who are still alive.
Since I saw that the good of this world is not within man's control, and even the righteous cannot escape all that we have described - because punishment becomes collective and strikes everyone - therefore, "And I praised the dead who have already died." Those who have already escaped this land of distress and are no longer subject to the reality of oppression are better off than the living. This stands in contrast to what was stated earlier, "There is nothing better than that a person should rejoice in his works" - I returned and saw that those who are no longer here in this world are in a better state.
The Kol Efraim offers a wonderful explanation of the phrase "and they have no comforter." He begins with a question: earlier, Shlomo stated, "And I hated life, because the work that is done under the sun seemed grievous to me," and here he explains what exactly he hated about life - it was the matters of oppression under the sun that led him to hate life.
Regarding the repetition: it is the well-known approach of the Malbim that when a word appears twice, the second instance carries a different meaning. The Kol Efraim explains this here as well. The root n-ch-m can be understood in two ways. The first is consoling mourners (nichum aveilim), derived from granting rest and relief (lehaniach) from sorrow: he is grieving, and I come to grant him relief from his sadness. The second is an expression of regret or relenting, as in "I regret (nichamti) that I have made them" and "nor the son of man that He should relent (veyitnecham)." This too stems from the idea of resting: to rest and turn away from one's initial thought - I thought one way, and now I step back from it and think differently. Both meanings, therefore, share the underlying concept of rest and release.
According to this, King David's words are explained wonderfully: "Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me (yanchamuni)." On the surface, this is puzzling: the rod is the stick, the blows of discipline, while the staff is protection and support; how can these two opposites comfort together? Rather, both meanings of the root n-ch-m are present here. The rod - as in "Woe to Assyria, the rod of My anger" - when the Holy One, blessed be He, brings a rod upon a person, "they comfort me" refers to repentance and regret: I receive the blows and repent for my evil deeds. And the staff - when Hashem sustains me and provides a support, "they comfort me" functions like the consolation of mourners, bringing relief from grief. Both together, "they comfort me," each with its own kind of comfort.
And so it is here in our verse: "and behold, the tears of the oppressed, and they have no comforter" - there is no one to bring them relief from their sorrow, like comforting mourners. "And on the side of their oppressors there was power, and they had no comforter" - the oppressors who use force do not console themselves, meaning they do not repent of their evil deeds. This is the reason for the repetition in the verse. Truly wondrous.
According to this principle, we can also explain "Comfort, comfort My people" (Nachamu, nachamu ami) in the haftarah. Everyone asks why it is repeated, and the well-known answer is: she suffered double, so she is comforted double. But according to our approach, it works out beautifully: the first "comfort" means repent of your evil deeds; and then "comfort My people" - then it will be possible to comfort you with encouragement and relief from sorrow, just as mourners are comforted.
Let us mention what is cited in the books of the Kabbalists regarding "and behold, the tears of the oppressed, and they have no comforter." In the Midrash, this is alluded to - "these are the little ones who are hidden away during their lifetime" - but the Kabbalists speak of this explicitly: the verse refers to those drops of seed emitted in vain, which contain souls that never reach their rectification. And regarding this it is said, "slaughterers of children," in the sense of those souls. They are "the tears of the oppressed" - souls that never reach their rectification, "and they have no comforter"; "and on the side of their oppressors there was power" - those who forcefully extract these souls, and these souls have no comfort. And because of the severity of this matter, it is said of the Generation of the Flood, "for all flesh had corrupted its way upon the earth," and our Sages said that they were tainted by this sin, which is why the judgment against them was so severe.
Pesikta Zutrata explains: "And I praised the dead who are already dead" - these are the righteous. For when Moshe Rabbeinu prayed, he was answered in their merit: "Remember Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yisrael, Your servants, to whom You swore by Yourself," and through this power he protected the Jewish people. What was not in the power of the living was in the power of the dead.
And the Midrash adds: "And I praised the dead who are already dead" - who have already received their judgment and have given up on this world. They have already paid the price and have moved past it all, whereas the living person still does not know what ordeal awaits him. In this respect, the dead are more praiseworthy than the living who are still alive.
Rashi explains: "I praised the dead who are already dead" - before this evil inclination could overpower them and drive them away from the Holy One, blessed be He. And this is the very intention of the Midrash that said "these are the righteous," for one cannot say of a deceased wicked person that he is praiseworthy; for what would we praise him, when at his death he enters Gehinnom? If there is anyone to praise, it is the righteous person, who reaches his destiny, Gan Eden, the Divine attachment that he cannot attain in full perfection here in this world. Therefore, this refers to righteous people such as the Patriarchs, about whom one can certainly say they are praised in their death; but a wicked person - what praise does he have in his death? On the contrary, he ought to fear death. And regarding this our Sages said that Moshe was not answered through them, and similarly we will see later that when Shlomo sought to bring the Ark into the Temple, he was answered in the merit of his father David and not through his own strength. Behold the virtue of the dead.
Ibn Ezra understands that this verse continues the previous one: if you see such oppression arising in the world, certainly the dead are better off than the living who are still alive. And why? Ibn Ezra states a startling insight: any person can accept whatever comes upon him from Heaven, but he cannot endure oppression inflicted upon him by a fellow human being like himself, and he would prefer death over life. What comes from Heaven, a person accepts; what comes from the hand of his fellow, he is incapable of accepting.
And we see this in reality. There is a story of a man who came to a rabbi with a kashrut question regarding the slaughter of his animal, whether it was kosher or treif. The rabbi inspected it and ruled it treif - a loss of two to three thousand shekels. The next day, he came to the same rabbi again, this time for a Din Torah with his fellow, arguing over a few hundred shekels, and the rabbi ruled in favor of the fellow. That man protested, began arguing and shouting: "No way! On what grounds? From what sources? By what authority did you judge me?" The rabbi said to him: "I am amazed at you. Yesterday you lost two thousand shekels and did not shout at all, and today, over five hundred shekels, you make such an uproar?" And it was not because it was added to the previous loss, but for a simple reason: you are willing to lose even two thousand shekels, but not that your fellow should gain. To lose on my own - fine; but that I should lose while he gains right in front of me - that is unbearable.
This is what Ibn Ezra says: a person is willing to lose a great deal, willing to accept whatever comes upon him from Heaven; but oppression inflicted on him by a fellow human being - he will hold it against him, bear a grudge, and never forget. Had it come directly from Heaven, you would say everything is from Heaven and move on; but when it happened through someone else, you suddenly forgot that Someone is running the world, and that what that person did also came from Heaven. Therefore, a person would choose death over life, and for this reason: "And I praised the dead who are already dead, more than the living who are still alive" and are forced to be among the oppressed.
The Midrash wonders: Shlomo states here, "And I praise the dead who have already died," while elsewhere he says, "For to a living dog it is better than to a dead lion" - it is better to be lowly and alive than great and dead. Which is more praiseworthy?
The Midrash resolves this by explaining that both statements refer to specific historical events. When Shlomo built the Beit HaMikdash and sought to bring the Aron into the Kodesh HaKodashim, the gates clung to one another and would not open. He recited twenty-four prayers and songs of praise, yet he was not answered; once he said, "Remember the lovingkindness of David Your servant," he was answered immediately. Behold: "And I praise the dead who have already died more than the living" - in this reality, the dead was found more praiseworthy than the living. Conversely, when David passed away on Shabbat, Shlomo sent to the beit midrash asking two questions: My father is lying in the sun, what is to be done? And my father's dogs are hungry, what is to be done? They sent back to him: Cut up a carcass and place it before the dogs, and for your father, place a loaf of bread or a baby upon him and move him. First, they answered concerning the dogs - thus, "For to a living dog it is better," since they attended to the living dog before the dead lion.
And the resolution of the matter: it all depends on what one is discussing. If one is speaking of merits - righteous people are greater in death than in life, and their merits accomplish far more here, as we saw with Shlomo, and as we saw with Moshe who mentioned the Avot of the world, and in that merit Hashem showed mercy to Israel and did not bring destruction upon them. On the other hand, a person must realize that today he possesses what that righteous person lacks: the ability to add merits. When speaking of what can be attained right now - the living person is still in the game, still able to score points; the dead person can no longer do so. But when speaking of acting through merits - the merits of righteous people who have passed away are greater than in their lifetime.
The Midrash further states: Rabbi Yehudah bar Simon said, the verse speaks of Yechezkel. When Yechezkel stood in the valley and said, "Dry bones, hear the word of Hashem," bone immediately drew near to bone, they all joined together, and men arose and began to walk. Yechezkel said to them: During your lifetime I said to you, "Hear the word of Hashem, O house of Yaakov," and you did not listen, but now in your death you listen! All your lives I spoke to you and no one paid attention, and now I say, "Hear the word of Hashem," and all rush to connect, bone to bone. Concerning that moment it is said, "And I praise the dead who have already died" - now, as dead, they listen - "more than the living who are still alive" - for when they were alive, they were unwilling to listen and hear.
And the explanation is simple: during his lifetime, he felt that his interest lay in celebrating and doing as he pleased, so it was difficult to speak with him. But in his death, he certainly understands that his interest now is to return to life - and therefore, all connect, bone to bone.
Shlomo revisits and examines his previous advice, discovering that this world is full of oppression: the oppressed who are defrauded of life, those oppressed by Torah hypocrites, those oppressed by the nations, and those oppressed in Gehinnom for squandering their days on vanity. There is oppression that stems from the removal of Divine Providence, where the suffering is collective and there is no comforter because everyone is caught in it; and there is the oppression of the ruthless, whom no one dares stand against - and even they themselves do not regret or repent of their actions. From this perspective, Shlomo praises the dead who have already escaped this land of distress, and especially the righteous whom the yetzer hara did not control, whose merits continue to operate even after their death. Nevertheless, "a living dog is better than a dead lion": as long as a person is alive, it remains within his power to add merits and serve his Creator - a virtue that even a departed tzaddik no longer possesses.