^* I would like to thank Dr. Bill T. Arnold, Dr. Sandra Richter and Dr. Brent A. Strawn for their valuable comments and suggestions.

¹ The golden mean, proper, is presented in 7,15-18, which is a part of the larger subsection of 7,15-22. V. 15, beginning with Qoheleth’s formulaic statement yty)r lk-t) starts this section; v. 23, with Qoheleth again using a formulaic lk statement, then, would begin a new sub-section. Within the section of 7,15-22, v. 15 serves as an introductory header, giving the reason for the advice to come in vv. 16-18. V. 19 speaks of the virtue of wisdom, while vv. 20-22 speak about the ubiquity of evil. The details of the relationships between these verses are further explored below.

² W. Brindle includes a concise and helpful survey of earlier interpretations of 7,15-18. W. BRINDLE, "Righteousness and Wickedness in Ecclesiastes 7:15-18", AUSS 23 (1985) 243-257.

³ R.N. WHYBRAY, Ecclesiastes (Grand Rapids, MI 1989) 120.

⁴ BRINDLE, "Righteousness and Wickedness", 244.

⁵ Of course, the theological impact of a doctrine of the golden mean is considerably reduced when the poles to be balanced are not absolute righteousness and wickedness. For example, Loyal Young argues that the balance is to be struck between complete apostasy and over-zealous fanaticism, the former, leading to divine punishment, the latter leading to martyrdom. A more comprehensive survey of these alternative poles is found in ibid., 244-251.

⁶ J. LOADER, Polar Structures in the Book of Qoheleth (BZAW 152; New York 1979) 47. Loader makes the argument that parallelism between the four terms emphasizes wisdom and folly over and against ethics.

⁷ C.L. SEOW, Ecclesiastes (AB 23C; New York 1997) 267. Seow argues that the four clauses hbrh qydc yht-l), lks yht-l), Mkxtt-l) and (#$rt-l) constituting the warnings of Qoheleth in vv. 16-17 are arranged in chiasm, and emphasize the poles of wisdom and folly, as the chiasm effectively states "the righteous is the opposite of the fool, ‘to be wise’ is the opposite of ‘to be wicked.’" R. Murphy comes to a similar conclusion, that the passage does not reflect ethics, based on his observation that v. 18 does not focus on prescribed behavior leading to a positive result, but is merely a statement of the instability of life (R.E. MURPHY, Ecclesiastes [WBC 23A; Dallas, TX 1992] 70). However, the passage does not present v. 18 in apposition to the statements regarding the negative nature of life, but because of this view of life. Thus, v. 18, in a sense, becomes a "way out" for those who experience life in this manner, pointing out a positive result in that one who achieves balance "in this" and "from this", is the one who fears God. It makes clear that balance in life, then, is efficacious in at least one thing - religious devotion.

⁸ qydc refers to right attitudes and conduct, according to the norms of society (SEOW, Ecclesiastes, 267), directed towards the divine or the human realm. (BRINDLE, "Righteousness and Wickedness", 254). The antonym (#$r is to be seen in the same ethical light, and neither term refers to a relative good or evil, as often denoted by bw+ and (r.

⁹ T.A. Perry (Dialogues with Kohelet [University Park, PA 1983]) and R. Gordis, (Koheleth – The Man and His World [New York 1951]) have noted that Qoheleth represents a dialogue between a sage and a pessimist on the merits of traditional wisdom. It has also been noted that a key conviction of Qoheleth was that "wisdom cannot achieve its goal" (J. CRENSHAW, Old Testament Wisdom. An Introduction [Louisville, KY 1998] 117).

¹⁰ Cf. Prov 2,6-9; 9,9; 10,31; 11,30; 14,16.

¹¹ WHYBRAY, Ecclesiastes, 120.

¹² Ibid.

¹³ Qoh 5,1 states "let your words be few", using the adjectival form of the root x(m. The verbal form of this root is not foreign to Qoheleth, for in 12,3, it is used in the piel perfect form. Qoh 8,12 states "it will be good to the fearers of God", again using an adjectival form in the place of an attested verbal root b+y.

¹⁴ As evidence for the "pretense" aspect of the hithpael, Whybray (Ecclesiastes, 121), refers to 2 Samuel 13,5, where the hithpael of hlx means "pretending to be sick".

¹⁵ The occurence of the hithpael of Mkx in Sir 32,4 refers to a demonstration of, not necessarily, fallacious wisdom. The other occurences, in Sir 6,32 and 38,24-25 refer to acquiring wisdom, rather than demonstrating false wisdom. For the classification of Sirach as "Later Biblical Hebrew", see A. SÁENZ-BADILLOS, A History of the Hebrew Language (trans. J. Elwolde) (Cambridge 1996) 112-113; 126.

¹⁶ Whybray himself notes the nearly identical clause lks yht-l)w refers not to a pretense to evil, but to the danger of being "completely abandoned to wickedness or folly" (WHYBRAY, Ecclesiastes, 121). See also MURPHY, Ecclesiastes, 70.

¹⁷ M. STRANGE, The Question of Moderation in Eccl 7:15-18 (CUSST 199; Washington, D.C. 1969) 64.

¹⁸ STRANGE, The Question of Moderation, 62.

¹⁹ Ibid.

²⁰ Cf. Qoh 6,12; 8,7 and 10, 14.

²¹ SEOW, Ecclesiastes, 267.

²² Strange asserts that because Qoheleth clearly states "there are no righteous", the idea of the golden mean is not present in this passage, since logically, one cannot be warned to not become something that is inherently impossible (STRANGE, The Question of Moderation, 87).

²³ SEOW, Ecclesiastes, 267.

²⁴ BROWN, Ecclesiastes, 82.

²⁵ SEOW, Ecclesiastes, 268 and M. FOX, A Time to Tear Down and a Time to Build Up. A Rereading of Ecclesiastes (Grand Rapids, MI 1999) 260.

²⁶ Cf. Qoh 2, 24; 3,13 and 6,2.

²⁷ The meaning of the root )cy in v. 18 is ambiguous but not problematic. Some prefer the primary lexical meaning, "to go out", and see this clause as assurance that the one who is balanced "goes out" or "escapes" from Mlk, that is, the fates of desolation and death listed in vv. 16-17. Others prefer a Mishnaic Hebrew usage of the root meaning "to do one’s duty" (GORDIS, Koheleth, 267; G. OGDEN, Qoheleth [Sheffield, England 1987] 116; FOX, A Time to Tear Down, 262) or "to fulfill obligations" (STRANGE, The Question of Moderation, 101). In this sense, the demonstrative pronouns must refer to the warnings against extreme behavior, and not extreme behavior itself, and assures that the one who fears God will succeed with "both" of the instructions; that is, they will fulfill their calling with a balanced perspective (STRANGE, The Question of Moderation, 101; CRENSHAW, Ecclesiastes, 142; FOX, A Time to Tear Down, 262). The verse itself gives little indication as to which meaning is preferred, but clearly, both options assure some measure of prosperity as a result of balance.

²⁸ SEOW, Ecclesiastes, 268.

²⁹ BROWN, Ecclesiastes, 82

³⁰ SEOW, Ecclesiastes, 268.

³¹ The relationship of v. 19 to this passage is debated. Seow states that v. 19 is an example of overconfidence that is warned against in v. 16, with v. 20, in parallel, speaking against overconfidence in righteousness (SEOW, Ecclesiastes, 269). Barton prefers to view the verse as a gloss (G.A. BARTON, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Ecclesiastes [Edinburgh, Scotland 1908] 144) while Fox radically emends the text by moving the verse to follow 7,12 (FOX, A Time to Tear Down, 256-7). Gordis notes that vv. 16-17 and vv. 19-20 lie in chiastic arrangement, with v.19 giving the reason for v.17, and v.20 giving the reason for v.16 (Gordis, Koheleth, 268). It seems likely that the verse functions to tilt the golden mean in the direction of wisdom/righteousness (Cf. BROWN, Ecclesiastes, 82). The golden mean, as will be demonstrated, is not the average between two extremes, and so, it seems that Qoheleth, even as he warns against hyper-righteousness, still extols righteousness as a beneficial trait in humanity. After all, evil is ubiquitous and unavoidable (cf. Qoh 7,20-22), and so righteousness is to be favored, even as the extreme of it is to be avoided.

³² Among those arguing against this relationship is M. Fox, who states that even though Qoheleth reflects the notions of moderation, it does not parallel the Aristotelian mean, which Fox defines as the mid-point between two extremes. He contrasts this with the idea of Qoheleth, who recognizes the importance of avoiding extremes, but still places emphasis on the pole of wisdom (FOX, A Time to Tear Down, 260). Additionally, W. Brown is careful to note that though Qoheleth calls for moderation, he does not call for a "muddled mean", where values are mixed and the average is held supreme (W. BROWN, Ecclesiastes [Lousiville, KY 1989] 82). Similarly, Murphy states that this doctrine is not the golden mean, seeing the Greek golden mean(s) as an advocate of "nothing in excess" (MURPHY, Ecclesiastes, 73). Clearly, though, neither Qoheleth nor Aristotle view the mean as a doctrine of averages in action, and so, the above seem to involve a misunderstanding of Aristotle’s mean.

³³ J. BARNES, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Aristotle (Cambridge 1995) 217.

³⁴ S.R.L. CLARK, Aristotle’s Man: Speculations Upon Aristotelian Anthropology (Oxford 1975) 96.

³⁵ "By the intermediate relatively to us that which is neither too much nor too little – and this is not one, nor the same for all....if ten pounds are too much for a particular person to eat and two too little, it does not follow that the trainer will order six pounds; for this is also perhaps too much for the person who is to take it....Thus a master of any art avoids excess and defect, but seeks the intermediate and chooses this – the intermediate not in the object by relatively to us". Nichomachean Ethics, Book 2, 1106^a31 to 1106^b6. Translation from The Complete Works of Aristotle (ed. J. BARNES) (Princeton, NJ 1984) 1747.

³⁶ Nichomachean Ethics, Book 2, 1109^b2-3. Translation from BARNES, The Complete Works , 1751.

³⁷ Aristotle makes clear that there are some things (intellect, money for the liberal man, power for the brave man) which are always favored (Nichomachean Ethics, Book 10, 1177^b28 to 1178^b7.), while other actions (spite, shamelessness, envy, adultery, theft, murder) are to be avoided at all times (Nichomachean Ethics, Book 2, 1107^a9-26).

³⁸ CLARK, Aristotle’s Man, 84.

³⁹ Line 98 of the Pseudo-Phokylida. Translation from ibid., 79.

⁴⁰ D. B. LEVINE, "Symposium and the Polis", Theognis of Megara (ed. T. J. Figueira and G. Nagy) (Baltimore 1985) 180.

⁴¹ Theognis, Lines 219-220 and Lines 331-332. Translation from ibid., 181.

⁴² Theognis, Lines 837-840. Translation from ibid., 183.

⁴³ V.C. STEVENS, "Opposites, Reversals, and Ambiguities: The Unsettled World of Theognis", Theognis, 159-75.

⁴⁴ M. HENGEL, Judaism and Hellenism (trans. J. Bowden) (London 1974), I, 123.

⁴⁵ Ibid., I, 117.

⁴⁶ C. WHITLEY, Koheleth (BZAW 145; New York 1979) 166.

⁴⁷ Ibid., 170. Briefly, the Stoics held that Zeus created all things; that all would be destroyed in a universal conflagration that only Zeus would survive; and that Zeus would re-create the world after the destruction. The Epicureans also held a similar view of a cycle of creation, destruction and re-creation.

⁴⁸ Among the plethora of parallels that Braun cites are Homer, Xenophanes, Archilocus, Sophocles, Euripides, Epicurus, Solon, and Hesiod. Braun also includes comprehensive tables which present ties between passages in Qoheleth and Greek works in lyric poetry, philosophy and drama. R. BRAUN, Kohelet und die Frühhellenistiche Popularphilosophie (BZAW 130; New York 1973) 146-149.

⁴⁹ Hengel proposes a dating between 270-220 BCE, noting that this era of massive change in Greek religion provided the perfect atmosphere for the skepticism of Qoheleth (HENGEL, Judaism and Hellenism, I, 116). Whitley poses an even later date, 175-164 BCE, based on the broad stroke of Epicurean ideas in the text which "presupposes a sustained contact with Epicurean thought which could hardly be possible before the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes" (WHITLEY, Koheleth, 165).

⁵⁰ Among the finds that support this date are Greek vessels found at Tyre, at Tel Hadar, located along the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee, and at Tel Dor, located along the Mediterranean Sea, all of which date to the 11^th century BCE. E. STERN, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible (New York 2001) 217 and J.C. WALDBAUM, "Early Greek Contacts with the Southern Levant 1000-600 B.C.: The Eastern Perspective", BASOR 293 (1994) 57.

⁵¹ WALDBAUM, "Early Greek Contacts", 60.

⁵² See W. NIEMEIER, "Archaic Greeks in the Orient: Textual and Archaeological Evidence", BASOR 322 (2001) 16-24 for a comprehensive survey of material and historical evidence of the presence of Greek mercenaries in the Near East during this early period. Niemeier also notes that neither the traders nor the mercenaries formed resident Greek communities until the middle of the 7^th century BCE. Before that time, Greek presence in the Levant was in the form of an enoikismos, small community colonies (pp. 12-13).

⁵³ STERN, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 221.

⁵⁴ For elements of Greek culture evidenced by the Philistines, see L. STAGER, "The Impact of the Sea Peoples", The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land (ed. T. LEVY) (New York 1995) 332-348. Notable in this discussion is the evidence of an increase in hog raising during the early Iron Age, an activity which was completely absent in the highlands, and likely echoing "the Mycenaean and Greek positive attitude toward pork" (p. 344). Stager also notes that the excavations of the Pentapolis, Ekron in particular, reveal a "full-blown urban tradition on the landscape, quite different from the Canaanite patterns which preceded them" (p. 345). Religious elements may also have been imported by the Philistines, as well. A sanctuary in Ekron revealed a large circular hearth, an unknown feature in the Levant, but one which "has a long history in the public and domestic architecture of the Aegean, Cypriot and Anatolian worlds", as well as being a central feature of Mycenaean palaces at Pylos, Mycenae and Tiryns (p. 347). As a whole, Stager sees the Pentapolis as evidence of an "urban imposition", which was in "harmony with that of the Aegean world" (pp. 347-348).

⁵⁵ The dating of the inscription is surmised from various Assyrian records. The annals of Esharhaddon (680-699 BCE) mention records that mention Achish / Ikausu, the builder of the temple. His father, Padi, is also mentioned in the taxation records of Sennacherib. S. GITIN et al., "A Royal Dedicatory Inscription from Ekron", IEJ 47 (1997) 9.

⁵⁶ Gitin, Dothan and Naveh note that the script of the inscription is not the same as those of other Philistine inscriptions from the 7^th century BCE. They states that most of the letters are similar to Phoenician or Hebrew script, but "since one would expect a more developed Hebrew or Phoenician script in the first half of the seventh century B.C.E., it seems likely that the script belongs neither to the Phoenician or Hebrew series, but rather to some peculiar local script", ibid., 13.

⁵⁷ The entire inscription, with the ptnyh emendation, reads "The temple (which) Achish son of Padi son of Ysd son of Ada son of Ya’ir ruler of Ekron, built for Ptnyh, his Lady. May she bless him and keep him and prolong his days and bless his land". A. DEMSKY, "Discovering a Goddess", BAR 24 (1998) 56.

⁵⁸ The original excavators of the site preferred the reading ptgyh, seeing it as the name of a previously unknown deity, perhaps with the gyh domain of the term reflecting the Greek deity Gea (GITIN et al., "A Royal Dedicatory Inscription from Ekron", 11-12). Aaron Demsky, however, prefers the reading ptnyh, reading the middle letter as an aborted nun, and not a gimel (A. DEMSKY, "The Name of the Godess of Ekron: A New Reading", JANES 47 [1997] 4)

⁵⁹ STERN, Archaeology, 227. The term appears as early as the 14^th century, in Mycenaean inscriptions, and as late as texts from the 3rd century BCE. Quite often, it is used in conjunction with the name of a specific goddess, but it is also often used as a term of veneration, or as a title (DEMSKY, "The Name of the Goddess", 4)

⁶⁰ Ibid., 4.

⁶¹ L. GRABBE, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian (Minneapolis, MN 1992) I, 165.

⁶² M. SMITH, Palestinian Parties and Politics that Shaped the Old Testament (New York 1971) 75-78. The author notes that with the exception of more a centralied legal system, most of the political and cultural institutions of the Hellenistic empire was derived from the empires of the Near East and not the city-states of ancient Greece.

⁶³ A more contemporary type of this phenomenon, where two cultures blend to form a novel culture, may be seen in the development of the Anglo-Indian culture during the British colonization of India, or the "Westernization" of many Asian nations after World War II (GRABBE, Judaism, I,167-8).

⁶⁴ SMITH, Palestinian Parties, 74-6.

⁶⁵ GRABBE, Judaism, I, 165.

⁶⁶ L. LEVINE, Judaism and Hellenism in Antiquity. Conflict or Confluence? (Seattle, WA 1998) 18.

⁶⁷ Ibid., 19.

⁶⁸ C. L. SEOW, "The Dating of Qoheleth", JBL 115 (1996) 666.

⁶⁹ sdrp and Mgtp, ibid., 646-650.

⁷⁰ Ibid., 650-654.

⁷¹ Ibid., 657-660. Seow undercuts the argument that such idioms as "under the sun", "see the sun", "to do well", etc. are of Greek origin.

⁷² Ibid., 660-665.

⁷³ Ibid., 666.

⁷⁴ Seow notes that the root +l#$ in Qoheleth has a technical sense of "having the right of disposal" and that this usage is limited to the Persian period (ibid., 653). Rudman demonstrates, though, that this technical use of the root is also attested in the Hellenistic period. (D. RUDMAN, "A Note on the Dating of Ecclesiastes", CBQ 61 [1999] 52).

⁷⁵ RUDMAN, "A Note on the Dating of Ecclesiastes", 52.

⁷⁶ J. LINDENBERGER, "Ahiqar", Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (ed. J. CHARLESWORTH) (New York 1985) 481. Lindenberger notes that the language of the text lends evidence for a North Syrian origin, while the proverbial section of the text shows evidence for an Armaic original.

⁷⁷ Ibid., 479.

⁷⁸ Lines 61-64 of Column Ten. Translation from B. PORTEN and A. YARDENI, Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Egypt (Winona Lake, IN 1993) III, 45.

⁷⁹ LINDENBERGER, "Ahiqar", 480. The work remained popular into the Christian era, with versions being published in Syriac, Arabic, Armenian, Russian and Serbian, among others.

⁸⁰ "The Instruction of the Vizier Ptah Hotep", translated by J. Wilson (ANET, 412).

⁸¹ The Teachings of Buddha (ed. P. CAIRNS) (New York 1998) 132.

⁸² Ibid., 132. The "Tathagata" is often a term used as the highest attribute of the Buddha.

⁸³ Ibid., 43.

⁸⁴ Ibid.

⁸⁵ The prince Siddahata Gautama, later to be known as the Buddha, lived from 560 to 480 BC. The development of the religion came shortly after his death, with the first set of major councils, held to rehearse and commit his teachings to memory, held shortly after his death He was born a prince and "there was no rival among the youths and men of India who could surpass him in any test, bodily or mental". He is also credited with keen observational skills, so that he saw "with his mental eye all the misery and sorrow of the world" and "the pains of pleasure and the inevitable certainty of death that hovers over every being" (ibid., 14, 19).

⁸⁶ Ibid., 1.

⁸⁷ Ibid., 44.

⁸⁸ J. CHENG, Confucius as Teacher (Petaling Jaya, Malaysia 1993) 291.

⁸⁹ "The master said, ‘Perfect is the virtue which is according to its mean. Rare for a long time has been its practice among the people’" (The Annalects, 6,27. Translation from CHENG, Confucius, 286). Also, "A Superior Man of the world...does not insist on doing anything or abstaining from anything, he stops at what is right and proper (the Mean)" (The Annalects 4, 10. Translation from ibid., 288).

⁹⁰ In matters of government, Confucius emphasized governmental control of public policy, but also advocated what might now be termed laissez-faire policy. Likewise, Confucius emphasized an individual’s social obligations, as well as the individual consciences, economic condition and personality (ibid., 289).

⁹¹ "Much of the effort of Confucius in teaching his disciples was spent to keep them in the Mean". The Analects, 11,21 recounts an episode where two students posed questions regarding an identical course of action each sought to take. One, he counseled to seek advice from his family, while to the other, he counseled to move ahead with the course of action. When another student asked why he gave conflicting advice, Confucius responded by noting that one student was slow and needed to be pushed forward, while another was very energetic, and needed to be held back (ibid., 287).