Hakol Hevel

In קהלת א:ב-ח Shlomo is proving הכל הבל תחת השמש by using nature. He concludes that nature is a repeating cycle. It may continue to repeat, but it never makes progress. He then claims that man is a part of this cycle and he too can't make any progress. 

I can't possibly agree with this. The world is constantly changing. We are discovering new things. We will eventually die and from then on we are no use to the world, however the things we did during our life still remain and progress the world further. 

Sit back, relax, and watch your people fail!

In מלכים א פרק ג, a conversation God is giving Shlomo the chance to ask for whatever he wants. Shlomo asks for the ability to tell the difference between good and bad so he can judge the nation. Instead of giving Shlomo what he asked for, God gives him a wise and understanding heart, wealth, and power. God then promises to give Shlomo a long life if he keeps the mitzvot. 

In class we wrote down the different outcomes that might come about now that Shlomo has these abilities. God granting Shlomo with these abilities could be good or bad. If he uses them to do good and help the nation, this was a great thing for Shlomo. If his new abilities cause him to become haughty and stray from God, the abilities were no good. 

I continue to struggle with one question. The answers I am getting for this question are not satisfying me. I am curious as to why God keeps setting his people up for failure. People are weak. If we say God knows everything how can he just "sit back and watch" as we fail to do what he wants/expects. Shlomo had so much thrown at him. We might have been in class guessing the outcomes, but God knew what would happen in the end. He knew Shlomo was weak and couldn't handle this amount of power and wealth. גן עדן is another example of God testing his people and watching them fail. 

Hakol Hevel

In the beginning of Kohelt, Shlomo says "Hakol Hevel." There are different ways to interpret this. One is that everything is pointless or worthless. He says that just like nature, people come and go, but do not change anything. Another is that this our world is pointless, but the world to come is not. The life we are live is pointless and it is worthless, but Olam Haba is not. We learnt a very similar idea in history. The Egyptians believed that everything went to the afterlife and they lived their lives trying to get there. They even mummified their bodies so that they would look good in it. According to this interpretation, Olam Haba is a lot like the Egyptian's afterlife.

Reading Between the Gray Lines

As we are all well aware of, Shlomo had a rather negative view on life. He was at the point where he considered everything to be hevel. After trying everything and finding it pointless and worthless, Shlomo questioned the meaning of his life and life in general. I was recently informed of how Shlomo's opinion on life might have been drastically different had he realized what he was actually searching for and why.
Shlomo was searching for what he considered to be the truth. However, he was evaluating this "truth" based on what he picked up from the outside world. Shlomo was incredibly wise, but as we know, even he was not wise enough to withstand outside influences; on the contrary, he surrounded himself with them (i.e. foreign wives and wealth, etc). Since he was influenced in so many directions and by so many different things, he began to see the world in a different way, and he also thought that it wouldn't affect him as a person.
The outside world can be said to see things in different shades of gray; good is mixed in with bad, and bad is mixed in with good. There is no definite right or wrong, because everything is muddled together. A lawyer's job is to try to point out where these shades of gray are, and make these "muddles" apparent. In the gentile world, this gray area is common and appreciated. There are at least two sides to every story, two views to every argument, and in most cases the number of differing voices gets much higher than just two. In the ideal Jewish world, this gray area could and should be immediately pointed out for what it is; confusion. What is right should be apparent, and what is wrong should be blatantly obvious. In this perspective, there is simply no room for gray; the truth is in black and white. Now, this obviously does not apply to halachic rulings, because as we all know, those will never be totally in line with each other. This applies to basic right and wrong and how we should navigate through life, because in a Jewish person's eyes, this should be as clear as the difference between day and night.
Shlomo was trying to use the outside world's behaviors and perspectives as a roadmap to the truth. This map was a faulty one, because using it would never actually lead him to anything close to the truth. In fact, it would only lead him straight into gray areas, where he could never get a full sense of meaning and satisfaction. These gray areas, upon close inspection, prove only to be facetious, unimportant, meaningless, and a lie. In short, Shlomo walked right into a trap of hevel; because he was looking in the wrong places and in the wrong ways, he had no possibility of reaching a conclusion other than "hakol hevel." If Shlomo had only realized this, and had instead looked to find meaning in true, fulfilling areas, and had he done so in ways that our traditions and beliefs praise, accept, and encourage, then he would have probably come to a very different conclusion. Perhaps, instead of believing that everything is hevel-worthless, purposeless, fleeting, and  lacking meaning and truth, Shlomo may have been able to realize that not only does life have meaning, but it can easily be found in any assortment of areas, you just have to know what you're looking for and where to look.

This morning, as I walked into Lily's room, I found her sprawled out across her bed. When she saw me she exclaimed, "HAKOL HEVEL." SHe then proceeded to tell me about the moment each day when she wakes up and decides hakol hevel except for her bed. I can't help but agree with her. The first two minutes in the morning are incredibly difficult. I can't help but to feel exactly like Shlomo- hakol hevel- except for one thing: my bed.

Obviously this feeling is slightly different from that of Shlomo because it does indeed pass by the time I'm eating breakfast. But, for just a few moments there, I understand what Shlomo is saying. Nothing in the day I am about to endure could possibly have any significance. Once I wake up, I feel like nothing in my life truly matters and nothing in my daily routine is of any importance. I get it, Shlomo. I get it.

Once I am fully conscience, I understand that the day ahead is in fact important. I am going to get an education and learn important skills. These things actually are of importance. Sorry Shlomo, but I am going to have to disagree. For whatever reason, I was put here on this Earth, so shouldn't I make something of it? Hakol is not hevel. I can do things that will not only give me purpose in my own life, but I can also work to improve the lives of others. Isn't that worth something?
So, Shlomo, I encourage you to move past those two minutes in the morning and find something that does, in fact, truly matter.

שירי סוף הדרך

 מַה-שֶּׁהָיָה, הוּא שֶׁיִּהְיֶה, וּמַה-שֶּׁנַּעֲשָׂה, הוּא שֶׁיֵּעָשֶׂה; וְאֵין כָּל-חָדָשׁ, תַּחַת הַשָּׁמֶשׁ.That which hath been is that which shall be, and that which hath been done is that which shall be done; and there is nothing new under the sun.(Kohelet 1:9)

The first part of Kohelet is really familiar to me; I feel like I've read it before. In a way I did-but not in Mr. Soleman's class when we learned Kohelet- in 9th grade when my Ivrit class learned "שירי סוף הדרך" with Mrs. Tsuna (hey! That's my mom! Cool). I always loved שירי סוף הדרך, but now that I'm starting to learn Kohelet, I wish that I could have read the poem after I learned Kohelet. 

The poem is separated into 3 different parts:  2שירי סוף הדרך 1, למדני אלקי, ושירי סוף. Essentially, shirei sof haderech is briefly interrupted in the middle for a little part that is sometimes called the "tefillah" portion. What is the premise of the poem? 

The first poem begins by people of all ages describing "הַדֶּרֶך"- "the road", otherwise known as "life". They all have different interpretations of what הַדֶּרֶך is like. The young boy says that הַדֶּרֶך is super beautiful; the young man say הַדֶּרֶך is very tough; the man says הַדֶּרֶך is super long. And the old man sat down with the golden sunset beating down on his  grey hair. The last bird of the day passes over him and sings- "Will you remember what was beautiful, tough, about הַדֶּרֶך?"

The middle part is the tefillah in which the author is pleading God to teach her secrets: the secrets of the withered leaf and the secrets of the ripened fruit. The secrets of this freedom we have to see, to breathe, to feel, to know, to yearn, to fail. Teach me how to sing out in praise about how time is renewed by each morning and night. Teach me this so that today won't be the same as yesterday. Teach me to appreciate the complexities in nature and the beauty of each new day lest I begin to think that יִהְיֶה עָלַי יוֹמִי הֶרְגֵּל. Teach me the secrets of nature because I don't want to think every day is the same and nothing changes. 
The poem ends with part B of "שירי סוף הדרך. This part isn't written in third person like the first part and it isn't written as a prayer like the second part. This part starts off אָמַרְתָּ- you said. It can be "you" as in the old man from the first paragraph or the "you" could be the author speaking reflexively and wanting us all to think reflexively.That's how I'll interpret this last part. I said that the days and nights were chasing after one another. They were just passing by, zooming by- I couldn't seem to tell the difference. It was just a blur. Days are coming and going. In my heart I see days passing- creeping through my window as the sun rises and the sun sets. The days are passing, but it seems like they're all the same. Does it really matter what day it is? הֲלֹא אֵין חָדָשׁ תַּחַת הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ? There's nothing new under the sun; it's all the same.... But now I'm old and grey and my days are limited and I realize-I know: : חָדָשׁ כָּל יוֹם תַּחַת הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ. Every day under the sun is new. 
It's really beautiful in its original Hebrew (much nicer than my explicated English version, anyways.) and I suggest you all read the poem. 

 א שירי סוף הדרך

הדרך יפה עד מאוד - אמר הנער 

הדרך קשה עד מאוד - אמר העלם 

הדרך ארכה עד מאוד - אמר הגבר 

ישב הזקן לנוח בצד הדרך 

צובעה השקיעה שיבתו בפז ואודם 

הדשא מבהיק לרגליו בטל הערב 

ציפור אחרונה של יום מעליו מזמרת 

התזכור מה יפתה, מה קשתה, מה ארכה הדרך 

לַמְּדֵנִי, אֱלֹהַי

לַמְּדֵנִי, אֱלֹהַי, בָּרֵך וְהִתְפַּלֵּל

עַל סוֹד עָלֶה קָמֵל, עַל נֹגַהּ פְּרִי בָּשֵׁל,

עַל הַחֵרוּת הַזֹּאת: לִרְאוֹת, לָחוּשׁ, לִנְשֹׁם,

לָדַעַת, לְיַחֵל, לְהִכָּשֵׁל.

לַמֵּד אֶת שִׂפְתוֹתַי בְּרָכָה וְשִׁיר הַלֵּל

בְּהִתְחַדֵּשׁ זְמַנְּךָ עִם בֹּקֶר וְעִם לֵיל,

לְבַל יִהְיֶה יוֹמִי הַיּוֹם כִּתְמוֹל שִׁלְשׁוֹם.

לְבַל יִהְיֶה עָלַי יוֹמִי הֶרְגֵּל.

שירי סוף הדרך ב

אמרת יום רודף יום ולילה - לילה 

הנה ימים באים בלבך אמרת 

ותראה ערבים ובקרים פוקדים חלונך 

ותאמר הלא אין חדש תחת השמש 

והנה אתה בא בימים, זקנת ושבת 

ימיך ספורים ויקר מניינים שבעתיים 

ותדע חדש כל וים תחת השמש 

Since ninth grade I have often thought about this poem at the weirdest times. I look at things in my life or sometimes in life in general and think יום רודף יום ולילה - לילה. But then I think of the tefillah portion of the poem.. I think there's something to be said about looking at the complexities of nature and of the subtle nuances that exist everywhere in life. 

Now, I can't tell you whether or not there is a purpose in life, and I'm not going to say that Shlomo is depressed because he calls everything "hevel", but I will affirm that I strongly believe that חדש כל וים תחת השמש- no day is the same. Every day is different. Days might seem to all blob up and cluster- sometimes it might seem like all days are the same- but every day is new, and every day is different. I have a hunch Shlomo might come to that conclusion at some point over the sefer (even if he argues against it soon after).

I'd love to hear what you guys think about the poem and its relation to Kohelet!

What does worthless mean?

            This week in class, we stressed on a very important idea. We stressed on the definition of the word Hevel. What I took from it is that Hevel means worthless. As Shlomo shares, "Everything is worthless." Shlomo basically explains that man is just a cycle. As people die out, the earth just keeps spinning around. He also explains, "There is nothing new under the sun." It seems like in Kohelet, it is all about negativity and depression. After learning about this, it brings up a good point. If we are all worthless, what is the point of our existence?

        I left class very sad after trying to think more in depth about or discussions. I started to think about all bad things in the world. I thought about deaths, poverty, depression, robberies, and more. If there's much suffering and we are all worthless and just specks of dust from the earth, then what is the point of us?

        Although this seems extremely depressing, there is a more positive way we can look at it. Instead of thinking overall that EVERYTHING is worthless, we can approach it in somewhat of a different way. We can look at it in the way that all the work does in this world is pointless, but may be important in the world to come. It could be saying that acquisition of materialism and power do not last, but that does not mean every single thing is worthless.

      Even after learning this, the concept of life is still something very hard to grasp. Even in this world, if such traumas and hardships happen, it is extremely hard to realize what is important and why we exist. Although I do not have a clear definition of life's meaning, reading Kohelet shows me that everything in life is temporary. Sukkot, we take a break from our normal lifestyle as we leave our home and basically 'live' in our Sukkahs. Just like in life, we have to realize that it is a temporary thing and nothing lasts forever. What we could and should do is no matter what circumstance we are in, we should try to be the best we can, because life really is short.

A personal letter to Shlomo - Cheer up, friend!

In the prologue we learn that the premise of Kohelet is basically "HaKol Hevel Tachat HaShemesh" - "All is worthless/fleeting/illogical under the sun." Shlomo gives some kind of proof for this by saying that the cycles of nature (the sun rising and setting, rivers flowing, the wind blowing) continuously repeat without making any progress. He adds that man is just like these cycles of nature, doing the same things over and over and not accomplishing anything.

This all seems like nonsense. What does Kohelet mean by this? People are constantly accomplishing amazing things, whether it be finding a new discovery, inventing new technological devices, or developing drugs to treat diseases. I think I have few words for Shlomo. Here is my letter to him:

Dear Shlomo A.K.A Kohelet (whichever you prefer),

Listen- maybe things seem pretty bad right now. This happens to everyone. Life gets you down. You feel like crying. And that's okay!

Perhaps the reason that you are so down in the dumps is that:
1. Let's face it- you had pretty rough life. You had absolutely everything- money, wives, power-  then it was all suddenly taken away. Even your relationship with G-d was ruined. :(
2. Antidepressants won't be invented until the 1950's, so you can't exactly medicate your way out of this one. Sorry, bud.

Shlomhelet, believe me when I say that there is so much to live for! The world can be a fantastic, magnificent place- I promise! Go outside on a beautiful day and frolic in a field of daisies and puppies. Then try telling me that HaKol Hevel. Yeah. HaKol is NOT Hevel!!!

I'm out.
Peace, love, & happiness <3
-Lily

Hakol Hevel

As I was davening on Yom Kippur, I was looking at the words carefully as I davened and I noticed that Hakol Hevel came up a lot in different times of davening. Sometimes when I don't understand what I am reading in davening, I will read the English so I can get the full meaning and really understand what I am saying. The definition in the Artscroll English siddur for hevel, was vain. Since, we haven't fully come to an exact meaning I started thinking about what Hevel means according to the Artscroll siddur.

Dictionary definitions of vain:

• producing no result; useless
• having no meaning or likelihood of fulfillment
• without success or a result

So according to the Artscroll siddur, it means useless. Saying that everything is useless and theres is no result to anything. I thought about it some more and maybe this is far fetched, or maybe not, but like one of the commandments. Lo tisa et shem Hashem lasahv. Don't use the name of Hashem in vain. The dictionary has a different meaning for vain in this context. 

Dictionary definition to in vain

• use someone's name in a way that shows a lack of respect.

So I got to thinking some more. I thought about what we learned in class. Everything tachat hashemesh is hevel. So, in this context, I think that maybe Shlomo looks back and realizes that he lacked respect for Hashem. When he called out to Hashem, he never felt respect for Him, maybe he just saw Him as someone who is there when he needs, but He's only there when he absolutely needs something. He lacked respect. Hakol Hevel-the way he treated Hashem was Hevel.

Just my thoughts on this. What do you guys think about it?

Our Purpose

Shalom!

In this week's riveting Megillot class, we discussed the first eleven Pesukim of Kohelet. These Pesukim offer the prologue/premise to the Sefer.

In Pesukim 2-3, Shlomo establishes the intitial premise by saying הֲבֵל הֲבָלִים אָמַר קֹהֶלֶת הֲבֵל הֲבָלִים הַכֹּל הָבֶל- everything is worthless and the acquisition of materialism and power doesn't last--it is ephemeral and  מַה יִּתְרוֹן לָאָדָם בְּכָל עֲמָלוֹ שֶׁיַּעֲמֹל תַּחַת הַשָּׁמֶשׁ- what is the purpose of man with all the work/toil that he does under the sun?

Proceeding further, Pesukim 4-8 explain that the cycles of nature, or the four elements (earth, fire, wind, and water) continuously repeat without making any progress. Shlomo adds man as the fifth element and proclaims that man is part of this cycle, and he too can't make any progress.

The last Pesukim (9-11) add that there is nothing new under the sun, in terms of ideas- there is no possibility of lasting progress. There is no memory of what came before, and no later events will etch a memory.

The philosophy that ensues? Nothing new is under the sun. After, reading these Pesukim, it appears that Shlomo is telling us that everything is worthless; there is no purpose to creativity, innovation, new ideas because everything is futile and ephemeral. So what is Shlomo true message to us?

I believe that Shlomo is either trying to tell us one of two things: 1) there is a purpose to creation of new ideas. However, we need to know what our goal is in generating these concepts. 2) there is no purpose to anything but serving G-d. This causes us to ask the question: if so what is the purpose of creation?

Hopefully, over the next few weeks, we will be able to discover what lesson Shlomo is conveying to man in Kohelet, and be able to discern what our purpose is in life.

The Purpose of Life

         This week in Megillot we began looking into what Kohelet is really all about. We first learned that Shlomo (aka Kohelet) uses the phrase "הכל הבל" quite a lot, and therefore, it would make sense that we should be able to translate it properly. There seem to be three translations of the word הבל- the first being "worthless" or "pointless", the second "ephemeral", and the third "illogical". We each learned about a different translation and decided that the most appropriate translation for "הכל הבל" would be "pointless", as it fits in with the context of the rest of the content. After learning about the basic translation for one of the main points of Kohelet, we had to dig deeper to find out the true premise of the book.

        

         "הכל הבל" is a phrase that is connected with most of the book. Therefore it would make sense for it to pop up in the premise of the book. In Pasukim ג-יא, Shlomo makes interesting connections that help us understand the basics of what he talks about later on. We know that the basis of Kohelet is explaining the purpose/meaning of life. In Pasuk ג, we see that Shlomo adds a new phrase- תחת השמש. This, coupled with הכל הבל, really helps us understand what Shlomo is trying to say. By connecting the two phrases and what we already know the book is based on, we can see that Shlomo is really saying, "If everything man does under the sun is pointless, then what is the purpose of life?

         Continuing on from the first few Pasukim, Shlomo begins explaining an interesting idea about the elements of nature. In Pasukim ד-ז, Shlomo talks about each of the four elements (water, earth, fire, and air) and discusses their cycles in nature. Then, to connect with his basic ideas talked about earlier, he explains that there is a fifth element- man. Man is part of these cycles of nature, and just like these cycles, everything man does is pointless and doesn't make any progress. 

          As we continue down this deep, depressing hole of endless descriptions of how life is pointless, Shlomo continues the bright and cheerful tone by discussing how there is no possibility of anything new. In Pasukim ט-יא, he says that was done in the past will be done again in the future. In other words, there is nothing new "תחת השמש". Just to make sure that we understand what he is saying, he adds one final note- there is no memory of what came before and what will come will not leave a memory either. 

         So obviously, anyone reading this could tell that it's pretty heavy stuff. We had a discussion in class where we tried to figure out why we would read such a depressing story on a happy holiday like Succos. While we were having this discussion, I was thinking that it doesn't really seem like Shlomo means it. It almost seems as if he's putting the worst possible ideas into our heads as an introduction. He is asking the question, "If everything man does is pointless under the sun, then what is the purpose of life?" To me, this doesn't sound like Shlomo is saying "Everything man does is pointless and there is no purpose to life". It sounds more like he is asking an introductory question that he will answer during the course of Kohelet. His question may sound rhetorical, but to me it sounds sincere. He is truly searching for the purpose of life. 

         

Everything in this worlds pointless, but not in the world to come.

This week we learned that there are two ways to understand that "all man does under the sun is pointless." One interpenetration is that everything we do is pointless and the second is that everything we do in this world (under the sun) is pointless, but what we do in the world to come (above the sun) is not. The second interpretation seems to be saying that only Olam Haba matters. This is a similar concept to what we learned in World History. Many of the early civilizations believe in after life. They spent most of their lives pleasing their gods so they could go to the afterlife. The Egyptians even mummified their deceased so that their bodies would be preserved and look nice for the gods of the afterlife. These early civilizations believed that this world was all about trying to get to the afterlife, just like the second interpenetration that says only things we do in Olam Haba or worth anything.

What is Life Worth?

Rabbi Perl said something today that I really connected to our study of Kohelet. He said that, in Yom Kippur davening, there is a verse that says that, "I had no purpose before I was born and now, I still have no purpose." This concept of having a purpose is one that people of all faiths struggle with. If they happen to be learning Kohelet at the same time, then they have probably struggled with this more than others have. In the past week, we have learned the basics of the first perek of Kohelet. Shlomo, in his reflective state, has said that everything is "Hevel." Okay. He then continues by giving examples of how nature follows an extremely structured cycle; water flows downstream and then returns to its source. The same is true about the wind and, with a logical leap, man. Man is also stuck in this cycle. We come into this world, flow downstream through life, and then return to the source - we return to the ground from whence the first people came. I think that most people have come to terms with the cycle of life. So what is Shlomo's issue? He is/was grappling with the idea of man's purpose on Earth and with leaving a legacy and making his life matter. Man can live a life of "accomplishment" and no one will remember his name or what he did within two generations. How is this the role of man? What is the role of the individual?

Shlomo's question could not be more relevant to Yom Kippur. On Yom Kippur, we ask G-d to write us into the book of life. We repent for all of our sins and come closer to G-d to sustain our relationship with him. We ask G-d not to slate us for death this year and pray that we can become better people. About two years ago, I spent the entire Yom Kippur wondering what this was all for. I davened because I was scared not to. At the same time, I couldn't understand why we were doing this. What is each individual life worth? This leads to the much bigger question of what the meaning of life is. I clearly can't answer that question in a blog post. Living every day to its fullest potential is the goal here. Shlomo was struggling with the role of the individual in the grand scheme of all of mankind. Yes, that may seem very daunting. It is very daunting. On Yom Kippur, that will all change for me. If one voice isn't loud enough to be heard, then how about the entire nation? When we are all davening for the fate of our own souls, what are we actually doing? In my opinion, we are all calling out to Hashem and asking him to send us a role to fulfill in life.

I wrote the beginning part of this blog before Yom Kippur. Now, on Sunday, after the tragedy that happened in Jacksonville, Florida to a friend, I have much more to say.

As most people already know, Orly Ohayon and her mother were hit by a car as they crossed the street on the way to shul for Kol Nidrei. Mrs. Ohayon was immediately killed and Orly sustained severe injuries. By Saturday night, she had already undergone several surgeries and is now expected to recover quickly. Doctors say that she will be walking within the next twelve weeks. Thank G-d she is alive. This tragedy hits close to home because I know Orly personally. While I was on GIVE this summer, Orly was on Michlelet with Racheli. When both programs went to greet the Nefesh B'Nefesh charter flight on July 23rd, Orly reached out to me without ever having mat or even heard my name before. She was so warm and caring; I can see exactly how she has managed to impact the lives of so many people. On Saturday night, as news of the accident spread via Facebook, the NCSY community and Orly's friends sprung into action. Within a few hours, tehillim groups were set up and people were planning on going to the Kotel to have a tehillim session for the aliyah of the soul of Esther Bat Yosef (Mrs. Ohayon) and the refuah shelemah of Orly Bat Esther. At 8:30 PM Israel time, a group of about 100 NCSYers gathered at the Kotel and said tehillim for her. I was on the conference call, so I heard everything that was happening. In the wake of Yom Kippur, after each of these individuals had taken an entire day and dedicated it to building a stronger relationship with G-d, each person was using their strength to ask Hashem to heal this wonderful and inspirational girl. I believe that Orly has found her role in life: she will inspire the world to turn back to G-d. Now, at nearly 16 years old, she is already well on the road to doing that. Why do bad things happen to good people? I don't know. When bad things happen, is it an indication that everything in life is "Hevel" or worthless? No. Just looking at the immense kindness that has sprung up in the wake of this tragedy is enough to show me that life is definitely worth something.

Please keep Orly Bat Esther in your prayers.

Cycle of Water: An Alternate Idea

I was thinking about how we said in class last week that פרק א, פסוקים ד-ז was talking about the cycle of nature, and I found online at Ray Stedman.org (http://www.raystedman.org/daily-devotions/ecclesiastes/the-endless-cycle) an interesting idea. It's a completely Christian site, and the article is pretty Christian as well, but disregarding the source, and most of the surrounding material, I wanted to focus on that one particular idea.
We said that the sun, wind, and water all go around and around and end up back where they started. The way I thought of this, I imagined the sun and wind going literally in circles around the earth, and the water flowing from stream to ocean to stream and back around again and again. This article proposes a different idea for the water cycle.
According to the article, the cycle is not that of water flowing downstream to the ocean and back around, it's the cycle of evaporation, condensation, and precipitation. Instead of water staying in one form and just traveling around and around the world, it's changing forms, but always coming back to the form in which it started.
I don't know if there's any particular correct answer, but I thought this was an interesting theory.

Life is Worthless. Sincerely, Shlomo

Well, everything is Hevel. Everything is illogical, worthless, and ephemeral. Basically, Shlomo and Hannah would have been best friends. Okay, let's go through this:

• Generations come and go all the time, but do things really change? Eh. Not exactly.
• The cycles of nature never change. Wind comes and goes, back and forth. The sun rises and sets in the same place.
• And as if that isn't depressing enough, Shlomo also goes on to stretch all this to mean that man is part of this never ending, yet never progressing cycle.

Shlomo doesn't stop there. He's on a role. He also says that there is no memory of what came first and there is no lasting memory of what's going on now, so basically, everything seems new but it isn't. There is nothing new under the sun. Which brings us back to our favorite statement, everything is hevel. 

Finally we get to this new phrase, "Tachat HaShemesh." Shlomo says that nothing is new under the sun and that man puts forth toil under the sun. So, this seems like a half glass full or a half glass empty type of situation. We could see this as, "Oh man, there is nothing new under the sun. There is nothing new ever. Everything is worthless." Or...we could see this as, "Although things might be so great under the sun, in the next world (in heaven), there is a purpose for man and things won't be so bad." Okay, so this isn't a totally half glass full type of theory, more like a "little more full than empty" type of thing. Yeah, so there is some purpose for man, just not in this world. Yall might think differently, but I'd like for there to be some purpose in this world. If not then you might as well do some mitzvot, and die while giving all your organs to those in need like the guy in 7 Pounds. Then at least you've done some good in your lifetime, people will have good things to say about you at your funeral, and you'll get into Olam HaBah where you will have a purposeful life that is not Hevel.

I know that by the end of this year I'll have a better understanding of what this all means but for now it just seems like Shlomo is going through a depression stage. Maybe Cymbalta can help. He obviously just had a hard realization about life and is like a distressed poet who tries to pour out all of his feelings into his work. Call me crazy but I'd like to think life isn't worthless. Hopefully there's some positivity on the future lesson plans.

Perspectification... Again.

I know this whole perspectification thing is getting old (why does Blogger think perspectification isn't a word?) but it's just so relevant!
This week we learned the beginning of Perek Alef. Going through the Perek we start to see a trend:
Passuk Alef: serves as an introduction to who is writing the sefer: "דברי קהלת" -- we decided there could be two possibilities of what the word קהלת could be giving us: 

1. מקהלה: implying there will be an internal dialogue. 
2. קהילה: implying he will be presenting ideas to congregation. 

Passuk Bet-Gimel: 'Kohelet' tells us that there's no point to any work that man does 'תחת השמש' because הכל הבל: (two perspectives):

1. Everything is הבל, there's no point to anything -- including G-d, religion, relationships.
2. Doing something in this world is הבל so there's no point to acquiring wealth, wisdom, power, etc. 

Passuk Hey-Chet: Kohelet goes through the cycles of nature to show that there is NO progress and THEREFORE this includes man as well --> no progress for nature or man. (big leap)

Passuk Tet - Yud Alef: Kohelet tells us that there is no memory of anything that ever came before and there will be no memory of what will be done (אין חדש תחת השמש). 

Now, what do we get from all of this? 

Mrs. Perl said in class that we would all leave class feeling down and depressed and like there is no point in life, because that is what we just read. I wanted to offer another possible feeling we could have. Instead of reading all of these depressing things (they certainly are upsetting) and getting down, we should rise to the challenge and try to find all the positive in life. Certainly Shlomo wasn't lying to us - it does in fact often seem like life is really just worthless/pointless/futile/ephemeral/incomrehensible/illogical, but sometimes if we instead just try to seek out the positive instead of point out the negative, it makes things seem brighter and happier. 

Clearly, there will be parts of this sefer that point out negative things about life: maybe as a class we could take on the challenge together of trying to look at the positive and the positive message within the portrayal of the negative. 

Who wrote it?

At the very beginning of our class, we said that no one knows for sure who קהלת was, but we think it was שלמה המלך בו דוד, and we have run on that assumption ever since. I was looking around to see if there were any convincing arguments that it could really be someone else.
I didn't really expect that I would find a convincing argument considering how much evidence that points to שלמה being the author, but I found something interesting by someone named Jedley Manimtim at https://voices.yahoo.com/who-really-wrote-ecclesiastes-3694932.html. He notes that a possible explanation to support the idea that שלמה wrote קהלת is that even though שלמה had a bad period, he did real תשובה in the end, and then wrote קהלת. Manimtim counters, however, that in the history that we know of שלמה at the very end of his life in מלכים א, Hashem is very angry at שלמה for turning away from Him. If שלמה had repented in the end and become great enough to write a whole new book which would become so important, why would that not be included in the history of his life? "שלמה turns away from Hashem, and Hashem is angry, but שלמה does תשובה and goes on to write a whole new book that later becomes very important to תנך?" Wouldn't that be significant enough to include in the record of his life?
Whether or not שלמה really wrote/compiled the book of קהלת or not, I thought this was just something interesting to think about.

"The Circle Game"

"A generation goes and a generation comes, but the earth endures forever.

The sun rises and the sun sets, and to its place it yearns and rises there.

It goes to the south and goes around to the north; the will goes around and around, and the will returns to its circuits.

All the rivers flow into the sea, yet the sea is not full; to the place where the rivers flow, there they repeatedly go...

What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun."

"And the seasons they go 'round and 'round
And the painted ponies go up and down
We're captive on the carousel of time
We can't return we can only look behind
From where we came
And go round and round and round
In the circle game"

What is the circle game? Is it what the first few pesukim of Kohelet talks about? This week when we started to dive into the text of Kohelet all I could think of was the song "The Circle Game." Pesukim 4-9 of the first chapter in Kohelet talk about all of the natural cycles of life and how they all come and go but they always return back to their original place. They all go in a circle. "And the seasons they go 'round and 'round." This also talks about the natural cycles chasing each other and themselves in circles. Both of these metaphor show that there is nothing new under the sun which is what Kohelet is talking about in these verses. 

The song goes on to say "and the painted ponies go up and down" which refers to a carousel. Imagine a carousel in your head and what do the ponies on there do, they only move up and down. They don't move side to side, they don't move in circles, they move up and they move down. Not only is this line a metaphor for there is nothing new under the sun, but I also think that it is a metaphor for childhood. A carousel is one of a child's favorite rides and this shows that even in childhood nothing is ever really new either. 

The fourth and fifth lines of the song resemble pasuk 9 in Kohelet. Pasuk 9 talks about what has been is done, people don't learn from it and that leads to nothing new under the sun. The song also talks about the same thing. It says that we can't return to the  past but we can look behind at it meaning that we can't go back and change it or learn from it but we can look at it which, again leads to nothing new under the sun. 

The first part of the first chapter in Kohelet is indeed describing the circle game. Our world chases itself in circles and we can never do anything new from chasing ourselves and our own mistakes. I encourage you all to listen to the song (link below).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbIuC9hTY9Y

What Shlomo did wrong.

In this week of learning we learned about how Shlomo didn't do the wise thing. When Hashem asked Shlomo what he wanted, Shlomo responded by listing many materialistic items that he did not actually need. What really stood out though is that he asked Hashem for the ability to tell from right or wrong. For everything that Shlomo asked for Hashem granted it, except for this one thing. Though to prove to Shlomo that he cannot be like Hashem, Hashem gave Shlomo a test. When Shlomo failed this test he finally realized that he cannot possibly be as great as Hashem.

Is any of this really fair? After learning about Shlomo's bad decisions and consequential downfall, I still can't help but ask myself- how is this fair? I would do the same! Of course Shlomo was the king of the Jewish people and therefore should behave as any role model should. Yes, he did directly defy the word of G-d himself. But let's just take a step back for a moment- it seems as if G-d is directly setting Shlomo up for failure by granting his more wisdom and wealth than anyone can truly handle.

By specifically telling Shlomo that a king cannot have too many horses, too much gold, or too many wives,  Shlomo became tempted to do exactly that.

It's kind of like when your mom makes cookies and specifically tells you not to eat them fresh out of the over. The cookies are sitting right there, so obviously you are going to eat a cookie as soon as she leaves the room (not that I would know from experience... Mindy doesn't bake). It is kind of the same thing.

Taking a step back, it is also fair to say that Shlomo was the king of the Jewish people, and despite taking the throne at a young age, he was in a position of great leadership and should have known better. Of course it would be incredibly difficult to resist the temptation all around you. But, Shlomo was the KING, for crying out loud. He was the ultimate role model for the Jewish people. His failure to comply to Hashem's specific rules and submission to the temptation around him showed he was truly unfit for the job.

The whole situation still makes me a bit uncomfortable. The whole thing still does seem a bit iffy. But looking at the bright side, it became clear that Shlomo was obviously not fit for the throne and needed to be replaced. Maybe in the end it turned out to be what was best for the Jewish people, when a new, better-behaved king took the throne. Maybe Shlomo's story set an example for the Jewish people and sort of scared them into following Hashem. By failing the test, Shlomo paved the way for change in the leadership of the Jewish people and set an example of exactly what not to do. Who knows... maybe that was Hashem's point? Meh. Maybe.

Hakol Hevel!!

Everything Is Worthless! Everything is Incomprehensible! Everything is Ephemeral- Nothing is Lasting! 

Oh goodness.. that does not sound swell. But guys... do you realize this is basically the main thing that we've discussed about Kohelet so far? Yes, first we talked about Shlomo's life for a few classes, but in terms of Kohelet learning, think for a second- what have we been discussing?

We've been talking about how Shlomo- who, after some text study and logical reasoning, we deduced wrote this lovely text- is quoted saying "Hakol Hevel!" Sounds like a great way to go into reading a philosophical/advice text, don't ya think? There's nothing quite like the anticipation of reading a philosophical that has its main catchphrase as: nothing matters! It's all worthless!  Especially when we know that this work was written by a man who is filled with regrets and at the verge of death. Oh, what a joy!

On a serious note, Kohelet is a very respected work and I cannot wait to start learning it and perspectifying it in all the right places! I know we are going to come up with some great things. But, as for now, unfortunately, we do not have much knowledge about Kohelet in order to have much of a conversation about it. You all have pretty much exhausted the conversation about Shlomo and all his fun jazz, so I won't talk about that. Instead, I'll just muse more about Kohelet if you don't mind.

I recently finished reading a novel by Jon Krakauer entitled Into the Wild. If you haven't read it I highly encourage reading it. (Also, there's a movie that is on Netflix, but don't make the mistake of watching the movie first.) Why am I telling you about the books I've been reading? The book is centered around researching the fascinating life and unfortunate death of a man named Christopher McCandless. McCandless was devout follower of writers like Thoreau and London and chose to live out their idealized visions of life after he graduated from Emory University by giving away all his money and possessions and stepping into the wild. There is one point early on in the book when he has $150 left and he burns it. He just burns the money. And so it was gone. No longer worth anything. But how much was something really worth in the first place if it could have value one second and no value the next moment? I can very easily see McCandless making the proclamation of "hakol hevel!" He took this to the extreme, perhaps, when **SPOILER ALERT** he went into the Alaskan wild alone and unprepared. But- and this is how it connects back to Shlomo- right before he dies, he writes, "HAPPINESS ONLY REAL WHEN SHARED." Everything is not hevel, then. He realized this all too late.

I can't wait to learn more about what Shlomo actually says in this book. From what Mrs. Perl has said so far, there are a lot of contradictions, so I'm a little bit hesitant. 

So, here's a little bit of the 'post-in-bullets' and things to think about for those who may want to comment: 

• What does it mean for everything to be worthless or meaningless? What is that saying about life in general? It's a bit grim, don't you think? If everything is meaningless or difficult to comprehend, where does God fit in to all of this and how is this a work of Jewish literature?
• I went off on a tangent about this guy who went into the wild because all material possessions were worthless. Thoughts? How much worth does something have if it can be gone in an instant? 
• Where do things like people (and maybe god) fit into the phrase "hakol hevel"? Is "hakol" strictly material things or is it really everything?
• McCandless came to a realization at the end of his life. Being close to death seems to make people finally put things from their life into perspective. So.. Shlomo.. Kohelet. What do you guys think? 

Ps. Yes, I realize the McCandless thing was a bit tangential  but just know I did the story no justice whatsoever. 

Auto-biography

In class, we looked at different sources that discuss the life of Shlomo Hamelech. In Melachim Aleph, we are told that G-d asks Shlomo what he wants from him. Shlomo replies that he wants the ability to tell the difference between good and bad in order to judge the nation. Hashem cannot give him this ability, but instead gives him a wise and understanding heart, and additionally, wealth and honor. Hashem promises to give Shlomo a long life if he follows his mitzvot like Dovid Hamelech, his father.

In a way, this story of Shlomo Hamelech reflects the story of Gan Eden. The test given by G-d to
Adam and Chava was designed to show that G-d was in control and man was beneath him. It gives the message that only G-d truly has the power to distinguish between good and evil. Similarly, Shlomo Hamelech asks for the ability to know the difference between good and bad, when G-d is the only one who knows this. Therefore, Shlomo Hamelech is essentially asking for the ability to be like G-d, which is absolutely unacceptable.

Before actually looking inside Kohelet, we discussed whether we thought Shlomo would include his own experiences in his philosophical book. It was a question of whether Shlomo would have written an auto-biography, or instead opted to keep his own experiences and life story out and just create a purely philosophical work.

This made me think about the idea of auto-biographies. Many people choose to write autobiographies. The question is: why? Why do these people choose to put their entire life out there? Why do people want to have everyone know all their business?

Celebrities, in particular, often write auto-biographies. Since they are always in the public eye, people tend to make judgements about the way these celebrities live their lives. Especially if there is some kind of scandal, the public tend to blow it up, discuss their view on the topic, and gossip. If you pick up any trashy magazine by the checkout aisle in Kroger, you are sure to see an incredible amount of gossip on the latest celebrity drama.

What we see on TV or in magazines may not always be the truth. Perhaps the reason that celebrities so often choose to write autobiographies is that they wan't to set the record straight. Writing an autobiography gives them a chance to have a voice, to let people know what the truth is, and maybe influence the way the public views them. For this reason exactly, it might have been helpful if Shlomo chose to write an auto-biography. It would be his opportunity to defend himself, voice his opinions on his experiences, or perhaps even apologize or show regret for the way he acted.

Temptation

Nowadays, we have many temptations in our lives. Whether it's technology or some other materialistic object that seems to always be calling our name, we are tempted. We often think that it's such an everyday thing and that it's really okay because every average person falls to temptation just like us, and this is true.

What we often don't realize is that it's not just average people who fall to temptation. CELEBRITIES DO IT TOO! Joking. But seriously, important people also fall to temptation just like us.

Shlomo was just like all of us: he was presented with an opportunity -- he had so much wealth, power, and wisdom that he had the potential to be the ideal, perfect leader. Despite this opportunity, however, Shlomo was still human: he had temptations just like all of us. When he thought that he could be just like G-d, and resist temptation, he failed and therefore was not the perfect king that he could have been. 

Because of this, he had his kingdom ripped away from him, the nation was split, and kicked out of the land. 

This week in class we talked about Shlomo's request of Hashem. He asks Hashem for knowledge, to know the difference between good and bad. We also learned what Dovid's response was and why it was so much better. The movie we watched at slechote, which I did not like, shows a lot of people who clearly do not know the difference. I understand that we can never really know the difference but the people in the movie were way off base.

No One can be as Great as Hashem

The other night, I was watching an episode of Malcolm in the Middle. The main character, Malcolm, get's into an argument with his mother. For days they argued, because Malcolm did not think his mother should have authority over him. He believed he should have full control over everything in his life, even though he was a child. After they argued he realized he was wrong, and needed his mother's guidance.

This reminded me of what we learned about Shlomo and Hashem. Shlomo asked to be able to find the difference between good and bad. By looking at the story of Adam and Chava, we learned that Shlomo is basicly asking to be as great as Hashem. 

All of the creatures on earth are Hashem's children, and just like Malcolm, we all need are mother or father to help guide us through life. By Shlomo asking to be just as wise and great as Hashem, he is saying that he can have control over his own life, and does not need a father (Hashem) to help guide him.

All to a Servant?!

This past week our class discussed one of the consequences that would occur if Shlomo did not follow G-d's rules: a servant would take over the kingship. What could this mean? Does this mean an actual servant of Shlomo's, or just a person that had the status of servant? Why in the world would G-d hand over the kingship of Israel to a servant? Doesn't this seem to be demeaning to position of king? What about royal bloodlines? What about Shlomo's family: will consequences befall them because of Shlomo`s actions? Would that be fair? How does a servant get picked to be a king? 

Why would G-d give the kingship over to a servant anyway? I have a few different theories. Perhaps this was supposed to be demeaning to Shlomo, which would be a method of "teaching him a lesson." Or maybe, a servant would be the only logical choice because they are accustomed to following orders, and this would be G-d's nway of showing Shlomo what went wrong. Then again, a servant may be a  natural choice because they would not have been blessed with everything they ever wanted, and because of this they would probably be very unlikely to be swayed by hubris or be too narcissistic. What do you guys think about my opinions? Do you have any answers to the questions above? PLEASE feel free to respond to anything in this post in the comments below!

Shlomo's Big Mistake

Shlomo was an incredible king for the Jews, but was afraid that his knowledge was not vast enough. He went to G0d and asked him for the knowledge to know between right and wrong, so he could judge the Jews fairly. He did not ask him for wealth and power or anything materialistic. In response G0d gave him this knowledge and many more materialistic things. There are two different opinions on why G0d responded in this way. The first is that he was rewarding Shlomo for not requesting to have all of the wealth and items that he did not need. The other opinion is that G0d was giving him all these temptations to see if he would use them correctly (a test). The reason behind this idea is because Shlomo asked to know the difference between bad and good it was like he was asking to be too close to G0d. We got this idea from when Adam and Chava were in Gan Eiden, and they were told not too eat from the עץ לדעת טוב ורע because it was too G0dly for them. Therefore G0d gave him materialistic items to test to see if he had the potential to be G0dlike. 

Personally the second opinion makes better sense to me than the first. Why would G0d reward Shlomo with materialistic items if he knew that he would use them badly and eventually stray away from holiness? G0d doesn't purposely create a situation for us that we cannot overcome, so he must have meant for it to be a test to see if he could overcome it. 

Incentives

This week in Megillot we opened the book of Melachim and started learning about Shlomo's downfall. The first thing we learned about was when Shlomo asked Hashem for something. He didn't ask Hashem for wealth or power, he asked Hashem for the ability to judge fairly between good and evil. When I first learned about this I really admired Shlomo for what he asked for because I thought this showed that he wasn't focused on the materialism and power but was focused on being a good model for his kingdom. But, I started to change my mind as soon as Hashem responded.

After Shlomo asked Hashem for the ability to judge fairly, I think Hashem saw that as I did. He saw it as Shlomo not being selfish and trying to be a role model for his kingdom. So, in response Hashem gave him the ability to judge fairly and a lot more. Along with that he gave him wealth and power, but there was a catch/incentive. When Hashem decided to give him this wealth and power he told Shlomo that he had to model after his father and also use that wealth and power to be a role model for his kingdom; and if he did so his life would be prolonged. I bet Shlomo thought to himself, "YIPEE, I am getting what I asked for and more!" But, he didn't think of the incentive. Once he got the wealth and power he did indeed use it for good, like building the Beit HaMikdash and a palace for himself but he also violated the basic rule that Hashem gave to all of the kings.

The rules: One, you may not have too many horses and to acquire any horse you may not go down to Egypt to get them. Two, you may not have too many wives, and third, you may not have too much gold and silver. Although Shlomo used a lot of this wealth for good, he also used it to violate these rules. He did acquire many horses from Egypt and that gave him too much power. Because of his wisdom that Hashem blessed him with, royalty from all over the world started to visit Shlomo and he started to take a lot of them as wives for economical purposes. This led Shlomo astray from Hashem because he started to worship his wives' gods and build them Bamot in his house. As for the gold and silver, he accepted many gifts from his wives that led him to be more haughty.

In the end he disregarded the incentive that he was given to prolong his life which is sad because, in my opinion, Shlomo was one of the greatest Kings in history and he would have remained that way if he listened to Hashem.

Leaders of the Past, Present, and the Future

In this week's Megillot class, we discussed the downfall of Shlomo. At the tender age of twelve, Shlomo asked for the ability to discern between good and evil. Hashem granted him his wish with the potential for good, and Shlomo was prominently known throughout the land. People arrived from near and far to seek out his wisdom, and Shlomo was immensely successful, both spiritually and militarily. However, as time wore on, Shlomo began to acquire too many horses, wives, and money, and his heart strayed from Hashem. He also became increasingly haughty, and was eventually told that his sons would suffer the repercussions of his actions.

Studying the story of Shlomo evoked many concepts of leadership. Some of the most pressing questions that entered my mind were: What makes a good leader? Do the values and expectations of leaders change as societies evolve?

Shlomo was an excellent leader, prior to his collapse. He expanded his borders, boosted the nation's economy, and built the Beit Hamikdash, thus securing a powerful kingdom in both the religious/spiritual aspect and in the military/economical realm. However, the power corrupted him. Shlomo began to forget that G-d was above him and that his purpose was to bring the people closer to G-d, as a spiritual leader. Shlomo failed at doing so, and by the end of his rule, his heart was not complete with Hashem as it had been before.

I will now fast-forward to the fourteenth century, when the Renaissance began. During our World History II class this week, we discussed an excerpt of The Prince, a political treatise written during the Renaissance by the Italian diplomat and political theorist, Niccolò Machiavelli. The excerpt we read questioned whether a king/prince should be feared or loved. Machiavelli came to the conclusion that a leader should be feared in a manner that does not conjure up animosity or hatred. He should also refrain from seizing the land and women of his subjects.

Machiavelli stressed that being a good leader meant that he needed to have respect and boundaries towards those around him. The king does not deserve anything he desires because of his title. He has to be a king who attends to the needs of the people, not only to himself. Power should not and cannot overcloud his judgements of right and wrong, but should benefit the people.

Now, I will focus on today's day and age. John Adams once said, "Because power corrupts, society's demands for moral authority and character increase as the importance of the position increases." This quote is so applicable to our lives. "We are the leaders of tomorrow," as we are often told. Our generation carries an immense responsibility. As young leaders, we need to know the way, go the way, and show the way to others.

No matter the society or time period, maintaining virtue and integrity when given power can sometimes be a difficult, but not insurmountable task. We need to be able to focus on using power for good. We must channel the power we are given to benefit others, and help make the world a better place.

Hashem is in Control

           As a new year comes and school begins once more, we again have the privilege of contributing to Mrs. Perl's blog(s) (for those of us in AP Psych, we get to do two! Yippee!). In our very first class we found out that we would be studying the book of Kohelet. "But what does Kohelet mean?", you might ask. Excellent question! Kohelet is actually a name. I know, right? Who saw that coming? But from what we learn from the very first pasuk in Kohelet is that Kohelet is actually a code name for Shlomo-  
"דברי קוהלת בן-דוד מלך בירושלים". Who else is a son of Dovid that ruled in Yirushalayim? Seeing that Shlomo actually wrote Kohelet, we looked more into Shlomo's life to see what we might expect in Kohelet.
       
           Ignoring most of the better years of Shlomo's reign (because who likes all of that gross happy stuff?), we jumped straight to his issues. In מלכים א פרק ג, we see that Shlomo is given the opportunity to request something of Hashem. He asks for "a heart to judge the nation and to understand between good and bad". When first looking at his request, it seems impressive and humble. He is simply asking for wisdom to be able to judge the nation, right? But when looking more deeply, it seems to take on a more negative meaning. By comparing this situation to the one of Gan Eden, we see that similarities arise.

          Hashem gives Adam and Chava a paradise for a home with only one restriction- they cannot eat from the עץ הדעת. As we know, Adam and Chava went against the word of Hashem, which resulting in a major punishment for them. The עץ הדעת was the tree of knowledge, or in this case, the ability to know between good and bad. Therefore, when Adam and Chava chose to eat from the עץ הדעת, they were trying to gain the ability of knowing between good and bad. This is where Shlomo's story comes in. By requesting to know the difference between good and bad, he was copying Adam and Chava's sin. But what is so bad about knowing between good and bad? Hashem is the only one who can have this ability. It shows that He is in control and that man is beneath Him. Therefore, Adam, Chava, and Shlomo were punished because they wanted to become like Hashem.

           Hashem does give Shlomo wisdom, along with wealth, power, and honor, but with a condition. He tells Shlomo that he will only get a long life if he follows the mitzvot. However, since he soon falls into the trap of desire, this privilege is torn from him, as was Adam and Chava's.

           As ראש השנה draws near, it is extremely important to recognize Hashem's power in this world. We can take many lessons from Shlomo's downfall. The most important to remember during this time of the year is that Hashem really is the only one who has complete control. While saying selichos last night, I was having trouble getting through the Hebrew so I read the English instead. What is said was very relevant to the idea that I am explaining now. It talks about how we are begging for Hashem's forgiveness because we regret our sins and we understand that He is in control. I hope that we all can remember this during ראש השנה, Yom Kippur, and really all year round.

!שנה טובה ומתוקה

Questioning Shlomo's Downfall

This past week we've continued our introduction to Kohelet. After identifying Shlomo HaMelech as the author of Kohelet, we reviewed Shlomo's life. The main story we focused on was when G-d asked Shlomo what he wanted and Shlomo responded that he wanted a wise and understanding heart to help him judge the nation fairly and to know the difference between good and evil. G-d also gives Shlomo wealth and honor, and promises him a long life if he follows in His ways like Dovid had. At first this seems like G-d is rewarding Shlomo's modesty. After all, it seems extraordinary that a 12 year old would ask for the ability to judge the nation fairly over wealth, fame, or power. After looking deeper into this story, it is clear, though, that G-d is not rewarding Shlomo but is testing him instead. Shlomo had asked to know the difference between Ra and Tov which is something that is considered G-d-like. By asking for this, he is not recognizing the hierarchy in which humans are below G-d. G-d therefore grants Shlomo his wish and tells him that if he can succeed in staying on the Derech while knowing the difference between Ra and Tov (being like G-d) then he can have it all (long life). Obviously, this what leads to Shlomo's downfall since no human can handle this kind of gift.

This story evokes many questions which we have asked multiple times in class, the main one being, "Why would G-d set up Shlomo for failure?" If He knew that no human could remain holy and righteous with a gift like this then why did He grant Shlomo this wish? Also, why was a 12 year old taken so seriously? In davening everyday we ask G-d to help us realize what we need because He knows better than we do. Why could He not do this for Shlomo, Dovid's son? Clearly Shlomo did not know what was best for him, which is understandable for a 12 year old. Why couldn't G-d help Shlomo understand what he needed to rule the nation as best he could?

Another big question I had about Shlomo's downfall has to do with his violations of G-d's rules for kings. The three rules for kings that G-d gave to Shlomo were:
1. A king cannot have too many horses or purchase horses from Egypt
2. A king cannot have too much money
3. A king cannot have too many wives

As we all know, Shlomo manages to violate all three of these rules. I've always been able to somehow get how Shlomo could violate three parts of these rules. Maybe he didn't recognize what "too many" wives or horses meant or what "too much" money was. However, in Perek 10, Pasuk 28 in Malachim Aleph, it clearly states that with the wealth he gathered from all those who visited him to witness his incredible wisdom, he bought horses and chariots from Egypt. This made zero sense to me. G-d said explicitly that a king could NOT buy horses from Egypt, and Shlomo, the great king who built the Beit Hamikdash, and son of the great Kind Dovid who wanted nothing more in his lifetime than to have a close, spiritual relationship with G-d, went ahead and violated this direct commandment from G-d. Not only did he just violate it, he used money that he obtained from people who had come to see him because of the gift that G-d had given him. I simply cannot understand how Shlomo could violate a commandment so specific and explicit from G-d. Maybe this just proves how far off the Derech Shlomo was at the time due to the gifts that G-d had given him that no human could be capable of succeeding with. This, however, begs the same questions we've already asked: Why would G-d give a gift like this to Shlomo when it could only push him farther off the Derech?

Summary of Kohelet

            Kohelt is Shlomo, who is the son of Dovid who ruled in Yerushalim. Shlomo asked Hashem for A heart that could judge the people. And Understand the difference between good and bad. Hashem Promised to give to Shlomo A wise heart. Hashem gave him what he had asked for and also gave him Riches and Honors. And he said "If you follow my Mitzvos like Dovid then I will give you a long life." Hashem's Response was a good thing because he was rewarding him for asking for something and not for himself. Shlomo had Chachma and he worte thousands of poems and Mashals. The three things that a Shlomo is prevented from doing is He can't have to many horses, He can't have too much gold and silver, and he can't have to many wives. He can't do these things because it might make him haughty and it will lead him away from Hashem. Shlomo had a thousand foreign wives. Foreign wives lead Shlomo astray his heart and was not complete with out Hashem like it had been before. Hashem Takes away Shlomo's kingdom because he didnt follow Hashem's Mitzvos. And I will give it to my servant.
            The Servant has no money and no power. Shlomo isn't a defective leader despite money, power and wisdom. If Shlomo were to look back at his life and reflect 
on what he did wrong and what caused his downfall, he would have listed for his "top offenders" he could have asked for other things from Hashem. If Dovid Hamelech were to be asked this same question  that Hashem asked of Shlomo, then he would have answered be closer with Hashem, and have spiritual relationship with Hashem. The purpose of Writing Kohelet is conquering man's purpose in the world.

Power Corrupts

This week we learnt about how Hashem told Shlomo he could have everything he wanted. Shlomo asked for the wisdom to tell the difference between good and bad. Hashem gave him wealth, power, and wisdom. Hashem was giving Shlomo a similar test to the one he gave Adam and Chava in Gan Eden. Shlomo quickly failed the test by becoming corrupt and had to many wives, horses, and treasure.

Napoleon thought of himself as all powerful. He wanted to rule all of Europe. He kept trying to take over different countries in Europe. When he tried to conquer Russia he lost half his army. But he would not stop there. He thought he should rule Europe and had the power to do it. He came back and tried to defeat the Purssain army, which ended in defeat and Napoleon's exile.