The Meaning of הבל in Qohelet: An Intertextual Suggestion

Meek, Russell L.

doi:10.1515/9781575066929-013

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For Qoheleth, it is clear that suffering and trauma exist, and it is also clear that the deedconsequence nexus does not and cannot account for the examples he lists. Michael V. Fox argues that Qoheleth's central concern is therefore "meaning-not transience, not work, not values, not morality"-metaphorically conveyed with a word meaning "vapor" but more appropriately denoting an "existential vacuum" ‫)הבל(‬ (Fox, 1998: 225-26) or the basic lack of correspondence between actions and rewards, as exemplified in the life of Abel ‫)הבל(‬ (Meek, 2013). According to Fox, while the collapse of meaning for Qoheleth is found in life's contradictions, he nevertheless finds meaning by reconstructing and recovering meanings, or what trauma theorists call "meaning making" (Fox, 1998: 225).…”

Section: Resilience Through Meaning Making In Qohelethmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resilience through Disclosure and Meaning Making in Qoheleth and the Babylonian Theodicy

Meek¹,

Mehlman²

2023

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study rereads Qoheleth and the Babylonian Theodicy through a trauma lens as opposed to the generic lens of speculative wisdom encompassing retributive justice, retribution theology, and the deed-consequence nexus and their consequent view of the gods’/God’s justice. According to retribution theology, actions correlate appropriately to consequences; however, in light of their suffering and resilience, both authors are disillusioned, struggling to make sense of life’s predicaments despite their religiosity and placating of the deity, as they also resist retribution theology. Rereading Qoheleth and the Babylonian Theodicy through a trauma lens shows that both sufferers seek answers and cope with suffering similarly to modern readers. This study acknowledges the use and limits of retribution theology operating within the Hebrew and Mesopotamian worldview to illustrate how these texts resist retributive justice. However, we also illustrate how the collective and individual aspects of trauma theory transcend ethic, cultural, epochal, and geographical boundaries. Furthermore, the juxtaposed ancient texts demonstrate how to cope with traumatic life experiences outside the confines of retributive justice by making meaning of self and others in the world and exhibiting resilience through effective coping strategies. Ultimately, Qoheleth affirms that while fearing God is right, navigating trauma includes enjoying God’s simple gifts such as food, wine, work, and a spouse for momentary relief. The Babylonian Theodicy sufferer makes meaning and develops resiliency through self-disclosure to friends and acceptance.

show abstract

Section: Resilience Through Meaning Making In Qohelethmentioning

confidence: 99%