BEHOLD. Kohelet is still talking about the women [mentioned in the previous verse.]
The phrase amerah Kohelet (saith Kohelet) is what wisdom days.1
The meaning of cheshbon (account) is a [logical] conclusion.2
Kohelet says, [Behold, this have I found...] adding one thing to another3 in order to come to a [logical] conclusion.4 This is because a person cannot come to a conclusion, which is what he desires, unless he places one premise next to another other premise. Now, it is known that the first premise consists of a subject and a predicate. So, does the second premise. Now [we can come to a logical conclusion] if when placing the premises side to side, the predicate of the first premise is the same as the subject of the second premise.5 [A logical conclusion may also be reached] if the two subjects of the premises are the same6or the two predicates of the premises are the same.7 If we place one premise next to the other in the manner just described then a third premise will result.8
The above applies to things relating to the spirit9 and also to [things relating to] bodies.10
The point of our verse is: It would be improper for a wise man to be joined with a woman in any way, were it not for the fact that it is impossible to leave behind a descendent, a third person,11 unless the father and mother are joined.
Another interpretation [for, Behold, this have I found, saith Koheleth, adding one thing to another, to find out the account] is:
This verse is connected to what follows.
The meaning of cheshbon (account) is "an account" or “a sum."12 The point of our verse is: When you consider any thing, you will find that it does not exist by itself.13 [It cannot be described] unless14 it is compared to something else. Let describing an object as large or small [serve as an example]. Something cannot be described as large unless it is compared to something smaller than it. The reverse is the case with a small object.15 The same applies to the terms wise and foolish.
The same is true of numbers.16 For when 1 is added to 1, the first of the numbers [the number 2] is established.17 If you join 1 to the first number [2], it turns into the end [3].18 When you join 1 to the end [3], you get the root [4].19 When you join 1 to the root [4] you get the circular number [5].20 [If you add 1 to the circular number] you get the perfect number [6].21 [If you add 1 to the perfect number [6] you get the complete number [7].22 [If you add 1 to the complete number] you get a body [8].23
The meaning of our verse is: Even though we cannot [in reality] find a [perfectly] intelligent, wise, and God-fearing man—that is, the perfect man—we can [from a relative point of view] find such a person if we compare people.24 Among males alone,25 will one such person will be found among a thousand.
[ADDING ONE THING TO ANOTHER] The word achat (one) is feminine.26
Note, the letters of the Hebrew alphabet are divided into two groups. They are divided into letters that at times function as servile letters,27 and at times as root letters. The remaining letters of the alphabet serve as root letters. The letters that serve as servile letters are kastil av hamon (kof, sin, tav, yod, lamed, alef, bet, heh, mem, vav, nun).28 The rest of the letters [of the alphabet] always serve as root letters.
Letters which serve only as root letters are found employed as servile letters only in words where the root letter is doubled. Compare,
shechachoret (swarthy)
(Song of Songs 1:6).
29 Letters which serve only as root letters are also never dropped unless they come from a double root, such as the
dalet in the words
shod (desolation) (Is. 59:7) which comes from the root
shin, dalet, dalet.
Similarly, the
tav root letter is dropped when it precedes a
tav30 indicating the second person. Compare,
ve-kharata (and cut down)
31 (Deut. 20:20). The root letter
nun is likewise dropped when it precedes the
nun of the feminine [imperfect] plural form. Compare,
tishkonnah (shall they dwell) (Ezek. 17:23). The
nun is swallowed [by the dagesh].
32 So, too, the root letter
tav is dropped in the word
mesharat (ministered)
33 (1 Kings 1:15) because the root letter
tav precedes
34 the
tav which indicates the feminine.
The
resh of
mesharat (minister) (1 Kings:15)
35 is vocalized with a
pattach to indicate that the word is in the feminine. It is so vocalized in order to differentiate between it and the word
mesharet (minister) (Num.11:28) which is a masculine. The same is true with the
dalet of [the feminine form of]
echad (one)
(Kohelet 2:14) which has no
dagesh.
36 The
dalet is dropped when it precedes a feminine
tav which does not have a
dagesh. The root letter
dalet is dropped because the
dalet and the
tav are both linguals.
37 The same is the case with
la-lat (to be delivered) (1 Sam. 4:19.)
38
Some say that [
echad and
achat] come from different roots but have the same meaning.
39 They explain that the word
ach (brother)
(Ps. 49:8) and
ach (brother) (Ezek. 18:10) mean “one.” However, this is farfetched, for the meaning of
ach lo fado yifdeh ish (Ps. 49:8) is "a brother (
ach) cannot redeem the life of a man (related to him),” or "a man cannot redeem the life of his brother (
ach)."
40 The word
ach [in Ps. 49:8] is either the subject or the object.
41 The next verse [which reads:
For too costly is the redemption of their soul, and must be let alone forever] proves that this is the case. The point of the verses
(Ps. 48:8-9) is: People cannot redeem their brothers or their loved ones from death. How can they redeem their brothers or their loved ones from death when they cannot redeem themselves from death?
42
The word ach (brother) in ve'asah ach (that doeth to a brother) (Ezek.18:10) is an object or a subject. If we take ach (brother) as a subject then ach refers to Israel.43 The meaning of ve'asah ach is, an Israelite shall do.44.
If ach is an object, it refers to a sin. In this case the meaning of ve'asah ach is “he will commit a sin which is a sister45 to the previously noted transgressions.”46
Or the meaning of ach (brother) is, [an evil thing,] for an evil thing is their brother.47
Furthermore, how can the meaning of ach in ve-asah ach be “one” when the interpretation that ach means “one” is refuted48 by the phrase me'achat me'elleh (any of these things) that follows? For, if ach means “one,” then the verse would be read as if written: ve-asah echad me-achat me-elleh (doeth one, one of these things).49
1. Amerah is feminine. The phrase should have read amar Kohelet. Hence, Ibn Ezra's suggestion that amerah Kohelet should be understood as amerah he-chakhmah (wisdom said) or amerah chokhmat Kohelet (Kohelet's wisdom said). See Goodman.
2. Hebrew, machashevet. Ibn Ezra refers to the third step in a syllogism by the term machashevet. David Rosin Die Religionphilosphie Abraham ibn Ezra's, p. 232. Quoted by Goodman.
3. According to Kohelet, adding one thing to another means comparing one thing to another.
4. Ibn Ezra's rendition of our verse which reads: Behold, this have I found, saith Koheleth, adding one thing to another, to find out the account.
5. Premise a. People (subject) are living beings (predicate). Premise b. Living beings (subject) are sentient (predicate). Conclusion: People are sentient. (Maimonides, Milot Ha-Higayon; Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 1987, p. 34 as quoted by R. Goodman.)
6. Premise a. Living beings (subject) are sentient (predicate). Premise b. Some living beings (subject) are white (predicate). Conclusion. Some sentient beings are white (Maimonides, Milot Ha-Higayon; Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 1987, p. 34 as quoted by R. Goodman).
7. Premise a: People (subject) are living beings (predicate). Premise b: Stones (subject) are not living beings (predicate). Conclusion c: Stones are not people (Maimonides, Milot Ha-Higayon; Magnes Press, Jerusalem, 1987, p. 34 as quoted by Goodman).
8. See notes 168, 169, 170.
9. Intellectual premises.
10. Human bodies.
11. A child.
12. The first interpretation explained cheshbon as meaning, a logical conclusion reached via comparing two premises. This interpretation renders cheshbon as a sum, that is examining a large number of people and coming to a conclusion. Ibn Ezra reads our verse as follows: "Behold, this (what is recorded in verse 28) have I found adding one person to another person to find the total number of worthy people."
13. Literally, it is not alone. Nothing stands by itself. You cannot describe anything except by comparing it in your mind to other things.
14. Literary, until.
15. It is small in relation to something which is large.
16. According to Ibn Ezra, 1 by itself is not considered a number (see next note). However, when joined to another number, it takes on meaning. For example, 2 consists of 1+1, 3 consists of 2(1+1) +1; 4 consists of 3(1+1+1) + 1, and so on. Thus, adding 1 to one of the numbers defines the number a. The number 1 added to the number 2 becomes number three and so on.
17. According to Ibn Ezra, the numbers start with 2. This is the opinion of the Pythagoreans. Cf. Aristotle, Metaphysics, 14a, 1087b. The number 1 is the foundation of numbers. However, the counting of the numbers starts with 2. See Sefer Ha-Echad 1. Also see Levin p. 399. Also see Ibn Ezra on Ex. 3:15, Short Commentary.
18. A body consists of 3 sides [or, ends]: height, width, and depth. See Sefer Ha-Echad:3, Levin, p.400. Ibn Ezra refers to the numbers by names that only one familiar with numerology would recognize. He speaks of the first number, the end, the root, the perfect number, and the complete number.
19. 4 is the first number to have a root. The square root of 4 is 2.
20. It does not disappear when squared. 5 squared=25.
21. " In number theory, a perfect number is a positive integer that is equal to the sum of its proper positive divisors, that is, the sum of its positive divisors excluding the number itself" (Wikipedia).
22. 7 is called a complete number because it is made up of the first odd number (3) plus the second even number (4). It is also made up of the first even number (2) plus the second odd number (5).
23. A cube. A cube consists of eight points. See Sefer Ha-Echad 8, where Ibn Ezra goes on to say that 9 ends the numbers. I do not know why he omitted 9 here.
24. The truly perfect man cannot be found. However, a relative perfect man can be found.
25. Not females.
26. Our verse reads: achat le-achat li-metzo cheshbon (adding one thing to another, to find out the account). According to Ibn Ezra, this should be rendered: “comparing one [woman] to another [woman] to find the account”; that is, to see the result of comparing a number of women to each other. Ibn Ezra now goes into a discourse on Hebrew linguistics because he wants to grammatically explain the word achat (one).
27. Letters which serve as prepositions, prefixes, and suffixes. See Leo Prij, Dies Grammatikalische Terminologie Des Abraham Ibn Esra, Basel, 1950. pp. 141-142. They also serve as formative elements to a root. For example, the mem in the word mitzvah (precept) is a servile letter, for the root of mitzvah is tzadi, vav, heh. Dikduke Hate'amim, ed. Baer and Strack, page 4, line 22. Berlin 1879.
28. Ibn Ezra employs
kastil av ha-mon as a mnemonic device to assist in remembering these letters. He chose the words
kastil av ha-mon for they spell out “Abraham (
av hamon (Gen. 17:5) from Castille.” Abraham ibn Ezra came from Castille.
29. Shechachoret comes from the root shin, chet, resh. The resh is not ordinarily a servile letter. However, the second resh in shechachoret is. Ibn Ezra points out that a root letter that is doubled can serve as a servile letter.
30. Literally, is combined with the tav.
31. From the root kaf, resh, tav.
32. Placed in the nun of tishkonnah.
33. From the root, shin, resh, tav.
34. Literally, joins.
35. Mesharat is a variant of mesharetet. It thus should have been vocalized mesharet. However, it was vocalized mesharat to distinguish it from the male form mesharet.
36. The dalet with a dagesh is sounded differently in biblical Hebrew than a dalet without a dagesh. The Hebrew word for “one” is echad. We would thus expect the feminine form to be achdat. However, it is hard to pronounce a dalet and a tav back to back when the dalet and tav have no dagesh. Hence, the dalet is dropped and the word sounded achat.
37. Two consecutive linguals, a dalet and tav, are difficult to sound.
38. La-lat is short for la-ledet. The dalet is dropped to simplify pronunciation. See the above two notes.
39. According to this interpretation, achat is not the feminine of echad, but is the feminine form of ach.
40. It does not mean "one cannot redeem the life of a man," or "a man cannot redeem the life of one."
41. It is the subject in Ps. 49:8 if we render the verse, "a brother (ach) cannot redeem the life of a man." It is the object if we render PS. 49:8"a man cannot redeem the life of his brother (ach).”
42. Literally, grow tired in attempting to save themselves [from death].
43. Israel (an Israelite)) is the brother of which Ezek. 18:10 speaks. Ezek. 18:10 reads: “If he beget a son that is a robber, a shedder of blood, and that doeth to a brother (ach) any of these things.” This interpretation reads our verse as follows: “If he beget a son that is a robber, a shedder of blood, and a brother (ach) that doeth any of these things.”
44. That is, an Israelite shall do. The reference is to the son mentioned earlier in the verse. Ibn Ezra uses the term “Israel” because he wants to stress that the word ach refers to a person, not to a number.
45. That is, who commits a sin which is similar to robbing or shedding blood.
46. Ezek. 18:10 reads: “If he beget a son that is a robber, a shedder of blood, and that doeth to a brother (ach) any of these things.” According to this interpretation, our verse means: If he beget a son that is a robber, a shedder of blood, and a "brother" that commits a sin, which is a sister (similar) to any of these things—robbing or shedding blood. “Which is a sister” is not part of the verse. It is Ibn Ezra's interpretation of “any of these things.” According to Ibn Ezra “any of these things” means “anything similar (a “sister”) to these things.”
47. Evil is their second nature. Hence, the prophet applies the term "brother" to their evil activities.
48. So Yonah Filwarg, Ve-nei Reshef, Petrekov, 1900, p.36.
49. Doeth one, one of these things is redundant. Furthermore, the phrase echad me-achat is ungrammatical, for echad is masculine and achat is feminine.