Introduction
We continue in Chapter 6 of Kohelet, a chapter devoted entirely to the futility of this world: a person who possesses wealth yet is not granted the ability to enjoy it, a soul that is never satisfied, and the question of what truly remains in a person's hand from all his toil. In the passage before us, King Solomon continues and asks: if everyone's ultimate end is the same place, what advantage does the wise man have over the fool, and what is truly good for man? We will study the verses in their order, alongside the words of the Midrashim, Rashi, and the masters of Mussar.
What Advantage Does the Wise Man Have Over the Fool?
כִּי מַה יּוֹתֵר לֶחָכָם מִן הַכְּסִיל, מַה לֶּעָנִי יוֹדֵעַ לַהֲלֹךְ נֶגֶד הַחַיִּים׃ - For what advantage does the wise man have over the fool, and what does the poor man have who knows how to walk before the living?
The Pesikta Zutreta explains: "What advantage does the wise man have over the fool" - the limbs that the wise man possesses, the fool possesses as well; the very same intellect was given to both of them. If so, who caused the fool's ruin? He himself did. You chose the path of foolishness, and you have no one to blame but yourself.
As has been explained more than once, especially when studying Mishlei, when King Solomon speaks of a wise man and a fool, he does not mean intellectual capacity or IQ. A wise man is one who walks in the path of Hashem, whereas a fool can be a doctor or a professor - yet his actions are foolish because he does not consider his ultimate end and gives no thought to the life of the World to Come. A person can be educated and foolish at the same time, and there is no contradiction between the two.
Rashi interprets differently: What advantage does the wise man have through his wisdom over what he would have had if he were a fool, and what disadvantage does the poor man suffer compared to the rich man - does he not also know how to walk in the land of the living? In other words, there is no inherent difference between them. Both walk here in the land of the living, and each is required to fulfill what is incumbent upon him during his lifetime. Just as the wise man can merit the life of the World to Come, so can the fool; and just as the rich man can merit it, so can the poor man. If so, what advantage does one have over the other?
The "Living" Generation and the "Dead" Generation
The Imrei Shefer explains the verse against the background of the preceding verse, "All of man's toil is for his mouth": those individuals who are submerged all day in the depths of vanity, in material acquisitions and purely earthly matters, are so absorbed in their crass physical world that in their eyes, the wise man possesses no advantage over the fool. They give no appreciation to someone who chose the correct path or serves Hashem, compared to the fool who may be making money but is heading toward doom, marching toward it with full confidence, oblivious to where his feet are taking him.
Had the two simply been equal in their eyes, says the Imrei Shefer, one might hold one's peace. But I have seen something far worse, and this is "what does the poor man have who knows how to walk before the living?" To explain this, he offers a parable: A wealthy man traveling on the road in his splendid carriage meets another wealthy man - his peer will not turn aside from the road before him, but quite the contrary, will stop, shake his hand, "Shalom aleichem, how are things, how is business?", and after polite pleasantries proceed on his way. But a poor man dressed in sackcloth and rags who meets that same wealthy man - from afar, as soon as he sees the carriage galloping forward, he hurries to step off the path and take roundabout trails so that his shame will not be seen: how do I look compared to how he looks, and surely they will cast derisive glances at me. And if he should nevertheless try to approach, perhaps with a question or a request for help, the attendants will not let him near at all, and will not hesitate to spit in his face; he will only suffer humiliation.
And not only this. There are generations that call themselves a "living generation," while labeling the generations before them a "dead generation": the world belongs to the young, we are a different generation, do not adopt the ways of those old generations, that is outdated. And the righteous man, who does not depart from the path of Hashem and clings to His service, is viewed by them as a relic of the old generation, the dead generation - look at him, still dressed in clothes from the shtetl. And when this trend erupted, says the Imrei Shefer, the righteous themselves began to feel ashamed to be seen before the people of the "living generation," performing mitzvot in secret so as not to be mocked.
Anyone who remembers the period after the founding of the State knows that this was the reality. There was a sense of shame in being an observant Jew. Someone entering the army would quickly hide his kippah, and tzitzit worn outside were seen as an oddity. Those who continued observing mitzvot would hide so as not to be ridiculed. And this is the meaning of "what does the poor man have who knows how to walk before the living": that very "poor man" - who is in truth the one great in Torah, who knows the right path and does not walk in darkness like those blind individuals, but is deemed lowly and destitute compared to the members of the "living generation" - when he sees them approaching, he does not dare confront them, but flees and hides. He would never dare walk against them. And the result is bitter: the observant, God-fearing Jew is humbled before those who transgress the covenant, and even feels too ashamed to protest against them.
"Better Is What the Eyes See" - One Who Studies and Understands
טוֹב מַרְאֵה עִ֫ינַ֥יִם מֵֽהֲלָךְ־נָ֑פֶשׁ גַּם־זֶ֥ה הֶ֖בֶל וּרְע֥וּת רֽוּחַ׃ - Better is what is seen by the eyes than the wandering of desire; this too is futility and vexation of spirit.
The Midrash expounds: Better is one who reasons through his study than one who merely recites and moves on. "One who reasons through his study" refers to someone who learns and strives to understand, delving deep and reflecting. "The wandering of desire" refers to one who merely moves his tongue out of habit, reciting mechanically and moving forward. Ask him the basic meaning here, and he will reply that he was not paying attention; he swallowed several lines at once and has no idea what the question was and what the answer was.
A memory from childhood illustrates this well: a certain shiur given in shul. The person delivering the shiur had not studied in a yeshivah and had no formal Torah background. He taught from the Steinsaltz edition that existed at the time - which was not all that elaborate either, certainly not a Schottenstein. He would read and try to understand on the fly, apparently without preparing the lesson. Whatever he did not understand, he simply skipped ahead a few lines. Then he would reach a passage he thought he understood and begin explaining: a question turned into an answer, an answer turned into a refutation - in short, complete confusion. About this the Midrash says: It is far better to learn four lines and truly understand them than to recite a great deal by habit of the tongue, where the main goal is just to chant the words and keep moving.
As has been noted previously, the Acharonim write: If a person studies the Written Torah without understanding, or recites the Zohar or Nach without understanding, it is still credited to him as Torah study. But the Oral Torah without understanding is not considered Torah study at all. Reciting a page of Gemara without comprehension is simply not learning Torah. Why? Because the entire essence of the Oral Torah is to elucidate the Written Torah. With the Written Torah, one has read the word of Hashem; he has uttered the word of God with his mouth. But the Oral Torah is the explanation of God's word, and if you have not understood the explanation, what have you accomplished? It may count as a mitzvah, but not as Torah study.
Therefore, it cannot be overstated: it is better to learn a single Mishnah and understand it than to recite eighteen chapters every day without comprehension. One Mishnah studied with comprehension is worth far more than chanting many chapters mechanically. A person should take a sefer he understands, with an explanation that speaks to him - nowadays there is Schottenstein for Mishnayot as well - and learn one Mishnah and understand it. If Mishnayot in Niddah or Eruvin are too difficult, take an easier tractate; and if you are truly struggling, learn Pirkei Avot. But a single Mishnah understood is far better than a great deal learned without comprehension. There was once someone who studied Masechet Eruvin, and when asked, "Did you understand it? It is a difficult tractate," he replied, "To be honest, I understood everything, except two abbreviations were not clear to me: what are resh-hei-resh and resh-hei-yud [Reshut HaRabim and Reshut HaYachid]? They appear many times and I did not understand them; other than that, Baruch Hashem!" What good is recitation without comprehension? This is the meaning of "Better is what is seen by the eyes" - one who reasons carefully through his study, delving deep and reflecting - "than the wandering of desire" - one who merely rushes ahead and turns another page.
Guarding the Eyes
The Pesikta Zutarta cites another homily, and the Gemara similarly states: "Better is what is seen by the eyes" regarding a woman than the act itself. A person derives more gratification from looking than from the physical act itself, for with the physical act, once he is finished, his desire has subsided; but with the sight of the eyes, his desire is never extinguished. This makes the sin even graver, for with the sin of looking, a person never finishes looking. With a physical transgression, there is a point at which the sin ends, but one who gazes has no rest and no peace of mind, never reaching satisfaction.
Worst of all, he does not even see any need to repent, for he says, in the words of the Rambam, "Did I draw near to her?" What did I do? I committed no sin! In truth, however, by looking he blemishes the very highest realm. As the author of Nefesh HaChaim writes, it is like bringing an idol into the Holy of Holies, even worse than what Titus did. Why? Because with an inappropriate thought, one defiles the mind, the sanctuary, the highest place within man, the soul; whereas an action devoid of thought affects only the bodily vessels - hands and feet - which are inferior to the brain and thought. How careful, then, must a person be regarding the sight of the eyes, regarding forbidden gazing.
A Person's Wealth Before His Eyes
Another explanation appears in the Pesikta Zutarta: "Better is what the eyes see than the wandering of desire" - it is better for a person to keep his wealth in his own hands rather than give it to someone else to trade with, leaving his heart wandering after it in constant worry. "This too is futility" - pursuing great wealth, which brings "vexation of spirit," a crushing of the spirit. It is better that your money remain with you, right before your eyes, than to entrust it to someone to invest, while your soul constantly frets: What happened to the money? Where is the money? Did he lose it? Did he run off? Was it a scam? True, the money might not generate more money, but you have peace of mind, and a person's money remains with him.
Investors like to say that money must make money, and that if it sits in the bank it gets "bored." That may well be true, but it is far better for the money to be bored and the person calm, than for the money to be active while its owner stares into space wondering where it went. Consider people invested in the stock market: in times of market turmoil, even before smartphones, you would see them waiting beside the kiosk for the financial newspaper to arrive, going over the tiny print with a ruler and magnifying glass: did the stock rise, did it fall, should I sell, should I buy, endless stress. One who avoids all of that avoids the anxiety as well.
There was a man who served as a bank manager for many years, receiving a handsome pension, and was confident he understood the stock market and all related matters. He set up a computer station at home connected to online trading platforms - and ended up losing his shirt. He fell to such a state that he had to rent an apartment in south Tel Aviv, remarking: "You wouldn't want to know who my neighbors are," God preserve us. Afterward, he fell ill and passed away of heartbreak. In his prime, he had lived with a partner in a luxurious villa in Rosh Ha'ayin, but when she realized the money was gone, he found himself utterly alone. He lost her as well - battery-operated friends: once the battery runs out, the friendship dies, and it wasn't even a rechargeable battery. To our point: this is an excruciating reality, where a person believes his money will amass more money, and in the end nothing remains. It is far better to hold on to what you have and maintain your peace of mind. People may tell you about someone who struck it rich or doubled his money - there are plenty of such stories - but what about the opposite stories, about those who lost everything and were left with nothing? Regarding this it is said, "This too is vanity and a pursuit of wind," that a person chases after wealth and ultimately ends up heartbroken.
Two Explanations of Rashi
Rashi explains: "It was better and more fitting for him to see his wealth with his own eyes than to enjoy food and drink." "Nefesh" here does not necessarily refer to the soul in a spiritual sense, but rather to what a person requires - food and drink to sustain life, as in the phrase, "for he takes a life (nefesh) in pledge," referring to a person's livelihood. A person chasing wealth prefers seeing the money flow before his eyes over eating and drinking. If you do not believe it, see what happens when a business owner is in the middle of transactions with customers at noon: "Gentlemen, a thirty-minute break" - what break, what leaving? That night, he eats a dinner that includes breakfast and lunch as well, because there was such pressure at work. Concerning this Shlomo says: vanity and heartbreak, that a person is so captivated by his wealth.
A further explanation in Rashi: a person finds it fitting to follow his eyes, to rob, extort, and be drawn after earthly matters even though he is acting dishonestly - "the walking of the soul," more than understanding where his soul will go at the end of his life. Do you not think that the soul will one day depart and you will have to give an accounting? Yet despite all this, he prefers to follow the sight of his eyes, robbing and extorting. About this it is said: this too is vanity and a pursuit of wind, for heartbreak will accompany him in the end.
The Eye Satisfies
In the Gemara in Yoma (74b), Abaye said: Because the blind eat and are not satisfied, therefore whoever has a meal should eat only by day. A blind person eats and is not satisfied, because much of satiety comes through sight: a person sees a generous portion - and his soul is satisfied. But when it seems to him that something is lacking, he is never satisfied.
An incident was once related about a stay some twenty years ago at a hotel in Be'er Sheva. Their kitchen was located elsewhere - a Mehadrin kitchen from which they brought the food - and they had not properly calculated the quantities. They brought French fries, but there was not enough; they said, "Another batch is arriving shortly," and brought more from the distant kitchen. People there ate four times what they would normally eat on an ordinary day, simply because of the sense of scarcity: they brought some, take it now, soon there won't be any left! When a person sees a huge pile of fries, he takes a little and eats - there is plenty, the eye sees and the soul is satisfied. But if you put out only a little, he will take four times what he actually needs. This is what was meant: it is better for a person to see what he eats, and that itself brings satiety; whereas a blind person, who cannot see, often eats without limit. Rabbi Zeira said: What is the verse for this? "Better is the sight of the eyes than the wandering of desire" - the sight of the eyes is what brings a person to satisfaction.
Cash Now Versus Eternity
The Imrei Shefer explains that here Shlomo exposes yet another distortion: a person is capable of abandoning future bliss because of a trivial thing tempting him today. You promise him an abundance in the future, yet he is willing to forgo everything for a few pennies handed to him right now. A common saying among people goes: "Better is the sight of the eyes" in this world than "the wandering of the soul" - what your soul envisions, contemplates, and plans for the life of the World to Come. Here, it is in cash. The evil inclination pays in cash; the good inclination pays, as it were, net plus sixty years. But what the good inclination pays is an immense, eternal, boundless reward, whereas what the evil inclination gives you - another ice cream, another steak, another fleeting pleasure, another indulgence - vanishes a moment later as if it never existed. A person sells his World to Come, an eternity of eternities, for a momentary pleasure, merely because it is immediate. Regarding this it is said, "This too is vanity and a pursuit of wind": you are willing to give up eternal life for vanity, and in the end you will suffer heartbreak when you realize how you sold an everlasting world for a bowl of lentils.
The truth is, if someone were to say: "Take a thousand dollars today, or receive one hundred thousand dollars twenty years from now," most people would choose the thousand dollars today. Where will you or I be in twenty years, and how much will the dollar even be worth then? A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Ostensibly, there is logic in this. Yet there is a vast difference here. In that case, one worries who will pay, whether the other person will even be around, whether one will be able to collect, or if the debtor will claim, "I don't remember, what are you talking about?" But Hashem, God, endures forever, and there is no doubt that the debt will be repaid. Furthermore: what would you say of a person who has a fortune secured in a safe vault, and he is willing to give it up for a mere sip and a momentary pleasure? What could be said of such a person?
The Chafetz Chaim's Snuff Parable
This is the famous parable of the Chafetz Chaim regarding the town fool. One day the man vanished, and for four days he was nowhere to be seen. Everyone wondered where he had gone, and the town children grew bored. After four days he returned in triumph, holding a small box. They asked him, "What happened?" He replied: "Haven't you heard? A new snuff factory opened, and anyone who comes to the grand opening receives a free tin of snuff!" The man had traveled two days in each direction just for a "schmeck tabak" - a pinch of snuff - and the town erupted in laughter. Said the Chafetz Chaim: And what will we say? After a hundred and twenty years, we will be asked: "You were down there for eighty years - for what? What did you bring back with you - a tin of snuff?" We can imagine the profound shame if a person discovers he brought back nothing at all. How much effort must one make so as not to become a laughingstock in Heaven, so they do not say to him: "Is this all you brought back from a lifetime in this world?" This is what Shlomo means: will people not despise a man who surrenders a secure treasure for the pleasure of a single drink or for a pinch of snuff?
The Approbation for the Model of the Beit HaMikdash
It is told of a chareidi architect in Jerusalem named Yaakov Yehudah, who worked on the architectural plans of the Beit HaMikdash and built a model of it. Many people have created such models: those who recall, at the Holyland complex there was an enormous, complete model of Jerusalem and the Beit HaMikdash, constructed in stone - something truly extraordinary, and school trips were often taken there. There is also a model of the Beit HaMikdash at the Beis Yaakov Sharansky seminary in Tel Aviv, and there are photographs of a large, beautiful model made at Yeshivat Chachmei Lublin under the direction of the Maharam Shapira. One can see in them the chambers, the side rooms, the corners of the Altar, the flaying area, the ramp, the Menorah, and so forth - fascinating indeed, especially for someone learning these tractates, as it allows one to visualize how everything was built.
That architect designed everything according to Masechet Middot, and consulted with Rabbi Isser Zalman Meltzer on every single detail, receiving his guidance on how to construct it, since there are matters subject to dispute - as seen in the study of the Mishnayot. At a certain point, he was invited to exhibit the model in the United States, so he loaded it onto a ship. Since questions naturally arise in such matters regarding how authentic and faithful to the words of Chazal it truly is, he went to obtain an approbation (haskamah) from Rabbi Isser Zalman Meltzer.
The model itself disappeared, and its whereabouts remain unknown, but the haskamah has been preserved. The author of the Even HaEzel opens it with our verse: "Better is what the eyes see than the longing of the soul; this too is vanity and a pursuit of wind." He writes that it is human nature to be far more impressed by what the eyes see, by something tangible, than by mere intellectual comprehension and knowledge. In truth, however, "this too is vanity and a pursuit of wind" - do not imagine that this is an advantage of man, that seeing with his eyes makes him certain; know that this is an inherent deficiency within him. Why? Because what you see here is the coarse physical reality of this world, which deceives you into believing it truly exists. In truth, after seventy or eighty years, up to a hundred and twenty and beyond, it will become clear to a person that this entire world is vanity, that it is an illusion and not genuine reality, and that the spiritual realm is the true reality. The fact that a person is more impressed and moved by what he sees with his eyes than by a spiritual concept is an inherent flaw within him, and concerning this Shlomo said: "This too is vanity and a pursuit of wind."
In Summary:
In these verses, Shlomo HaMelech holds up a mirror before us. "For what advantage has the wise man over the fool?" - the same limbs and intellect were granted to both, and it was the fool who chose his path; on the other hand, no person holds an inherent advantage over another, for the wise and the fool, the rich and the poor, all walk the land of the living and each is required to fulfill his obligation. And "what has the poor man who knows how to conduct himself before the living?" - matters have deteriorated to the point that the knowledgeable, God-fearing person is intimidated before those who forsake the covenant and does not dare protest. And "Better is what the eyes see than the longing of the soul" is expounded in several ways: a small amount of learning with deep understanding is better than reciting vast amounts without comprehension; the severity of guarding the eyes, whose wandering has no end; the advantage of modest wealth over a relentless, restless pursuit; and the satisfaction that comes from sight. At a deeper level - this also reflects man's inherent flaw, that the tangible attracts him far more than spiritual truth, to the point that he is willing to sell eternal life for momentary pleasure. "This too is vanity and a pursuit of wind": whoever keeps this in mind will not arrive in the World of Truth only to discover that all he brought with him is a pinch of snuff.