Both Epicurus and Koheleth urge acting ethically. Epicurus understands justice to be “a pledge of mutual advantage to restrain men from harming one another and save them from being harmed.” Keeping this pledge is in the interest of all: “It is hard for an evil-doer to escape detection, but to obtain security for escaping is impossible.” Furthermore, “a man who causes fear cannot be free from fear.”
1 Thus the moral path is always wisest.
Koheleth likewise notes the foolishness of immorality. “Cheating may rob the wise man of reason and destroy the prudence of the cautious.”
2 Also, “it will not be well with the scoundrel.”
3 Throughout the centuries commentators have wondered how Koheleth reconciles this observation with recognizing that “sometimes a wicked one endures in spite of his wickedness.”
4 Perhaps Koheleth is admitting that the wicked one may endure for a while but eventually is likely to be undone by excess,
5 a point also made by Epicurus.
Apart from being moral, however, what is involved in living well? For Epicurus, as we have seen, the answer is found in seeking pleasure, remembering that the worthiness of each pleasure must be judged in terms of whatever pains it may bring.
Incidentally, that caution was offered in an especially charming manner two millennia later by Benjamin Franklin.
6 He tells the story of how, when he was seven years old, he spent all his money in a toy shop to buy a whistle, which over time gave him less pleasure than he had anticipated. Later in life he observed many people overestimating the value of things they sought, making too great sacrifices to obtain, for example, fine clothes, fine houses, fine furniture, wealth, popularity, or what Franklin called “mere corporeal Sensations.” He said of those who made such unwise choices that they had paid too much for their whistle. This warning captures the spirit of Epicurus.
As for Koheleth, he offers a single formula for living well and repeats it often: “There is nothing worthwhile for a man but to eat and drink and afford himself enjoyment with his means.”
7 Again: “Only this, I have found, is a real good: that one should eat and drink and get pleasure with all the gains he makes under the sun, during the numbered days of life that God has given him; for that is his portion.”
8 Yet again: “I therefore praised enjoyment. For the only good a man can have under the sun is to eat and drink and enjoy himself.”
9 Finally, “Go, eat your bread in gladness, and drink your wine in joy; for your action was long ago approved by God. Let your clothes be freshly washed, and your head never lack ointment. Enjoy happiness with a woman you love all the fleeting days of your life that have been granted to you under the sun—all your fleeting days. For that alone is what you can get out of life and out of the means you acquire under the sun.”
10The message is clear: enjoy yourself pursuing whatever activities in which you find delight. Only two conditions need to be remembered. First, always act morally. Second, be prudent. As Koheleth advises, “he who digs a pit will fall into it.”
11Are any particular activities recommended by Epicurus or Koheleth? Both praise friendship. Epicurus writes that “of all the things which wisdom acquires to produce the blessedness of the complete life, far the greatest is the possession of friendship.”
12 Koheleth similarly remarks that “two are better off than one, in that they have greater benefit from their earnings. For should they fall, one can raise the other; but woe betide him who is alone and falls with no companion to raise him!”
13 For neither Epicurus and Koheleth is friendship a requirement, but both strongly recommend it.
One intriguing difference between them regards sexual activity. Epicurus comments: “You tell me that the stimulus of the flesh makes you too prone to the pleasures of love. Provided that you do not break the laws or good customs and do not distress any of your neighbors or do harm to your body or squander your pittance, you may indulge your inclination as you please. Yet it is impossible not to come up against one or other of these barriers; for the pleasures of love never profited a man and he is lucky if they do him no harm.” Furthermore: “Sexual intercourse has never done a man good, and he is lucky if it has not harmed him.”
14Koheleth takes a wholly different approach. Recall his recognizing “a time for embracing and a time for shunning embraces” as well as “a time for loving and a time for hating.”
15 And also this advice: “Enjoy happiness with a woman you love all the fleeting days of life that have been granted to you under the sun—all your fleeting days.”
16 After all, Solomon is said to have had seven hundred royal wives and three hundred concubines, and his father, King David, was hardly a model of asceticism.
17Note that Judaism has traditionally been unequivocally in favor of marriage and of passionate sex within marriage. Such is not the case with Christianity. For instance, St. Paul says: “It is well for a man not to touch a woman,” and “I wish that all were as I myself am,” that is, unmarried.
18 Even apart from St. Paul’s metaphysical view that “nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh,”
19 he offers this argument against marriage: “The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, but the married man is anxious about the affairs of the world, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman and the virgin are anxious about the affairs of the Lord, so that they may be holy in body and spirit, but the married woman is anxious about the affairs of the world, how to please her husband.”
20The celibacy of priests and nuns thus has biblical support. Rabbis, however, are expected to marry, because Judaism considers marriage an essential human relationship, bringing joy to both partners. Sex is not a “concession”
21 but an embodiment of the human capacity for love.
Neither Epicurus nor Koheleth offers any extended list of worthwhile activities. Both urge the seeking of pleasure, although Epicurus understands it as tranquility, a cautious choice, while Koheleth prefers enjoyment, a less abstemious option. But either approach, pursued ethically, can bring satisfaction, the prescription for living well.
