I just finished reading Adam Miller’s latest modernization of ancient scripture: Nothing New Under the Sun. This is a very quick read, a modern version of Ecclesiastes:
Because the modern language made the parallels to modern wisdom literature so clear, I was curious about the links to Buddhism. According to Wikipedia, Ecclesiastes was written between 450 and 350 BCE.
The presence of Persian loan-words and Aramaisms points to a date no earlier than about 450 BCE, while the latest possible date for its composition is 180 BCE, when another Jewish writer, Ben Sira, quotes from it. The dispute as to whether Ecclesiastes belongs to the Persian or the Hellenistic periods (i.e., the earlier or later part of this period) revolves around the degree of Hellenization (influence of Greek culture and thought) present in the book. Scholars arguing for a Persian date (c. 450–330 BCE) hold that there is a complete lack of Greek influence; those who argue for a Hellenistic date (c. 330–180 BCE) argue that it shows internal evidence of Greek thought and social setting.
Is Ecclesiastes Buddhism in the Bible? Or is it simply the case that all wisdom is roughly the same and there is nothing new under the sun. Buddha dates to 600 BC. Adam Miller’s book doesn’t dwell on these parallels, but merely hints at them. Wisdom is wisdom, no matter the source. It’s an interesting question, though. His modernized take on Ecclesiastes also demonstrates that there really is nothing new under the sun, including Christian wisdom.
Ecclesiastes is written by an author referred to as “the Preacher.” Traditionally, most sects attribute it to King Solomon, but that attribution seems forced given the earliest date of the manuscript. It seems more likely that it’s a poetic and philosophical piece merely attributed to a Jewish King to make it more accessible to a Jewish audience. The parallels to Siddartha Gautama (who achieved enlightenment and became Buddha) are striking. In particular “the Preacher” has lived a privileged life but then learned that all of life is vain and idle. The Preacher seems to have tried all the excesses of life and then renounces them. Likewise, Siddhartha Gautama begins as a pampered wealthy boy and then is troubled when he sees an elderly man. He then becomes an ascetic. Later he indulges in sexual excess. Ultimately, he determines that all of life is a distraction, and that even seeking for wisdom takes our eye off living and relieving suffering.
Adam’s paraphrase of The Preacher’s similar background is even more succinct:
“I scratched every itch.”
Of course, this take on Ecclesiastes is both an update and also Christianity-compatible. As Adam says in the intro:
“Before we can find hope in Christ, we must first give up hope in everything else.”
Even though Ecclesiastes is rightly accused of being a stone cold bummer, we need a wake up call to be able to let go of the illusions that constitute our lives. I couldn’t help but think of The Four Agreements in which author Don Miguel Ruiz points out that all of humanity is mentally trapped in a dream, but that our perceptions and priorities are all a deception. Only when we let go of them can we truly learn to love ourselves and others.
“Wherever you go you will find people lying to you, and as your awareness grows, you will notice that you also lie to yourself. Do not expect people to tell you the truth because they also lie to themselves.” Don Miguel Ruiz, The Four Agreements
Likewise, Ecclesiastes points out all the ways in which the life we are living gets us all wrapped up in its dramas but that it’s just an illusory cycle that is ultimately meaningless. Adam makes these far more accessible than the KJV translation, lifting the obscuring language and revealing with clarity the simple yet game-changing messages below the text.
In another chapter, Adam’s paraphrase seems to be channeling Battlestar Galactica (“All this has happened before, and it will happen again”) on the futility of the illusions we have about the world in which we live:
“Everything is an iteration of what went before.”
This parallels something from the Four Agreements:
“Maybe we cannot escape from the destiny of the human, but we have a choice: to suffer our destiny or to enjoy our destiny.” Don Miguel Ruiz, The Four Agreements
Ecclesiastes, in Adam’s capable hands, takes us through all the illusions life offers us, some of which are a reaction to other illusions we abandon. We believe the system is reality, but it’s really just self-sustaining illusion. We believe we have to follow the rules, play the game, but these are often a distraction, a way to believe we control and earn a reward. Another parallel to the Four Agreements:
“We are so well trained that we are our own domesticator. We are an autodomesticated animal. We can now domesticate ourselves according to the same belief system we were given, and using the same system of punishment and reward. We punish ourselves when we don’t follow the rules according to our belief system; we reward ourselves when we are the “good boy” or “good girl”.” Don Miguel Ruiz, The Four Agreements
A big part of Ecclesiastes is about identifying and getting past these illusions, also similar to Buddha’s journey to enlightenment:
“Now, he thought, that all transitory things have slipped away from me again, I stand once more beneath the sun, as I once stood as a small child. Nothing is mine, I know nothing, I possess nothing, I have learned nothing…when I am no longer young, when my hair is fast growing gray…now I am beginning again like a child.” Hermann Hesse, Siddhartha
Adam even takes down the pursuit of wisdom in this breathtaking paraphrase:
“What wisdom there is, I’ve gathered it. So I tried to determine what advantage wisdom had given me over madmen and fools–but again, it was futile. There’s no lasting difference I can tell. All of my learning has only made me feel more alone.”
I’ll leave it at that. Hopefully, I’ve piqued your interest in reading it for yourself. It really only took about an hour to read, but will take a lifetime to comprehend. All wisdom literature seems to be like that. All this has happened before, and it will all happen again.
Wheat & Tares 
I’m am Adam Miller junkie and enjoyed NNUS. I’d sum the book up with: “This life may be all there is. Not knowing, it’s better to stop fantasizing about some great reward and, instead, learn to love our work for its own sake.”
I started studying the Wisdom lit when I was assigned to teach those lessons in Sunday School: Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Job. I was excited to dive into Proverbs because I had recently heard about the theory of HM being Lady Wisdom. Even though I eventually dismissed the theory, I’m grateful for the motivation to better appreciate the books. With Proverbs you get a very black and white view (do good and you’ll be blessed, do bad and you’ll be cursed). Ecclesiastes basically turns that on it’s head and says it’s a crock – bad stuff happens to good people and good stuff happens to bad people. The book of Job is Ecclesiastes incarnate – how do we make sense of good people suffering? While Job is suffering, you have his friends pushing the black and white thinking from Proverbs, but the audience clearly understands based on the prologue that those are not helpful towards understanding his suffering.
I enjoy watching those ancient conversations that mirror in many ways the conversations we have today. We don’t have all the answers, life is a whole muddle of shades of gray, but there are still reasons to do good regardless.
I definitely noticed the parallels between Job and Ecclesiastes as I read Adam’s book and recently reread Job. I can only hope that Adam’s next book will tackle Job. These seem particularly relevant to our current Mormon culture and that culture’s pet sins.
Mary Ann, that sounds like a blog post right there!
Adam Miller’s paraphrase is actually just a translation, in the tradition of the more colloquial translations of the Bible like the Good News translation:
KJV: And I gave my heart to know wisdom, and to know madness and folly: I perceived that this also is vexation of spirit. For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.
Good News Translation: I was determined to learn the difference between knowledge and foolishness, wisdom and madness. But I found out that I might as well be chasing the wind. The wiser you are, the more worries you have; the more you know, the more it hurts.
Adam Miller: So I tried to determine what advantage wisdom had given me over madmen and fools—but, again, it was futile. There’s no lasting difference I can tell. All of my learning has only made me feel more alone. My wisdom is all hot air. More knowledge just means more heartache.
By calling it a “paraphrase,” Adam gets around the LDS complex over “translations” and fills a desperately needed void. Many scriptures are too opaque to be useful. Paraphrases could be a way to bring new light into stagnant scriptural understandings.
Nate: Good point – and that would be a great post, too. Perhaps you’ve seen these posts that replace the word “Philistines” with “haters” and “sinners” with “posers.” http://the-toast.net/2016/02/16/bible-verses-where-sinners-has-been-replaced-with-posers/
Psalm 1:4-6: “The posers are not so,
But are like the chaff which the wind drives away.
Therefore the posers shall not stand in the judgment,
Nor fakers in the congregation of the righteous.
For the Lord knows the way of the legit,
But the way of the poser shall perish.”
1 Corinthians 6:9-10: “Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Posers, hypocrites, fake-ass bitches, scenesters, try-hards, fakes bullshitters, followers, wannabees, bandwagon fake fans – none of these will inherit the kingdom of God.”
Hawk and MH, I’m fairly positive at least some of those ideas came from Michael Austin’s _Re-reading Job_. Another great book related to this topic. Maybe I’ll put something together.
That’s hilarious! A homey version of the Bible. I love how it mixes formal “therefore” and “nor” with “fake-ass bitches.” It’s like a whole bible narrated by Samuel Jackson.
Firstly, Adam Miller is writing way too many books. I now have like…3..? in my backlog.
Secondly…at the risk of commenting with yet another new post idea (let’s just set a week on the calendar to be Adam Miller week, why don’t we?), it seems that a big theme of Adam Miller’s works is the need to renew and rejuvenate old stories. His way of practicing this as an example to others seems to be things like Grace is Not God’s Backup Plan, Nothing New Under the Sun, and even, say, The Gospel According to David Foster Wallace. It seems that he is tying all these efforts together thematically with “Future Mormon”.
Do you think that’s a fair way to describe NNUS?
And, if so, how do you think that meshes with the last few lines of your review — it seems like he wants people to re-invent their religion every generation (and not just go off what people believed/lived in previous generations), but at the same time, this pursuit is vain, precisely because there is “nothing new under the sun”. Or…would you say that “it has all happened before; it will all happen again” is more of a validation of the need to renew — it’s going to happen anyway, so we might as well get to it?
I think the renewal is necessary, and I think Adam would agree. Perhaps that’s the point of the restoration, too, that everything needs to be “made” new even though it is not new really.
We always need to renew because it’s impossible to go back. Even though generally you can say everything that’s happening here “has been done in other worlds,” the actors are *always* different. With the belief in agency and unique intelligences (as well as a belief in linear time), you can never duplicate exactly what happened in the past. Even if you have the same person going through the same motions, that person is not the same person at age 20 as she is at age 50.
So it’s a paradox – while we generally repeat the same patterns, deal with the same human tendencies, continually repeat the cycle of birth, life, and death, everything is also constantly new. The flower that blooms in the spring is a different flower that bloomed the year before, even though they derive from the same plant. The constant renewal is necessary because it’s the only way to move forward (and, paradoxically, complete the patterns established in the past).
If you think about evolution, it’s based on the idea that reproductive cycles repeat consistently. Random mutations (the result of descent into carnal mortality) introduce slight variations into those reproductive cycles, providing a way for eventual progress to appear on a large scale even though the system is still based on repetitive cycles. It’s the constant renewal (and ever so slight variations in that constant renewal due to unique circumstances of each individual) that allow change, even as things seem to remain the same.
I am loving this conversion.