Ecc 3:16 | KD | STEP | “And, moreover, I saw under the sun the place of judgment, that wickedness was there; and the place of righteousness, that wickedness was there.” The structure of the verse is palindromic, like ; ; Ecc 4:1. We might also render מקום as the so-called casus absol ., so that שׁם ... מק is an emphatic בּמקום (Hitz.), and the construction like ; but the accentuation does not require this (cf. ); and why should it not be at once the object to ראיתי, which in any case it virtually is? These two words שׁמה הרשׁע might be attribut. clauses: where wickedness (prevails), for the old scheme of the attributive clause (the tsfat) is not foreign to the style of this book ( vid ., , nathan = nethano; and , raithi = reithiha); but why not rather virtual pred. accus.: vidi locum juris ( quod ) ibi impietas? Cf. with Psa 37:25. The place of “judgment” is the place where justice should be ascertained and executed; and the place of “righteousness,” that where righteousness should ascertain and administer justice; for mishpat is the rule (of right), and the objective matter of fact; tsedek, a subjective property and manner of acting. רשׁע is in both cases the same: wickedness (see under ), which bends justice, and is the contrary of tsěděk, i.e. , upright and moral sternness. רשׁע elsewhere, like mělěk̂ tsěděk, preserves in p . its e , but here it takes rank along with חסד, which in like manner fluctuates (cf. with ). שׁמּה is here = שׁם, as at , etc.; the locative ah suits the question Where? as well as in the question Whither? - He now expresses how, in such a state of things, he arrived at satisfaction of mind.

‏ Ecclesiastes 3:16

Ecc 3:16 “And, moreover, I saw under the sun the place of judgment, that wickedness was there; and the place of righteousness, that wickedness was there.” The structure of the verse is palindromic, like Ecc 1:6; Ecc 2:10; Ecc 4:1. We might also render מקום as the so-called casus absol., so that שׁם ... מק is an emphatic בּמקום (Hitz.), and the construction like Jer 46:5; but the accentuation does not require this (cf. Gen 1:1); and why should it not be at once the object to ראיתי, which in any case it virtually is? These two words שׁמה הרשׁע might be attribut. clauses: where wickedness (prevails), for the old scheme of the attributive clause (the tsfat) is not foreign to the style of this book (vid., Ecc 1:13, nathan = nethano; and Ecc 5:12, raithi = reithiha); but why not rather virtual pred. accus.: vidi locum juris (quod)ibi impietas? Cf. Neh 13:23 with Psa 37:25. The place of “judgment” is the place where justice should be ascertained and executed; and the place of “righteousness,” that where righteousness should ascertain and administer justice; for mishpat is the rule (of right), and the objective matter of fact; tsedek, a subjective property and manner of acting. רשׁע is in both cases the same: wickedness (see under Psa 1:1), which bends justice, and is the contrary of tsěděk, i.e., upright and moral sternness. רשׁע elsewhere, like mělěk̂ tsěděk, preserves in p. its e, but here it takes rank along with חסד, which in like manner fluctuates (cf. Psa 130:7 with Pro 21:21). שׁמּה is here = שׁם, as at Psa 122:5, etc.; the locative ah suits the question Where? as well as in the question Whither? - He now expresses how, in such a state of things, he arrived at satisfaction of mind.