As if wishing to distract himself from the gloomy conclusions to which he himself had come, Ecclesiastes again and again praises wisdom and its merits. He speaks about the importance of preserving wisdom in all its fullness (v. 1), and about the different paths followed by the wise and by fools (v. 2). He condemns ignorant rulers who do not know how to value wisdom (vv. 4-6). He understands that for a fool there is no path on which his foolishness would not hinder him (v. 3). Wisdom is needed even for the most ordinary tasks, and Ecclesiastes gives examples of how foolishness can interfere even in such ordinary matters (vv. 9-10). All the more is it necessary where one must know how to speak and choose the right words: here a foolish word sometimes proves worse than a snake's sting (vv. 11-13). And yet the words of Ecclesiastes sometimes seem like attempts to calm himself. Deep down he does not forget for a minute that at the end of life's path everyone - wise and foolish alike - awaits Sheol, where the fool will have no more concern for the foolish things he has done or said than the wise person will have for the wise deeds he has performed (v. 14).

And yet Ecclesiastes is not indifferent to the affairs of earthly governments and earthly rulers; he keeps returning to the theme of wise and foolish rulers and what the rule of each brings to their subjects (vv. 16-17). Apparently, inwardly he cannot come to terms with the sad conclusion to which his preceding reflections led him: the conclusion that wisdom is powerless and useless when earthly affairs are concerned, that it can give a person nothing except the opportunity to enjoy inner peace and the joy that God gives him.

Some scholars of the Bible have compared the worldview of Ecclesiastes with that of the Greek Stoics, whose contemporary he was. The resemblance is indeed evident: the Stoics, while highly valuing the moral law and considering it absolutely necessary to follow it, were convinced that the world could not be corrected and that no reward should be expected for strict adherence to moral norms. But unlike Ecclesiastes, they were inwardly fully reconciled to this state of affairs, accepting it as proper, so that it aroused in them neither bitterness nor inward protest. Ecclesiastes, as it appears, never managed to come to terms with the fact that no one needs wisdom except those who seek it. And no wonder: in his time wisdom was above all the art of righteous living, and Ecclesiastes, as a sincerely believing person, could in no way accept that righteousness, like wisdom, is needed by no one except the righteous themselves.

If these verses were inserted into the Book of Proverbs of Solomon, a person reading the Bible for the first time would not distinguish which words came from which book. Ecclesiastes' reflections on wisdom and his advice on how to behave in various situations are similar to proverbs. Yet here they are in another context, within reflections on the meaning of being and on the foundations of one's relation to the world. But if this is so, what is the point of advice about observing safety rules when digging a pit or chopping wood, or reflections on whether one should or should not speak evil of the king, if both every household concern and royal power belong to the sphere of vanity?

It means there is still a need, in the midst of existence that seems like a meaningless and chaotic set of events, not to deny either what surrounds us or to interrupt our customary labor. And if we remember that both in the Old and in the New Testament eternal truths are explained through parables based on everyday life, then everyday concerns are not meaningless, and there is no wisdom in folding one's hands after recognizing everything around as a manifestation of vanity of vanities and being satisfied with that conclusion. And therefore not everything in the world is vanity of vanities.

Ecclesiastes was well read in the traditional books of sages of his time. He speaks the language of those very aphorisms from which the Book of Proverbs was composed, sometimes repeating them directly, sometimes paraphrasing. But for him the wholeness of the path comes first. In spiritual life there are no scales on which one could place good and evil deeds in order to see which outweighs which. And such weighing itself, even if it were possible, would decide nothing. God is not a judge in an earthly sense, and still less a policeman.

God knows perfectly well, without any scales, what we are worth and what we deserve. But fortunately for us, He repays us not according to our merits, but according to His love. And yet the issue is not only in Him, but in us too. Ecclesiastes cannot fail to understand this: after all, he was where God's eternity meets the created world. He listened and heard that apophatic silence behind which the Presence is hidden and through which it is revealed. Therefore Ecclesiastes could not fail to understand that any noise, especially inner noise, will drown out God. Will make Him fall silent.

God will not shout over us; He will simply wait until we fall silent. Unlike us, He has all eternity in His hands; He can wait. Wait until we learn to correspond not to His fullness, which is impossible for us in principle, but to His Presence. Until we learn to live with it and in it. Learn to live? But all the writings of the wise are precisely about this, about learning to live... And then the requirement of blamelessness that so often sounds in collections of aphorisms from which the books of the wise are composed becomes all the more understandable to Ecclesiastes.

A person is not sinless, but does he give his sins power over himself? If not, his heart is on the right side; if so, on the left. Here it is no longer a matter of religious formalism, and not even of moral blamelessness. The question is whether a spoonful of tar will poison a large barrel of honey. One fly is enough to spoil precious aromatic oil. One small sin, even one thought of sin to which a person turns the whole fullness of his attention, is enough to lose that very Presence. So perhaps earthly wisdom is not only earthly? There is something to think about...