As a philosophical treatise in which the author considers the meaning of man's existence on earth, the Book of Ecclesiastes is an exceptional section of the Tanakh that differs from traditional didactic narratives that surround him. The Preacher in Ecclesiastes is concerned with the idea that no matter how a man chooses to live his life, ultimately, his actions are in vain and have no lasting consequences because the world itself remains unchanged and essentially static. In light of this observation, the driving question of the work becomes: "What does man gain from all the toil he toils under the sun?" (Ecc. 1:3) At the end of the book, the author does not provide a traditional, concrete answer to this question, but the ambiguous solution can be found throughout the text. Consistently, the Preacher's reasoning is based on what can be seen as the intrinsic duality of life, which man is able to recognize and contemplate but not fully understand, and the inability to resolve this basic uncertainty brings the author to the simple conclusion that, "There is nothing better for a man than to eat and drink and enjoy labor" (Ecc. 2:24). The Preacher's dialectical reasoning is as circular and static as the world he observes, and from this parallel it can be deduced that life wants to be ambiguous, and that every human being must do his best with what he is given, taking advantage of the present. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why video games should not violence be prohibited"? Get an original essay Within the text, dichotomies emerge from what appear to be contradictions in the author's statements as he makes statements such as, "I hated all my labor," (Ecc. 2.18 ) and then goes on to say that the enjoyment of effort is the best thing for man. This apparent logical leap is the result of the fact that the Preacher's thought process cannot escape the dichotomy of life. He must consider hating toil before he can love it, for one emotion flows out of another, "for with sorrow of countenance the heart rejoices" (Ecc. 7:3). Light cannot exist without darkness just as wisdom cannot exist without madness, because they complement and define each other. Happiness and contentment would be inconceivable without the alternative of pain and difficulty. To demonstrate this idea, the author makes unconventional statements such as, “Sorrow is better than laughter” (Ecc. 7:3). Pain is not necessarily better than laughter, but laughter cannot be better than pain either, because they rely on each other to exist and are both inevitable features of life. During his time on earth, a man cannot change the nature of existence; therefore he must in turn accept both good and evil. The opening verses of the third chapter express this concept eloquently as the Preacher explains that: "For everything there is a time... a time to be born and a time to die" (Ecc. 3:1-2) because God, work “lasts forever; nothing can be added to it, nor can anything be taken away" (3,14). This inherent dichotomy is what makes the Preacher's work enjoyable, for he is a philosopher whose work takes place in the mind, and the ambiguity he sees as ordained by God is what gives substance to his thoughts. Near the beginning, in chapter four, verse two, he concludes that the dead are luckier than the living, but in chapter nine “a living dog is better than a dead lion” (v.4). His arguments qualify each other just as life and death go hand in hand. Recognizing the value of couples, the Preacher translates the concept of duality into human relationships. A rich man who does not have a partner with whom to share the fruit of his laboras long as he is alive he will experience only misery since "Two are better than one, because they have a good reward for their labor" (Ecc. 4,9). Being one of God's creations, human beings are naturally dichotomous and need a complementary partnerwhether it is a close friend or spouse. The Preacher, a man cannot be safe alone, "if two lie together, they are hot; but how can one stay warm alone?" (Ecc. 4:11). Alone, a man is easily overwhelmed, but with the bulwark of companionship that reflects the intrinsic nature of life, adversity can be overcome. This logic supports the idea that monogamous marriage is the foundation of human community as opposite sexes support each other and are able to build a strong family unit through this support While interhuman relationships are easier for us to understand, the Preacher comes to the conclusion that, overall, humanity is only given the ability to recognize the presence of duality but not to fully understand its meaning or purpose, because only God knows the true truth of duality. The ambiguous nature of life makes it for uncertain definition, and man must learn to live with this uncertainty, "because you do not know what evil can happen on earth" (Ecc. 11,2). Since the Preacher believes that all existence is the will of God, he sees the beauty in doubt, but he is also troubled by his inability to reach a firm solution. He states, "(God) has made everything beautiful in its time; he has also put eternity in the mind of man, so that he cannot discover what God has made from the beginning to the end," (Ecc. 3: 11). . From a philosopher's point of view, these dilemmas are like clay to a potter, for they provide endless material with which to speculate and debate, but they can also be a troublesome burden to the curious human intellect, "For in much wisdom there is a lot of harassment." ,” (Ecc. 1:18). Once again man is confronted with conflicting ideas. On the one hand, humans are given a unique position among animals because we have the ability to reason, but that ability has limits, so that we truly "know not the work of God" (Ecc. 11:5) and remain , essentially, ignorant as beasts. Overall, the author of Ecclesiastes wrestles with the idea that man's knowledge is limited, but also praises the ambiguity of life as the will of God who is seen as the omniscient creator. Ultimately, the faithful preacher comes to the conclusion that life is neither good nor bad, it just is, because one side of the coin cannot exist without the other. Life would lose some of its preciousness if existence were simply one-dimensional. There would be no happiness, because there would be no pain, and there would be no joy in liberation, because there would be no oppression. It is difficult for humans as conscious beings to accept the harsher and more bitter aspects of the world, and this is one of the Preacher's main concerns at the beginning, but he ultimately seems to have resolved them on his own. Paradoxically, his final decision is that there is no real answer to why human existence seems to be vain and fleeting. Man must accept his fate or condemn himself to mental anguish. Repeatedly the Preacher states that "all is vanity and a chasing after the wind" (Ecc. 1:14), but in the end this conclusion is not as bleak as it seems. While it is vain to assume that a man's life is of such great importance as to influence the cycle of life, it may be healthy and comforting to accept this vanity as the Preacher does. If one accepts the fact that one's actions are not lasting, then the present can be enjoyed for what it is rather than what proud human aspirations believe it should be. Here,.