Thoughts About The Burdens and Problems of Wealth (Ecclesiastes 5:8-17).
Here we find a total contrast to the first seven verses. There the thought was of attitude towards God. Now we move on to the attitude towards life. It must be remembered that many would see the wealthy as those who were pleasing to God. Was that not why they were wealthy? But the Preacher has come to recognise that it is not the wealthy who are pleasing to God, but those who are content with what they have and have an open heart towards God (Ecclesiastes 2:24-26). Thus he points out that the accumulation of wealth, often by unjust means, may seem to add significance to life, but in the end it is meaningless and simply adds to the problems of life. (This is, of course, the view of one who is wealthy). He will conclude with the fact that seeking God is better.
‘If you see the oppression of the poor, and the violent taking away of justice and right in a province, do not marvel at the matter. Because one who is higher than the high regards, and there are higher ones than they.'
There is nothing sadder than a province where there is no justice, and right is overturned, especially when it is accompanied by violence (Isaiah 5:8; Amos 8:4-6). Yet The Preacher advises patience. There is One Who is Higher than the high, and He can bring into play some who are even higher than the local oppressors, those who are princes and kings over the whole (this would be a carrying out of the justice demanded in Ecclesiastes 3:16-17). Thus matters can be righted. Those who have accumulated wealth by oppression will suffer for it. For the expression ‘one higher than the high' compare ‘the one mightier than he' (Ecclesiastes 6:10).
All of this is but a part of the overall procession of time.
Alternately we may see this verse as simply listing grades of officials, the high, the higher and the highest, with the thought that with such a multiplicity of officials it is not surprising that there is injustice. Everyone wants to have their share in what is available. So fields are taken away and the poor set to work as bondservants. This would fit in better with the meaninglessness of wealth (Ecclesiastes 5:10), but not with expectations of justice (Ecclesiastes 3:16-17).
‘Moreover the profit of the land is for all. The king himself is served by the field.'
This may be seen as a comfort for the oppressed. While they may suffer some oppression and loss nevertheless they can remember that the profit of the land is, in the end, for all. All benefit from it in one way or another, either as owners or workers. This was especially so in Israel where land rights were seen as having been allocated by God and always, at least in theory, finally reverted to their owners. Why, he adds, even the king profits from his land in the countryside (or it may mean profits by way of taxation).
Alternately it may be seeing it from the eyes of the oppressing officials, ‘the profit of the land is for all (of us)', just as the king himself profits from taxation of the land. Then the prospect for the righteous is more gloomy.
However some translate ‘a king is an advantage to a land with cultivated fields'. The idea being that his control of the reins and the stability that results enables the people to cultivate the land properly. His kingship is thus good for all.
Overall is either the thought that God watches over the oppression of the poor and the doings of the unjust, and will remedy the situation (as in Ecclesiastes 3:16-17), while those who make themselves wealthy will be brought to account, or the thought of the meaninglessness of such wealth to those who by one means or another obtain it. The latter is made clear in the next verse.
‘He who loves silver will not be satisfied with silver, nor he who loves plenty with increase. This also is vanity.'
The truth is that those who seek to accumulate wealth will never be satisfied. The one who seeks silver will finally not be satisfied with it and will desire gold. For the one who seeks to build up wealth the amount of increase is never sufficient. He always wants more. Thus all is meaningless and empty.
‘When goods increase those who eat them are also increased, and what advantage is there to the owner except looking at them with his eyes?'
The achieving of wealth in fact simply results in larger households of family and servants to consume them, so that in the end they are no better off. And anyway, in the end such a man has so much that all the benefit he really obtains is that he can survey his wealth in order to gain satisfaction from it. There comes a point where he cannot really improve the quality of his life. He has much more than he can spend. So he is simply building up wealth for no good reason. And, as the next verse reveals, there is a downturn. He may find that he suffers from the rich food he eats. But what is certain is that he does not think of God.
‘The sleep of a labouring man is sweet, whether he eat little or much. But the fullness of the rich will not allow him to sleep.'
In contrast with the rich the working man sleeps well. He is exhausted and the food he eats, whether little or much, does not disturb his sleep. But the food of the wealthy causes problems that prevent sleep. This may also include the thought that the pressures of being wealthy also interfere with his sleep. So the labouring man is better off than the wealthy, even if he does not have much to eat.
‘There is a grievous evil which I have seen under the sun, namely riches kept by an owner to his hurt, and those riches perish by an evil adventure, and if he has begotten a son there is nothing in his hand. As he came forth out of his mother's womb, he will go again, naked as he came, and will take nothing for his labour which he can carry away in his hand.'
Here the writer has in mind those who seek to build up wealth for their sons. It may well be that when the son comes to inherit there will be nothing left. He is thinking here of wealth lost through poor investment, speculation, foolish behaviour or as a result of the activities of others such as theft and banditry. Wealth quickly, or dishonestly and unfairly, gained, and yet at great cost, can equally quickly be lost, and possibly even result in physical disadvantage or death, especially in violent times. His son is left with nothing, and he himself (or possibly his son) goes to the grave just as he came, also with nothing. he can take none of the fruits of his labour with him. Furthermore wealth can bring other evils such as the need to be always on the alert lest any seek to get hold of his wealth. The wealthy are the focus of attention for the greedy and dishonest. So wealth may actually hurt us.
‘And this also is a grievous evil, that in all points as he came, so will he go.'
The thought of the man leaving as he came, makes The Preacher aware also of another significance of what he has said. When the wealthy die they can take nothing with them, even if they are still rich. For all go as they came, naked and with nothing. Thus in the end he gains nothing, and may indeed have lost what he could have gained by righteous living.
‘And what profit has he who labours for the wind?'
So the accumulation of riches is in the final analysis of no benefit. It just brings with it its own problems. And those who seek wealth, often hopelessly, desiring to find in it some extra meaning to life, simply find that they have laboured for the unattainable.
‘All his days also he eats in darkness, and he is sore vexed and has sickness and wrath.'
Such a man ‘eats in darkness.' Compare Ecclesiastes 2:13. He is not a wise man because his life is concentrated in the wrong direction. The man who would be rich will stint himself, and overwork himself, and ruin his own health through stress, and thus be miserable, ill and bad tempered. It may also have in mind that the one who gains wealth and loses it spends the rest of his life regretting it, and suffering from the fact.
So wealth is not necessarily the road to contentment and wellbeing. It can bring as many problems as it solves. And yet all crave wealth to their hurt.