¹ tn Or “Leader/Speaker of the Assembly.” Perhaps “Qoheleth” (surname of Solomon) The meaning of tl#h#q) (Qal active participle fs from lhq) is somewhat puzzling. The verb lh*q* means “to assemble, summon” (KBL 3:1078-79), and is derived from the noun lh*q* “assembly” (KBL 3:1079-80). The term tl#h#q) might mean: (1) convener of the assembly, (2) leader, speaker, teacher, or preacher of the assembly, or (3) member of the assembly. Elsewhere in the book, the term tl#h#q) is used in collocation with statements about his position as king in Jerusalem (Eccl 1:12), his proclamations about life (Eccl 1:2; 7:27; 12:8), and his teaching of wisdom and writing wise sayings (Eccl 12:9-10). Thus, tl#h#q) probably means “the leader of the assembly, speaker of the assembly” (KBL 3:1080) (also see study note below). Rabbinic literature treats tl#h#q) as a traditional surname for Solomon, relating it to the noun lh*q* “assembly,” e.g., “Why was his name called Qoheleth [tlhq]? Because his words were proclaimed in public meeting [lhq], as it is written (1 Kings 8:1)” (Qoheleth Rabbah 1:1). LXX rendered it ejkklhsiasth" “member of the assembly” (Liddell-Scott 509), in keeping with the custom of relating the Greek noun ejkklhsiva (“assembly”) to the Hebrew noun lh*q* “assembly” (KBL 3:1079). The traditional English title “Ecclesiastes” is simply a transliteration of LXX. Symmachus paroimiasth" “author of proverbs” (Liddell-Scott 1342) is not a translation of tl#h#q) but refers to his authorship of many proverbs (Eccl. 12:9-10). The term tl#h#q) (Qal active participle fs from lhq ”to assemble, summon”) is used substantively to designate the profession or title of the author. Substantival participles often designate the title or profession of an individual: /hK) “priest,” /zr) “ruler,” rfv) “officer,” dqn) “sheep-breeder,” fpv) “judge,” rxoy “potter,” <rK) “vine-dresser,” bgy) “farmer,” ruv) “gate-keeper,” Jrox “smelter,” and apr) “doctor” (Waltke-O’Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 37.2). While the form tl#h#q) is feminine in gender, its referent is masculine. Jouon suggests the feminine ending has an intensive nuance, e.g., tu^d^om “close relative” from ud*om “kinsman” (Paul Jouon, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, 89.b). A similar usages occurs in Arabic, e.g., rawiyat “a great narrator” from rawi “narrator” (Wright, Arabic Grammar, 1:233c). Thus, tl#h#q) may mean “the leader/teacher of the assembly” from the noun lhq “assembly.” When used in reference to a male referent, the feminine form may denote a professional title or vocational office, as in Arabic, Ethiopic, and Aramaic (GKC 122r). For example, tr#p#s) “scribe,” tr#k#P) “gazelle-catcher.” hj*P# “provincial governor,” and toor*P= “princes.” Occasionally, a professional name later became a personal name, e.g., the title tr#p#s) “scribe” became the name “Sophereth” (Ezra 2:55; Neh 7:57), tr#k#P) “gazelle-catcher” became “Pokereth” (Ezra 2:57; Neh 7:59), and perhaps tl#h#q) “assembler” became the surname “Qoheleth” (KBL 3:926). The term is used in Ecclesiastes 12:8 with the article, indicating that it is a professional title rather than a personal surname: tl#h#oQh^ (“the Teacher”). Numerous English translations render tl#h#q) as a professional title: “the Speaker” (NEB, Moffatt), “the Preacher” (KJV, RSV, YLT, BV, ASV, NASB), “the Teacher” (NIV, NRSV), “the Leader of the Assembly” (NIV margin), “the Assembler” (NJPS margin). Others render it as a personal surname: “Koheleth” (AB, JPS, NJPS) and “Qoheleth” (NAB, NRSV margin).
sn The Hebrew verb lh*q* means “to assemble, summon” (KBL 3:1078-79). It is used of assemblying or summoning various groups of people: “all Israel” (1 Chr 13:5; 15:3), “the elders of Israel” (1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Chr 5:2), all the elders of their tribes” (Deut 31:28), “all the princes of Israel” (1 Chr 28:1), “your tribes” (Deut 31:28), “all the house of Judah” (1 Kgs 12:21; 2 Chr 11:1), “the people” (Deut 4:10; 31:12), “the whole congregation” (Lev 8:3; Num 1:18; 16:19; 20:8), “all the congregation of the sons of Israel” (Exod 35:1; Num 8:9), “the assembly” (Num 10:7; 20:10), and “your assembly” (Ezek 38:13). The verb is often used in reference to summoning/assembling people for a religious occasion (Exod 35:1; Lev 8:3-4; Num 8:9; Deut 4:10; Josh 18:1; 22:12; 1 Kgs 8:1; 2 Chr 5:2-3), political occasion (2 Sam 20:14), military occasion (Judg 20:1l; 2 Chr 11:1), or a judicial occasion (Job 11:10). The Hiphil stem is used to describe the action of the leader (usually a single individual who possesses/commands authority) summoning the people, e.g., Moses (Exod 35:1; Lev 8:3; Num 20:10), Moses and Aaron (Num 1:18), Korah (Num 16:19), King David (1 Chr 13:5; 15:3; 28:1), King Solomon (1 Kgs 8:1; 12:21; 2 Chr 5:2), and King Rehoboam (2 Chr 11:1). On almost every case, he who assembles the people is a person invested with authority; he makes a public proclamation or leads the nation in an important action. The Niphal stem is most often used to describe the people assembling at the direction of the leader (e.g., Lev 8:4; Josh 18:1; 22:12; 1 Kgs 8:2; 2 Chr 5:3). The verb lh*q* is a denominative derived from the noun lh*q* “assembly, contingent” (KBL 3:1079-80). The noun has numerous referents: the congregated nation as a whole in the wilderness, assembled for ceremonies and instruction (Exod 16:3; Lev 4:13,21; 16:17,33; Num 10:7; 14:5; 15:15; 16:3; 17:12; 19:20; 20:4,6,10,12; Deut 9:10; 10:4; 18:16); the congregation of Israel assembled for divine worship (Pss 22:23,26; 26:5; 35:18; 40:10; 107:32; 149:1; Lam 1:10); the post-exilic community assembled to hear the Torah and instruction (Neh 13:1); a military contingent assembled for warfare (Num 16:3; 20:4; Judg 20:2; 21:5,8; 1 Sam 17:47; 2 Chr 28:14); people summoned to court (Ezek 16:40; 23:46-47); judicial authorities (Jer 26:17; Prov 5:14; 26:26; Sir 7:7). The term is often used as a designation for Israel: “the assembly of Israel” (Lev 16:17; Deut 31:30; Josh 8:35; 1 Kgs 8:14,22,55; 12:3; 2 Chr 6:3,12-13; Sir 50:13,20), “the assembly of the congregation” (Exod 12:6); “the assembly of the congregation of the sons of Israel” (Num 14:5), and “the assembly of God” (Neh 13:1). The related noun hL*h!q= means “assembly, community” (KBL 3:1080), e.g., hlhq /t^n` “to hold an assembly” (Deut 33:4); “I called a great assembly to deal with them” (Neh 5:7).
²tn Or “son of David” or “a son of David”
³sn While 1:1 says only “king in Jerusalem” (<lvWryb ilm ), 1:12 adds “king over Israel in Jerusalem” (<lvWryb lar?y-lu ilm). The LXX adds Israhl (“Israel”) in 1:1 to harmonize with 1:12; however, MT makes sense as it stands. Apart from David, only Solomon was “king over Israel in Jerusalem” - unless the term Israel (lar?y) in 1:12 is used for Judah or the post-exilic community. Solomon would fit the description of the author of this book who is characterized by great wisdom (1:13,16), great wealth (2:8), numerous servants (2:7), great projects (2:4-6), and the collection, editing and writings of many proverbs (12:9-10). All of this generally suggests Solomonic authorship. However, many scholars on the basis of linguistic and historical arguments deny Solomonic authorship.
⁴sn The form of the title is typical: (1) “the words of [the writer],” (2) his family name or name of his father, and (3) his social/political position in Israel (e.g., Prov. 22:17; 24:23; 30:1; 31:1). Sometimes, the writer’s qualifications are given in the introduction (e.g., Jer. 1:1; Amos 1:1). Qoheleth lists his qualifications at the end of the book (12:9-12).
⁵tn Heb “says”
⁶sn See the note on “Teacher” in v. 1.
⁷tn Heb “futility of futilities.” The phrase “absolutely futile” (<ylbh lbh) is a superlative genitive construction (GKC 133i). When a plural genitive follows a singular construct noun of the same root, it indicates the most outstanding example of the person/thing described. Examples: <yvdqh vdq “holy of holies” = “the most holy place” (Exod 26:33), <yryvh ryv “song of songs” = “the most excellent song” (Song 1:1), <yndah yndaw <yhlah yhla “the God of gods and Lord of lords” = “the Highest God and the Supreme Lord” (Deut 10:17) (Ronald Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, 80; Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 9.5.3j).
⁸tn Although lK) (“everything, all”) is often used in an absolute or comprehensive sense (BDB 481.1), it is frequently used as a synecdoche of the general for the specific, that is, its sense is limited contextually to the topic at hand (BDB 482.2). This is particularly true of lK)h^ (BDB 482.2b) in which the article particularizes or limits the referent to the contextual or previously mentioned topic (e.g., Gen 16:12; 24:1; Exod 29:24; Lev 1:9,13; 8:27; Deut 2:36; Josh 11:19 [see 2 Sam 19:31; 1 Kgs 14:26=2 Chr 12:9]; 21:43; 1 Sam 30:19; 2 Sam 17:3; 23:5; 24:23; 1 Kgs 6:18; 2 Kgs 24:16; Isa 29:11; 65:8; Jer 13:7,10; Ezek 7:14; Pss 14:3; 49:18; 1 Chr 7:5; 28:19; 29:19; 2 Chr 28:6; 29:28; 31:5; 35:7; 36:17-18; Ezra 1:11; 2:42; 8:34-35; 10:17; Eccl 5:8). Thus, “all” does not always mean “all” absolutely or universally in comprehension. In several cases the context limits its reference to two classes of objects/issues being discussed, so lK)h^ means “both” (e.g., 2:14; 3:19: 9:1,2). Thus, lK)h^ (“all, everything”) refers only to what Qoheleth characterizes as “futile” (lb#h#) in the context. Qoheleth does not mean that everything in an absolute, all-encompassing sense is futile. For example, the sovereign work of God is not “futile” (3:1-4:3); fearing God is not “futile” (2:26; 3:14-15; 11:9-12:1, 9, 13-14); and enjoying life as a righteous person under the blessing of God is not “futile” (2:24-26; 11:9-10). Only those objects/issues that are contextually placed under lK) are designated as “futile” (lb#h#). The context of 1:3-15 suggests that 1:2 refers to the futility of secular human endeavor. The content and referent of 1:3-15 determines the referent of lK)h^ in 1:2.
⁹tn The term “futile” (lb#h#) is repeated five times within the eight words of this verse for the sake of emphasis. The noun lbh (“futile”) is the key word in Ecclesiastes. The root is used in two ways in OT, literally and figuratively. The literal, concrete sense is used in reference to the wind, man’s transitory breath, evanescent vapor (Isa 57:13; Pss 62:10; 144:4; Prov 21:6; Job 7:16). In this sense, it is often a synonym for “breath, wind” (Eccl 1:14; Isa 57:13; Jer 10:14). The literal sense lent itself to metaphorical senses: (1) breath/vapor/wind is non-physical, evanescent, and lacks concrete substance thus, the connotation “unsubstantial” (Jer 10:15; 16:19; 51:18), “profitless, fruitless” (Ps 78:33; Prov 13:11), “worthless” (2 Kgs 17:15; Jer 2:5; 10:3), “pointless” (Prov 21:6), “futile” (Lam 4:17; Eccl 1:2,14; 2:1, 14-15), (2) breath/vapor/wind is transitory and fleeting—thus, the connotation “fleeting, transitory” (Prov 31:30; Eccl 6:12; 7:15; 9:9; 11:10; Job 7:16) and (3) breath/vapor/wind cannot be seen thus, the idea of “obscure, dark, difficult to understand, enigmatic” (Eccl 11:10) (see KBL 1:236-37; BDB 210-11; TWAT 2:334-43; TDOT 3:313-20; THAT 1:467-69; TWOT 1:204-05). The metaphorical sense is used with the following synonyms: Whotl= “for nothing, in vain, for no reason” (Isa 49:4), WhoT “empty, vanity” (Isa 44:25), qyr! “profitless, useless” (Isa 30:7; Eccl 6:11), and lyu!oh al) “worthless, profitless” (Is 30:6; 57:12; Jer 16:19). It is parallel to “few days” and “[days] which he passes like a shadow” (Eccl 6:12). It is used in reference to youth and vigor (11:10), life (6:12; 7:15; 9:9) which are “transitory” or “fleeting.” The most common parallels to lbh in Ecclesiastes are the phrases “chasing after the wind” (jwr twur) (2:11,17,26; 7:14); and “what profit?” (/wrty-hm) or “no profit” (/wrty /ya) (2:11; 3:19; 6:9,19). It is used in reference to enigmas in life (6:2; 8:10,14) and to the future which is obscure (11:8). It is often used in antithesis to terms connoting value: bof (“good, benefit, advantage”) and /ort=y{ (“profit, advantage, gain”). Because the concrete picture of the “wind” lends itself to the figurative connotation “futile,” the motto “This is futile” (lb#h# hz#) is often used with the metaphor, “like striving after the wind” (j^Wr tWur=) - a graphic picture of an expenditure of effort in vain because no one can catch the wind by chasing it (e.g., 1:14,17; 2:11,17,26; 4:4,6,16; 6:9). Although it is the key word in Ecclesiastes, it should not be translated the same way in every place.
sn The motto Everything is futile! is the theme of the book. Its occurs at the beginning (1:2) and end of the book (12:8), forming an envelope structure (inclusio). Everything described in 1:2—12:8 is the supporting proof of the thesis of 1:2. With few exceptions (e.g., 2:24-26; 3:14-15; 11:9-12:1, 9), everything described in 1:2—12:8 is characterized as “futile” (lb#h#).
¹⁰tn The term “profit” (/ort=y{) is used in Ecclesiastes to evaluate the ultimate benefit/effects of human activities, as is bof (“good, worthwhile”) as well (e.g., 2:1,3). While some relative advantage/profit is recognized (e.g., light over darkness, and wisdom over folly), Qoheleth denies the ultimate advantage of all human endeavors (e.g., 2:11,15).
¹¹tn The use of the relative pronoun v# (“which”) -- rather than the more common term rva (“which”) - is a linguistic feature that is often used to try to date the book. Noting that v# is the dominant relative pronoun in Mishnaic Hebrew and that rva does not appear as frequently (Jastrow, 130), many critical scholars conclude that rva is early and v# is late. They suggest that v# is a contraction of rva which then fell into disuse. They conclude that the appearance of v in Ecclesiastes points to a late date. However, as Samuel-Kings suggest, the v versus rva phenomena may simply be a dialectical issue: rva is commonly used in the south, and v in the north. The use of v in Ecclesiastes may indicate that the book was written in a northern rather than a southern province, not that it is a late book. This is supported from the related Akkadian terms, both of which occur in texts from the same periods: rva is related to asru (“place”) and v is related to sa (“what”).
¹²sn The root lmu (“toil”) is repeated for the sake of emphasis: “What gain does anyone have in his toil (wlmu) with which he toils (lmuyv).” For all his efforts, man’s endeavors and secular achievements will not produce anything of ultimate value that will radically revolutionize anything in the world. The term “toil” is used in a pejorative sense to emphasize that the only thing that man obtains ultimately from all his efforts is weariness and exhaustion. Due to sin, mankind has been cursed with the futility of his labor that renders work a “toilsome” task (Gen 3:17-19). Although it was not yet revealed to Qoheleth, God will one day deliver the redeemed from this plight in the future Kingdom when man’s labor will no longer be toilsome, but profitable, fulfilling, and enjoyable (Isa 65:17-23).
¹³sn This rhetorical question expects a negative answer: “Man has no gain (/ort=y{) in all his toil.” Ecclesiastes often uses rhetorical questions in this manner (e.g., 2:2; 3:9; 6:8,11,12) (E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech in the Bible, 949).
¹⁴tn The verb Elh) (Qal active participle ms from Elh “to walk, go”) emphasizes continual, durative, uninterrupted action (present universal use of participle). The root Elh is repeated in this section (1:4a, 6a, 6b, 7a, 7b, 7c) to emphasize the continual action and constant motion of everything in nature. Despite the continual action of everything in nature, there is no completion, attainment or rest for anything. The first use of Elh is in reference to man; all subsequent usages are in reference to nature - illustrations of the futility of human endeavor. Note: All the key terms used in 1:4 to describe the futility of human endeavor and repeated in 1:5-11 as illustrations from nature. The literary monotony in 1:4-11 is designed to mirror the actual monotony of human action that repeats itself with no real change.
¹⁵tn The verb aB* (Qal active participle ms from awb “to go”) emphasizes continual, durative, uninterrupted action (present universal use of participle). The term is repeated in 1:4-5 to compare the futility of secular human accomplishments with the futile actions in nature: everything is in motion, but there is nothing new accomplished.
¹⁶tn The verb tdmu (Qal active participle fs from dmu “to stand”) emphasizes a continual, durative, uninterrupted state (present universal condition). Man, despite all his secular accomplishments throughout all generations, makes no ultimate impact upon the face of the earth.
¹⁷tn As KBL and BDB note, <lou has a wide range of meanings: (1) indefinite time: “long time, duration,” often “eternal” or “eternity,” (2) future time: “things to come,” and (3) past time: “a long time back,” that is, the dark age of prehistory (KBL 2:798-99; BDB 762-64). It may also denote an indefinite period of “continuous existence” (BDB 762.2b). It is used in this sense in reference to things that remain the same for long periods: the earth (Eccl 1:4), heavens (Ps 148:6), ruined cities (Isa 25:2; 32:14), ruined lands (Jer 18:16), nations (Isa 47:7), families (Ps 49:12; Isa 14:20), the dynasty of Saul (1 Sam 13:13), the house of Eli (2 Sam 2:30), continual enmity between nations (Ezek 25:15; 35:5), the exclusion of certain nations from the assembly (Deut 23:4; Neh 13:1), a perpetual reproach (Ps 78:66).
¹⁸tn The verb jroz (Qal active participle ms from jrz “to rise”) emphasizes continual, durative, uninterrupted action (present universal use of participle): the sun is continually rising (and continually setting) day after day.
¹⁹tn Heb “the sun goes.” The verb aB (Qal active participle ms from awb “to go”) emphasizes continual, durative, uninterrupted action (present universal use of participle): the sun is continually rising and continually setting day after day. The repetition of aB in 1:4-5 creates a comparison between the relative futility of all human endeavor (“a generation comes and a generation goes” aB) with the relative futility of the action of the sun (“The sun rises and the sun goes = sets” aB).
²⁰tn Heb “hastens” or “pants.” The verb [aov (Qal active participle ms from [av) has a three-fold range of meanings: (1) “to gasp, pant,” (2) “to pant after, long for,” and (3) “to hasten, hurry” (KBL³ 937; BDB 983). The related Aramaic root [wv means “to be thirsty, be parched.” The Hebrew verb is used of “gasping” for breath, like a woman in the travail of childbirth (Isa 42:14); “panting” with eagerness or desire (Job 5:5; 7:2; 36:20; Ps 119:131; Jer 2:24) or “panting” with fatigue (Jer 14:6; Eccl 1:5). Here [av pictures the sun (personified as a racer), panting with fatigue, as it hastens to its destination (BDB 983.1). The participle form depicts continual, uninterrupted, durative action (present universal use). Like the sun, man - for all his efforts - never really changes anything; all he accomplishes in his toil is to wear himself out.
²¹tn The verb jrz is repeated in this verse to emphasize that the sun is locked into a never changing, ever repeating monotonous cycle: rising, setting, rising, setting. In 1:5a the perfect tense focuses on the starting-point of the cycle (present definite use of perfect): “the sun rises” (at a definite point in time). However, in 1:5b the participle emphasizes the continual, uninterrupted cycle of the sunrise (present universal use of participle): “there it continually rises again.”
²²tn The root bbs (“to circle around”) is repeated 4x in this verse to depict the wind’s continual motion: “The wind circles around (bbos) …round and round (bbs) bbos)… its circuits (wytbybs).” This repetition is designed for a rhetorical purpose - to emphasize that the wind is locked into a never-ending cycle. This vicious circle of monotonous action does not change anything. The participle form is used 3x to emphasize continual, uninterrupted action (present universal use of participle). Despite the fact that the wind is always changing direction, nothing really new ever happens. The constant shifting of the wind cannot hide the fact that this is nothing but a repeated cycle; nothing new happens here (e.g., 1:9-10).
²³tn The use of bv (Qal active participle ms bWv “to return”) creates word-play (paranomasia) with the repetition of bbs (“to circle around”). The participle emphasizes continual, durative, uninterrupted action (present universal use).
²⁴tn Heb “are going” or “are walking.” The term <yklh (Qal active participle mpl from ilh “to walk”) emphasizes continual, durative, uninterrupted action (present universal use of participle). This may be an example of personification; this verb is normally used in reference to the human activity of walking. Qoheleth compares the flowing of river waters to the action of walking to draw out the comparison between the actions of man (1:4) and the actions of nature (1:5-11).
²⁵tn Heb “there they are returning to go.” The term <ybv (Qal active participle mpl from bWv “to return”) emphasizes the continual, durative action of the waters. The root bWv is repeated in 1:6-7 to emphasize that everything in nature (e.g., wind and water) continually repeats its actions. For all of the repetition of the cycles of nature, nothing changes; all the constant motion produces nothing new.
sn This verse does not refer to the cycle of evaporation or the return of water by underground streams, as sometimes suggested. Rather, it describes the constant flow of river waters to the sea. For all the action of the water - endless repetition and water constantly in motion - there is nothing new accomplished.
²⁶tn The term <yrbd (mpl noun from rbd) is often used to denote “words,” but it can also refer to actions and events (KBL 1:211.3a; BDB 4). Here, it means “things,” as is clear from the context: “What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done” (1:9). <yrbd can be nuanced “occurrences” or even “(natural) phenomena.”
²⁷sn The statement no one could bear to describe them all probably means that Qoheleth could have multiplied examples (beyond the sun, the wind, and the steams) of the endless cycle of futile events in nature. However, no tongue could ever tell, no eye could ever see, no ear could ever hear all the examples of this continual and futile activity.
²⁸tn The term alm (“to be filled, satisified”) is repeated in 1:7-8 to draw a comparison between the futility in the cycle of nature and human secular accomplishments: lots of action, but no lasting affects. In 1:7 alm Wnnya (“it is never filled”) describes the futility of the water cycle: “All the rivers flow into the sea, yet the sea is never filled.” In 1:8 almt-alw (“it is never satisified”) describes the futility of human labor: “the ear is never satisified with hearing.”
²⁹tn Heb “under the sun”
³⁰tn Alternately, “[Even when] there is something of which someone might claim…” The terms rmayv rbd vy may be an interrogative clause without an introductory interrogative particle (GKC 150a). In questions, vy often implies doubt about the existence of something (BDB 441.2b). LXX rendered it as a question, as do most English versions: “Is there anything of which it can be said…?” (KJV, NEB, RSV, AB, ASV, NASB, BV, NRSV, NIV). On the other hand, vy is used elsewhere in the book as a predication of existence (“There is…”) to assert the existence of something (2:13,21; 4:8,9; 5:13[12]; 6:1,11; 7:15; 8:6,14; 9:4; 10:5). KBL renders rbd vy as “There is something …” (KBL 2:443.2). This view is taken by several translations: “Even the thing of which we say…” (NAB), “Men may say of something …” (Moffatt), and “Sometimes there is a phenomena of which they say…” (NJPS).
³¹tn The verb hyh (Qal perfect 3ms “to be”) refers to a past perfect situation: it describes an action that is viewed as a remote past event from the perspective of the past. This past perfect situation is brought out by the temporal adverb rbK “already” (KBL 2:459; BDB 460) (Eccl 1:10; 2:12,16; 3:15; 4:2; 6:10; 9:6-7). BDB notes that rbK + hyh connotes a past perfect nuance: “it has already been” (Eccl 1:10) (BDB 460).
³²sn This does not deny man’s creativity or inventiness, only the ultimate newness of his accomplishments. For example, there is no essential difference between the first voyage to the moon and the discovery of America (different point of arrival, different vehicles of travel, but the same essential action and results).
³³tn Heb “in the ages long ago before us”
³⁴tn Heb “There is no remembrance of former things.” The term <ynvar “former things” is the mpl form of adjective /ovar “former, first, chief” (BDB 911). When used in a temporal sense, the singular denotes “former” in time (BDB 911.1a) or “first” in time (BDB 911.2a). The plural <ynvar is only used to denote “former” in time: “former persons” = ancestors, men of old (e.g., Lev 26:45; Deut 19:14; Job 18:20; Isa 61:4; Ps 79:8; Sirach 4:16) or “former things” = past events (e.g., Isa 41:22; 42:9; 43:9,18; 46:9; 48:3) (BDB 911.1a). BDB suggests that this usage refers to “former persons” (BDB 911.1a). This approach is adopted by several translations: “men of old” (NEB, NAB, NIV, Moffatt), “people of long ago” (NRSV), “earlier ones” (TNK), “earlier people” (AB), and “former generations” (ASV, YLT). On the other hand, KBL classifies this usage as “former things” (KBL³ 866). This is adopted by some translations: “former things” (KJV, RSV), “former times” (BV), and “earlier things” (NASB). Although future generations are mentioned in 1:11, what they will not remember is the past events. The context of 1:3-11 focuses on human achievement = former things.
³⁵tn Heb “and also of the last things which will be.” The term <ynrja (“the future things”) is the mpl form of the adjective /orja “coming after” (BDB 30) or “at the back” (KBL 1:36). When used in a temporal sense, it may mean (1) “later one, “(2)” in the future, “(3)” last,” or (4) “at the last” or “in the end” (KBL 1:36.2). The term <ynrja may be used in reference to (1) future generations, e.g., Deut 29:21; Pss 48:14; 78:4,6; 102:19; Job 18:20; Eccl 4:16, or (2) future events, e.g., Neh 8:18 (BDB 30). BDB suggests that this usage refers to “future generations” (BDB 30b), while KBL suggests future events (KBL 1:36c). As noted in the previous note, it probably refers to future events rather than future generations.
sn The terms <ynrja (“future things”) and <ynvar (“former things”) create a merism (two polar extremes encompass everything in between). This encompasses all secular achievements in human history past to future things yet to be done.
³⁶tn Heb “There will not be any rememberance of them among those who come after.”
sn According to Qoheleth, nothing new really happens under the sun (1:9). Apparent observations of what appears to be totally revolutionary are due to a lack of rememberance by subsequent generations of what happened long before their time in past generations (1:10-11a). And what will happen in future generations will not be remembered by the subsequent generations that will arise after them (1:11b).
³⁷sn Heb “I gave my heart.” Alternately, “I set my mind.” The term ybl (“my heart”) is an example of synecdoche of part (heart) for the whole (myself). Qoheleth uses this figurative expression frequently in the book. On the other hand, in Hebrew mentality, the term “heart” is frequently associated with one’s thoughts and reasoning thus, this might be a metonymy of assocation (heart = thoughts). The equivalent English idiom would be, “I applied my mind.”
³⁸tn Heb “to seek and to search out” (rWtlw vordl). This is an example of a verbal hendiadys (the use of two synonymous verbs to state a common idea in an emphatic manner). The terms are used because they are closely related synonyms; therefore, the similarities in meaning should be emphasized rather than the distinctions in meaning. The verb vordl (preposition + Qal infinitive construct from vrd) means “to inquire about, investigate, search out, study” (KBL 1:233; BDB 205). The verb vrd is used literally of the physical activity of investigating a matter by examining the physical evidence and interviewing eye-witnesses (e.g., Judg 6:29; Deut 13:15; 17:4,9; 19:18), and figuratively (hypocatasasis) of mentally investigating abstract concepts (e.g., Eccl 1:13; Isa 1:17; 16:5; Pss 111:2; 119:45). Similarly, the verb rWtl (preposition + Qal infinitive construct from rWt) means “to explore, seek out” (KBL³ 1023.2; BDB 1064.2). The verb rWt is used literally of the physical action of exploring physical territory (Num 13:16-17; 14:6,34-36; Job 39:8), and figuratively (hypocatastasis) of mentally exploring things (Eccl 1:13; 7:25; 9:1).
sn Qoheleth states that he made a thorough investigation of everything that had been accomplished on earth. His position as king gave him access to records and contacts with people that would have been unavailable to others.
³⁹tn Heb “under heaven”
⁴⁰tn Heb “has given”
⁴¹tn Heb “the sons of men”
⁴²tn The phrase ur /ynu (“rotten business, grievous task”) is used only in Ecclesiastes (1:13; 2:23,26; 3:10; 4:8; 5:2,13; 8:16). It is parallel with lbh “futile” in 4:8, and describes a “grave misfortune” in 5:13. The noun /ynu (“business”) refers to something that keeps a person occupied or busy: “business, affair, task, occupation” (KBL 2:857; BDB 775). The related verb hnu III means “to be occupied, busy with (B=),” e.g., Eccl 1:13; 3:10; 5:19 (KBL 2:854; BDB 775). The noun is from the Aramaic loanword anynu “concern, care.” The verb is related to the Aramaic verb “to try hard,” the Arabic verb “to be busily occupied, worry, be a matter of concern,” and the Old South Arabic root “to be troubled, strive with” (KBL 2:854). The phrase ur /ynu is treated creatively by English translations: “sore travail” (KJV, ASV), “sad travail” (YLT), “painful occupation” (Douay), “sorry business” (NEB), “sorry task” (Moffatt), “evil task” (AB), “thankless task” (NAB), “grievous task” (NASB), “trying task” (BV), “unhappy business” (RSV, NRSV, TNK), and “heavy burden” (NIV).
⁴³tn The syntax of this line in Hebrew is intentionally redundant, e.g., literally, “It is a grievous task/unpleasant business that God has given to the sons of men to be occupied with it.” The referent of the 3ms suffix on oB tou&l^ (“to be occupied with it”) is ur /ynu (“a grievous task, rotten business”).
⁴⁴tn Alternately, “that keeps them occupied” or “that busies them.” The verb tonu&l^ (preposition + Qal infinitive construct from hnu III “to be occupied with”) is related to the noun /ynu (“business, task, occupation”) which also occurs in this verse. The verb hnu III means “to be occupied, busy with (B=),” e.g., Eccl 1:13; 3:10; 5:19 (KBL 2:854; BDB 775). The Hebrew verb is related to the Aramaic verb “to try hard,” the Arabic verb “to be busily occupied, worry, be a matter of concern,” and the Old South Arabic root “to be troubled, strive with” (KBL 2:854).
⁴⁵tn Heb “under the sun”
⁴⁶sn As noted in the note on 1:2, the term lK)h^ (“everything”) is often limited in reference to the specific topic at hand in the context (e.g., BDB 482.2). The argument of 1:12-15, like 1:3-11, focuses on secular human achievement. This is clear from the repetition of the root h?u (“do, work, accomplish, achieve”) in 1:12-13.
⁴⁷tn This usage of lbh denotes “futile, profitless, fruitless” (e.g., 2 Kgs 17:15; Ps 78:33; Prov 13:11; 21:6; Eccl 1:2,14; 2:1, 14-15; 4:8; Jer 2:5; 10:3; Lam 4:17) (KBL 1:236-37; BDB 210-11; TWAT 2:334-43; TDOT 3:313-20; THAT 1:467-69; TWOT 1:204-05). The term is used with the simile “like striving after the wind” (j^Wr tWur=) - a graphic picture of an expenditure of effort in vain because no one can catch the wind by chasing it (e.g., 1:14,17; 2:11,17,26; 4:4,6,16; 6:9; 7:14). When used in this sense, the term is often used with the following synonyms: Whotl= “for nothing, in vain, for no reason” (Isa 49:4), WhoT “empty, vanity” (Isa 44:25), qyr! “profitless, useless” (Isa 30:7; Eccl 6:11), and lyu!oh al) “worthless, profitless” (Is 30:6; 57:12; Jer 16:19); “what profit?” (/wrty-hm); and or “no profit” (/wrty /ya) (2:11; 3:19; 6:9,19). It is also used in antithesis to terms connoting value: bof (“good, benefit, advantage”) and /ort=y{ (“profit, advantage, gain”). Despite everything that man has accomplished in history, it is ultimately futile because nothing on earth really changes.
⁴⁸tn The term twum (Pual participle ms from twu “to bend”) is used substantively (“what is bent, crooked”) in reference to irregularities in life and obstacles to human secular achievement accomplishing anything of ultimate value.
⁴⁹tn A parallel statement occurs in 7:13 which employs the active form of twu (“to bend”) with God as the subject: “Who is able to strengthen what God bends?” (wtwu r?a ta /qtl lkwy ym). The passive form occurs here: “No one is able to straighten what is bent” (/qtl lkwy-al twum). In the light of 7:13, the personal agent of the passive form is God.
⁵⁰tn The noun /wrsj is used in the OT only here, and means “what is lacking” (as an antonym to /wrty “what is profitable”) (KBL 1:339; BDB 341). It is an Aramaic loanword meaning “deficit.” The related verb rsj* means “to lack, be in need of; to decrease, lessen” (in number), the related noun rs#j) refers to “one in want of,” and the noun rs#j# means “poverty, want” (KBL 1:338; BDB 341). It refers to what is absent (zero in terms of quantity) rather than what is deficient (poor in terms of quality). LXX misunderstood the term and rendered it as uJsterhma (“deficiency”): “deficiency cannot be numbered.” It is also misunderstood by several English versions: “nor can you count up the defects in life” (Moffatt) and “the number of fools is infinite” (Douay). However, most English versions correctly understand it as referring to what is lacking in terms of quantity: “what is lacking” (AB, NASB, RSV, NRSV, NIV, BV), “a lack” (NJPS), “that which is wanting” (KJV, ASV), “what is not there” (NEB), and “what is missing” (NAB).
⁵¹tn Heb “cannot be counted” or “cannot be numbered.” The term twnmh (Niphal infinitive construct from hnm “to count”) is rendered literally by most translations: “[cannot] be counted” or “[cannot] be numbered” (KJV, NEB, RSV, NRSV, ASV, NASB, NIV, BV, JPS, NJPS). However, the nuance “count” might function as a metonymy of effect for cause, that is, “to supply.” What is absent cannot be supplied (cause) therefore, it cannot be counted as present (effect). NAB adopts this approach: “what is missing cannot be supplied.”
⁵²tn Heb “I said to my heart”
⁵³sn The verbal hendiadys ytpsohw ytldgh (lit. “I have become great and increased in wisdom”) means that Qoheleth had become the wisest man in the history of Jerusalem.
⁵⁴tn Heb “my heart” (ybl). The term “heart” is a metonymy of part for the whole (=myself).
⁵⁵tn Heb “My heart has seen much wisdom and knowledge”
⁵⁶tn Heb “my heart”
⁵⁷tn The terms twlk? (“folly”) and twllwh (“foolishness) are synonyms. twlk? (alternate spelling of twlks) refers to foolish behavior (KBL 2:754-55), while twllwh refers to foolish ideas and mental blindness (KBL 1:242). Qoheleth uses these terms to refer to foolish ideas and self-indulgent pleasures (e.g., Eccl 2:2-3, 12-14; 7:25; 9:3; 10:1,6,13).
⁵⁸tn The term <G (“even”) is a particle of association and emphasis (KBL 1:195).
⁵⁹sn Glenn writes, “The greater the awareness that human efforts cannot alleviate inequities, irregularities, deficiencies of life the more the frustration, mental anguish and sorrow a wise man has” (D. R. Glenn, “Exegesis of Ecclesiastes,” unpublished class notes, Dallas Theological Seminary, fall 1984, p. 5).
¹tn Heb “I myself spoke in my heart” (yblb yna ytrma). The term “heart” (bl) is a synecdoche of part (=heart) for the whole (=whole person): “I said to myself” (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 648).
²tn The verb hkl “Come!” (Qal imperative 2ms from Elh “to go”) is a weakened imperative, used merely as an introductory word, e.g., Gen 19:32; 31:44; Judg 19:11; 1 Sam 9:9-10; 11:44; 2 Kgs 3:7; Ps 66:5; Song 7:12; Isa 1:18; 2:3; Mic 4:2 (KBL 1:246.2; BDB 234.I.5.f.2). Whenever hkl introduces an exhortation, it functions as an invitation to the audience to adopt a course of action that will be beneficial to the addressee or mutually beneficial to both the speaker and the addressee. Here, Qoheleth personifies his “heart” (ybl) and addresses himself. The examination of self-indulgent pleasure is designed to be beneficial to Qoheleth. The purpose clause of v. 1 is indicated by the volitive sequence: imperative (hk*l=), followed by a cohortative (hk*S=n~a&), followed by waw + imperative (har=W).
³tn The verb hk*S=n~a& (Qal cohortative 1cs with 2ms suffix from hsn “to test”) is a volitional form that emphasizes the resolve of the speaker. The term hsn (“to test”) means “to conduct a test,” that is, to conduct an experiment (Judg 6:39; Eccl 2:1; 7:23; Dan 1:12,14) (KBL 2:702.3; BDB 650.1). The verb hsn (“to test”) is often used as a synonym with /jB “to examine” (BDB 103 and 650.1), and tudl “to ascertain” (Deut 8:2).
⁴tn Heb “I will test you with pleasure.” The term hjmv (“pleasure”) has a two-fold range of meanings: (1) it can refer to the legitimate enjoyment of life that Qoheleth affirms is good (5:17; 8:15; 9:7; 11:8,9) and that God gives to those who please Him (2:26; 5:19); or (2) it can refer to foolish pleasure, self-indulgent, frivolous merry-making (2:1,2; 7:4). The parallelism in 2:2 between hjmv (“pleasure”) and qoj? (“laughter, frivolous merry-making”), which always appears in the context of banqueting, drinking, and merry-making, suggests that the pejorative sense is in view.
sn This is a figurative expression (metonymy of association). As 2:1-3 makes clear, it is not so much Qoheleth who is put to the test with pleasure, but rather that pleasure is put to the test by Qoheleth.
⁵tn Heb “See what is good!” The volitive sequence of the cohortative (hk*S=n~a& “I will test you”) followed by waw + imperative (har=W “and see!”) denotes purpose/result: “I will test you … in order to see …” (see Waltke-O’Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 34.6). The verb ha*r* (Qal imperative 2ms “to see”) has a broad range of meanings (16 categories in KBL). In this context it means “to discover, perceive, discern, understand” (KBL 1159.13; BDB 907.5).
⁶sn The phrase “to see what is good” (har “to see” + bof “good”) is repeated twice in 2:1-3. This is the key phrase in this section. Qoheleth sought to discover (har) whether merry-making offered any value (bof) to man.
⁷tn The particle hnhw (literally, “Behold!”) occurs after verbs of perception to introduce what was seen, understood or discovered (KBL 1:252.8). It is used to make the narrative graphic and vivid, enabling the reader to enter into the surprise of the speaker (BDB 244.c). This is an example of the heterosis of the deitic particle (“Behold!”) for a verb of perception (“I found”) (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 510-34).
⁸tn This use of lb#h# denotes “futile, worthless, fruitless, pointless” (KBL 1:237.2; BDB 210.2). It is a synonym to ll*ohm= (“folly”) in 2:2a and an antonym to bof (“worthwhile, beneficial”) in 2:1b and 2:3c.
⁹tn Heb “laughter.” The term qoj? (“laughter”) has a four-fold range of meanings: (1) “joyful laughter” (Ps 126:2; Prov 14:13; Job 8:21), (2) “frivolous laughter, merry-making” (Eccl 2:2; 7:3,6), (3) “pleasure, sport” (Prov 10:23; Eccl 10:19), and (4) “derision, mockery, laughingstock” (Jer 20:7; 48:26,27,39; Job 12:4; Lam 3:14) (KBL 3:1315; BDB 966). In Ecclesiastes, qoj? (“laughter”) is always used in contexts of self-indulgent banqueting, drinking, frivolous partying and merry-making (Eccl 2:2; 7:3,6; 10:19). It is distinct from “healthy” joy and laughter (Ps 126:2; Job 8:21). The connotation of “frivolous merry-making” fits the context best.
¹⁰tn The term hjmv (“pleasure”) has a two-fold range of meanings in Ecclesiastes: (1) it can refer to the enjoyment of life that Qoheleth affirms is good (5:17; 8:15; 9:7; 11:8,9) and that God gives to those who are pleasing to Him (2:26; 5:19), and (2) it can refer to foolish pleasure, that is, frivolous merry-making (2:1,2; 7:4). The parallelism between hjmv (“pleasure”) and qoj? (“laughter, frivolous merry-making”) in 2:2 suggests that the pejorative sense is in view here.
¹¹tn Heb “What does it accomplish?” The rhetorical question - “What does it accomplish?” - is an example of erotesis of an expected negative answer: “It accomplishes nothing!” (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech in the Bible, 949-51). Examples: Gen 1:19; 18:14,17; Deut 7:17; 1 Sam 2:25; Job 40:2; Pss 56:7[8]; 90:11; 94:16; 106:2; Eccl 3:21.
¹²sn Heb “In my heart I explored.” As the repetition of the term bl (“heart, mind”) indicates (2:1, 3), this experiment appears to have been only an intellectual exercise or a cognitive reflection: “I said to myself (lit. “in my heart, mind”) (2:1); “I explored with my mind (lit. “heart”) (2:3a); and “my mind (lit. “heart”) guiding me with wisdom” (2:3b). Qoheleth himself did not indulge in drunkenness; but he contemplated the value of self-indulgence in his mind.
¹³tn The verb rWT (“to seek out, spy out, explore”) is used in OT to describe: (1) the physical activity of “spying out, exploring” geographical locations (Num 13:2,16,17,21,25,32; 14:6,7,34,36,38; Job 39:8) and (2) the mental activity of “exploring, examining” a course of action or the effects of an action (Eccl 1:13; 2:3; 7:25; 9:1) (BDB 1064.2; KBL 1023). It was used as a synonym with vrd (“to study”) in 1:13: “I devoted myself to study (vord=l!) and to explore (rWtl*=).”
¹⁴tn Alternately, “I sought to cheer my flesh with wine.” The term Eovm=!!l (Qal infinitive construct from Ev^m* “to draw, pull”) functions in a complementary sense with the preceding verb rWT (“to examine”): lit., “I sought to draw out my flesh with wine” or “I [mentally] explored (the effects) of drawing out my flesh with wine.” The verb Ev^m* means “to draw, drag along, lead” (BDB 604) or “to draw out, stretch out (to full length); drag, pull; seize carry off; pull, go” (KBL 2:645-46). BDB suggests that this use be nuanced “to draw, attract, gratify” the flesh, that is, “to cheer” (BDB 604.7). While this meaning is not attested elsewhere in the OT, it is found in Mishnaic Hebrew: “to attract” (Qal), e.g., “it is different with heresy, because it attracts (persuades, offers inducements)” (Abodah Zarah 27b) and “to be attracted, carried away, seduced” (Ithpeel), e.g., “he was drawn after them, he indulged in the luxuries of the palace” (Sabbath 147b) (Jastrow 108-9). KBL suggests that here it denotes “to stretch, draw out (to full length),” that is, “to revive, restore” the body (KBL 2:646.3). LXX rendered Eovm=!!l with ejklusai from ejkluw (“to relax”): “how to relax my body with wine.” The context suggests that Qoheleth’s experiment in 2:1-3 was not how to relax his body with wine, but whether self-indulgence with wine had any real value or profit. The statement functions as a metonymy of cause (=indulging the flesh with wine) for effect (=the effects of self-indulgence).
¹⁵ tn Alternately, “I sought to cheer myself.” The term yr?b (“my flesh”) may function as a synecdoche of part (=flesh) for the whole (=whole person) (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 642).
¹⁶tn Heb “embracing.” The verb zja (“to embrace”) is used normally used to describe the physical action of taking hold of an object. Here is it is used metaphorically to describe a person’s choice of lifestyle, that is, adopting a particular course of moral conduct (e.g., Job 17:9) (KBL 1:31-32; BDB 28).
¹⁷tn The waw + noun yB! !lw+ introduces a disjunctive, parenthetical clause designed to qualify his remarks lest he be misunderstood: “Now my mind …” He emphasizes that he never lost control of his senses in this process. It was a purely mental, cognitive endeavor; he never actually gave himself over to wanton self-indulgence in wine or folly.
¹⁸tn Alternately, “until….” The construction rv#a& du^ (“until”) introduces a temporal result clause (e.g., Gen 27:44; 28:15; Num 21:35; Isa 6:11) (KBL 2:787.2b). With an imperfect verb (such as ha#r=a# Qal imperfect 1cs from har “to see”), the compound construction rv#a& du^ (“until”) usually refers to future time (Gen 27:44; 29:8; Exod 23:30; 24:14; Lev 22:4; Num 11:20; 20:17; 1 Sam 22:3; Hos 5:15), but it also rarely refers to past time (Jon. 4:5; Eccl 2:3) (BDB 725.2.1.a.b). Jouon notes that when the compound construction rv#a& du^ (“until”) is occasionally used with an imperfect depicting past action to denote a virtual nuance of purpose: “until” = “so that,” e.g., Jon. 4:5; Eccl 2:3 (Paul Jouon, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, 113k).
¹⁹tn Heb “where is the good?” The interrogative particle ya (“where?”) used with the demonstrative pronoun hz# (“this”) forms an idiom: “where (then)?” (KBL 1:38.2a) (e.g., I Sam 9:18; 1 Kgs 13:12; 2 Kgs 3:8; Isa 50:1; 66:1; Jer 6:16; Job 28:12,20; 38:19,24; Est 7:5). The phrase bof hz#-ya is an indirect question that literally means, “Where is the good?” that is, “what good” (KBL 1:38.2d).
²⁰tn Heb “the sons of men”
²¹tn Heb “under the heavens”
²²tn Heb “number of the days.” The noun rP^s=m! (“number, quantity”) sometimes means “few” (e.g., Gen 34:30; Num 9:20; Deut 4:27; 33:6; Isa 10:19; Jer 44:28; Ezek 12:16; Ps 105:12; Job 16:22; 1 Chr 16:19) (KBL 2:607.2b; BDB 709.1a). This phrase is an idiom that means, “during all their lives” (BDB 709.1a), “during their total (short) time of life,” that is, “as long as they live” (KBL 2:608.3d). Ecclesiastes often emphasizes the brevity of life (e.g., 5:17; 6:12; 9:9). LXX rendered rP^s=m! (“number”) in a woodenly literal sense: ajriqmon (“the number [of days of their lives]”). Several English translations adopt the same approach: “all the days of their life” (Douay, AB, ASV) and “the number of days of their lives” (YLT). However, this idiom is handled well by a number of English translations: “during the few days of their lives” (RSV, NRSV, NASB, NIV, Moffatt, NJPS), “during the limited days of their life” (NAB), and “throughout the brief span of their lives” (NEB).
²³tn Alternately, “my works” or “my accomplishments” The term y?um (lit. “my works”) has been handled in two basic ways: (1) great works/projects, and (2) possessions. Both approaches are reflected in the major English translations: “works” (KJV, NEB, AB, NAB, ASV, NASB, BV, RSV, Douay, Moffatt), “projects” (NIV), and “possessions” (NJPS).
sn This section (2:4-11) is unified and bracketed by the repetition of the verb ldG (“to increase”) which occurs at the beginning (2:4) and end (2:9), and by the repetition of the root h?u (noun: “works” and verb: “to do, make, acquire”) which occurs throughout the section (2:4,5,6,8,11).
²⁴sn The term yl! (“for myself”) is repeated eight times in 2:4-8 to emphasize that Qoheleth did not deny himself any acquisition. He indulged himself in acquiring everything he desired. His vast resources as king allowed him the unlimited opportunity to indulge himself. He could have anything his heart desired, and it did.
²⁵tn The noun sdrp (“garden, parkland, forest”) is a foreign loanword that occurs only 3x in BH (Song 4:13; Eccl 2:5; Neh 2:8). The original Old Persian term pairidaeza designated the enclosed parks and pleasure-grounds that were the exclusive domain of the Persian kings and nobility (KBL 3:963; Liddell-Scott 1308). The related Babylonian term pardesu “marvelous garden” refereed to the enclosed parks of the kings (AHw 833a and 1582a). The term passed into Greek as paradeiso" (“enclosed park, pleasure-ground”), referring to the enclosed parks and gardens of the Persian kings (Liddell-Scott 1308). The Greek term is transliterated into English as “paradise.”
²⁶tn The phrase “sons of the house” (tyb ynB) appears to be parallel to “a son of my house” (yt!yB-/B#) which refers to a person born into slavery from male and female servants in the master’s possession: Eleazar of Damascus (Gen 15:3). The phrase appears to denote children born from male and female slaves already in his possession, that is, “homeborn slaves” (NASB) or “other slaves who were born in my house” (NIV). Apparently confusing the sense of the phrase with the referent of the phrase in Gen 15:3, NJPS erroneously suggests “stewards” in Eccl 2:7.
²⁷tn The term hL*g%s= denotes “personal property” (KBL 2:742.1; TWOT 2:617) or “valued property, personal treasure” (BDB 688.2). Elsewhere, it refers to a king’s silver and gold (1 Chr 27:3). It is related to Akkadian sug/kullu “flock” (AHw 1053-54) and sikiltu “private property (belonging to the king)” (AHw 1041a). The term refers to the personal, private and valued possessions of kings, which do not pass into the hands of the state.
²⁸tn The noun gWnut has a three-fold range of meanings: (1) “luxury, comfort” (Mic 2:9; Prov 19:10; Sir 6:28; 11:27; 14:16; 37:29; 41:1), (2) “pleasure, delight” of sexual love (Song 7:7), and (3) “daintiness, feminine” (Mic 1:16) (KBL 1036; BDB 772). The related adjective gn)u* (“pampered, dainty”) is used to describe a pampered woman (Deut 28:56), to personify Babylon as a delicate woman (Isa 47:1), and to ridicule delicate men (Deut 28:54) (KBL 2:851; BDB 772). It is related to the noun gn\u) (“pleasure, exquisite delight, daintiness”) (KBL 2:851; BDB 772) and the verb gn)u* which means “to be soft, delicate” and “pleasurable” (Pual) and “to pamper oneself” and “to take delight or pleasure in” (KBL 2:851; BDB 772). The root gnu is paralleled with Er) (Deut 28:56), Er^ (Deut 28:54) and hK*r^ (Deut 28:56) (“delicate, soft, tender, weak, coddled, pampered”). The context of Ecclesiastes 2:4-11 suggests that it denotes either “luxury” as in “the luxuries of commoners” (NJPS) or “pleasure, delight” as in “the delights of men” (KJV, NASB, NIV). Part of the difficulty in determining the meaning of this term is caused by the ambiguity in meaning of its referent, namely, the appositional phrase: toDv!w+ hD*v! (meaning uncertain) (see following study note).
²⁹tn The meaning of the superlative genitive construction toDv!w+ hD*v! is uncertain because the term hD*v! occurs only here in the OT. There are four basic approaches to the phrase: (1) Most scholars suggest that it refers to a royal harem, and that it is in apposition to “the sensual delights of men” (<dah ynb twgnutw). There are four variations of this approach: (a) KBL relates hD*v! to Ugaritic sd “Dame, lady” and Arabic sat “Dame, lady” (KBL 950). (b) German scholars relate it to Assyrian sadadu “love” (Delitzsch, Konig, Wildeboer, Siegfried); however, BDB questions this connection (BDB 994). (c) Ibn Ezra relates it to dv^ II “plunder, spoil” or hdv “(women) taken by violence,” and suggests that it refers to the occupants of the royal harem. (d) BDB connect it to the Hebrew noun dv^ I “breast” (e.g., Isa 28:9; Ezek 16:7; 23:3,21,34; Hos 2:4; 9:14; Song 1:13; 4:5; 7:4,8,9; 8:1,8,10; Job 3:12). ). BDB suggests that hdv “breast” is related to the cognate Arabic and Aramaic roots meaning “breast” (BDB 994). This would be a synecdoche of part (=breast) for the whole (=woman), similar to the idiom “one womb, two wombs” (<ytmjr <jr) (womb = woman) (Judg 5:30). This is the approach taken by most English versions: “many concubines” (RSV, NRSV, NASB), “a wife and wives” (YLT), “women of all sorts” (AB), “mistresses galore” (BV), “many a mistress” (Moffatt) and “a harem” (NIV). This is the approach suggested by the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project: “une femme et des femmes” = one or two women (e.g., Judg 5:30) (Dominque Barthelemy, ed. et al., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project [New York: United Bible Society, 1979], 3:566). (2) Two translations connect it to the Mishnaic Hebrew noun hD*v! > hD*yv! “a strong box, chest” (Jastrow 1558), and render the phrase “coffers and coffers of them” in apposition to the phrase “the luxuries of commoners” (<dah ynb twgnutw) (New Jewish Publication Society and La Sainte Bible). (3) KJV and ASV take the phrase in apposition to “male and female singers,” and translate it as “musical instruments.” However, there is no known Hebrew term that would justify this approach. (4) LXX related the term to the Aramaic root adv “to pour out (wine),” and rendered the phrase as oijnocoon kai oijnocoa" “a male-butler and female cupbearers.” Aquilla took a similar approach: kulikion kai kulikia “wine-cups and wine-vessels.” This is reflected in the Latin Vulgate, as well as the Douay translation: “cups and vessels to serve to pour out wine.” Although the semantic meaning of the terms toDv!w+ hD*v! (lit. “a breast of breasts”?) is uncertain, the grammatical/syntactical form of the phrase is straightforward: (1) It is in apposition to the preceding line: “the delights of the son of men” (<dah ynb tgwnutw). (2) The phrase is a superlative genitive construction. When the genitive is plural and it follows a construct noun from the same root which is singular, it indicates the best or most outstanding example of the person or thing so described. Examples: <yvdqh vdq “the holy of holies” = the most holy place” (Exod 26:33), <yryvh ryv “the song of songs” = “the most excellent song” (Song 1:1), <yndah yndaw <yhlah yhla “the God of gods and Lord of lords” = “the Highest God and the Supreme Lord” (Deut 10:17); and <ydbu dbu “a slave of slaves” = “the most abject slave” (Gen 9:25) (GKC 133i; Williams, 80; Waltke-O’Connor, 9.5.3j). If the semantic meaning of the terms toDv!w+ hD*v! denotes “a breast of breasts” or “a lady of ladies” (Eccl 2:8) (but see studynote above), the superlative genitive construction may connote “the most beautiful breasts” (metonymy of part for the whole) or “the most beautiful woman.” This might refer to a harem of concubines or to one woman (the wife of the king?) who was the most beautiful woman in the land.
³⁰tn The waw prefixed to ytldgw (waw + Qal perfect 1cs from ldg “to be great, increase”) functions in a final summarizing sense, that is, it introduces the concluding summary of 2:4-9.
³¹tn Heb “I became great and I surpassed” (ytpsohw ytldgw). This is a verbal hendiadys: the second verb functions adverbially, modifying the first: “I became far greater.” Most translations miss the hendiadys and render the line in a woodenly literal sense (JKV, NEB, RSV, NRSV, AB, NAB, ASV, NASB, BV, Moffatt), while only a few recognize the presence of hendiadys here: “I became greater by far” (NIV) and “I gained more” (NJPS).
³²tn Heb “I did not withhold my eyes from anything they asked for.”
³³tn Heb “my heart.” The term ybl (“my heart”) is a synecdoche of part (=heart) for the whole (=whole person) (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 648). The term is repeated twice in 2:10 for emphasis.
³⁴tn Heb “I did not refuse my heart any pleasure.”
³⁵tn Heb “my heart.” The term ybl (“my heart”) is a synecdoche of part (=heart) for the whole (=whole person) (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 648).
³⁶tn Heb “all my work that my hands had done”
³⁷tn Heb “and all the toil with which I had toiled in doing it.” The term lmu (“toil”) is repeated to emphasize the burden and weariness of the labor which Qoheleth exerted in his accomplishments.
³⁸tn The term lK)h^ (lit. “everything, all”) must be qualified and limited in reference to the topic that is dealt with in 2:4-11. This is an example of synecdoche of general for the specific; the general term “all” is used only in reference to the topic at hand. This is clear from the repetition of lK) (“everything”) and (“all these things”) in 2:11.
³⁹tn The parallelism with /ort=y{ (“profit, advantage, gain”) indicates that lb#h# be nuanced “profitless, fruitless, futile” in this context. While labor offers some relative and temporal benefits, such as material acquisitions and the enjoyment of the work of one’s hands, there is no ultimate benefit to be gained from secular human achievement.
⁴⁰tn The noun /ort=y{ (“profit”) has a two-fold range of meanings: (1) “what comes of [something], result” (Eccl 1:3; 2:11; 3:9; 5:8,15; 7:12; 10:10) and (2) “profit, advantage” (Eccl 2:13; 10:11) (KBL 2:452-53). It is derived from the noun rt#y\ “what is left behind, remainder” (KBL 2:452). The related verb rty denotes “to be left over, survive (Niphal)” and “to have left over (Hiphil)” (KBL 2:451-52). When used literally, /ort=y{ refers to what is left over after expenses (gain or profit); when used figuratively, it refers to what is advantageous or of benefit. Though some things have relative advantage over others (e.g., light over darkness, and wisdom over folly in 2:13), there is no ultimate profit in man’s labor due to death.
⁴¹tn Heb “under the sun”
⁴²sn Throughout 2:1-11, Qoheleth evaluated the merits of merry-making (2:1-3), accomplishing grand things (2:4-6), amassing great wealth (2:7-8), and secular acquisitions and accomplishments (2:9-10). Now, he reflects on the benefit in life in living wisely and not giving oneself over to frivolous, self-indulgence.
⁴³tc The MT reads WhW? *u “they have done it” (Qal perfect 3mpl from h?u + 3ms suffix). However, many Hebrew manuscripts read Wh? *u* “he has done” (Qal perfect 3ms from h?u), reflected in LXX and Syriac. The error was caused by dittography (w written twice) or by orthographic confusion between w and h in wwh - confused as wwhw -- at the end of 2:12 and beginning of 2:13. The 3ms referent of Wh? *u* “(what) he has done” is the king, that is, Qoheleth himself.
⁴⁴tn Heb “has his eyes in his head.” The term /yu (“eye”) is used figuratively in reference to mental and spiritual faculties (BDB 744.3a). The term “eye” is a metonymy of cause for effect (sight and perception).
⁴⁵tn The term <L*K% (lit. “all of them”) denotes “both of them.” This is an example of synecdoche of general (“all of them”) for the specific (“both of them,” that is, the wise man and the fool).
⁴⁶tn The emphatic use of the 1cs personal pronoun yn{a& (“me”) with the emphatic particle of association <G^ (“even, as well as”) (KBL 1:195-96) appears to emphasize the 1cs suffix on yn{rq=y{ “it will befall me” (Qal imperfect 3ms + 1cs suffix from /rq “to befall”) (see GKC 135e). Qoheleth laments, not that the fate of the wise man is the same as that of the fool, but that even he himself - the wisest man of all - would far no better in the end than the most foolish!
⁴⁷tn The adjective rtoy means “too much, excessive,” e.g., 7:16 “excessively righteous” (KBL 2:404.2; BDB 452). It is derived from the root rt#y\ “what is left over” (KBL 2:452), and related to the verb rty Niphal “to be left over” and Hiphil “to have left over” (KBL 2:451-52). The adjective is related to /ort=y{ (“advantage, profit”) which is a key-term in this section, creating a word-play: The wise man has a relative “advantage” (/ort=y{) over the fool (2:13-14a); however, there is no ultimate advantage because both share the same fate - death (2:14b-15a). Thus, Qoheleth’s acquisition of tremendous wisdom (1:16; 2:9) was “excessive” because it exceeded its relative advantage over folly: it could not deliver him from the same fate as the fool. He had striven to obtain wisdom, yet it held no ultimate advantage.
⁴⁸sn The rhetorical question is an example of erotesis of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “I gained nothing!” (E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 949).
⁴⁹tn Heb “So I said”
⁵⁰tn Heb “in my heart”
⁵¹tn The preposition <u! (lit. “with”) may occasionally function in a comparative sense, meaning “together with, even as, like” (e.g., Eccl 1:11; 2:16; 7:11; Job 9:26; 1 Chr 14:10: 20:6; 25:8) (KBL 2:839.2). When used to describe a common lot, it connotes “together with” (Gen 18:23,25; 1 Chr 24:5; Job 3:14,15; 30:1; Ps 26:9; 28:3; 69:29; Isa 38:11), hence “like” (Pss 73:5; 106:6; Eccl 2:16) (BDB 767-68.1e).
⁵²tn As KBL and BDB note, <l*ou has a wide range of meanings: (1) indefinite time: “long time, duration,” (2) unlimited time: “eternal, eternity,” (3) future time: “things to come,” and (4) past time: “a long time back,” that is, the dark age of prehistory (KBL 2:798-99; BDB 762-64). The context suggests the nuance “a long time.”
⁵³tn The preposition B= on rb*K=v#B= (adverb rb*K= “already” + relative pronoun v# + preposition B=) is probably best classified as causal: “Because … already.”
⁵⁴tn The verb jK*v=n{ (Niphal perfect 3ms from jKv “to forget”) is a future perfect: it describes an event that is portrayed as a past event from the perspective of the future: “they will have been forgotten.” The emphasis of the past perfect is not simply that the future generations will begin to forget him, but that he will already have been forgotten long ago in the past by the time of those future generations. This past perfect situation is brought out by the emphatic use of the temporal adverb rb*K= “already” (KBL 2:459; BDB 460) (e.g., Eccl 1:10; 2:12,16; 3:15; 4:2; 6:10; 9:6-7).
⁵⁵tn The particle Eya (“Alas!”) is an exclamation of lamentation and mourning (e.g., 2 Sam 1:19; Isa 14:4,12; Jer 2:21; 9:18; Ezek 26:17; Mic 2:4) (KBL 39.5; BDB 32.2) (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech in the Bible, 955).
⁵⁶tn The preposition <u! (lit. “with”) may occasionally function in a comparative sense, meaning “together with, even as, like” (e.g., Eccl 1:11; 2:16; 7:11; Job 9:26; 1 Chr 14:10: 20:6; 25:8) (KBL 2:839.2). When used to describe a common lot, it connotes “together with” (Gen 18:23,25; 1 Chr 24:5; Job 3:14,15; 30:1; Ps 26:9; 28:3; 69:29; Isa 38:11), hence “like” (Pss 73:5; 106:6; Eccl 2:16) (BDB 767-68.1e).
⁵⁷tn The term <yyjh (“life”) functions as a metonymy of association, that is, that which is associated with life, that is, the profitlessness and futility of human secular achievement.
⁵⁸tn The root h?u (“to do”) is repeated in h? *u&N~v# h? #u&M^h^ (lit. “the deed that is done”) for emphasis. Here, the term “deed” does not refer to human accomplishment, as in 2:1-11, but to the fact of death that destroys any relative advantage of wisdom over folly (2:14a-16). Qoheleth metaphorically describes death as a “deed” “done” to man.
⁵⁹tn Heb “under the sun”
⁶⁰tn Heb “I hated all my toil for which I had labored.” The term ylmu (“my toil”) is repeated throughout 2:18-21. In each case, it functions as a metonymy of cause (=toil) for effect (=fruit of labor) (e.g., Ps 105:44) (BDB 765.3). The metonymy is indicated by several factors: (1) The 3ms suffix (“it”) on wnjyna “I must leave it” in 2:18, and on wnnty “I must give it” in 2:21 refer to his wealth, that is, the fruit of his labor. (2) In 2:21 the 3ms suffix on wb-lmu alv (“who did not work for it”) refers to the inheritance that Qoheleth must turn over to his successor, namely, the fruit of his labor. (3) While he himself enjoyed the fruit of his labor, he despaired that he had to turn the fruit of his labor over to his successor: “So I loathed all the [fruit of] my labor” (2:18a) and “I began to despair about the [fruit of] my labor” (2:20a). Although most translations render ylmu as “my toil” in 2:18, the metonymy is recognized by several English translations: “So I hated all the fruit of my labor for which I had labored” (NASB), “So I detested all the fruits of my labor” (NAB), “I hated all the things I had toiled for” (NIV), and “So I loathed all the wealth that I was gaining” (NJPS).
⁶¹tn Qoheleth uses an internal cognate accusative construction (accusative noun and verb from the same root) for emphasis: lmu ynav ylmu lit., “my toil for which I had toiled” (see Waltke-O’Connor, 10.2.1g).
⁶²tn Heb “under the sun”
⁶³tn The relative pronoun v# on Wnj#yN{ ^av# (relative pronoun v# + Hiphil imperfect 1cs from j^Wn “to leave” + 3ms suffix) is causal: “Because I must leave it behind.”
⁶⁴tn The 3ms suffix on wnjyna (“I must leave it”) refers to his wealth, that is, the fruit of his labor (see study note on 2:18). The suffix is rendered literally by nearly all translations; however, a few make its referent explicit: “I have to leave its fruits” (NEB), “I must leave them (=all the fruits of my labor)” (NAB).
⁶⁵tn The verb j#yna (Hiphil imperfect 1cs from j^Wn “to rest”) denotes “to leave (something) behind” in the hands of someone (KBL 2:680.B.2.c) (Ps 119:121; Eccl 2:18). The imperfect functions in a modal sense of obligation or necessity. At death, Qoheleth will be forced to pass on his entire estate and the fruit of his labors to his successor.
⁶⁶tn The waw on fl^v=y{w+ (conjunction + Qal imperfect 3ms from flv “to be master”) is adversative: “yet …”
⁶⁷tn Heb “my labor.” As in 2:18, the term ylma (“my labor”) is a metonymy of cause (=my labor) for effect (=fruit of my labor). The metonymy is recognized by several translations: “he will control all the wealth that I gained” (NJPS), “he will have control over all the fruits of my labor” (NAB), “he will have mastery over all the fruits of my labor” (NEB), “he will have control over all the fruit of my labor” (NASB), “he will have control of all the product of my toil” (AB), and “he will be master over all my possessions” (BV).
⁶⁸tn An internal cognate accusative construction (accusative and verb from same root) is used for emphasis: ytlmuv ylmu “my toil for which I had toiled” (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 10.2.1g). The two verbs ytmkjvw ytlmuv (“for which I had labored and for which I had acted wisely”) form a verbal hendiadys (two separate verbs used in association to communicated one idea): “for I had labored so wisely.” The second verb is used adverbially to modify the first verb, which functions in its full verbal sense.
⁶⁹tn Heb “under the sun”
⁷⁰tn Heb “I turned aside to allow my heart despair.” The term ybl (“my heart”) is a synecdoche of part (=heart) for the whole (=whole person) (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 648).
⁷¹tn Heb “all my toil.” As in 2:18-19, the term ylma (“my labor”) is a metonymy of cause (=my labor) for effect (=the fruit of my labor). The metonymy is recognized by several translations: “all the fruits of my labor” (NAB), “all the fruit of my labor” (NASB), “all the gains I had made” (NJPS).
⁷²tn Qoheleth uses an internal cognate accusative construction (accusative noun and verb from the same root) for emphasis: ytlmuv lmuh lit., “the toil for which I had toiled” (see Waltke-O’Connor, 10.2.1g).
⁷³tn Heb “he must give it.” The 3ms suffix on WNT#y{ (Qal imperfect 3ms from /tn “to give” + 3ms suffix) refers back to olmu (“his labor”) which is treated in this line as a metonymy of cause for effect, that is, “he must give it” = “he must give his labor” = “he must give the fruit of his labor.” As in 2:18-19, Qoheleth laments the injustice that a person who works diligently in wisdom must one day turn over the fruit of his labor (his fortune and the care of his achievements) to his successor. There is no guarantee that one’s heir will be wise and be a good steward of it, or foolish and squander it - in which case, that man’s entire life’s work would be in vain.
⁷⁴tn Alternately, “he must turn over an inheritance” or “he must turn it over, namely, an inheritance.” There are two approaches to the syntax of oqlj (“his inheritance”): (1) The 3ms suffix is a subjective genitive: “his inheritance” = the inheritance which he must give to his heir. The referent of the 3ms suffix is Qoheleth in 2:21a who worked hard to amass the fortune. The noun qlj (“inheritance”) functions as an adverbial accusative of state (GKC #118a) or a predicate accusative (Ronald J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, 57).: “He must give it [his fortune] as an inheritance.” (2) The 3ms suffix is an objective genitive: “his inheritance” = the inheritance which the heir will receive from Qoheleth. The referent of the 3ms suffix is the heir in 2:21b. The noun qlj (“inheritance”) functions as the accusative direct object in apposition (Williams #71) to the 3ms suffix on Wnn\T=y{ “he must give it” (Qal imperfect 3ms from /tn + 3ms suffix): “He must give it, namely, his inheritance, to one who did not work for it.”
⁷⁵tn The noun hur (lit. “evil”) probably means “misfortune” (KBL 3:1263.4) or “injustice, wrong” (KBL 3:1262.2b). The phrase hbr hur connotes “grave injustice” or “great misfortune” (e.g., Eccl 2:17; 5:12,15; 6:1; 10:5). It is expressed well as: “This too is … a great misfortune” (NAB, NIV, BV) and “utterly wrong!” (NEB).
sn Verses 18-21 are arranged into two sub-units (2:18-19 and 2:20-21). Each contains a parallel structure: (1) Introductory lament: “I hated all my toil” and “I began to despair about all my toil.” (2) Reason for the lament: “I must turn over the fruit of my labor to the hands of my successor” and “he must hand over the fruit of his work as an inheritance.” (3) Description of successor: “who knows whether he will be a wise man or a fool?” and “he did not work for it.” (4) Concluding statement: “This also is fruitless!” and “This also is profitless and an awful injustice!”
⁷⁶tn Heb “on earth.” The rhetorical question is an example of erotesis of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “Man acquires nothing …” (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 949-51).
⁷⁷tn The syntax of this verse has been interpreted in two different ways: (1) The phrase “all his days” (wymy-lk) is the subject of a verbless clause, and the noun “pain” (<ybakm) is a predicate nominative or a predicate of apposition (see Ronald J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, #71). Likewise, the noun “his work” (onynu) is the subject of a second verbless clause, and the term “vexation” (sukw) is a predicate nominative: “All his days are pain, and his work is vexation.” (2) The noun “his work” (onynu) to be the subject of both nouns - “pain and vexation” (sukw <ybakm) - which are predicate nominatives, while the phrase “all his days” (wymy-lk) is an adverbial accusative functioning temporally: “All day long, his work is pain and vexation.” The latter option is supported by the parallelism between “even at night” and “all day long.” This verse draws out an ironic contrast/comparison between his physical toil/labor during the day and his emotional anxiety at night. Even at night, he has no break!
⁷⁸tn The preposition B= on <d*a*=*B has been taken in two ways: (1) Walter Kaiser interprets it as locative and, taking bof (“good”) in reference to man’s moral nature, renders the line: “There is nothing (inherently) good in man …” (2) Don Glenn argues that B= denotes advantage, and taking bof (“good”) in reference to the enjoyment theme of 2:24-27, renders the line: “There is nothing better for a man than …” (Reading comparative /m! on lk^aY)v#m! see study note below). The latter is preferred: (1) The preposition B= is used with a similar idiom in 3:12 in collocation with the particle phrase <a yk (“except”): “There is nothing better … than to rejoice/be happy” (NASB, NIV). (2) The theme of 2:1-26 focuses on the futility of human toil, concluding that the only real reward that man has in his labor is to find enjoyment in it (e.g., 2:10, 24-26). The section says nothing about man’s inherent sinful nature.
⁷⁹tn The MT reads lk^aY)v# “that he should eat” (Qal imperfect 3ms from lka “to eat,” with relative pronoun v# “that”). Walter Kaiser interprets this as, “There is nothing (inherently) good in man that he should eat …” However, the variant textual tradition of lk^aY)v#m! “than he should eat” (comparative preposition /m! “than” + Qal imperfect 3ms from lka “to eat”) is reflected in LXX, Coptic, Syriac, Aramaic Targum, Old Latin, and Jerome. The textual error arose from a single writing of m from lkayvm <da (haplography). The same idiom appears in the expanded form <a yk bof /ya (“there is nothing better for man than …”) in 3:12; 8:15.
⁸⁰tn The term ovp=n~ (“his soul”) is a metonymy of part (=soul) for the whole ( = whole person), e.g., Num 23:10; Judg 16:30; Pss 16:10; 35:13; 103:1 (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 640-41).
⁸¹tn Heb “to cause his soul to see good….” The idiom bof har (“to see good”) is a metonymy of association, meaning “to find enjoyment” (e.g., 3:13; 5:17; 6:6). In 3:12-13 and 5:17-18 it is in collocation/parallelism with B= + jm? (“to rejoice in,” or “to find satisfaction or pleasure in” something). Here, it is used in collocation with vWj (“to enjoy”).
⁸²tn Heb “is from the hand of God”
sn The phrase “the hand of God” is an anthropomorphism (depicting the invisible spirit God in the form of man with hands) or anthropopatheia (depicting God performing human-like actions). The hand of God is a figure often used to portray God’s sovereign providence and benevolence (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 878). The phrase “the hand of God” is often used to connote the favor or grace of God (2 Chr 30:12; Ezra 7:9; 8:18; Neh 2:8,18) (BDB 390.1.e.2).
⁸³tn Heb “For who can…?” The rhetorical question (“For who can…?”) is an example of erotesis of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “No one!” (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 949-51).
⁸⁴tn The verb vwjy (Qal imperfect 3ms from vwj II “to enjoy”) is a hapax legomena which BDB defines as “feel, enjoy (with the senses)” on the basis of the context, and the cognates: Arabic “to feel, perceive” by senses; Aramaic vwj “feel, pain,” and New Hebrew vwj “feel pain” (BDB 301). KBL relates the Hebrew root to Akkadian hawAwu “to be delighted with” (KBL 1:300.1). The Latin Vulgate renders this term as “to enjoy.” The Greek versions (LXX, Theodotion) and the Syriac Peshitta, however, did not understand this hapax; they rendered it as “to drink” make some sense of the line by filling-out the parallelism “to eat (and drink)” (e.g., Eccl 8:15).
⁸⁵tc The MT reads yN{ #Mm! (“more than me”). However, an alternate textual tradition of WNM#m! (“apart from Him”) is preserved in several Hebrew manuscripts, and is also reflected in LXX, Syriac, Syro-Hexapla, and Jerome. The textual deviation is a case of simple orthographic confusion between y and w as frequently happened, e.g., MT wxl wx wxl wx versus 1QIsa^a yxl yx yxl yx (Isa 28:10) (see P. Kyle McCarter, Jr., Textual Criticism: Recovering the Text of the Hebrew Bible [Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986], 47). The English versions are split on the textual problem: a few retain MT yN{ #Mm! “more than I?” (KJV, YLT, Douay, ASV, NJPS), while others adopt the alternate reading WnM#m! “apart from Him” (NEB, AB, NAB, BV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, NIV, Moffatt). The MT reading involves a parenthetical clause, where Qoheleth refers to himself: no one had more of an opportunity to experience more enjoyment in life than he (e.g., 2:1-11). The alternate reading is a causal clause, explaining why the ability to enjoy life is a gift from God: no one can experience enjoyment in life “apart from Him,” that is, “the hand of God” in 2:24. The internal evidence supports the alternate textual tradition. In 2:24-26, Solomon is not emphasizing his own resources to enjoy life, as he had done in 2:1-11; but is emphasizing that the ability to enjoy life is the gift of God. On the other hand, the Jerusalem Hebrew Bible project retains the MT reading with a “B” rating - see Dominique Barthelemy, ed. et al., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (New York: United Bible Society, 1979), 3:570.
tn Alternately, “more than me.”
⁸⁶sn The phrase “gathering and heaping up” is a hypocatastasis, drawing an implied comparison between the work of the farmer reaping his crops and storing them up in a barn, with the work of the laborer amassing wealth as the fruit of his labor. However, rather than his storehouse being safe for the future, the sinner is deprived of it.
⁸⁷sn The three-fold repetition of “give” (/tn) creates irony: God “gives” the righteous the ability to prosper and to find enjoyment in his work; but to the wicked He “gives” the task of “giving” his wealth to the righteous.
⁸⁸tn The antecedent of the demonstrative pronoun hz# (“this”) is debated: (1) Some refer it to the enjoyment which Qoheleth had just commended in 2:24-26. However, this is inconsistent with the enjoyment theme found elsewhere in the book. It also ignores the fact that 2:24-26 states that such enjoyment is a good gift from God. (2) Others refer it to the term “toil” (l.mu) which is repeated throughout 2:18-26. However, Qoheleth affirmed that if one is righteous, he can find enjoyment in his toil - even though so much of it is ultimately futile. (3) Therefore, it seems best to refer it to the grievous “task” (/ynu) God has given to the sinner in 2:26b. Consistent with the meaning of lb#h# (“futile, profitless, fruitless”), 2:26b emphasizes that the “task” of the sinner is profitless: He labors hard to amass wealth, only to see the fruit of his labor given away to someone else. The righteous man’s enjoyment of his work and the fruit of his labor under the blessing of God (2:24-26a) is not included in this.
¹tn Verse 1 is arranged in an ABB'A' chiasm (Jpj-lkl tuw /mz lkl): “for everything” / “a season” // “a time”/ “for every matter.” The terms “season” (/mz) and “time” (tu) are parallel. In the light of its parallelism with “every matter” (Jpj-lk), the term “everything” (lk) must refer to events and situations in life.
²tn The noun /m*z= denotes “appointed time, appointed hour” (KBL 1:273; BDB 273) (Eccl 3:1; Est 9:27,31; Neh 2:6; Sir 43:7), e.g., the appointed or designated time for the Jewish feasts (Est 9:27,31), the length of time that Nehemiah set for his absence from Susa (Neh 2:6), and the appointed times in the Jewish law for the months to begin (Sir 43:7). It is used in parallelism with duom “appointed time,” i.e., jry duom “the appointed time of the moon” parallels qj ynmz “the appointed times of the law” (Sir 43:7). The related verb /mz means “to be appointed” (Pual) (KBL 1:273) (Ezra 10:14; Neh 10:35; 13:31). These terms may be related to the noun hM*z! I “plan, intention” (Job 17:11) (KBL 1:272), and hM*z!m= “purpose, plan, project” e.g., the purposes of God (Job 42:2; Jer 23:20; 30:24; 51:11) and man’s plan (Isa 5:12) (KBL 2:566; BDB 273). Verses 1-8 refers to God’s sovereignly appointed time-table for human activities or actions whose most appropriate time is determined by men. Verses 9-15 state that God is ultimately responsible for the time in which events in human history occur. This seems to provide a striking balance between the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man. Man does what God has willed, but man also does what he “pleases” (see note on Jpj in 3:1).
³tn The noun tu (“point in time”) has a basic two-fold range of meanings: (1) “time of an event” and (2) “time for an event” (BDB 773). The latter has sub-categories: (a) “usual time,” (b) “the proper, suitable or appropriate time,” (c) “the appointed time,” and (d) “uncertain time” (Eccl 9:11). Here it connotes “a proper, suitable time for an event” (KBL 2:900.6; BDB 773.2.b). Examples: “the time for rain” (Ezra 10:13), “a time of judgment for the nations” (Ezek 30:3), “an appropriate time for every occasion” (Eccl 3:1), “the time when mountain goats are born” (Job 39:1), “the rain in its season” (Deut 11:14; Jer 5:24), “the time for the harvest” (Hos 2:11; Ps 1:3), “food in its season” (Ps 104:27), “no one knows his hour of destiny” (Eccl 9:12), “the right moment” (Eccl 8:5) (KBL 2:900.6).
⁴tn The noun Jp#j (here “matter, business”) has a broad range of meanings: (1) “delight, joy,” (2) “desire, wish, longing,” (3) “the good pleasure, will, purpose,” (4) “precious stones” (=jewelry), i.e., what someone takes delight in, and (5) “matter, business,” as a metonymy of adjunct to what someone takes delight (Eccl 3:1,17; 5:7; 8:6; Isa 53:10; 58:3,13; Pss 16:3; 111:2; Prov 31:13) (KBL 1:340.4; BDB 343.4). It is also sometimes used in reference to the “good pleasure” of God, that is, His sovereign plan, e.g., Judg 13:23; Isa 44:28; 46:10; 48:14 (BDB 343b.3). While the theme of the sovereignty of God permeates 3:1-4:3, the content of 3:1-8 refers to human activities that are planned and purposed by man. LXX translated it with pragmati (“matter”). The term is translated variously: “every purpose” (KJV, AB, ASV), “every event” (NASB), “every delight” (NASB margin), “every affair” (NAB), “every matter” (RSV, NRSV), “every activity” (NEB, NIV), “every project” (BV), and “every experience” (NJPS).
⁵tn Heb “under heaven”
⁶tn The verb tdll (Qal infinitive construct from dly “to bear”) is used in the active sense of a mother giving birth to a child (KBL 2:413; BDB 408). However, in the light of its parallelism with “a time to die,” this phrase should be taken as a metonymy of cause (=to give birth to a child) for effect (=to be born).
⁷sn In 3:2-8, Qoheleth uses fourteen sets of merism (a figure using polar opposites to encompass everything in between, that is, totality), e.g., Deut 6:6-9; Ps 139:2-3 (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 435).
⁸tn The term dba (Piel infinitive construct from dba “to destroy”) here denotes “to lose” (e.g., Jer 23:1) - parallel to the Qal meaning “to be lost” (1 Sam 9:3,20; Jer 50:6; Ezra 34:4,16; Ps 119:176) - as its parallelism with vqb (“to seek to find”) indicates (BDB 2.3). KBL suggests that the parallelism with vqb (“to seek to find”) points to the nuance “to give up as lost” here (KBL 1:1.1). This is the declarative or delocutive-estimative sense of the Piel: “to view something as lost” (Ronald Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, #145; Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 24.2g).
⁹tn The term h?wuh (article + Qal active participle ms from h?u “to do”) functions substantively (lit. “the worker”) (BDB 794.II.1). This is a figurative description of man (metonymy of association), and plays on the repetition of h?u (verb: “to do,” noun: “work”) throughout the passage. In the light of God’s sovereign immutable orchestration of human affairs, man’s efforts cannot change anything. It refers to man in general with the article functioning in a generic sense (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 13.5f; Paul Jouon, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, 137m).
¹⁰sn This rhetorical question is an example of erotesis of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “Man gains nothing from his toil!” (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 949-51). Any “advantage” (/wrty) that man might gain from his toil is nullified by his ignorance of divine providence.
¹¹sn The adjective hpy (lit. “beautiful”) functions as a metonymy of effect (=to appear beautiful) for cause (=to make it fit): “to fit beautifully.” It is used in parallelism with Qoheleth’s term for evaluation: bof (“good”) in 5:17.
¹²tn Heb “the future” or “eternity.” Perhaps, “a sense of eternity.” Unlikely, “ignorance” or “knowledge.” The meaning of <l*u) is debated. There are three major approaches: (1) Most suggest that <lu is the defectively written form of <l*ou “duration, eternity” (e.g., Eccl 1:4; 2:16; 3:14; 9:6; 12:5) (BDB 762.2k). Within this school of interpretation, there are several varieties: (a) BDB suggests that here it denotes “age (duration) of the world,” which is attested in PB-H (BDB 762.2k). The term <lu III “eternity” = “world” (Jastrow 1084) is used in this sense in PB-H (mostly in reference to the Messianic age, or the world to come) (e.g., Targum Genesis 9:16; Targum Onkelos Exodus 21:6; Targum Psalms 61:7). For example, “the world (<lu) shall last six thousand years, and after one thousand years it shall be laid waste” (Babylonian Talmud: Rosh hash-Shanah 31a) and “the world (<lu) to come” (Sotah 10b). LXX and the Latin Vulgate took the term in this sense. This approach was also adopted by several traditional translations: “the world” (KJV, Douay, ASV margin). (b) KBL and THAT suggest that the term refers to an indefinite, unending future: “eternity future” or “enduring state referring to past and future” (KBL 2:799.5; THAT 2:242; BDB 762.2i). In this sense, the noun <lu functions as a metonymy of association: “a sense of eternity” but not in a philosophical sense (see James Barr, Biblical Words for Time, 117 note 4). This approach is supported by three factors: (A) the recurrence of <l*ou (“eternity”) in 3:14, (B) the temporal qualification of the statement in the parallel clause (“from beginning to end”), and (C) by the ordinary meaning of the noun as “eternity” (KBL 2:798-799). The point would be that God has endowed man with an awareness of the extra-temporal significance of himself and his accomplishments (Donald R. Glenn, “Ecclesiastes,” in Biblical Knowledge Commentary, 984). This is the most plural approach among English versions: “the timeless” (NAB), “eternity” (RSV, BV, ASV, NASB, NIV, NJPS), “a sense of time past and time future” (NEB), and “a sense of past and future” (NRSV). (3) Other scholars suggest that <l*ou simply refers to the indefinite future: “the future,” that is, things to come (e.g., KBL 2:799.2; BDB 762.2a; THAT 2:241). The plural <ymlu (“things to come”) was used in this sense in Eccl 1:10 (e.g., 1 Kgs 8:13 = 2 Chr 6:2; Pss 61:5; 77:8; 145:13; Dan 9:24) (KBL 2:799.2). The point would simply be that God has not only ordained all the events that will take place in man’s life (3:1-8), but also preoccupies man with the desire to discover what will happen in the future in terms of the orchestration/timing of these events in his life (3:9-11). This fits well with the description of God’s orchestration of human events in their most appropriate time (3:1-10) and the ignorance of man concerning his future (3:11b). Elsewhere, Qoheleth emphasizes that man cannot learn what the future holds in store for him (e.g., 8:7,17). This approach is only rarely adopted: “the future” (NJPS margin). (2) The second basic approach to this term is to suggest that <lu is not the defectively written form of <l*ou (“eternity”) but the form of the segholate noun <l#u# II “dark” (literal sense) and “ignorance, obscurity, secrecy” (figurative sense). The related nouns hmlut means “hidden thing, secret,” and the related verb <lu means “to hide, conceal” (BDB 761; KBL 2:834-35). These are related to the cognate Ugaritic noun “dark” and the Akkadian verb “to be black, dark” (see KBL 2: 834-35). The root <l#u# II appears in post-biblical Hebrew with two basic meanings: (1) “secret” and (2) “forgetfulness” (Jastrow 1084). In this case, the point would be that God has “obscured” man’s knowledge so that he cannot discover certain features of God’s program. This approach is adopted by only a few English versions: “ignorance” (AB) and “mystery” (Moffatt). Similarly, the term could be understood in the sense of “forgetfulness,” that is, God has plagued man with “forgetfulness” so that he cannot understand what God has done from the beginning to the end (e.g., Eccl 1:11). (3) Delitzsch relates <lu to a cognate Arabic root meaning “knowledge.” The point would be that God has endowed man with “knowledge,” but not enough for man to discover God’s eternal plan. This is only rarely adopted: “knowledge” (YLT).
¹³sn The term bl (“heart”) functions as a metonymy of association for man’s intellect, emotions, and will (BDB 524-25.3-6, 9). Here, it probably refers to man’s intellectual capacities, as verse 11 suggests.
¹⁴tn The compound preposition ylbm (preposition /m + negative particle ylb) is used as a conjunction here. Elsewhere, it can express cause: “because there is no/not” (e.g., Deut 9:28; 28:55; Isa 5:13; Ezek 34:5; Lam 1:4; Hos 4:6), consequence: “so that there is no/not” (e.g., Ezek 14:5; Jer 2:15; 9:9-11; Zeph 3:6), or simple negation: “without” (e.g., Job 4:11,20; 6:6; 24:7-8; 31:19). BDB suggests the negative consequence: “so that not” (BDB 115.3c), while KBL suggests the simple negation: “without the possibility of” (KBL 1:133.5).
¹⁵tn Heb “the work that God has done.” The phrase h?u-rva h?umh-ta (“the work which He has done”) is an internal cognate accusative (direct object and verb are from the same root), used for emphasis (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 10.2.1g). The repetition of the verb h?u (“He has done”) in 3:11 and 3:14 suggests that this phrase refers to God’s sovereign foreordination of all the events and timing of human affairs: God has “made = foreordained” (h?u) everything appropriate in His sovereign timing (3:11a), and all that God has “done = foreordained” (h?u) will come to pass (3:14). Thus, the verb h?u (“to do”) functions as a metonymy of effect (=God’s actions) for cause (=God’s sovereign foreordination). The temporal clause “from beginning to end” (3:11) supports this nuance.
¹⁶tn Traditionally, “what God has done from the beginning to the end.” The temporal clause [ws-duw varm (“from the beginning to the end”) is traditionally taken in reference to “eternity” (traditional understanding of <luh above) (e.g., KJV, NEB, AB, NAB, ASV, NASB, NIV, RSV, NRSV). However, if <luh simply denotes “the future” (e.g., KBL 2:799.2; BDB 762.2a; THAT 2:241), this temporal clause would refer to the events God has ordained to transpire in an individual’s life, from beginning to end. This approach is adopted by one English version: “but without man ever guessing, from first to last, all the things that God brings to pass” (NJPS). This would fit well in the context begun in 3:1 with the fourteen merism encompassing man’s life, starting with “a time to be born” (=from the beginning in 3:11) and concluding with “a time to die” (=to the end in 3:11). This is approach is also supported by the admonition of 3:12-13, namely, since no one knows what will happen to him in the future days of his life, Qoheleth recommends that man enjoy each day as a gift from God.
¹⁷tn Heb “I know that”
¹⁸tn Qoheleth uses the exceptive particle <a-yk “except” (BDB 474.2) to identify the only exception to the futility within man’s life.
¹⁹tn The phrase bwf tw?ul (lit. “to do good”) functions idiomatically for “to experience/see happiness/joy.” The verb h?u probably denotes “to acquire, obtain” (BDB 795.II..7), and bwf means “good, pleasure, happiness,” e.g., Eccl 2:24; 3:13; 5:17 (BDB 375.1)
²⁰tn The referent of the 3ms independent person pronoun awh (“it”) is probably the preceding statement: “to eat, drink, and find satisfaction”). This would be an example of an anacoluthon (GKC 167b).
²¹tn Heb “God will seek that which is driven away.” The meaning of [drn-ta vqby is difficult to determine: vqby (Piel imperfect 3ms from vqb “to seek”) and [drn (Niphal participle 3ms from [dr “to drive away”); literally, “He seeks/will seek what is driven away.” There are several options: (1) God watches over the persecuted: vqby (“seeks”) functions as a metonymy of cause for effect (=to protect), and [drn-ta (“what is driven away”) refers to “those who are persecuted.” But this does not fit the context. This approach is adopted by one English version: “God seeks him who has been persecuted” (AB). (2) God will call the past to account: vqby (“seeks”) functions as a metonymy of cause for effect (= to hold accountable), and [drn-ta (“that which is driven away”) is a metonymy of attribute (=the past). This approach is adopted by one literal and two dynamic equivalent translations: “God requires that which is past” (KJV), “God will call the past to account” (NIV) and “God summons each event back in its turn” (NEB). (3) God finds what has been lost: vqby (“seeks”) functions as a metonymy of cause for effect (=to find), and [drn-ta (“what is driven away”) refers to what has been lost: “God restores what would otherwise be displaced” (NAB). (4) God repeats what has already occurred: vqby (“seeks”) functions as a metonymy of effect (=to repeat), and [drn-ta (“that which is driven away”) is a metonymy (=that which has occurred). This fits the context and provides a tight parallel with the preceding line: “That which is has already been, and that which will be has already been” (3:15a) parallels “God seeks [to repeat] that which has occurred [in the past].” This is the most popular approach among English versions: “God restores that which has past” (Douay), “God seeks again that which is passed away” (ASV), “God seeks what has passed by” (NASB), “God seeks what has been driven away” (RSV), “God seeks out what has passed by” (BV), “God seeks out what has gone by” (NRSV), and “God is ever bringing back what disappears” (Moffatt).
²²tn The phrase <dah ynb trbd-lu is handled variously: (1) introduction to the direct discourse: “I said to myself concerning the sons of men …” (NASB), (2) direct discourse: “I thought, ‘As for men, God tests them …’” (NIV), (3) indirect discourse: “I said in my heart concerning the estate of the sons of men” (KJV), and (4) causal conjunction: “I said, ‘[It is] for the sake of the sons of men …”
²³tn The meaning of <rbl (preposition + Qal infinitive construct + 3mpl suffix from rrb) is debated because the root has a broad range of meanings: (1) “to test, prove, sift, sort out” (e.g., Dan 11:35; 12:10), (2) “to choose, select” (e.g., 1 Chr 7:40; 9:22; 16:41; Neh 5:18), (3) “to purge out, purify” (e.g., Ezek 20:38; Zeph 3:9; Job 33:3), and (4) “to cleanse, polish” (Isa 49:2; 52:11) (KBL 1:163; BDB 141). The meanings “to prove” (Qal), as well as “to cleanse, polish” (Qal), “to keep clean” (Niphal), and “to cleanse” (Hiphal) might suggest the meaning “to make clear” (Eaton 85-86). The meaning “to make clear, prove” is well attested in post-biblical Mishnaic Hebrew (Jastrow 197). For example, “they make the fact as clear (bright) as a new garment” (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Kethuboth 46a) and “the claimant must offer clear evidence” (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 23b). The point would be that God allows human injustice to exist in the world in order to make it clear to mankind that they are essentially no better than the beasts. On the other hand, LXX adopts the nuance “to judge,” while Targum and Vulgate take the nuance “to purge, purify.” BDB suggests “to test, prove” (BDB 141.4), while KBL prefers “to select, choose” (KBL 1:163.2).
²⁴tn The two infinitives twarlw … <rbl (literally, “to make it clear to them … and to show”) function as a verbal hendiadys (the two verbs are associated with one another to communicate a single idea). The first verb functions adverbially and the second retains its full verbal force: “to clearly show them …”
²⁵tn Heb “after him” (KJV, NASB, NIV) or “afterward” (NJPS).
¹tn The prefixed waw on ytbvw (waw + perfect 1cs from bwv “to turn”) might be: (1) introductory -- and left untranslated: “I observed again…” (2) consequence of preceding statement: “So I observed again…” or (3) continuation of preceding statement: “And I observed again…” This section is closely related to the preceding: his observation of oppression (4:1-3) links back to his previous observation of oppression and injustice (3:16). It stands in stark contrast with the light of his admonition for man to enjoy life on earth as the reward for one’s work (3:22). Now, Qoheleth turns his attention to consider the sorry fate of those who are not able to enjoy life on earth and their work because of oppression (4:1-3), over-obsessive competitiveness (4:4-6), and loneliness (4:7-12).
²tn Heb "I turned and I saw ..." Alternately, “I again considered.” The phrase haraw… ytbvw (literally, “I turned and I saw”) is a verbal hendiadys (the two verbs represent one common idea). Normally in a verbal hendiadys, the first verb functions adverbially, modifying the second verb which retains its full verbal force. The verb ytbvw (waw + perfect 1cs from bwv “to turn”) is used idiomatically to denote repetition: “to return and do” = “to do again” (e.g., Gen 26:18; 30:31; 43:2) or “to do repeatedly” (e.g., Lam 3:3) (KBL³ 952.6; BDB 998.8; GKC 120e): “I observed again” or “I repeatedly observed.” On the other hand, the shift from the perfect ytbvw (waw + perfect 1cs from bwv “to turn”) to the preterite ha#r=a#w` (waw + Qal preterite 1cs from har “to see”) might indicate a purpose clause: “I turned [my mind] to consider….” The preterite ha#r=a#w` (waw + Qal preterite 1cs from har “to see”) follows the perfect ytbvw (waw + perfect 1cs from bwv “to turn”). When a wayyiqtul form (waw + preterite) follows a perfect in reference to a past-time situation, the preterite also represents a past-time situation. Its aspect is based on the preceding perfect. In this context, the perfect and preterite may denote definite past or indefinite past action (“I turned and considered …” as hendiadys for “I observed again” or “I repeatedly observed”) or past telic action (“I turned [my mind] to consider …”) (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 33.3.1a).
³tn Heb “all the oppressions” or “all the oppression.” Alternately, “all the various kinds of oppression.” The term qvu denotes “oppression,” e.g., Jer 6:6; 22:17; Ezek 18:18; 22:7,12,29; Pss 73:8; 119:134 (KBL 3:897.1; BDB 799.1). It occurs several times in the book, always in reference to personal rather than national oppression (4:1; 5:8[Heb 7]; 7:7). The noun <yqvuh is plural and articular (literally: “the oppressions”). The article indicates a generic class (“oppression”). The plural may be classified in one of two ways: (1) plural of number: refers to specific kinds of oppression that occur on earth: “the various kinds of oppression,” (2) abstract plural: used to refer to abstract concepts: “the oppression,” or (3) plural of intensity: describes the oppression at hand as particularly grievous: “awful oppression” or “severe oppression.” LXX renders it as a plural of number: sukofantia" (“oppressions”), as does the Latin Vulgate. Most English versions treat it as a plural of number: “the oppressions” (KJV, ASV, AB, NAB, RSV, NRSV, BV, YTL); however, a few treat it as an abstract plural: “the oppression” (NJPS, NIV, Moffatt).
⁴tn Heb “is done.” The term <y?un (Niphal participle mpl from h?u “to do”) is a probably a verbal use of the participle rather than a substantival use (NEB: “all the acts of oppression”). This verbal use of the participle depicts durative or universal gnomic action (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 37.6). It emphasizes the lamentable continuity of oppression throughout human history. The English versions translate it variously: “[all the oppressions that] are done” (KJV, ASV, Douay, YLT), “[all the oppression] that goes on” (NJPS, Moffatt), “[all the oppressions] that are practiced” (AB, RSV, NRSV), “[all the oppressions] that occur” (BV), “[all the acts of oppression] which were being done” (NASB), “[all the oppressions] that take place” (NAB), “[all the oppression] that was taking place” (NIV).
⁵tn Heb “under the sun”
⁶tn Heb “and behold.” The deitic particle hnhw (“and behold!”) often occurs after verbs of perceiving, such as har “to see” (e.g., Gen 19:28; 22:13; Exod 3:2; Lev 13:8). It introduces the content of what the character or speaker saw (KBL 1:252.8). It is used for rhetorical emphasis, to draw attention to the following statement (e.g., Gen 1:29; 17:20; Num 22:32; Job 1:19) (KBL 1:252:5). It often introduces something surprising or unexpected (e.g., Gen 29:6; Num 25:6) (KBL 1:252.6).
⁷tn The term <yqvuh (Qal passive participle mpl from qvu “to oppress”) is a passive form, emphasizing that they are the objects of oppression at the hands of their oppressors. The participle functions substantivally, emphasizing the durative aspect of their condition and that this was the singular most characteristic attribute of this group of people: their lives were marked by oppression (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 37.2b).
⁸tn Heb “tears of the oppressed.” Alternately, “the oppressed [were in] tears.” The singular noun humd (literally, “tear”) is usually used as a collective for “tears” (2 Kgs 20:5; Isa 16:9; 25:8; 38:5; Jer 8:23; 19:7; 13:17; 14:17; 31:16; Ezek 24:16; Mal 2:13; Pss 6:7; 39:13; 42:4; 56:9; 80:6; 116:8; 126:5; Lam 1:2; 2:18; Eccl 4:1) (KBL 1:227; BDB 199). It is often used in reference to lamentation over calamity, distress, or oppression (e.g., Ps 6:7; Lam 1:2; 2:11; Jer 9:17; 13:17; 14:17). LXX translated it dakroun (“the tear”); however, the Vulgate treated it as a collective (“the tears”). Apart from the woodenly literal YTL (“the tear”), the major English versions render this as a collective: “the tears” or “tears” (KJV, NEB, AB, NAB, ASV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, NJPS, BV, NIV). The term humd (“tears”) functions as a metonymy of association for “weeping” (e.g., Isa 16:9; 8:23): “the oppressed [were weeping in] tears.” The genitive-construct <yqvuh tumd (literally, “tear of the oppressed”) is an objective genitive construction, that is, the oppressed are weeping. The singular tumd (“tear”) is used as a collective for “tears.” LXX translated it in a woodenly literal fashion: “the tear of the oppressed” (dakroun twn sukofantoumenwn). This woodenly literal approach is adopted by most translations: “the tears of the oppressed” (NEB, AB, NAB, ASV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, BV, NIV, NJPS). However, the paraphrases flesh out the syntax, e.g., “the oppressed were in tears” (Moffatt).
⁹tn Heb “comforts.” The verb <jn (“to comfort”) is used as a metonymy of effect (=comfort) for cause (=deliverance), e.g., it is used in parallelism with lag “to deliver” in Isa 52:9 (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 560-67).
¹⁰tn The verb jbvw (waw + Piel infinitive absolute from jbv) has a two-fold range of meanings: (1) “to praise, laud” and (2) “to congratulate” (KBL³ 941; BDB 986). LXX translated it as ejphnesa (“I praised”). The English versions reflect the range of possible meanings: “praised” (KJV, ASV, Douay); “congratulated” (AB, BV, NASB); “declared/judged/accounted/thought … fortunate/happy” (NJPS, NEB, NIV, RSV, NRSV, NAB).
¹¹tn Heb “under the sun”
¹²tn Heb “all the toil and all the skill.” The clause “all the toil and all the skill” (/wrvk-lk taw lmu-lk-ta) is a nominal hendiadys (a figurative expression in which two independent phrases are used to connote the same thing). The second functions adverbially, modifying the first, which retains its full nominal function: “all the skillful work.”
¹³tn The noun hanq (“competition”) has a wide range of meanings: “zeal, jealousy, envy, rivalry, competition, suffering, animosity, anger, wrath” (KBL 3:1110; BDB 888). Here, as in 9:6, it denotes “rivalry” (BDB 888.1) or “competitive spirit” (KBL 1110.1b). LXX rendered it zhlo" (“envy”). The English versions reflect this broad range: “rivalry” (NEB, NAB, NASB), “envy” (KJV, RSV, NRSV, ASV, BV, NIV, NJPS), and “jealousy” (AB, Moffatt).
¹⁴tn Heb "a man and his neighbor"
¹⁵sn The idiom, “the fool folds his hands” means that he does not work (e.g., Prov 6:10; 24:33).
¹⁶tn Heb “and eats his own flesh.” Most English versions render the idiom literally: “and eats/consumes his flesh” (KJV, AS, NASB, AB, NAB, RSV, NRSV, NJPS). However, a few versions attempt to “flesh out” the idiom: “and lets life go to ruin” (Moffatt), “and wastes away” (NEB), “and ruins himself” (NIV).
¹⁷sn Qoheleth lists three approaches to labor: (1) the competitive workaholic in 4:4, (2) the impoverished sluggard in 4:5, and (6) the contented laborer in 4:6. The balanced approach rebukes the two extremes.
¹⁸tn The prefixed waw on ytbvw (waw + perfect 1cs from bwv “to turn”) might be: (1) introductory -- and left untranslated: “I observed again…” (2) consequence of preceding statement: “So I observed again…” or (3) continuation of preceding statement: “And I observed again…” This section is closely related to the preceding: his observation of oppression (4:1-3) links back to his previous observation of oppression and injustice (3:16). It stands in stark contrast with his e light of his admonition for man to enjoy life on earth as the reward for one’s work (3:22). Now, Qoheleth turns his attention to consider the sorry fate of those who are not able to enjoy life on earth and their work because of oppression (4:1-3), over-obsessive competitiveness (4:4-6), and loneliness (4:7-12).
¹⁹tn Heb “I turned and I saw...”; alternately, “I again considered.” The phrase haraw… ytbvw (literally, “I turned and I saw”) is a verbal hendiadys (the two verbs represent one common idea). Normally in a verbal hendiadys, the first verb functions adverbially, modifying the second verb which retains its full verbal force. The verb ytbvw (waw + perfect 1cs from bwv “to turn”) is used idiomatically to denote repetition: “to return and do” = “to do again” (e.g., Gen 26:18; 30:31; 43:2) or “to do repeatedly” (e.g., Lam 3:3) (KBL³ 952.6; BDB 998.8; GKC 120e): “I observed again” or “I repeatedly observed.” On the other hand, the shift from the perfect ytbvw (waw + perfect 1cs from bwv “to turn”) to the preterite ha#r=a#w` (waw + Qal preterite 1cs from har “to see”) might indicate a purpose clause: “I turned [my mind] to consider …” (see following study note). The preterite ha#r=a#w` (waw + Qal preterite 1cs from har “to see”) follows the perfect ytbvw (waw + perfect 1cs from bwv “to turn”). When a wayyiqtul form (waw + preterite) follows a perfect in reference to a past-time situation, the preterite also represents a past-time situation. Its aspect is based on the preceding perfect. In this context, the perfect and preterite may denote definite past or indefinite past action (“I turned and considered …” as hendiadys for “I observed again” or “I repeatedly observed”) or past telic action (“I turned [my mind] to consider …”) (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 33.3.1a).
²⁰tn Heb “under the sun”
²¹tn Heb "There is one and there is not a second."
²²tn Heb "son nor brother." The terms "son" and "brother" are examples of synecdoche of specific (species) for the general (genus). The term "son" is put for offspring, and "brother" for siblings (e.g., Prov 10:1).
²³tn Heb "his eye." The term “eye” is a synecdoche of part (=the eye) for the whole (=the whole person) (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 647).
²⁴tn The direct discourse (“For whom am I toiling and depriving myself of pleasure?!?”) is not introduced with any kind of introductory structure. As in LXX, several English versions suggest that these are the words of the lonely workaholic, e.g., “He says …” (AB, NAB, NEB, ASV, NIV, NRSV). Others suggest that this is a question that he never asks himself, e.g., “Yet he never asks himself …” (KJV, RSV, BV, YLT, Douay, NASB, Moffatt).
²⁵tn Heb "my soul."
²⁶tn This rhetorical question is an example of erotesis of negative affirmation, that is, it expects a negative answer: “No one!” (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 949-951).
²⁷tn The noun hur (lit. “evil”) means “misfortune” (KBL 3:1263.4) or “injustice, wrong” (KBL 3:1262.2b). The phrase ur /ynu (“unhappy business, rotten business, grievous task”) is used only in Ecclesiastes (1:13; 2:23,26; 3:10; 4:8; 5:2,13; 8:16). It is parallel with lbh “futile” in 4:8, and describes a “grave misfortune” in 5:13. The noun /ynu (“business”) refers to something that keeps a person occupied or busy: “business, affair, task, occupation” (KBL 2:857; BDB 775). The related verb hnu III means “to be occupied, busy with (B=),” e.g., Eccl 1:13; 3:10; 5:19 (KBL 2:854; BDB 775). The noun is from the Aramaic loanword anynu “concern, care.” The verb is related to the Aramaic verb “to try hard,” the Arabic verb “to be busily occupied, worry, be a matter of concern,” and the Old South Arabic root “to be troubled, strive with” (KBL 2:854). KBL renders the phrase as “unhappy business” here (KBL 2:857). The phrase ur /ynu is treated creatively by English translations: “sore travail” (KJV, ASV), “sad travail” (YLT), “grievous vexation” (Douay), “unhappy business” (RSV, NRSV, NJPS), “sorry business” (NEB, Moffatt), “miserable business” (NIV), “evil task” (AB), “worthless task” (NAB), “grievous task” (NASB), and “sorry situation” (BV).
²⁸tn Heb “they have”
²⁹tn Heb “a good reward”
³⁰tn Heb “woe to him”
³¹tn The verb opqty (Qal imperfect 3ms + 3ms suffix from [qt) means “to overpower, prevail over” e.g., Job 14:20; 15:24; Eccl 4:12; 6:10 (KBL³ 1040; BDB 1075).
³²tn Heb “against him”
³³tn Heb "from the house of bonds".
³⁴tn Heb “to be king”
³⁵tn Heb “his kingdom.” The syntax of this verse is difficult. It is not clear whether the 3ms suffix (“his”) on otwklmb (“his kingdom”) refers to the old foolish king or to the poor but wise youth of 4:13.
³⁶tn Heb “under the sun”
³⁷tn It is not clear whether the term “the second” (ynvh) refers to the young man who succeeds the old king or to a second youthful successor.
³⁸tn The verb dmu (lit. “to stand”) may denote “to arise, appear, come on the scene” (e.g., Ps 106:30; Dan 8:22,23; 11:2-4; 12:1; Ezra 2:63; Neh 7:65) (BDB 764.6a; KBL 2:840.1a).
³⁹tn Heb “the people.” The term <u (“people”) can refer to the subjects of the king (BDB 766.2).
⁴⁰tn Heb “those who were before them”
⁴¹tn Heb “those coming after.” The term <ynwrjah “future generations” (lit. “those coming after”) is derived from the preposition rja (“behind”). When used in reference to time, it refers to future generations (e.g., Deut 29:21; Pss 48:14; 78:4,6; 102:19; Job 18:20; Eccl 1:11; 4:16) (KBL 1:36.3; BDB 30.b).
¹sn Beginning with 5:1, the verse numbers through 5:20 in the English Bible differ by one from the verse numbers in the Hebrew text (BHS), with 5:1 ET = 4:17 HT, 5:2 ET = 5:1 HT, etc., through 5:20 ET = 5:19 HT. From 6:1 the versification in the English Bible and the Hebrew Bible is again the same.
²tn Heb “Guard your feet”
³tn Heb "feet." The kethib is the plural y;lgr ("your feet"), while the qere is the singular l;gr ("your foot") which is preserved in a several Hebrew manuscripts and is reflected in the versions (Greek LXX, Aramaic Targum, Latin Vulgate, Syriac Peshitta). For example, LXX reads ton poda sou (“your foot”) which reflects l;gr ("your foot”).
sn The exhortation, “Guard your feet” is an idiom for “Watch your steps” = “Be careful what you do.” This is a compound figure: “foot” is a metonymy for “step,” and “step” is a metonymy for “action” (e.g., Job 12:5; 23:11; 31:5; Pss 119:59,101,105; Prov 1:16; 3:23; 4:26-27; 6:18; 19:2; Isa 58:13; 59:7; Jer 14:10). For example, “I have refrained my feet from every evil way” (Ps 119:101) (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 648).
⁴tn Heb "the house of God." The term “house” (tyb) is a synecdoche of general (=house) for specific (=temple) (e.g., 1 Kgs 6:3; 7:12; 1 Chr 9:11; 2 Chr 3:8; 28:11) (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 620).
⁵tn Alternately, “to obey.” The term umvl (preposition + Qal infinitive construct from umv “to hear”) may be taken in one of two ways: (1) literal: “to listen” in contrast to speak or (2) figurative (metonymy of cause for effect) “to obey” in contrast to sacrifice (KBL³ 990-991; BDB 1033-34). LXX took the term in the literal sense: tou ajkouein (“to listen”). The English versions reflect both options: “obedience” (NJPS, Douay, NAB, NEB, AB) versus “to hear/listen” (KJV, YLT, BV, RSV, ASV, NASB, NIV, NRSV). The section warns against rash vows therefore, the nuance “to listen” is more appropriate: the wise man will be slow to speak and quick to listen in the presence of God; however, the fool is unrestrained and speaks rashly.
⁶tn The term “sacrifice” (jbz) is the general term that refers to the thank offering and free will offering (Lev 7:12,16). This section focuses on making vows in prayer and fulfilling them, such as the vow offering. The term “sacrifice” functions as a synecdoche of general (=sacrifice) for specific (=vow offering).
⁷tn Heb "the offering of fools." The term “fools” (<ylyskh) is an adverbial accusative of comparison (e.g., GKC 118r): “rather than giving a sacrifice like fools” (jbz <ylyskh ttm). Contextually, the “sacrifice of fools” is a rash vow made to God that is not fulfilled. The rash vow is referred to in 5:2 as the “voice of a fool.” Qoheleth admonishes the fool against making a rash vow that is not paid: “When you make a vow to God, do not delay in paying it; for God takes no pleasure in fools: Pay what you vow! It is better for you not to vow than to vow and not pay it” (vv. 4-5 [3-4]).
⁸tn The term /ynu means “business, affair, task, occupation” (KBL 2:857; BDB 775). KBL nuances /ynu br as “excessive activity” (KBL 2:857). Here, it is used as a metonymy of cause (=tasks) for effect (=cares). The term is nuanced variously: (1) literal sense: “business” (KJV, YLT, NEB, RSV, AB, ASV) and “effort” (NASB), and (2) metonymical: “cares” (NAB, NIV, NRSV), “concerns” (BV, Douay), “worries” (Moffatt) and “brooding” (NJPS). LXX mistakenly related /ynu to the root hnu II “to afflict,” and rendered it as peirasmou (“trial”).
⁹tn The juxtaposition of the two lines joined by waw (“just as … so …”) suggests a comparison (BDB 253.1.j) (see Ronald J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, 437).
¹⁰tn Heb “voice.” The term “voice” (loq) is used as a metonymy of cause (=voice) for the contents (=the thing said), e.g., Gen 3:17; 4:23; Exod 3:18; 4:1,9; Deut 1:45; 21:18,20; 1 Sam 2:25; 8:7,9; 2 Sam 12:18 (KBL 3:1084.4b; BDB 877.3a) (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 545-46). Contextually, this refers to a rash vow made by a fool who made a mistake in making it because he is unable to fulfill it.
¹¹tn Heb “vow a vow.” The phrase “to vow a vow” (rdn rdt) is a Hebrew idiom in which the root rdn is repeated for emphasis. The construction is a cognate accusative (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 10.2.1f). The verb rdt (Qal imperfect 2ms from rdn “to vow”) refers to the action of making a solemn promise to YHWH to perform an action or offer a sacrifice, e.g., Lev 27:8; Num 6:21; 30:11; Deut 23:23-24; Jonah 2:10; Mal 1:14; Pss 76:12; 132:2 (KBL 2:674). The noun rdn (“vow”) was a gift or offering promised to be given to YHWH (Num 30:3; Deut 12:11; 23:19; Isa 19:12; Nah 2:1 [1:15]; Ps 61:6,9) (KBL 2:674-75). It usually was a sacrifice or free-will offering (Deut 12:6; Ps 66:13) that was often promised during times of pressure (Judg 11:30; 1 Sam 1:11; 2 Sam 15:7-8; Pss 22:25; 66:13; 116:14,18; Jonah 2:9).
¹²tn The term omlvl (preposition + Piel infinitive construct from <lv + 3ms suffix) from <lv (“to pay, fulfill”) which is used in a general sense of paying a debt (2 Kgs 4:7; Ps 37:21; Prov 22:27; Job 41:3), and more specifically of fulfilling a vow to YHWH (Deut 23:22; 2 Sam 15:7; Pss 22:26; 50:14; 61:9; 66:13; 76:12; 116:14,18; Prov 7:14; Job 22:27; Isa 19:21; Jonah 2:10; Nah 2:1) (KBL³ 980.3; BDB 1022.4). An Israelite was never required to make a vow, but once made, it had to be paid (Lev 22:18-25; 27:1-13; Num 15:2-10; Nah 2:1 [1:15]).
¹³tn Heb “your flesh.” The term rvb (“flesh”) is a synecdoche of part (= flesh) for the whole (=whole person), e.g., Gen 2:21; 6:12; Ps 56:4[5]; 65:2[3]; 145:21; Isa 40:5,6 (KBL 1:164) (E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 642).
¹⁴tn The MT reads Ealmh (“messenger”); however, LXX reads tou qeou (“God”). Rather than reflecting an alternate textual tradition of <yhlah (“God”), it is likely that LXX simply was attempting to clarify the meaning of this ambiguous phrase. Except for Moffatt (“God”), all the major English versions follow the MT reading.
sn The term “messenger” (Ealm) refers to the temple priest (e.g., Mal 2:7) (KBL 2:585.2b; BDB 521.1c). The temple priests recorded what Israelite worshippers had vowed (Lev 27:14-15). When an Israelite delayed in fulfilling a vow, the priest would remind the Israelite to pay what he had vowed. Although the traditional rabbinic view is that it refers to an angelic superintendent over the temple, Rashi suggested that it is the temple-official. The English versions reflect both views: “his representative” (NAB), “the temple messenger” (NIV), “the messenger” (AB, RSV, NRSV, NASB, BV, NJPS) versus “the angel” (KJV, ASV, Douay) and “the angel of God” (NEB).
¹⁵sn The noun hggv denotes “error, mistake” and refers to a sin of inadvertence or unintentional sin (e.g., Lev 4:2,22,27; 5:18; 22:14; Num 15:24-29; 35:11,15; Josh 20:3,9; Eccl 5:5; 10:5) (KBL³ 948; BDB 993). In this case, it refers to a rash vow thoughtlessly made - the foolish worshipper claiming it was a mistake (e.g., Prov 20:25).
¹⁶tn Literally "your voice"
¹⁷tn The syntax of this verse is difficult. Perhaps the best approach is to classify the waw on <ylbhw (“futilities”) as introducing the predicate (e.g., Gen 40:9; 2 Sam 23:3; Prov 10:25; Isa 34:12; Job 4:6; 36:26) (BDB 255.5.c.g): “There is futility…” The phrase twmlh brb is an adverbial modifier (“in many dreams”), as is hbrh <yrbd (“many words”). The waw prefixed to <yrbdw and the juxtaposition of the two lines suggests a comparison: “just as … so also …” (BDB 253.1.j). The English versions reflect a variety of approaches: “In the multitude of dreams and many words there are also diverse vanities” (KJV), “Through many empty dreams come many vows” (AB), “In the multitude of dreams there are vanities, and in many words” (ASV), “When dreams increase, empty words grow many” (RSV), “In many dreams and follies and many words” (BV), “In the abundance of dreams both vanities and words abound” (YLT), “Where there are many dreams, there are many vanities, and words without number” (Douay), “Many dreams and words mean many a vain folly” (Moffatt), “Much dreaming leads to futility and to superfluous talk” (NJPS), “In many dreams and in many words there is emptiness” (NASB), “Much dreaming and many words are meaningless” (NIV), “With many dreams comes vanities and a multitude of words” (NRSV).
¹⁸tn Alternately, “oppression.” The term qvu has a basic two-fold range of meanings: (1) “oppression, brutality” (e.g., Isa 54:14) and (2) “extortion” (e.g., Ps 62:11) (KBL 2:897; BDB 799). LXX understands the term as “oppression,” as the translation sukofantian (“oppression”) indicates. Likewise, KBL classifies this usage as “oppression” against the poor (KBL 2:897.1). However, the context of 5:8-9 [7-8] focuses on corrupt government officials robbing people of the fruit of their labor through extortion and the perversion of justice.
¹⁹tn Heb “robbery.” The noun lzg (“robbery”) refers to the wrestling away of righteousness or the perversion of justice (KBL 1:186). The related forms of the root lzg mean “to rob, loot” (KBL 1:186). The term “robbery” is used as a figure for the perversion of justice (hypocatastasis): just as a thief robs his victims through physical violence, so corrupt government officials “rob” the poor through the perversion of justice.
²⁰tn Heb “in the province”
²¹sn This may describe a corrupt system of government in which each level of hierarchy exploits its subordinates, all the way down to the peasants: “Set in authority over the people is an official who enriches himself at their expense; he is watched by a more authoritative governor who also has his share of the spoils; and above them are other officers of the State who likewise have to be satisified” (A. Cohen, Sincino Books of the Bible, 12:141).
²²tn The function of the term dbun (Niphal participle ms from dbu “to serve”) has been understood in four ways: (1) adjectival use of the participle, modifying the noun hd? (“field”): “cultivated field” (AB, RSV, NRSV, NJPS, NAB), (2) adjectival use of the participle, modifying Elm (“king”): “the king who cultivates” (NASB), (3) verbal use of the participle, taking hd? (“field”) as the subject: “field is cultivated” (NEB), and (4) verbal use of the participle, taking Elm (“king”) as the subject: “the king is served” (KJV, NASB) = “the king profits” (NIV). BDB lists both the adjectival and verbal options: “a king for (devoted to) the cultivated field” and “a king that makes himself servant to the field (devoted to agriculture)” (BDB 713.2). KBL suggests the line be rendered: “a king who serves the land” (KBL 2:774). In the Qal stem the verb dbu is sometimes used in reference to tribute imposed upon a king’s subjects (e.g., Jer 25:14; 27:7; 30:8; Ezek 34:27) and in reference to subjects serving a king (e.g., Judg 9:28,38; 1 Sam 11:1; 1 Kgs 5:1; 2 Sam 22:44; Jer 27:7; 28:14; 2 Kgs 25:24) (BDB 713.3; KBL 2:773.3). Likewise, it is also used in reference to tilling the ground (e.g., Gen 2:5; 4:2,12; 2 Sam 9:10; Isa 30:24; Jer 27:11; Zech 13:5; Prov 12:11; 28:19) and a vineyard or garden (Gen 2:15; Deut 28:39) (KBL 2:773.1; BDB 713.1).
²³tn The syntax and exegesis of the line is difficult. There are three basic interpretive options: (1) the king takes care of the security of the cultivated land: “in any case, the advantage of a country is that there is a king for the cultivated land,” (2) the king is in favor of a prosperous agricultural policy: “in any case, the advantage of a country is that there is a king who is obeyed for the sake of the agriculture,” and (3) the king exploits the poor farmers: “the produce of the land is [seized] by all, even the king is served by the fields.” Perhaps the best option in the light of the context is to take the referent of lk (“all”) to the government officials of 5:8[7] rather than to the people as a whole. The verse depicts the exploitation of the poor farmers by corrupt government officials. This is reflected in a few English versions: “the increase from the land is taken by all; the king himself profits from the fields” (NIV), “the profit of the land is among all of them; a cultivated field has a king” (RSV margin) and “the ruthless has an advantage in everything; he is king over the cultivated land” (AB). On the other hand, LXX treated the syntax so that the king is viewed in a neutral sense: kai perisseia gh" ejpi panti ejsti, basileu" tou argou eijrgasmenou (“The abundance of the earth is for everyone; the king is dependent on the tilled field”). Most English versions deal with the syntax in such a way that the king is viewed in a neutral or positive sense: “the profit of the earth is for all; the king himself is served by the field” (KJV), “a king who cultivates the field is an advantage to the land” (NASB), “this is an advantage for a land: a king for a plowed field” (NRSV), “the greatest advantage in all the land is his: he controls a field that is cultivated” (NJPS), “a country prospers with a king who has control” (Moffatt), “a king devoted to the field is an advantage to the land” (BV), “a king is an advantage to a land with cultivated fields” (RSV), “the best thing for a country is a king whose own lands are well tilled” (NEB) and “an advantage for a country in every respect is a king for the arable land” (NAB). See Dominique Barthelemy, ed. et al. Preliminary and Interim Report of the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (New York: United Bible Society, 1979), 3:576-77.
²⁴tn Heb “silver.” The term [sk (literally, “silver”) refers to “money” (KBL 2:491.3). It is a synecdoche of specific (=silver) for the general (=money) (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 625-29).
²⁵sn The Hebrew term [sk (“silver, money”) is repeated twice in this line for rhetorical emphasis.
²⁶tn The term /wmh (“abundance, wealth”) has a wide range of meanings: (1) agitation, (2) turmoil, (3) noise, (4) pomp, (5) multitude, crowd = noisy crowd, and (6) abundance, wealth (KBL 1:250.1-6). Here, it refers to abundant wealth (related to “pomp”) (KBL 1:250.6), that is, lavish abundant wealth (Ezek 29:19; 30:4; 1 Chr 29:16).
²⁷tn The term hbwf (“good”) connotes “prosperity” (Deut 23:7; Job 9:25; 21:25; Ps 106:5; Lam 3:17; Eccl 4:8; 5:10,17; 6:3,6; 7:14; 9:18; Neh 2:10; Sir 6:11; 41:13) (KBL 2:372.2). The related term bwf (“good”) connotes “prosperity” as well (Prov 11:10; Job 20:21; 21:16) (KBL 2:372.1b). Here, it refers to the possessions and wealth a person acquires as the fruit of his labors. This nuance is well reflected in several English versions: “The more a man gains, the more there are to spend it” (Moffatt), “When riches multiply, so do those who live off them” (NEB), “As his substance increase, so do those who consume it” (NJPS), and “Where there are great riches, there are also many to devour them” (NAB). The line does not describe the law of “supply and demand,” as some versions seem to imply, e.g., “When goods increase, those who eat them increase” (KJV, AB, ASV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, BV, NIV).
²⁸tn The rhetorical question is an example of erotesis of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “There is no ultimate advantage!” (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 947-48).
²⁹tn The term vy (literally, “there is”) is often used in aphorisms to assert the existence of a particular situation that occurs sometimes. It may indicate that the situation is not the rule but that it does occur on occasion, and may be nuanced “sometimes” (Prov 11:24; 13:7, 23; 14:12; 16:25; 18:24; 20:15; Eccl 2:21; 4:8; 5:12; 6:1; 7:15²; 8:14³).
³⁰tn The noun hur (lit. “evil”) probably means “misfortune” (KBL 3:1263.4) or “injustice, wrong” (KBL 3:1262.2b). The phrase hbr hur connotes “grave injustice” or “great misfortune” (Eccl 2:17; 5:12,15; 6:1; 10:5).
³¹tn Heb “under the sun”
³²tn Alternately, “bad business deal.” The basic meaning of /ynu is “business, affair” (KBL 2:857) or “occupation, task” (BDB 775). The term is used in a specific sense in reference to business activity (Eccl 8:16), as well as in a more general sense in reference to events that occur on earth (Eccl 1:13; 4:8). BDB suggests that the phrase ur /ynu in 5:13 refers to a bad business deal (BDB 775); however, KBL suggests that it means “bad luck” (KBL 2:857). The English versions reflect the same two approaches: (1) bad luck: “some misfortune” (NAB, NIV) and (2) bad business deal: “a bad investment” (NASB), “a bad venture” (RSV, NRSV, BV), “some unlucky venture” (Moffatt, NJPS), “an unlucky venture” (NEB), “an unfortunate enterprise” (AB), “an evil adventure” (ASV).
³³tn Heb “there is nothing in his hand”
³⁴tn The noun hur (lit. “evil”) probably means “misfortune” (KBL 3:1263.4) or “injustice, wrong” (KBL 3:1262.2b). The phrase hbr hur connotes “grave injustice” or “great misfortune” (Eccl 2:17; 5:12,15; 6:1; 10:5).
³⁵sn The phrase “to eat and to drink” is a common idiom used in the book to describe a person enjoying the fruit of his labor (e.g., 2:24; 3:13).
³⁶tn Heb “the toil which one toils”
³⁷tn Heb “under the sun”
³⁸sn The term qlj (“lot”) has a wide range of meanings: (1) “share of booty” (Gen 14:24; Num 31:36; 1 Sam 30:24), (2) “portion of food” (Lev 6:10; Deut 18:8; Hab 1:16), (3) “portion or tract of land” (Deut 10:9; 12:12; Josh 19:9), (4) “portion or possession” (Num 18:20; Deut 32:9), (5) “inheritance” (2 Kgs 9:10; Amos 7:4), (6) “portion, award” (Job 20:29; 27:13; 31:2; Isa 17:14) or “profit, reward” (Eccl 2:10,21; 3:22; 5:17-18; 9:6,9) (KBL 1:323; BDB 324). Throughout Ecclesiastes, the term is used in reference to man’s temporal profit from his labor and his reward from God (e.g., Eccl 3:22; 9:9).
³⁹tn The syntax of this verse is difficult. The best approach is to view the verb wfylvh (Hiphil perfect 3ms from flv “to empower” + 3ms suffix) as governing all three infinitives which follow: lkal (“to eat”), ta?lw (“and to lift” = “to accept”) and jm?lw (“and to rejoice”). This statement parallels 2:24-26 which states that no one can find enjoyment in life unless God gives him the ability to do so.
⁴⁰sn The feminine singular demonstrative pronoun hz) (“this”) refers back to all that preceded it in the verse (e.g., GKC 135p), that is, the ability to enjoy the fruit of one’s labor is the gift of God (e.g., Eccl 2:24-26).
⁴¹tn The verb rkzy (Qal imperfect 3ms from rkz “to remember”) may be nuanced “to call to mind, think about,” that is, “to reflect upon” (e.g., Isa 47:7; Lam 1:9; Job 21:6; 36:24; 40:32; Eccl 11:6) (BDB 270.5; KBL 1:270.2).
⁴²tn The term hnum (Hiphil participle ms from hnu II “to be occupied”) refers to activity that keeps a person physically busy and mentally preoccupied, e.g., Eccl 1:13; 3:10; 5:19 (KBL 2:854; BDB 775). The related noun /ynu (“business, occupation, task”) refers to activity that keeps many busy and occupies his time, e.g., Eccl 1:13; 2:26; 3:10 (KBL 2:857; BDB 775). The participle form is used to emphasize durative, uninterrupted, continual action.
¹tn The term vy (literally, “there is”) is often used in aphorisms to assert the existence of a particular situation that occurs sometimes. It may indicate that the situation is not the rule but that it does occur on occasion, and may be nuanced “sometimes” (Prov 11:24; 13:7, 23; 14:12; 16:25; 18:24; 20:15; Eccl 2:21; 4:8; 5:12; 6:1; 7:15²; 8:14³).
²tn The noun hur (literally, “evil”) probably means “misfortune” (KBL 3:1263.4) or “injustice, wrong” (KBL 3:1262.2b) (e.g., Eccl 2:17; 5:12,15; 6:1; 10:5).
³tn Heb “under the sun”
⁴tn Heb “it is great upon men.” The phrase <dah-lu ayh hbrw is taken in two basic ways: (1) commonality: “it is common among men” (KJV, BV), “it is prevalent among men” (NASB), “that is frequent among men” (Douay). (2) oppressiveness: “it lies heavy upon men” (RSV, NRSV), “it weighs heavily upon men” (NEB, NAB, NIV), “it presses heavily on men” (Moffatt), “it is heavy upon men” (AB, ASV), and “a grave one it is for man” (NJPS). The preposition lu^ (“upon”) argues against the first in favor of the second; the notion of commonality would be denoted by B= (“among”). The singular noun <da is used as a collective, denoting “men.” The article on <dah is used in a generic sense referring to humankind as a whole; the generic article is often used with a collective singular (Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 13.5.1f).
⁵tn Heb “his flesh”
⁶tn Heb “There is no lack in respect to his flesh.” Alternately, “his desire lacks nothing.”
⁷tn The verb wnfylvy (Hiphil imperfect 3ms + 3ms suffix from flv “to give power”) means in Qal stem “to domineer, dominate; to lord it over; to be master of” and in Hiphil stem “to give power to” (BDB 1020) and “to grant” (KBL³977). God must grant a person the ability to enjoy the fruit of his labor, otherwise a person will not be able to enjoy their possessions and wealth. The ability to partake of the fruit of one’s labor and to find satisfaction and joy in it is a gift from God (e.g., Eccl 2:24-26; 3:13; 5:18[19]; 9:7).
⁸tn Heb “to eat of it.” The verb lkal (preposition + Qal infinitive construct from lka “to eat”) functions as a metonymy of association, that is, the action of eating is associated with the enjoyment of the fruit of one’s labor (e.g., Eccl 2:24-26; 3:12-13, 22; 5:17-19; 8:15; 9:9).
⁹tn Heb “a stranger.” The term “stranger” (yrkn ?ya) sometimes refers, not to a foreigner or someone that the person does not know, but simply to someone else other than the subject (e.g., Prov 27:2). In the light of 6:3-6, it might even refer to the man’s own heirs. The term is used as a synecdoche of species (foreigner for stranger) in the sense of someone else other than the subject: “someone else” (BDB 649.3).
¹⁰tn Heb “eats it”
¹¹sn A person may be unable to enjoy the fruit of his/her labor due to an unfortunate turn of events that robs a person of his possessions (5:13-14) or a miserly, lifelong hoarding of one’s wealth that robs him of the ability to enjoy what he has worked so hard to acquire (5:15-17). Solomon recommends the enjoyment of life and the fruit of one’s labor, as God enables (5:18-20). Unfortunately, the ability to enjoy the fruits of one’s labor is often thwarted by the obstacles described in 6:1-2 and 6:3-9.
¹²tn Heb “an evil sickness.”
¹³tn Heb “the days of his years are many”
¹⁴tn Heb “he has no burial.” The phrase htyh-al hrWbq-<gw (lit., “he even has no burial”) is traditionally treated as part of a description of his sorry final state, that is, he is deprived of a proper burial (KJV, NEB, RSV, NRSV, AB, ASV, NASB, NIV, NJPS, BV, Moffatt). However, the preceding parallel lines suggest that this a hyperbolic protastasis: “If he were to live one hundred years … even if he were never buried (=were to live forever) …” A similar idea occurs elsewhere (e.g., Pss 49:9; 89:48) (see Donald R. Glenn, “Ecclesiastes,” in Bible Knowledge Commentary, 990).
¹⁵tn The noun lpn denotes “miscarriage” and by metonymy of effect “stillborn child” (e.g., Ps 58:9; Job 3:16; Eccl 6:3 (KBL 2:711). The noun is related to one of the meanings of lpn “to be born” (Isa 26:18) (KBL 710.5).
¹⁶sn The point of 6:3-6 is that the futility of unenjoyed wealth is worse than the tragedy of being stillborn.
¹⁷sn The birth of the stillborn was in vain: it did it no good to be born.
¹⁸sn The name of the stillborn is forgotten.
¹⁹tn Heb “it never saw the sun”
²⁰tn The term “rest” (tjn) here refers to freedom from toil, anxiety, and misery - part of the miserable misfortune that the miserly man of wealth must endure.
²¹tn Heb “Do not both go to the same place?” The rhetorical question (“Do not both go to the same place?”) is an example of erotesis of positive affirmation, expecting a positive answer, e.g., Ps 56:13[14] (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 947). It affirms the fact that both the miserly rich man who lives two thousand years, as well as the stillborn who never lived one day, both go to the same place - the grave. And if the miserly rich man never enjoyed the fruit of his labor during his life, his fate was no better than that of the stillborn who never had opportunity to enjoy any of the blessings of life. In a sense, it would have been better for the miserly rich man to have never lived than to have experienced the toil, anxiety, and misery of accumulating his wealth, but never enjoying any of the fruits of his labor.
²²tn Heb “All man’s work is for his mouth.” The term “mouth” functions as a synecdoche of part (=mouth) for the whole (=person), substituting the organ of consumption for the person’s action of consumption (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 641-43), as suggested by the parallelism with “his appetite” (wvpn).
²³tn The term vpn (“desire, appetite”) is used as a metonymy of association, that is, the soul is associated with man’s desires and appetites (BDB 660.5c and 6a).
²⁴tn Heb “So what advantage does a wise man have over a fool?”
²⁵tn Heb “to walk before the living.” Alternately, “how to get along in life.”
²⁶tn Heb “What advantage has a pauper who knows to walk before the living …?”
²⁷tn The expression <ynyu harm (“the seeing of the eyes”) is a metonymy of cause (=seeing an object) for effect (=being content with what the eyes can see) (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 552-54).
²⁸tn Heb “the roaming of the flesh.” The expression vpn-Elhm (“the roaming of the flesh”) is a metonymy for unfulfilled desires. The term “flesh” (vpn) is used as a metonymy of association for man’s desires and appetites (BDB 660.5c and 6a). This also involves the personification of the roving appetite as “roving” (Elhm) (BDB 235 II.3.f.1.b; 235.II.f.2 and 232 I.3).
²⁹tn Alternately, “and what man is was foreknown.”
³⁰tn Heb “He cannot contend with Him who is more powerful than him.”
³¹tn Heb “The more the words, the more the futility.”
³²tn Alternately, “What benefit does man have [in that]?”
³³tn Heb “For who knows what is good for a man in his life?” The rhetorical question (“For who knows …?”) is an erotesis of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “For no one knows …!” (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 949-51). The translation above provides the dynamic equivalent of this rhetorical device.
³⁴tn The waw prefixed to <?uyw (conjunction + Qal imperfect 3ms + 3mpl suffix from h?u “to do”) functions in an explanatory or epexegetical sense (“For …”).
³⁵tn The 3mpl suffix on the verb <?uyw (conjunction + Qal imperfect 3ms + 3mpl suffix from h?u “to do”) refers to wlbh yyj-ymy rpsm (“the few days of his fleeting life”). The suffix may be taken as an objective genitive: “he spends them (=the days of his life) like a shadow” (KBL 2:891.8) or as a subjective genitive: “they (=the days of his life) pass like a shadow” (BDB 795.11).
³⁶tn Heb “Who can tell him what shall be after him under the sun?” The rhetorical question (“For who can tell him …?”) features erotesis of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “For no one can tell him …!” (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 949-51). The translation above is the dynamic equivalent of this rhetorical device.
¹tn Heb “name.” The term “name” (<v) is used metonymically for a person’s reputation (KBL³ 983.2; BDB 1028.2b) (e.g., Prov 22:1; Deut 22:14,19; Neh 6:13; also Gen 6:4; 12:2; 2 Sam 7:9; 8:13; 23:18,22; 1 Chr 5:24; 12:31; 2 Chr 26:15; Neh 9:10; Isa 62:12,14; Jer 32:20; Ezek 16:14; Dan 9:15).
²tn The comparative term bof (“better”) is repeated throughout 7:1-12. It term introduces a series of “Better-Than Sayings,” particularly in 7:1-6 in which every poetic unit is introduced by bof (“better”).
³tn “good perfume.” The repetition of bof (“good”) forms an inclusion (a structural devices that book-ends the colon), while the two internal terms /mvm <v (“name … ointment”) creates a paranomastic word-play (see below). The combination of these two sets of literary devices creates an AB:BA chiasm: bof /mvm <v bof (e.g., “good name”//“ointment good”).
⁴tn Alternately, “oil” or “ointment.” The term /mv refers to fragrant “perfume, cologne, ointment” (Amos 6:6; Eccl 10:1; Song 1:2 [H 3]; 4:10) (KBL³ 990.3). Odoriferous bodily oils were expensive (1 Kgs 17:12; 2 Kgs 2:4). Possession of oils and perfumes was a sign of prosperity (Deut 32:8; 33:24; Job 29:6; Prov 21:17; Ezek 16:13,20). Wearing colognes and oils was associated with joy (Ps 45:8; Eccl 9:8; Isa 61:3) because they were worn on festive occasions (Prov 27:9). The similar sounding terms “name” (<v) and “perfume” (/mv) create a word-play (paranomasia). See Wilfred W.E. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1984), 242-43; I.M. Casanowicz, "Paranomasia in the Old Testament," JBL 12 (1893): 105-67; J.J. Gluck, "Paranomasia in Biblical Literature," Semitics 1 (1970): 50-78; A. Guillaume, "Paranomasia in the Old Testament," JSS 9 (1964): 282-90; J.M. Sasson, "Wordplay in the OT," Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible: Supplement (Nashville: Abingdon, 1976): 968-70.
⁵tn The waw prefixed to the form <wyw+ functions in a comparative sense, e.g., Job 5:7; 12:11; 16:21; Prov 25:25 (see Ronald J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, #437).
⁶tn The article prefixed to twmh (“death”) probably functions in an indefinite possessive sense or in a generic sense: “one’s death,” e.g., Gen 44:2 (see Ronald J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, #86 and 92).
⁷sn There are two ways to understand this proverb: (1) Happy times (characterized by celebration and “fragrant perfume”) teach us less than hard times (“the day of one’s death”) which can bring about moral improvement (“a good reputation”). (2) It is better to come to the end of one’s life (“day of one’s death”) with a good reputation (“a good name”) than to merely be starting life (“day of one’s birth”) in an auspicious manner in joy and wealth (“fine perfume”). Folly and wickedness could foil a good beginning so that a person ends life as a fool. For example, Solomon began as the wisest man who ever lived, only to end life as one of history’s greatest fools.
⁸sn The phrase “house of mourning” refers to a funeral where the deceased is mourned.
⁹tn Heb “house of drinking” or “house of feasting.” The noun htvm can denote (1) “feast, banquet,” occasion for drinking-bouts (1 Sam 25:36; Isa 5:12; Jer 51:39; Job 1:5; Est 2:18; 5:14; 8:17; 9:19) or (2) “drink” (exilic/post-exilic) (Ezra 3:7; Dan 1:5,8,16) (KBL³ 581; BDB 1059).
sn Solomon recommended that people soberly reflect on the brevity of life and the reality of death (“It is better to go to a house of mourning”) than to waste one’s life in the foolish pursuit of pleasure (“than to go to a house of drinking”). Sober reflection on the brevity of life and reality of death has more moral benefit than frivolous levity.
¹⁰tn Heb “this”
¹¹tn Heb “the end.” The noun [ws literally means “end, conclusion” (KBL 2:747.1; BDB 693). It is used in this context in reference to death, as the collocated phrase “house of mourning” (=funeral) suggests.
¹²tn Heb “all men” or “every man”
¹³tn The verb /ty (Qal imperfect 3ms from /tn “to give”) functions in a modal sense, denoting obligation, that is, the subject’s obligatory of necessary conduct: “should” or “ought to” (see Ronald J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, #172; Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 31.4g).
¹⁴tn NEB suggests “grief,” and TNK “vexation.”
¹⁵tn Heb “A sad face is good for the heart.”
¹⁶tn Less likely, “Though the face is sad, the heart may be glad.”
¹⁷sn This refers to a banquet where those who attend engage in self-indulgent feasting and riotous drinking.
¹⁸tn Heb “hear”
¹⁹tn Heb “rebuke of the wise”
²⁰tn Alternately, “praise.” The antithetical parallelism between “rebuke” (trug) and “song” (ryv) suggests that the latter is figurative (metonymy of association) for praise/flattery which is “music” to the ears: “praise of fools” (NEB, TNK) and “flattery of fools” (Douay). However, the collocation of “song” (ryv) in 7:5 with “laughter” (qjv) in 7:6 suggests simply frivolous merry-making: “song of fools” (KJV, NASB, NIV, AB, ASV, RSV, NRSV). The antithetical parallelism between “rebuke” (trug) and “song” (ryv) suggests that the latter is figurative (metonymy of association) for “music” to the ears: “praise of fools” (NEB, TNK) or “flattery of fools” (Douay).
²¹tn The term “thorns” (<yrysh) refers to twigs from wild thorn bushes which were used as fuel for quick heat, but die out quickly before a cooking pot can be properly heated (e.g., Pss 58:9; 118:12).
²²tn It is difficult to determine whether this use of lbh means “fleeting” or “useless.” The imagery of quick-burning thorns under a cooking pot is ambiguous and lends itself in either direction: (1) It is useless to try to heat a cooking pot by burning quick-burning thorns because they die out before the pot can be properly heated. (2) The heat produced by quick-burning thorns is fleeting - it produces quick heat, but lasts only for a moment. Likewise, the “laughter of a fool” can be taken in both ways: (1) In comparison to the sober reflection of the wise, the laughter of fools is morally useless: the burning of thorns, like the laughter of fools, makes a lot of noise but accomplishes nothing. (2) The laughter of fools is fleeting due to the brevity of life and certainty of death. Perhaps this is an example of intentional ambiguity.
²³tn Alternately, “extortion.” Scholars debate whether the noun qvu (“oppression, extortion”) in this context denotes “oppression” (KBL 2:897.1) or “gain of extortion” (BDB 799.3). The parallelism between qvu and hntm (“bribe”) seems to suggest the latter; but the prominence of the theme of oppression in 7:8-10 argues for the former. Elsewhere in Ecclesiastes, the noun qvu denotes “oppression” (Eccl 4:1) and “extortion” (Eccl 5:8 [Heb 5:7]). LXX rendered it as sukofantia (“oppression”). The translations are split between these two options: “extortion” (ASV, NIV, BV), “oppression” (KJV, AB, NAB, NASB, RSV, NRSV, YLT, Douay, Moffat), as well as “cheating” (TNK) and “slander” (NEB).
²⁴tn Alternately, “Oppression drives a wise man crazy” or “Extortion drives a wise man crazy.” The verb llohy (Po’el imperfect 3ms from llh III “to be foolish”) denotes “to make foolish, make a fool out of someone, make into a madman” (Job 12:17; Isa 44:25) (BDB 239; KBL 1:249). It has been handled variously: “deprives a wise man of reason” (Jastrow), “makes a wise man mad” (KJV, AB, NASB), “drives a wise man crazy” (NEB), “can make a fool of a wise man” (NAB), “makes the wise man foolish” (RSV, NRSV), and “turns a wise man into a fool” (NIV).
²⁵tn The waw prefixed to dbayw (“corrupts”) may function in a comparative sense, e.g., Job 5:7; 12:11; 16:21; Prov 25:25 (see Ronald J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, #437).
²⁶tc The DSS text 4QQoh^a reads “twists” or “perverts.” The MT kethib (“what is written”) is dbayw (conjunction + Piel imperfect 3ms from dba “to destroy”), but the qere (“what is read”) is hwuyw (conjunction + Piel imperfect 3ms from hwu I “to bend, twist”). The qere is supported by DSS text 4QQoh^a reading hwuyw (James Muilenburg, “A Qoheleth Scroll from Qumran,” BASOR 135 (1954): 27). The DSS + qere verb hwuy (Piel imperfect 3ms from hwu I “to bend, twist”) is used in reference to moral perversion, e.g., 2 Sam 7:14; 19:20; 24:17; 1 Kgs 8:47; Job 33:27; Prov 12:8; Jer 9:4 (KBL 2:796-97; BDB 730). The kethib verb dbayw (conjunction + Piel imperfect 3ms from dba “to destroy”) is used similarly in reference to moral corruption, e.g., Eccl 3:6; 9:18; Jer 23:1 (KBL 1:3; BDB 2.2).
²⁷tn Alternately, “and a bribe drives a person mad.” The noun bl (“heart”) may be taken as a synecdoche of part (=heart) for the whole (=a person). KBL suggests that bl dbayw (lit. “destroys the heart”) is an idiom meaning, “drives a person mad” (KBL 1:3). The B-line is taken as a comparison with the preceding A-line. On the other hand, the A-line and B-line might be in synoymous parallelism in which case the two lines could be rendered: “Surely [the gain of] extortion turns a wise man into a fool, and a bribe corrupts the heart.” On the other hand, the lines could be rendered, “Surely oppression drives a wise man crazy, and a bribe drives a person mad.”
²⁸tn The term rbd denotes “matter, thing” rather than “speech, word,” as the parallelism with “patience” suggests. The term was misunderstood as “speech, word” by the Latin Vulgate (so also the English version by Douay).
²⁹tn The waw prefixed to dbayw (“corrupts”) may function in a comparative sense, e.g., Job 5:7; 12:11; 16:21; Prov 25:25 (see Ronald J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, #437).
³⁰tn Heb “the patient of spirit”
³¹tn Heb “the proud of spirit”
³²tn Heb “Do not be hasty in your spirit to become angry”
³³tn Heb “bosom”
³⁴tn Heb “It is not from wisdom that you ask about this”
³⁵tn Alternately, “Wisdom with an inheritance, is good” or “Wisdom is as good as an inheritance.” This use of the preposition <u! may denote: (1) accompaniment: “together with,” or (2) comparison: “as good as, like, in comparison to” (KBL 3:839-40; BDB 767-69). BDB suggests the accompaniment nuance “together with” (BDB 767.1), while KBL suggests the comparative sense “in comparison to” (KBL 3:840.2c). The translations are also split: “wisdom with an inheritance is good” (KJV, RSV, AB, ASV margin, NASB, YLT), “wisdom, like an inheritance, is a good thing” (NIV), “wisdom is as good as an inheritance” (ASV, NRSV, BV, TNK, Moffat), “wisdom is better than an inheritance” (NEB). Because verse 12 compares wisdom with money (=an inheritance), verse 11 is probably making a comparison as well: “Wisdom, like an inheritance, is good” (7:11a) = “Wisdom provides protection, just as money provides protection” (7:12a). The “good thing” that wisdom, like an inheritance/money, provides is protection.
³⁶tn Heb “see the sun”
³⁷tn Heb “wisdom is a shade.” When used with a predicate nominative in a verbless clause, the preposition B= - which appears twice in the line [skh lxb hmkjh lxb -- denotes identity (the so-called beth of essence) (KBL 1:104.3; BDB 88.1.7) (see Ronald J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, 249).
³⁸tn The term “shade, shadow” (lx) refers to that which provides protection or a shelter from the sun (Gen 19:8; Judg 9:36; Isa 25:5; 32:2; Jer 48:45; Jon 4:5). It is used often in a figurative sense (hypocatastasis) to connote “protection” from calamity (Num 14:9; Isa 49:2; Hos 14:8; Pss 17:8; 36:8; 57:2; 63:8; 91:1; 121:5; Lam 4:20).
³⁹tn Heb “Wisdom is a shade, money is a shade.” The repetition of lxb (“shade, protection”) suggests that the A-line and B-line function as comparisons. Thus [skh lxb hmkjh lxb may be nuanced, “Wisdom [provides] protection [just as] money [provides] protection.” This approach is adopted by several translations: “wisdom is a defense, as money is a defense” (ASV), “wisdom is protection just as money is protection” (NASB), “wisdom like wealth is a defense” (Moffat), “the protection of wisdom is as the protection of money” (NAB), “the protection of wisdom is like the protection of money” (RSV, NRSV), “wisdom protects as wealth protects” (BV), and “wisdom is a shelter, as money is a shelter” (NIV). The comparison is missed by KJV: “wisdom is a defense, and money is a defense.” Less likely is taking B= in a locative sense: “in the protection of wisdom is the protection of money” (AB) or “to be in the shelter of wisdom is to be in the shelter of money” (TNK).
⁴⁰tn The verb hyjt (Piel imperfect 3fs from hyj “to live”) in the Piel denotes (1) “let live, keep alive, preserve alive, allow to live happily” (Gen 12:12; Exod 1:17; Num 31:15; Deut 6:24; Josh 9:15; Isa 7:21; Jer 49:11) and (2) “bring back to life” of persons who are ill (Ps 30:4) or deceased (Hos 6:2) (KBL 1:309). Its parallelism with “protection” (lx) indicates that it means “to preserve someone’s life” from premature death or calamity. Therefore, “preserves the life” (RSV, AB, NAB, ASV, NASB, NIV, TNK) is preferable to “gives life to” (KJV, Douay, NRSV, YLT).
⁴¹tn Heb “the day of good”
⁴²tn Heb “the day of evil”
⁴³tn Less likely: “God has made one thing to balance another” (AB), “God hath made the one side by side with the other” (ASV), and “God has set the one alongside the other” (NEB).
⁴⁴tn Heb “anything after him.” This line is misinterpreted by several versions: “that man may not find against him any just complaint” (Douay), “consequently, man may find no fault with Him” (TNK), “so that man cannot find fault with him in anything” (NAB).
⁴⁵tn As is the case throughout Ecclesiastes, the term lkh should be nuanced “both” rather than “all.”
⁴⁶tn The term vy (literally, “there is”) is often used in aphorisms to assert the existence of a particular situation that occurs sometimes. It may indicate that the situation is not the rule but that it does occur on occasion, and may be nuanced “sometimes” (Prov 11:24; 13:7, 23; 14:12; 16:25; 18:24; 20:15; Eccl 2:21; 4:8; 5:12; 6:1; 7:15²; 8:14³).
⁴⁷tn Heb “perishes”
⁴⁸tn Alternately, “in his righteousness.” The preposition B= on the terms oqr=x! !=B (“his righteousness”) and otu*r*B= (“his evil-doing”) are traditionally taken in a locative sense: “in his righteousness” and “in his wickedness” (KJV, NASB, NIV). However, it is better to take the B= in the adversative sense “in spite of,” e.g., Lev 26:27; Num 14:11; Deut 1:32; Isa 5:25; 9:11,16,20; 10:4; 16:14; 47:9; Pss 27:3; 78:32; Ezra 3:3 (KBL 1:104.7; BDB 90.3.7). NJPS renders it well: “Sometimes a good man perishes in spite of his goodness, and sometimes a wicked one endures in spite of his wickedness.” In a similar vein, Donald Glenn writes: “The word ‘in’ in the phrases ‘in his righteousness’ and ‘in his wickedness’ can here mean ‘in spite of.’ These phrases … argue against the common view that in 7:16 Solomon was warning against legalistic or Pharisaic self-righteousness. Such would have been a sin and would have been so acknowledged by Solomon who was concerned about true exceptions to the doctrine of retribution, not supposed ones (cf. 8:10-14 where this doctrine is discussed again)” (Donald Glenn, “Ecclesiastes,” in Bible Knowledge Commentary, 1:993-94).
⁴⁹tn The term vy (literally, “there is”) is often used in aphorisms to assert the existence of a particular situation that occurs sometimes. It may indicate that the situation is not the rule but that it does occur on occasion, and may be nuanced “sometimes” (Prov 11:24; 13:7, 23; 14:12; 16:25; 18:24; 20:15; Eccl 2:21; 4:8; 5:12; 6:1; 7:15²; 8:14³).
⁵⁰tn Heb “endures”
⁵¹tn See note on the phrase “in his evil-doing” (KJV, NASB, NIV) versus “in spite of his evil-doing” (NJPS).
⁵²tn The adjective rtoy means “too much, excessive,” e.g., 2:15 “excessively wise” (KBL 2:404.2; BDB 452). It is derived from the root rt#y\ “what is left over” (KBL 2:452), and related to the verb rty Niphal “to be left over” and Hiphil “to have left over” (KBL 2:451-52). In 2:15 the adjective rtoy is used with the noun /ort=y{ (“advantage, profit”) in a word-play or pun: The wise man has a relative “advantage” (/ort=y{) over the fool (2:13-14a); however, there is no ultimate advantage because both share the same fate - death (2:14b-15a). Thus, Qoheleth’s acquisition of tremendous wisdom (1:16; 2:9) was “excessive” because it exceeded its relative advantage over folly: it could not deliver him from the same fate as the fool. He strove to obtain wisdom, yet it held no ultimate advantage. Likewise, in 7:16, Qoheleth warns that wisdom and righteous does not guarantee an advantage over wickedness and folly - because the law of retribution is sometimes violated.
⁵³tn Heb “So do not be overly righteous and do not be overly wise.” The Hithpa`el verb <kjtt (from <kj “to be wise”) means “to make or show yourself wise” (KBL 1:314; BDB 314). The Hithpa`el may be understood as: (1) benefactive reflexive use which refers to an action done for one’s own behalf (e.g., Gen 20:7; Josh 9:12; 1 Kgs 8:33; Job 13:27): Because the law of retribution is sometimes violated, it is not wise for a person to be overly dependent upon wisdom or righteousness for his own benefit. (2) estimative-declarative reflexive which denotes esteeming or presenting oneself in a certain state, without regard to the question of truthfulness (e.g., 2 Sam 13:5; Prov 13:6; Est 8:17): It is useless to overly esteem oneself as wise or to falsely present oneself as wiser than he really is because the law of retribution sometimes fails to reward the wise. The enigma of this line - “overly righteous and overly wise” - may be resolved by proper classification of the Hithpa`el stem of this verb.
⁵⁴tn Heb “Why should you be dumbfounded?”
⁵⁵tn The verb <movT (Hithpolel imperfect 2ms from <mv) functions in a modal sense, denoting possibility: “you might be …” (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 31.4e).
⁵⁶ tn Alternately, “Why should you ruin yourself?” or “Why should you destroy yourself?” The verb <movT (Hithpolel imperfect 2ms from <mv “to destroy, ruin”) is traditionally taken as “to destroy, ruin oneself.” The lexicons classify its use here as “cause oneself ruin” (KBL³ 989.2) and “cause oneself desolation, ruin” (BDB 1031.2). Most English versions take a similar approach: “Why destroy yourself?” (KJV, NEB, ASV, NRSV, BV, NIV), “Why ruin yourself?” (AB, NAB, NASB). However, in the Hithpolel stem the root <mv never means this elsewhere, but is always nuanced elsewhere as “to be appalled, astonished, dumbfounded, confounded, horrified,” e.g., Ps 143:4; Isa 59:16; 63:5; Dan 8:27 (BDB 1031.1; KBL³ 989.1). It is taken this way in the English version of the Ta`anak: “or you may be dumbfounded” (TNK). Likewise, Cohen renders the line, “Why should you be overcome with amazement?” (A. Cohen, “Ecclesiastes,” in Soncino Books of the Bible 14:154). If a person was trusting in his own righteousness or wisdom to guarantee prosperity, he might be scandalized by the exceptions to the doctrine of retribution that Solomon had observed in 7:15. Glenn notes: “This fits in nicely with Solomon’s argument here. He urged his readers not to be over-righteous or over-wise ‘lest they be confounded or astonished.’ He meant that they should not depend on their righteousness or wisdom to guarantee God’s blessing because they might be confounded, dismayed, or disappointed like the righteous people whom Solomon had seen perishing in spite of their righteousness [in 7:15]” (Donald Glenn, “Ecclesiastes,” in Bible Knowledge Commentary 1:994). (Note: See GKC 54c).
⁵⁷tn Heb “Why should you die before your time?”
⁵⁸sn Solomon is referring to the two words of advice in 7:16-17. He is not, as some suggest, urging his readers to grasp righteousness without letting go of wickedness. His point is not that people should live their lives with a balance of modest righteousness and modest wickedness. Because he urges the fear of God in 7:18b, he can not be inconsistent in suggesting that his readers offend the fear of God by indulging in some degree of sin in order to counterbalance an overly righteous life. Rather, the proper fear of God will prevent a person from trusting in righteousness and wisdom alone for their security, and it will also prevent indulgence in wickedness and folly.
⁵⁹tn Alternately, “will escape both” or “will go forth in both.” The phrase <lk-ta axy (lit. “he will follow both of them”) has been interpreted in several ways: (1) To adopt a balanced lifestyle that is moderately righteous while allowing for self-indulgence in moderate wickedness: “to follow both of them,” that is, to follow both righteousness and wickedness. However, this seems to unnecessarily encourage an antinomian rationalization of sin and moral compromise. (2) To avoid the two extremes of being over-righteous and over-wicked. This takes axy in the sense of “to escape,” e.g., Gen 39:12,15; 1 Sam 14:14; Jer 11:11; 48:9 (KBL 2:426.6c; BDB 423.1.d): “He who fears God shall escape both of them” (Delitzsch, Hitzig, Noldeke, Mishnah). (3) To follow both of the warnings given in 7:16-17. This approach finds parallels in post-biblical rabbinic literature denoting the action of discharging one’s duty of obedience and complying with instruction. In post-biblical rabbinic literature the phrase ydy axy (“to go out of the hands”) is an idiom meaning “to comply with the requirements of the law” (Jastrow, 587). This fits nicely with the context of 7:16-17 in which Solomon issued two warnings. In 7:18a Solomon exhorted his readers to follow both of his warnings: “It is best to grasp the first warning without letting go of the second warning.” The person who fears God will heed both warnings. He will not depend upon his own righteousness and wisdom, but upon God’s sovereign bestowal of blessings. Likewise, he will not exploit the exceptions to the doctrine of retribution to indulge in sin, rationalizing sin away just because the wicked sometimes do not get what they deserve.
⁶⁰tn Alternately, “both [extremes]” or “both [fates].” The point of this expression is either (1) “ he achieves both things,” (2) “he escapes all these misfortunes,” (3) “he will do his duty by both,” or (4) “he avoid both extremes.” See Dominique Barthelemy, ed. et al. Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (New York: United Bible Society, 1976), 3:580-81.
⁶¹tn Heb “gives strength”
⁶²tn The introductory particle yK! is rendered variously: “for” (KJV), “indeed” (NASB), not translated (NIV), “for” (NJPS). The particle functions in an explanatory sense, explaining the need for wisdom in verse 19. Righteousness alone can not always protect a person from calamity (7:15-16) therefore, something additional, such as wisdom, is needed. The need for wisdom for protection from calamity is particularly evident in the light of the fact that no one is truly righteous (7:19-20).
⁶³tn Heb “so that you do not hear …” or “lest you hear …”
⁶⁴tn The verb umvt (Qal imperfect 2ms from umv “to hear”) functions in a modal sense, denoting possibility: “you might hear …” (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 31.4e).
⁶⁵tn Heb “your heart knows”
⁶⁶tn The verb hmkja (Qal cohortative 1cs from <kj “to be wise”) emphasizes the resolve/determination of Qoheleth to become wise enough to understand the perplexities of life.
⁶⁷tn Alternately, “I am determined to become wise”
⁶⁸tn Heb “but it was far from me.” Alternately, “but it eluded me”
⁶⁹tn Heb “is far away”
⁷⁰tn Heb “It is deep, deep - who can find it?”
⁷¹tn Heb “my heart”
⁷²tn Heb “to seek”
⁷³tn The phrase /oBvjw hmkj (literally, “wisdom and the scheme of things”) is a hendiadys (a figure of speech in which two nouns connote one idea): “wisdom in the scheme of things.” This is similar to the hendiadys Enrhw Enobxu (literally, “pain and childbearing”) which connotes “pain in childbearing” (Gen 3:16).
⁷⁴tnAlternately, “the evil of folly” The genitive-construct phrase lsk uvr may be taken as a genitive of attribution (“the wickedness of folly”) or as a genitive of attribute (“the folly of wickedness”). The English versions treat it thus: “wickedness of folly” (KJV, NEB), “wrong of folly” (YLT), “evil of folly” (NASB), “stupidity of wickedness” (NIV), “wickedness, stupidity” (NJPS), “wickedness is folly/foolish” (AB, NAB, ASV, NRSV, BV, Moffat), and “it is folly to be wicked” (NEB).
⁷⁵tn Alternately, “the folly of madness” The genitive-construct phrase tolloh tWlskhw may be taken as a genitive of attribution (“the stupidity of wickedness”) or a genitive of attribute (“the evil of folly”). The phrase is rendered variously: “foolishness and madness” (KJV), “foolishness of madness” (NASB), “madness of folly” (NIV), “madness and folly” (NJPS), “the foolishness which is madness” (NEB), and “foolishness/folly is madness” (AB, NAB, ASV, NRSV, BV, Moffat).
⁷⁶tn The article on hvah (lit. “the woman”) functions in a particularizing sense (“the kind of woman”) ather than in a generic sense (i.e., “women”).
⁷⁷tn Heb “is snares.” The plural form <ydoxm (from the noun doxm II “snare”) is used to connote either intensity, repeated or habitual action, or moral characteristic. For the function of the Hebrew plural, see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 7.4.2c and 7.4.3a. The term doxm II “snare” is used in a concrete sense in reference to the hunter’s snare or net, but in a figurative sense of being ensnared by someone (Job 19:6; Prov 12:12; Eccl 7:26).
¹tn The preposition K= prefixed to <kjhK= (“wise man”) is traditionally taken in a comparative sense: “Who is like/as the wise man?” On the other hand, it may denote identity, e.g., Gen 1:26; Num 11:1; 1 Sam 20:3; 2 Sam 9:8; Neh 7:2; Job 10:9; Nah 3:6 (see Ronald J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, #261; Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 11.2.9b).
²tn The definite article on <kjh (“wise man”) may be taken in an individualizing (“the wise man”) or generic sense (“a wise man”).
³tn Alternately, “the explanation.” The noun rvp denotes “solution, explanation, interpretation, meaning” (KBL 3:982; BDB 833). The Hebrew term is an Aramaic loanword from arvp “diagnosis, meaning, solution.” The Aramaic noun rv^P= (“interpretation of a dream or prophecy”) and verb rv^P= (“to interpret a dream or prophecy”) reflect a later meaning not present in Ecclesiastes, but current at the time of Daniel (Dan 2:5-7; 4:3,15,16; 5:12,15,16; 7:16) and Qumran (e.g., 1QpHab).
⁴tn Heb “a thing”
⁵tn Heb “his face”
⁶tc The MT vocalizes the consonantal form an?y as aN\v%y+ (Pual imperfect 3ms from anv “to change”). However, LXX misqhsetai reflects an alternate vocalization tradition of an? *y{ (Niphal imperfect 3ms from an? “to hate”), while Latin Vulgate commutabit reflects hN\v^y+ (Piel imperfect 3ms from hnv III “to repeat”).
tn Heb “the strength of his face is changed”
⁷tn Heb “the strength of his face is changed.” The expression wynp zu (lit. “strength of his face”) is an idiom for “boldness, impudence” (BDB 739.4) or “hard face” = harsh countenance (KBL 2:805.2c).
⁸tc The Masoretic Text reads, “I, obey the king’s command.” The Leningrad Codex (BHS) reads yna (1cs independent personal pronoun: “I”). Other Hebrew manuscripts and the versions (Greek LXX, Latin Vulgate, Aramaic Targum, Syriac Peshitta) preserve an alternate textual tradition of the definite accusative marker -ta introducing the direct object: rwmv Elm-yp-ta (“Obey the command of the king”). See Dominique Barthelemy, ed. et al. Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (New York: United Bible Society, 1976), 3:582-83.
⁹tn The genitive-construct <yhla tuwbv (lit. “an oath of God”) functions as a genitive of location (“an oath before God”) or an adjectival genitive of attribute (“a supreme oath”).
¹⁰tn Alternately, “do not stand up for a bad cause”
¹¹tn Heb “word”
¹²tn Heb “supreme”
¹³tn Heb “Who can say …?”
¹⁴tn Heb “the heart of a wise man”
¹⁵tn The term tu (“time”) connotes “a proper, suitable time for an event, the right moment” (KBL 2:900.6; BDB 773.2.b). Examples: “it was the time for rain” (Ezra 10:13), “a time of judgment for the nations” (Ezek 30:3), “there is an appropriate time for every occasion” (Eccl 3:1), “the time when mountain goats are born” (Job 39:1), “the rain in its season” (Deut 11:14; Jer 5:24), “the time for the harvest” (Hos 2:11; Ps 1:3), “food in its season” (Ps 104:27).
¹⁶tn Heb “evil” or “misery”
¹⁷tn Heb “the man”
¹⁸tn Heb “upon him”
¹⁹tn Heb “what will be”
²⁰tn Heb “him” Alternately, “a person can suffer great harm because of him”
²¹tn Heb “Who can tell him what will be?”
²²tn Heb “There is no one who has mastery over the wind to restrain the wind”
²³tn Heb “There is no discharge in war”
²⁴tn Heb “its owners”
²⁵tn The term /otnw (Qal infinitive absolute from /tn “to give”) is a verbal use of the infinitive absolute, used with waw to indicate an action that took place simultaneous to the main verb (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Hebrew Syntax, 35.5.2d). Thus, the clause ybl-ta /otnw (“while applying my mind …”) indicates contemporaneous action to the clause, “All this I have seen” (ytyar hz-lk-ta). This is view is taken by several translations: “All this I have seen, having applied my mind to” (NEB); “All this I observed while applying my mind to” (RSV); “All this I observed, applying my mind to” (NRSV); “All this have I seen, having devoted my mind to” (AB); “All this I saw, as I applied my mind to” (NIV); “All this I saw, as thoughtfully I pondered…” (Moffat). On the other hand, LXX took waw is taken in a coordinating sense (“and”) and the infinitive absolute as an independent verb: Kai sumpan touto eijdon, kai ejdwka thn kardian mou eij" (“I saw all this, and I applied my heart to”). This is adopted by other English versions: “All this I have seen, and applied my heart” (KJV); “All these things I considered and I applied my mind” (NAB); “All this have I seen, and applied my heart unto” (ASV); “All this I have seen and applied my mind to” (NASB); “All these things I observed; I noted” (TNK).
²⁶tn Heb “my heart”
²⁷tn Heb “every work” or “every deed”
²⁸tn Heb “that is done under the sun.” The phrase “that is done under the sun” (vmvh tjt h?un rva) is an idiom for “what happens in this world” or “on the earth” (BDB 1039.4c). Moffat renders this idiom, “what goes on within this world.”
²⁹tn An alternate approach takes <dah (“[one] man”) in a collective sense as mankind as a whole (e.g., KBL 1:14.1; BDB 9.2). So LXX: “All the things in which man has power over [his fellow] man to afflict him.” This is adopted by RSV (“man lords it over man to his hurt”), TNK (“men still had authority over men to treat them unjustly”), Moffat (“men have power over their fellows, power to injure them”), BV (“man has mastery over another to harm him”), and YLT (“man hath ruled over man to his own evil”). On the other hand, the context of 8:1-9 focuses on the absolute power of the king thus, the referent of <dah is probably the king. The article functions in an individualizing, particularizing sense. The particularization of <dah is reflected in many English versions: “one man” (KJV, NEB, AB, NAB, ASV, Douay), “a man” (NASB, NIV), and “one person” (NRSV).
³⁰tn The verb flv denotes “to domineer, dominate; to lord it over” (KBL³977; BDB 1020). The English versions: “rule over” (KJV, YLT, Douay), “have power over” (NEB, AB, ASV), “lord it over” (RSV, NIV), “have authority over” (TNK), “exercise authority over” (NASB, NRSV), “have mastery over” (BV), “tyrannize” (NAB).
³¹tn The singular noun <da (“man”) functions as a collective singular, connoting “men” (KBL 1:14.1; BDB 9.2). The absence of the article might suggest an indefinite than an individual, particular sense.
³²tn Heb “a man exercises power over [another] man to his harm.” Alternately, “his own harm.” The 3ms singular pronominal suffix ol (“to his”) may reference to the antecedent <da (“man” or “men”), being understood either in a singular sense (NEB, RSV, NRSV, AB, NAB, ASV, NASB) or in a collective sense (Moffat, TNK, NIV margin). However, the antecedent might be <dah (“[one] man” = the king) with the suffix functioning reflexively: “to his own harm” (KJV, YTL, Douay, ASV margin, NIV).
³³tn Heb “Then …” The construction /kb means “then, thereupon, on this condition” (Eccl 8:10; Est 4:16; Sir 13:7) (GKC 119ii; BDB 486.3b; KBL 2:483.8c). The line could be rendered, “It is was then that I saw …”
³⁴tc There are three textual options: (1) The MT reads <wqmmw wabw <yr! %bq= “they were buried, and they came, and from the place …” The MT reads <yr! %bq= “being buried” (Qal passive participle mpl from rbq “to bury”). The MT reading is retained by most translations: “[And so I saw the wicked] buried, who had come and gone from the place [of the holy]” (KJV), “[Then I saw the wicked] buried; they used to go in and out of the [holy] place” (RSV, NRSV), “[I saw how the wicked] were buried, who had gone in and out from the [holy] place” (BV), “[I have seen the wicked] buried, those who used to go in and out from the [holy] place” (NASB), “[Then too, I saw the wicked] buried - those who used to come and go from the [holy] place” (NIV), and “[And then I saw] scoundrels coming from the [Holy] Site and being brought to burial” (NJPS). (2) LXX reflects the reading <wqmmw <ya! *bWm <yr! *bq= “to the tombs they are brought, and from the place …” LXX reflects the consonantal text of <yrbq but tafou" (“tombs”) reflects a vocalization tradition of <yr! *bq= (“tombs”). This approach is adopted by several translations: “emmenes a leur tombeau, et … du lieu [saint]” (La Sainte Bible). (3) Several scholars suggest emending the text to <wqmmw <yabw <yb! )rq= “approaching and coming to the place.” The emendation involves <yb! )rq= (Qal active participle mpl from brq “to approach, draw near”). The emendation is adopted by several English versions: “I saw wicked men approach and enter … the sacred place” (NAB), and “I saw wicked men approaching and even entering the holy place” (NEB). The emendation makes good sense because brq (“to approach, draw near”) is a synonym to aob (“to enter”), and is often used in reference to a person approaching YHWH at the tabernacle or temple. The textual corruption would be due to transposition of b and r in brq (“to approach”) and rbq (“to bury”). See Dominique Barthelemy, ed. et al. Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (New York: United Bible Society, 1976), 3:584.
³⁵tn Heb “the Holy Place”
³⁶tc The MT reads wjktvyw “and they were forgotten” (Hithpael imperfect 3mpl from jkv “to forget”). Apart from the MT reading here, the verb jkv “to forget” never occurs elsewhere in the Hithpael (KBL³ 969; BDB 987). Many Hebrew manuscripts read wjbtvyw “and they boasted” (Hithpael imperfect 3ms from jbv “praise, boast”). This alternate textual tradition is reflected in the Greek versions, e.g., Old Greek: kai ejphneqhsan (“and they were praised”), Aquilla and Theodotion: kai ejkauchsanto (“and they boasted”), and Symmachus: kai ejpainoumenoi (“and they were praised”). This is also reflected in the Latin Vulgate. The English versions are split; several follow the MT and translate “they were forgotten” (KJV, ASV, NASB, BV, TNK), but a good number adopt the alternate textual tradition and translate either “they were praised” or “they boasted” (NEB, RSV, AB, NAB, NIV, NRSV). The context of 8:10-17, which focuses on the enigmatic contradictions in divine retribution (sometimes the wicked are not punished), favors the alternate tradition. The wicked boast that they can come and go as they please in the Temple, flaunting their irreligion without fearing divine retribution (8:10). This thought is continued in verse 11: failure to execute a sentence against a criminal emboldens the wicked to commit more crimes, confident they will not suffer retribution. It is likely that the original reading of wjbtvyw was confused for wjktvyw because the root jbv (“to praise, boast”) is much rarer than the common root jkv (“to forget”). The phrase is best rendered “they boasted” (NEB: “priding themselves”) rather than “they were praised” (AB, NAB, RSV, NRSV, NIV) - the verb jbv means “to praise” in Piel, but “to boast” in Hithpael (Ps 106:47; 1 Chr 16:35) (KBL³ 940-41; BDB 986). This approach is adopted by the committee for Jerusalem Hebrew Bible Project: see Dominique Barthelemy, ed. et al., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (New York: United Bible Society, 1976), 3:584-85.
³⁷tn The term lbh here means “enigmatic,” that is, difficult to grasp (mentally). This sense is derived from the literal concept of breath, vapor or wind that cannot be seen; thus, the idea of “obscure, dark, difficult to understand, enigmatic” (see KBL 1:236-37; BDB 210-11; TWAT 2:334-43; TDOT 3:313-20; THAT 1:467-69; TWOT 1:204-05). It is used in this sense in reference to enigmas in life (6:2; 8:10,14) and the future which is obscure (11:8,10).
³⁸tn The particle rva is used as a conjunction in a conditional/temporal clause to introduce the protasis (“when” or “if”), and /k-lu introduces the apodosis (“then”) (BDB 83.8.d).
³⁹tn The noun <gtp (“decision, announcement, edict, decree”) is a loanword from Persian patigama (KBL 3:984; BDB 834). The Hebrew noun occurs 2x in OT (Eccl 8:11; Est 1:20), 2x in the Apocrypha (Sirach 5:11; 8:9), and 5x in Qumran (11QtgJob 9:2; 29:4; 30:1; 34:3; 1QapGen 22:27). The English versions consistently nuance this as a judicial sentence against a crime: “sentence” (KJV, NEB, AB, NAB, ASV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, BV, YLT), “sentence for a crime” (NIV), “sentence imposed” (TNK), “sentence on a crime” (Moffat).
⁴⁰tn Heb “is not done.” The verb h?u (Niphal perfect 3ms from h?u “to do”) refers to a judicial sentence being carried out (KBL 2:892.1). The Niphal can denote “be executed, carried out” of sentence (Eccl 8:11) or royal decree (Est 9:1) (BDB 795.1a). Similarly, the Qal can denote “to execute” vengeance (Judg 11:36) or judgment (1 Sam 28:18; Isa 48:14; Ezek 25:11; 28:26; Ps 149:7,9) (BDB 794.1a).
⁴¹tn Heb “the heart of the sons of man.” The singular noun bl (“heart”) is used collectively. The term “heart”(bl) is often used figuratively (metonymy) in reference to inclinations and determinations of the will (BDB 525.4), moral character (BDB 525.6), and as a synecdoche for the man himself (BDB 525.7).
⁴²tn Heb “is full to do evil.” The verb alm (Qal perfect 3ms “to fill”) is used figuratively (metonymy): the lack of swift judicial punishment only emboldens the wicked to commit more crimes without fear of retribution. Most English versions translate the term literally: “are filled” (NIV, BV, YLT), “is fully set” (KJV, ASV, RSV, NRSV), “is fully determined” (AB). However, several versions nuance it figuratively: “emboldened” (ASV, TNK) and “boldly” (NEB). Moffat renders the line, “Because sentence on a crime is not executed at once, the mind of man is prone to evil practices.”
⁴³tn Heb “does evil one hundred [times]”
⁴⁴tn Heb “and prolongs his [life]”
⁴⁵tn Heb “those who fear God”
⁴⁶tn Heb “he”
⁴⁷tn The phrase “like a shadow” (lxk) modifies the verb (“prolong”) rather than the noun (“days”). Several English versions misconstrue the line: “he will not prolong his days, [which are] like a shadow” (KJV, ASV), “the man who does not fear God is like a shadow” (NEB), and “he will not prolong his shadowy days” (NAB). It should be rendered: “he will not prolong his days like a shadow” (RSV, NRSV, AB, NASB, BV, NIV). Unlike a shadow that lengthens at sunset, the wicked do not normally live long.
⁴⁸tn Heb “he”
⁴⁹tn The term vy (literally, “there is”) is often used in aphorisms to assert the existence of a particular situation that occurs sometimes. It may indicate that the situation is not the rule but that it does occur on occasion, and may be nuanced “sometimes” (Prov 11:24; 13:7, 23; 14:12; 16:25; 18:24; 20:15; Eccl 2:21; 4:8; 5:12; 6:1; 7:15²; 8:14³).
⁵⁰tn Alternately, “vanity.” The term lbh here denotes “enigma,” that is, something that is difficult to understand. This sense is derived from the literal referent of breath, vapor or wind that cannot be seen; thus, “obscure, dark, difficult to understand, enigmatic” (see KBL 1:236-37; BDB 210-11; TWAT 2:334-43; TDOT 3:313-20; THAT 1:467-69; TWOT 1:204-05). It is used in this sense in reference to enigmas in life (6:2; 8:10,14) and the future which is obscure (11:8,10).
⁵¹tn Heb “to whom it happens according to the deeds of the wicked.” Alternately, “who are punished for the deeds of the wicked.”
⁵²tn Heb “to whom it happens according to the deeds of the righteous.” Alternately, “who are rewarded for the deeds of the righteous.”
⁵³tn See above footnote on lbh (“enigma”) in 8:14a.
⁵⁴tn Heb “under the sun”
⁵⁵tn The construction <a-yk is used as a particle of exception to limit the preceding clause (“except, nothing but”) (e.g., Gen 28:17; 39:9; Lev 21:2; Num 14:30; Deut 10:12; 1 Sam 30:22; 2 Kgs 4:2; 5:15; 2 Chr 21:17; Est 2:15; 5:12; Eccl 3:12; Isa 42:19; Dan 10:21; Mic 6:8) (KBL 2:471.2; BDB 474.2a).
⁵⁶sn Solomon is not commending a self-indulgent lifestyle of Epicurean hedonism. Solomon is not lamenting the absolute futility of life and lack of eternal retribution; rather, he is submitting to the reality that in a sin-cursed world there is much of human existence marked by relative futility. Since the righteous man cannot assume that he will automatically experience temporal prosperity and blessings on this earth, he should - at the very least - enjoy each day to its fullest as a gift from God. Glenn notes, “Each day’s joys should be received as gifts from God’s hands and be savored as God permits (3:13; 5:19)” (Donald Glenn, “Ecclesiastes” in Bible Knowledge Commentary, 997).
⁵⁷tn Heb “under the sun”
⁵⁸tn Heb “I applied my heart”
⁵⁹tn Heb “to know”
⁶⁰tn Heb “and to see the business”
⁶¹tn Heb “for no one sees sleep with their eyes either day or night.” The construction <g-yk expresses a concessive sense: “even though” (e.g., Ps 23:4; Prov 22:6; Eccl 4:14; Isa 1:15; Lam 3:8; Hos 8:10; 9:16) (KBL 1:196.9; BDB 169.6; 473.2c).
⁶²tn Heb “he does not see sleep”
⁶³tn Alternately, “how it is that no one ever sleeps day or night”
⁶⁴tn Heb “all the work of God”
⁶⁵tn Heb “the work that is done”
⁶⁶tn Heb “under the sun”
⁶⁷tn Heb “his”
⁶⁸tn The particle -<a (“even if”) introduces the protasis in a real conditional clause (“If a wise man …”) (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 38.2d; Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, 453).
⁶⁹tn The verb rmay (Qal imperfect 3ms from rma “to say”) functions in a modal sense, denoting possibility (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 31.4e; Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, 169).
⁷⁰tn Heb “he cannot find [it]”
¹tn Heb “I laid all this to my heart”
²tn The term rWblw (conjunction + Qal infinitive construct from rWB “to make clear”) denotes “to examine, make clear, clear up, explain” (KBL 1:116; BDB 101). The Hebrew verb is related to Arabic baraw “to examine” (G.R. Driver, JBL, 55:108). The Hebrew verb is related to the Hebrew noun rB) (“cleanness”) and the adjective rB^ (“clean”). The term is used only in Ecclesiastes (1:13; 2:3; 7:25; 9:1). This use of the infinitive has a connotative sense (“attempting to …”), and functions in a complementary sense, relative to the main verb.
³tn Heb “whether love or hatred”
⁴tn Heb “man does not know anything before them”
⁵tn Heb “One fate -- all things just as to everyone”
⁶tc The MT reads, “the good,” but the Greek versions read, “the good and the bad.” In contrast to the other four pairs in verse 2 (“the righteous and the wicked,” “those who sacrifice, and those who do not sacrifice,” “the good man … the sinner,” and “those who make vows … those who are afraid to make vows”), MT has a triad in the second line: amflw rwhflw bwfl (“the good, and the clean, and the unclean”). This reading in the Leningrad Codex (1008 AD) - the basis of the BHS and BHK publications of the MT - is also supported by the Ben Asher text of the First Rabbinic Bible (“the Soncino Bible”) published in 1488-94 AD. On the other hand, the Greek version in B (Aquilla) has two pairs: tw ajgaqw kai tw kakw, kai tw kaqarw kai tw ajkaqartw (“the good and the bad, and the clean and the unclean”). Either Aquilla inserted kai tw kakw (“and the bad”) to fill out a pair and to create six parallel pairs in verse 2, or Aquilla reflects an early Hebrew textual tradition of urlw bwfl (“the good and the bad”). Since Aquilla is well known for his commitment to a literal - at times even a mechanically wooden - translation of the Hebrew, with no room for improvisation, it is more than likely that Aquilla is reflecting an authentic Hebrew textual tradition. Aquilla dates to 130 AD, while the Leningrad Codex dates to 1008 AD; therefore, the Vorlage of Aquilla might have been the original Hebrew textual tradition, being much earlier than the MT of the Leningrad Codex. The alternate textual tradition of Aquilla is also seen in the Syriac and Latin versions (but these are dependent upon the Greek = Aquilla). On the other hand, the editors of BHK and BHS suggest that the presence of the anomalous bwfl (“the good”) was an addition to the Hebrew text, and should be deleted. They also suggest that the Greek pair tw ajgaqw kai tw kakw (“the good and the bad”) does not reflect an alternate textual tradition, but that their Vorlage contained only bwfl (“the good”): the Greek intentionally added kai tw kakw (“and the bad”) to create a pair. The English versions are divided. Several follow the Greek: “the good and the bad, the clean and the unclean” (NEB, NAB, RSV, NRSV, NIV, Moffat). Others follow the Hebrew: “the good and the clean and the unclean” (KJV, ASV, BV, TNK) and “the righteous, the unrighteous, and the good” (AB). None, however, delete “the good” (bwfl) as suggested by the BHK and BHS editors. If the shorter text were original, the addition of kai tw kakw (“and the bad”) would be intentional. If the longer text were original, the omission of urlw (“and the bad”) could have caused by unintentional homoioarkton (“like beginning”) in the three-fold repetition of fl in amflw rwhfl urlw bwfl (“the good and the bad, the clean and the unclean”). The term urlw (“and the bad”) was accidentally omitted when a scribe skipped from the first occurrence of fl in bwfl (“the good”) to its second occurrence in the word rwhflw (“the clean”).
⁷tn Heb “As is the good man, so is the sinner”
⁸tn Heb “evil”
⁹tn Heb “under the sun”
¹⁰tn Heb “the heart of the sons of men”
¹¹tn Heb “and after that [they go] to [the place of] the dead”
¹²tn Heb “is joined to”
¹³tn Heb “all the living”
¹⁴tn Heb “their love”
¹⁵tn Heb “their hatred”
¹⁶tn Heb “their envy”
¹⁷tn Heb “under the sun”
¹⁸tn Heb “your bread”
¹⁹tn Heb “See life”
²⁰tn Heb “the wife whom you love”
²¹tn As noted previously in the note on 1:2, the term lbh has a wide range of meanings, and should not be translated the same in every place (see KBL 1:236-37; BDB 210-11; TWAT 2:334-43; TDOT 3:313-20; THAT 1:467-69; TWOT 1:204-05). The term is used in two basic ways in OT, literally and figuratively. The literal, concrete sense is used in reference to the wind, man’s transitory breath, evanescent vapor (Isa 57:13; Pss 62:10; 144:4; Prov 21:6; Job 7:16). In this sense, it is often a synonym for “breath, wind” (Eccl 1:14; Isa 57:13; Jer 10:14). The literal sense lent itself to the metaphorical sense. Because breath/vapor/wind is transitory and fleeting, the figurative connotation “fleeting, transitory” arose (e.g., Prov 31:30; Eccl 6:12; 7:15; 9:9; 11:10; Job 7:16). In this sense, it is parallel to “few days” and “[days] which he passes like a shadow” (Eccl 6:12). It is used in reference to youth and vigor (11:10), life (6:12; 7:15; 9:9) which are “transitory” or “fleeting.” In this context, the most appropriate meaning is “fleeting.”
²²tn Heb “under the sun”
²³tc The phrase ilbh ymy lk (“all your fleeting days”) is present in MT, but absent in the Greek versions, other early Hebrew manuscripts, and the Aramaic Targum. Its appearance in MT may be due to dittography (repetition: copied twice what should have been copied once) from ilbh yyj ymy lk (“all the days of your fleeting life”) which appears in the preceding line.
²⁴tn Heb “in your toil in which you toil”
²⁵tn Heb “under the sun”
²⁶tn Heb “your hands”
²⁷tn Heb “Whatever your hands find to do”
²⁸tn Alternately, “the grave”
²⁹tn Heb “are about to go”; alternately, “in Sheol where you are going.”
³⁰tn Heb “I returned and …”
³¹tn Heb “under the sun”
³²tn Heb “bread”
³³tn Heb “favor”
³⁴tn Heb “happen to”
³⁵tn Heb “man”
³⁶tn Heb “time.” BDB suggests that tu (“time”) refers to an “uncertain time” (BDB 773.2d). On the other hand, KBL nuances it as “destined time,” that is, “no one knows his destined time (hour of destiny)” (KBL 2:901.6). It is used in parallelism with /mz (“appointed time, appointed hour”) in 3:1 (KBL 1:273; BDB 273). Eccl 3:9-15 that teaches God’s sovereignty over the appointed time-table of human events. Similarly, Solomon here notes that no one knows what God has appointed in any situation or time. This highlights the limitations of human wisdom and human ability, as 9:11 stresses.
³⁷tn Heb “the sons of man”
³⁸tn The Masoretes pointed the consonantal form <y?qwy (“are ensnared”) as <yv! *qWy (Pual participle mpl from vqy “to be ensnared”). This is an unusual form for a Pual participle: (1) The characteristic doubling of the middle consonant (Q) was omitted due to the lengthening of the preceding short vowel from <yv! *Qy| to <yv! *qWy (GKC 20n, 52s), and (2) The characteristic prefix m= is absent, as in a few other Pual participles, e.g., Exod 3:2; Judg 13:8; 2 Kgs 2:10; Isa 30:24; 54:11 (GKC 52s). On the other hand, the consonant form <y?qwy might actually be an example of the old Qal passive participle which dropped out of Hebrew at an early stage, and was frequently mistaken by the Masoretes as a Pual form (e.g., Jer 13:10; 23:32) (GKC 52s). Similarly, the Masoretes pointed lka as lK*a% (Pual perfect 3ms “he was eaten”); however, it probably should be pointed lk^a% (old Qal passive perfect 3ms “he was eaten”) because lka only occurs in the Qal (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 22.6).
³⁹tn Heb “evil.” The term hur (“evil, unfortunate”) is repeated in verse 12 in the two parts of the comparison: “fish are caught in an evil (hur) net” and “men are ensnared at an unfortunate (hur) time.”
⁴⁰tn Heb “under the sun”
⁴¹tn LXX uses subjunctives throughout verses 14-15 to depict the scenario as a hypothetical situation: “Suppose there was a little city, and a few men [lived] in it; and there should come against it a great king, and surround it, and build great siege-works against it; and should find in it a poor wise man, and he should save the city through his wisdom; yet no man would remember that poor man.”
⁴²tn The two perfect tense verbs bbsw (“he besieged”) and hnbw (“he built”) may be taken in a complementary sense, qualifying the action of the main perfect tense verb abw (“he attacked it”).
⁴³tn The root ldg (“mighty, strong, large”) is repeated in 9:13b for emphasize: “a mighty (lwdg) king … building strong (<yldg) siege-works.” This repetition highlights the contrast between the vast power and resources of the attacking king, and the meager resources of the “little” (hnfq) city with “few” (fum) men in it.
⁴⁴tn “was found in it”
⁴⁵tn Heb “it”
⁴⁶tn Alternately, “he delivered.” The verb fL^m!W (conjunction + Piel perfect 3ms from flm “to deliver”) is functioning either in an indicative sense (past definite action: “he delivered”) or in a modal sense (past potential: “he could have delivered”). The literal meaning of rkz (“to remember”) in the following line harmonizes with the indicative: “but no one remembered that poor man [afterward].” However, the modal is supported by verse 16: “A poor man’s wisdom is despised; no one ever listens to his advice.” This approach must nuance rkz (“to remember”) as “[no one] listened to [that poor man].” Most translations favor the indicative approach: “he delivered” or “he saved” (KJV, RSV, NRSV, AB, NAB, ASV, NASB, BV, NIV); however, some adopt the modal nuance: “he might have saved” (NEB, TNK, NASB margin).
⁴⁷tn Heb “remembered”
⁴⁸tn Alternately, “power”
⁴⁹tn The participle form <yumvn (Niphal participle mpl from umv “to listen”) is used verbally to emphasize a continual, durative, gnomic action.
⁵⁰tn Heb “his words are never listened to”
¹tn Heb “flies of death”
²tn Alternately, “one dead fly.” The plural form of “flies” (ybwbz) may be taken as a plural of number (“dead flies”) or a distributive plural referring to one little fly (“one dead fly”). The parallelism supports the latter: “one little fly … so a little folly.”
³tn The verb vyaby (Hiphil imperfect 3ms from vab) denotes “to cause to stink, to turn rancid, emit a stinking odor” (e.g., Exod 16:24; Ps 38:6; Eccl 10:1) (KBL 1:107.1; BDB 93). It is related to the noun vaB= “stench” (Isa 34:3; Joel 2:20; Amos 4:10) (KBL 1:107; BDB 93). The verb uyby (Hiphil imperfect 3ms from ubn) denotes “to ferment” or “to emit, pour out, bubble, belch forth, cause to gush forth” (KBL 2:665; BDB 615). The two terms uyby vyaby (“to stink and to ferment”) create a hendiadys, a figure of speech in which two terms are used to connote one idea: “makes a rancid stench.” Several versions treat the two as a hendiadys (Old Greek, Symmachus, Targum, Vulgate); however, Syriac treats them as separate verbs. Most English translations treat these as a hendiadys: “Dead flies cause the ointment of the apothecary to send forth a stinking savor” (KJV), “Dead flies make a perfumer’s oil stink” (NASB), “dead flies give perfume a bad smell” (NIV), “Dead flies make the perfumer’s ointment give off an evil odor” (RSV), Dead flies make the perfumer’s ointment give off a foul odor” (NRSV), “Dead flies cause a perfumer’s perfume to send forth a stink” (YLT), “Dead flies make the perfumer’s ointment give off a foul odor” (NRSV). On the other hand, others render both separately: “Dead flies make the perfumer’s sweet ointment rancid and ferment” (NEB), “Dead flies turn the perfumer’s ointment fetid and putrid” (NJPS).
⁴tn Heb “carries more weight than…”; alternately, “is more precious than….” The adjective rqy denotes “precious, valuable, costly” (KBL 2:432) or “weighty, influential” (BDB 430.4). The related verb denotes “to carry weight,” that is, to be influential (KBL 2:432). The idea is not that a little folly is more valuable than much wisdom; but that a little folly can have more influence than great wisdom. It only takes one little mistake to ruin a life of great wisdom. The English versions understand it this way: “so a little foolishness is weightier than wisdom and honor” (NASB), “so a little folly outweighs massive wisdom” (TNK), “so a little folly outweighs an abundance of wisdom” (BV), “so a little folly outweighs wisdom and honor” (RSV, NRSV, NIV), “so can a little folly make wisdom lose its worth” (NEB), “so a little folly annuls great wisdom” (ASV), “a single slip can ruin much that is good” (NAB), “so doth a little folly him that is in reputation for wisdom and honor” (KJV). LXX rendered the line rather freely: timion ojligon sofiaj uJper doxan ajfrosunh" megalhn (“a little wisdom is more precious than great glory of folly”). This does not accurately represent the Hebrew syntax.
sn Qoheleth creates a wordplay by using two words for social honor or influence: “honorable, weighty” (rqy) and “honor, heavy”) (dwbk).
⁵tn The terms dwbkm hmkjm (“more than wisdom, more than honor”) might form a hendiadys: “more than honorable wisdom.” However, several Hebrew manuscripts read dwbkmw hmkjm (“more than wisdom and honor”).
⁶sn The phrase “right hand” is a Hebrew idiom for the place of protection (e.g., Pss 16:8; 110:5; 121:5). In ancient warfare, the shield of the warrior on one’s right-hand side protected one’s right hand. Solomon’s point is that wisdom provides protection (e.g., Eccl 7:12).
⁷sn The fool lacks the protection of wisdom which is at the right-hand side of the wise man (see note above). The wise man’s heart protects him, but the fool is always getting into trouble.
⁸tn Heb “he lacks his heart”
⁹tn Heb “he tells everyone …”
¹⁰tn Heb “spirit”
¹¹tn Heb “Do not leave”
¹²tn Heb “your place.” The term <wqm (“place”) denotes a position, post or office (1 Kgs 20:24; Eccl 8:3; 10:4) (BDB 879.1c).
¹³tn The noun aprm II (“calmness”) is used in reference to keeping one’s composure with a peaceful heart (Prov 14:30) and responding to criticism with a gentle tongue (Prov 15:4) (KBL 2:637). It is used in reference to keeping one’s composure in an emotionally charged situation (BDB 951.2).
¹⁴tn The verb jyny (Hiphil imperfect 3ms jwn) denotes “to leave behind, leave untouched” (KBL 2:680.2) in generally, and in this passage, “to undo” or “allay” offences (KBL 2:680.3; BDB 629.5) or “to avoid” offences (BDB 629.5). The point is either that (1) a composed response can calm/appease the anger of the ruler or (2) a calm heart will help one avoid great sins that would offend the king. The root jWn (“to rest”) is repeated, creating a wordplay: “Do not leave” (jnt-la) and “to avoid, allay” (jyny). Rather than resigning (=leaving), composure can appease a king (=cause the anger of the king to leave).
¹⁵tn Heb “an evil”
¹⁶tn Heb “under the sun”
¹⁷tn Heb “comes forth from the presence of a ruler”
¹⁸tn Heb “folly”
¹⁹tn Heb “high places”
²⁰tn Alternately, “slaves”
²¹tn Heb “upon the earth”
²²tn Alternately, “slaves”
²³tn The four imperfect verbs in vv. 8-9 may be nuanced in an indicative (“will …”) or a modal sense denoting possibility (“may …”). LXX rendered them with indicatives, as do many English translations (KJV, RSV, NRSV, ASV, BV, YLT, TNK). However, it is better to take them in a modal sense (NEB, AB, NAB, NASB, NIV).
²⁴tn Heb “a serpent will bite him.” The clause “he who breaks through a wall” (rdg Jrpw) is a nominative absolute -- the casus pendens is picked up by the resumptive pronoun in the following clause “a serpent will bite him” (vjn wnkvy). This construction is used for rhetorical emphasis (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 4.7).
²⁵tn The verb lqlq (Pilpal perfect 3ms from the noun llq II) means “to sharpen, make a blade sharp” (KBL 3:1104.1). This denominative verb is derived from the rare noun llq II “smooth, shiny” (bronze) (Ezek 1:7; Dan 10:6) (KBL 3:1105). Sharpening the blade or head of a bronze ax will make it smooth and shiny. It is not derived from the verb llq I “to treat light” or the noun hllq I “curse.” Nor is it related to the Pilpel of llq I “to shake” (Ezek 21:26) (KBL 3:1104). BDB erroneously relates it to llq I, suggesting “to whet” or “move quickly to and fro” (BDB 886.2).
²⁶tn Heb “face”
²⁷tn Heb “strengths.” The term <ylyjw (conjunction + plural noun from lyj “strength, efficiency”) is an example of a plural of intensification (GKC 124e). The point is that it is a waste of a great deal of strength and energy. If a person is not smart, he will have to use a lot of energy and waste his efficiency.
²⁸tn Heb “without charming”
²⁹tn Heb “a master of tongue”
³⁰tn Heb “has no profit”
³¹tn Heb “of a wise man’s mouth”
³²tn Alternately, “are gracious.” The antithetical parallelism suggests that /j does not denote “gracious character” but “[gain] favor” (e.g., Gen 39:21; Exod 3:21; 11:3; 12:36; Prov 3:4,34; 13:15; 22:1; 28:23; Eccl 9:11) (KBL 332.2; BDB 336.2). LXX, on the other hand, rendered /j with cari" (“are gracious”). The English versions are split: “are gracious” (KJV, YLT, AB, ASV, NASB, NIV) and “win him favor” (NEB, RSV, NRSV, NAB, BV, TNK, Moffatt).
³³tn Heb “lips”
³⁴tn Heb “consume him” or “engulf him.” The verb wnulbt (Piel imperfect 3ms from ulb I “to swallow”) creates a striking word-play on the homonymic root ulb II “to speak eloquently” (KBL 1:135). Rather than speaking eloquently (ulb II “to speak eloquently”), the fool utters words that are self-destructive (ulb I “to swallow, engulf”).
³⁵tn Heb “the words of his mouth”
³⁶sn The terms “beginning” and “end” form a merism (a figure of speech in which two opposites are contrasted to indicate totality) (e.g., Deut 6:7; Ps 139:8; Eccl 3:2-8). The words of a fool are madness from “start to finish.”
³⁷tn Heb “his mouth”
³⁸tn Heb “madness of evil”
³⁹tn This line is best taken as the third line of a tricola encompassing 10:13-14a (NASB, NRSV, TNK, Moffatt) rather than the first line of a tricola encompassing 10:14 (KJV, NEB, RSV, AB, NAB, ASV, NIV). Several versions capture the sense of this line well: “a fool prates on and on” (Moffatt) and “Yet the fool talks and talks!” (TNK).
⁴⁰tn Heb “after him.” Alternately, “after he [dies]”
⁴¹tn The plural form of <ylyskh (from lysk “fool”) denotes (1) plural of number: referring to several fools or (2) plural of habitual character or plural of intensity: referring to a single person characterized by a habitual or intense quality of foolishness. The latter is favored because the two verbs in 10:15 are both singular in form: “wearies him” (wnugyt) and “he does [not] know” (udy-al) (see GKC 135p). The article on <ylyskh is used in the generic sense.
⁴²tn This line may be interpreted in one of three ways: (1) “a labor of fools wearies him because he did not know enough to go to a town,” referring to the labor of the peasants who had not been able to find a place in town where life was easier. (2) “the labor of the fools so wearies everyone of them (singular pronoun taken in a distributive sense) so much that he even does not know how to go to town,” that is, he does not even know how to do the easiest thing in the world. (3) “let the labor of fools so weary him that he may not even know how to go to town,” taking the verb as a jussive, describing the foolish man described in 10:12-14. See Dominique Barthelemy, ed. et al. Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (New York: United Bible Society, 1976), 3:592-93.
⁴³tn Heb “he does not know to go to the city”
⁴⁴tn Alternately, “a child” or “a servant.” The term run has a wide range of meanings (KBL 2:707; BDB 654-55; TWOT 2:585-86). Used in reference to age, it may refer to an infant (Exod 2:6; Judg 13:5; 1 Sam 1:22; 4:21; 2 Sam 12:16), child just weaned (1 Sam 1:24), an adolescent in puberty (1 Sam 16:11), or young man of marriageable age (Gen 34:19; 2 Sam 14:21; 18:5,12). Its technical or titular use denotes “servant” (Num 22:22; Judg 7:10-11; 19:3; 1 Sam 3:9; 2 Sam 16:1; 2 Kgs 4:12,25; 19:6), “retainer, attendant, follower” (Gen 14:24; 1 Sam 25:5; 2 Sam 2:14; 2 Kgs 19:6; Isa 37:6; Job 1:15-17; Neh 4:10,17) and “soldier” (1 Kgs 20:15-16). The parallel Ugaritic term is used in reference to physical age (lad, son, youth) and in a technical sense (guild members, servitors, soldiers) (UT 19:445). LXX rendered it with newtero" (“youthful”). The English versions vary: “child,” (KJV, AB, ASV, NASB, BV, RSV, NRSV margin, NIV margin), “childish” (NIV margin), “servant” or “slave” (NEB, NAB, ASV margin, NRSV, NIV), and “lackey” (TNK). When used in reference to rulers, it emphasizes incompetence, naiveté, inexperience, and immaturity (Isa 3:4,9; 1 Kgs 3:7). This use must be understood in the light of the parallel antonym: “son of freemen” (<yrwj-/b). This suggests “servant,” that is, one who was not well trained and prepared by noble birth to ascend to the throne.
⁴⁵tn Heb “son of nobles.” Alternately, “son of freemen.” The term <yroj is from rj “noble one, freeman” (KBL 1:348; BDB 359). It is related to Aramaic noun rrj “freeman,” Sabean rj “freeman, noble,” Old South Arabic rj and Arabic hurr “freedom” (KBL 1:348; BDB 359).
⁴⁶tn The noun tu (lit. “point in time”) has a basic two-fold range of meanings: (1) “time of an event” and (2) “time for an event” (BDB 773). The latter has four sub-categories: (a) “usual time,” (b) “the proper, suitable or appropriate time,” (c) “the appointed time,” and (d) “uncertain time.” Here it connotes “a proper, suitable time for an event” (KBL 2:900.6; BDB 773.2.b). Examples: “it was the time for rain” (Ezra 10:13), “a time of judgment for the nations” (Ezek 30:3), “there is an appropriate time for every occasion” (Eccl 3:1), “the rain in its season” (Deut 11:14; Jer 5:24), “the time for the harvest” (Hos 2:11; Ps 1:3), “food in its season” (Ps 104:27), “the right moment” (Eccl 8:5) (KBL 2:900.6).
⁴⁷tn More literally, “for strength and not for drunkenness”; alternately, “as heroes and not as drunkards” or “for nourishment and not for drunkenness.” According to KBL, the term hrwbg (lit. “strength”) may here connote “self-control” (KBL 1:172.1d). This tactic is adopted by a few English versions: “with self-control, and not as drunkards” (NEB) and “with restraint, not with guzzling” (TNK). On the other hand, most English versions render ytvb alw hrwbg in a woodenly literal sense, “for strength and not for drunkenness” (YLT, KJV, ASV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, NIV). However, a few others wrestle with the idiom: “as stalwarts and not as drunkards” (BV), “stalwart men, not sots” (Moffatt), “as men and not as sots” (AB), “for vigor and not in drinking bouts” (NAB), “for refreshment, and not for riotousness” (Douay).
⁴⁸tn Alternately, “the rafts sink”
⁴⁹tn Heb “lowering of hands”
⁵⁰tn Heb “bread.” The term <jl is used literally of “bread” and figuratively (metonymy) for “feast” (BDB 536-37). BDB suggests that <jl h?u in Eccl 10:19 means “make a feast” (BDB 537.1a). This obscure line has occasioned not a few proposals: “a feast is made for laughter” (KJV, ASV, NIV); “feasts are made for laughter” (NRSV); “men feast for merrymaking” (Moffatt); “men prepare a meal for enjoyment” (NASB); “the table has its pleasures” (NEB); “they [=rulers of v. 16] make a banquet for revelry” (TNK); “people prepare a banquet for enjoyment” (BV); “for laughter they make bread and wine, that the living may feast” (Douay); “bread is made for laughter” (RSV); “with mirth they make bread” (AB); “bread [and oil] call forth merriment” (NAB).
⁵¹tn The subject of the verb <y?u (Qal active participle mpl from h?u “to make”) is not specified. When active verbs have an unspecified subject, they are often used in a passive sense: “Bread/feasts are made …”
⁵²tn Heb “and wine gladdens life”
⁵³tn Alternately, “and [they think that] money is the answer for everything”
⁵⁴tn Heb “the rich”
⁵⁵tn The phrase <ypnkh lub (lit., “possessor of wings”) is an idiom for a winged creature, that is, a bird (e.g., Prov 1:17) (KBL 1:143.A.6; BDB 127.5.a). The term lub (“master, possessor”) is the construct governing the attributive genitive <ypnkh (“wings”) (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 9.5.3b).
⁵⁶tn Heb “tell the matter”
¹tn The verb ilv (Piel imperative 2ms from ilv “to send, cast”) refers to the action of sending something to someone (e.g., Neh 8:12) (KBL³ 976.5). The term is traditionally rendered here as “cast” (KJV, AB, NAB, RES, ASV, NASB, NIV); however, some render it “send” (TNK, NRSV, NEB). LXX uses ajposteilon (“send”).
²tn Heb “your bread.” The term <jl is traditionally rendered “bread” (KJV, AB, NAB, RSV, NRSV, ASV, NASB, NIV, TNK). However, 11:1-2 seems to deal with exporting goods overseas (Don Glenn, “Ecclesiastes,” BKC 1002-03). It is better to take <jl (“bread”) as a metonymy of product, standing for the grain and wheat from which bread is produced (e.g., Gen 41:54-55; 47:13,15,17,19; 49:20; Num 15:19; 2 Kgs 18:32; Isa 28:28; 30:23; 36:17; 55:10; Jer 5:17; Ezek 48:18; Job 28:5; Ps 104:14; Prov 28:3) (KBL 526.1; BDB 537.1b). It is taken this way by several translations: “grain” (NEB) and “goods” (Moffatt). Qoheleth encouraged the export of grain products overseas in international trade.
³tn Heb “upon the surface of the waters.” This is traditionally views as extolling generosity from which a reward will be reaped. On the other hand, some scholars suggest that the imagery deals with business through maritime trade. Jastrow took this verse as advice to take risks in business by trusting one’s goods or ships that will after many days return with a profit (Cohen, Soncino Bible, 12:181). Sea trade was risky in the ancient Near East, but it brought big returns to its investors (e.g., 1 Kgs 9:26-28; 10:22; Ps 107:23) (D. K. Glenn, “Ecclesiastes,” BKC 1002-03). The verse is rendered thus: “Send your grain across the seas, and in time you will get a return” (NEB) and “Trust your goods far and wide at sea, till you get a good return after a while” (Moffatt).
⁴tn Heb “find it”
⁵tn Heb “give a portion”
⁶tn The phrase “seven or eight” is a graded numerical saying depicting an indefinite plurality: “The collocation of a numeral with the next above it is a rhetorical device employed in numerical sayings to express a number, which need not, or cannot, be more exactly specified. It must be gathered from the context whether such formulae are intended to denote only an insignificant number (e.g., Is 17:6 “two” or at the most “three”) or a considerable number (e.g., Mi 5:4). Sometimes, however, this juxtaposition serves to express merely an indefinite total, without the collateral idea of intensifying the lower by means of the higher number” (GKC 134s). Examples: “one” or “two” (Deu 32:30; Jer 3:14; Job 33:14; 40:5; Ps 62:12); “two” or “three” (2 Kgs 9:32; Isa 17:6; Hos 6:2; Amos 4:8; Sir 23:16; 26:28; 50:25); “three” or “four” (Jer 36:23; Amos 1:3-11; Prov 21:19; 30:15,18; Sir 26:5); “four” or “five” (Isa 17:6); “six” or “seven” (Job 5:19; Prov 6:16); “seven” or “eight” (Mic 5:4; Eccl 11:2).
⁷tn This line is traditionally understood as an exhortation to be generous to a multitude of people (KJV, AB, NAB, ASV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, NIV, TNK); however, it is better taken an shrewd advice to not commit all one’s possession to a single venture (Cohen, Soncino Bible, 12:181). Glenn writes: “In view of the possibility of disaster, a person should make prudent investments in numerous ventures rather than put all his “eggs in one basket” (e.g., Gen 32:7-8 for a practical example of this advice)” (Don Glenn, “Ecclesiastes,” BKC 1003). Several translations reflect this: “Divide your merchandise among seven ventures, eight maybe” (NEB) and “Take shares in several ventures” (Moffatt).
⁸sn The phrase “you do not know” is repeated throughout this section (11:2, 5-6). Man is ignorant of the future. This should motivate a person to invest their financial resources wisely (11:1-3) and to work diligently (11:4-6).
⁹tn The term hur (lit. “evil”) refers to calamity (e.g., Eccl 5:13; 7:14; 9:12).
¹⁰tn The repetition of the term “clouds” and “wind” (jwr) in 11:3-4 creates an ABB'A' chiastic structure that unifies verses 3-4: “clouds” (<ybuh) and wind implied in 11:3, and “wind” (jwr) and “clouds” (<ybub) in 11:4. The farmer who waits for the most opportune moment to plant when there is no wind to blow away the seed, and to reap when there is no rain to ruin a ripe harvest will never do anything but sit around waiting for the right moment.
¹¹tn Heb “what is the way of the wind”; alternately, “how the spirit comes to the bones in the womb of a pregnant woman.” There is debate whether jWrh ird-hm refers to the wind (“the path of the wind”) or the human spirit of a child in the mother’s womb (“how the spirit comes …”). LXX understood it as the wind: “the way of the wind” (hJ oJdo" tou pneumato"); however, the Aramaic Targum and Latin Vulgate take it as the human spirit. The English versions are split: (1) spirit: “the way of the spirit” (KJV, YLT, Douay), “the breath of life” (NAB), “what the way of the spirit is into the bones in the pregnant womb” (AB), “how a pregnant woman comes to have … a living spirit in her womb” (NEB), “how the lifebreath passess into the limbs within the womb of the pregnant woman” (TNK), “how the spirit comes to the bones in the womb of a woman with child” (RSV), “how the breath comes to the bones in the mother’s womb” (NRSV); and (2) wind: “the way of the wind” (ASV, RSV margin), “the path of the wind” (NASB, NIV), and “how the wind blows” (BV, Moffatt).
¹²tn Heb “the one who is full.” The feminine adjective halm (from alm “full”) is used as a substantive referring to a pregnant woman whose womb is filled with her infant (KBL 2:584.2; BDB 571). This term is used in reference to a pregnant woman in later Hebrew (KBL 2:584). LXX understood the term in this sense: kuoforoush" (“pregnant woman”).
¹³tn Heb “do not let your hand rest.” The phrase “do not let your hand rest” is an idiom that means “do not stop working” or “do not be idle” (e.g., Eccl 7:18) (BDB 628.B.1). Several English versions capture the sense of the idiom well: “do not stop working” (NEB), “give your hand no rest” (AB), “do not be idle” (BV), “let not your hand be idle” (NAB), “let not your hands be idle” (NIV), “stay not your hand” (Moffatt). The term “hand” is a synecdoche of part (=do not let your hand rest) for the whole person (=do not allow yourself to stop working).
¹⁴tn The terms “morning” (rqb) and “evening” (bru) form a merism (figure of speech using two polar extremes to include everything in between) that connotes “from morning until evening.” The point is not that the farmer should plant at two times in the day (morning and evening), but that he should plant all day long (from morning until evening). This merism is reflected in several translations: “in the morning … until evening” (NEB, AB, Moffatt).
¹⁵tn The verb rvky (Qal imperfect 3ms from rvk “to prosper”) is used metonymically to denote “succeed.” In Eccl 11:10, it denotes “skill in work …
¹⁶tn Alternately, “together”
¹⁷tn The term “light” (rwah) is used figuratively (metonymy of association) in reference to “life” (e.g., Job 3:20; 33:30; Ps 56:14). By contrast, death is described as “darkness” (e.g., Eccl 11:8; 12:6-7).
¹⁸tn the term “sweet” (qwtm) is often used elsewhere in reference to honey. The point is that life is sweet and should be savored like honey.
¹⁹tn Heb “the eyes.” The term “eyes” is a synecdoche of part (=eyes) for the whole person. Used with the idiom “to see the sun” (=to be alive), Qoheleth is simply saying that the experience of a life is a pleasant thing that should be savored.
²⁰tn The phrase “to see the sun” (both vmvh har and vmvh hzj) is an idiom meaning “to be alive” (e.g., Ps 58:9; Eccl. 6:5; 7:11; 11:7) (BDB 1039.4b). The opposite idiom, “the sun is darkened,” refers to the onset of old age and death (Eccl 12:2).
²¹tn The phrase “the days of darkness” refers to the onset of old age (Eccl 12:1-5) and the inevitable experience of death (Eccl 11:7-8; 12:6-7). Elsewhere, “darkness” is a figure of speech (metonymy of association) for death (Job 10:21-22; 17:13; 18:18).
²²tn The term lbh here means “obscure,” that is, unknown. This sense is derived from the literal concept of breath, vapor or wind that cannot be seen; thus, the idea of “obscure, dark, difficult to understand, enigmatic” (see KBL 1:236-37; BDB 210-11; TWAT 2:334-43; TDOT 3:313-20; THAT 1:467-69; TWOT 1:204-05). It is used in this sense in reference to enigmas in life (6:2; 8:10,14) and the future which is obscure (11:8).
²³tn Heb “walk in the ways of your heart”
²⁴tn Heb “the sight”
²⁵tn The verb rsh (Hiphil imperative 2ms from rWs “to remove”) normally depicts a concrete action of removing a physical object from someone’s presence (KBL 2:748.1). Here, it is used figuratively (hypocatastasis) of the emotional/psychological action of banishing unnecessary emotional stress from one’s mind. The Hiphil usage means “to remove, abolish, keep away, turn away, push aside” (KBL 2:748.1). The English versions render this term in a variety of ways, none of which is very poetic: “remove” (KJV, RSV, ASV, NASB), “turn aside” (YLT), “put away” (AB), “ward off” (NAB), and “banish” (NEB, BV, NIV, NRSV, TNK, Moffatt)
²⁶tn The root “vexation” (suk) has a broad range of meanings: “anger” (Deut 4:25; 9:18), “irritation” (Deut 32:21), “offend” (2 Kgs 23:26; Neh 3:37), “vexation” or “frustration” (Ezek 20:28), “grief” (1 Sam 1:6), and “worry” (Ps 112:10; Eccl 7:9) (KBL 2:491). Here, it refers in general to unnecessary emotional stress and anxiety that can deprive a person of the legitimate enjoyment of life and its temporal benefits.
²⁷tn Heb “your heart”
²⁸tn In light of the parallelism, hur does not refer to ethical evil, but to physical injury, pain, deprivation or suffering (e.g., Deut 31:17,21; 32:23; 1 Sam 10:19; Neh 1:3; 2:17; Pss 34:20; 40:13; 88:4; 107:26; Eccl 12:1; Jer 2:27; Lam 3:38) (KBL 3:1263.4c; BDB 949.2). This sense is best captured as “pain” (NASB, RSV, NRSV, BV, Moffatt) or “the troubles [of your body]” (NEB, NIV), rather than “evil” (KJV, AB, ASV, YLT, Douay) or “sorrow” (TNK).
²⁹tn Heb “your flesh”
³⁰tn Alternately, “childhood”
³¹tn Alternately, “youth.” Literally, “black hair” or “the dawn (of life).” The feminine noun tWrjvh is a hapax legomena, occurring only here. There is debate whether it is from rjv I “black (hair)” (e.g., Lev 13:31,37; Song 5:11) or rjv II “dawn” (e.g., Gen 19:15; Job 3:9; Song 6:10) (KBL³ 962; BDB 1007). If this term is from rjv I “black (hair),” it is used in contrast to gray hair that characterizes old age (e.g., Prov 16:31; 20:29). This would be a figure (metonymy of association) for youthfulness. On the other hand, if the term is from rjv II “dawn,” it connotes the “dawn of life” or “prime of life” (KBL³ 962; BDB 1007). This would be a figure (hypocatastasis) for youthfulness. In either case, the term is a figure for “youth” or “prime of life,” as the parallel term tWdlyh (“youth” or “childhood”) indicates. The term is rendered variously in the English versions: “black hair” (NJPS), “the dawn of youth” (NAB), “the dawn of life” (ASV, BV, RSV, NRSV), “the prime of life” (NEB, AB, NASB), “vigor” (NIV), “youth” (KJV), and “manhood” (Moffatt). The plural forms of tWrjvh (=”youth”) and tWdlyh (“childhood”) are examples of the plural of state or condition that a person experiences for a temporary period of time, e.g., <ynqz “old age,” <yrwun “youth,” and <ymwlu “youthfulness” (Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 7.4.2b).
³²tn The term lbh (lit. “vanity”) often connotes the temporal idea “fleeting” (e.g., Prov 31:30; Eccl 3:19; 6:12; 7:15; 9:9). This nuance is suggested here by the collocation of “youth” (tWdlyh) and “the prime of life” (tWrjvh).
¹tn The imperative rkz (“Remember!”) is a figurative expression (metonymy of association) for obeying God and acknowledging His lordship over one’s life (e.g., Num 15:40; Deut 8:18; Pss 42:6-7; 63:6-8; 78:42; 103:18; 106:7; 119:52,55; Jer 50:51; Ezek 20:43; Jon 2:7; Mal 4:4). The exhortation to fear God and obey His commands in 12:13-14 spells out what it means to “remember” God.
²tn The temporal adjective du (“before”) is repeated three times in 12:1-7 (vv. 1b, 2a, 6a). Likewise, the temporal preposition b (“when”) is repeated twice (vv. 3a, 4b). These seven verses comprise one long sentence in Hebrew: the main clause is 12:1a (“Remember your Creator in the days of your youth”), while 12:1b-7 consists of five subordinate temporal clauses (“before … before … when … when … before …”).
³tn The adjective hur (lit. “evil”) does not refer to ethical evil, but to physical difficulty, injury, pain, deprivation and suffering (e.g., Deut 31:17,21; 32:23; 1 Sam 10:19; Neh 1:3; 2:17; Pss 34:20; 40:13; 88:4; 107:26; Eccl 11:10; Jer 2:27; Lam 3:38) (KBL 3:1263.4c; BDB 949.2).
⁴tn Heb “the light and the moon and the stars.” The phrase “the light and the moon” is a hendiadys (two separate terms denoting one idea) or perhaps even a hendiatrys (three separate terms denoting one idea) for “the light of the moon and stars” (e.g., Gen 1:14).
⁵tn The verb bwvw (conjunction + Qal perfect 3ms from bwv “to return”) here denotes “to desist” (KBL³ 952.2). It pictures the disappearance of the clouds as a result of the precipitation of their contents.
⁶tn Heb “the watchers of the house”
⁷tn The verb wuzyv (relative pronoun + Qal imperfect 3mpl from uwz “to tremble”) probably does not refer to physical tremors but to trembling in fear (e.g., Est 5:9; Hab 2:7; Sir 48:12) (KBL 1:267). At the onset of old age, those who had been the most courageous during their youth suddenly become fearful.
⁸tn The verb wtwuthw (conjunction + Hithpa`el perfect 3cpl from twu “to bend, stoop”) means “to be stooped” (KBL 3:804) rather than “to bend themselves” (BDB 736). The perfect tense may be taken in an ingressive sense (“begin to stoop over”) or in a durative, iterative sense (“are continually stooped over”).
⁹tn The term tonjfh (Qal active participle fpl from /jf “to grind”) is a double entendre. In its literal sense, it refers to female mill-grinders; in its figurative sense, it refers to molar teeth (KBL 2:374). The related Hebrew noun hnjf refers to a “mill,” and the related Arabic noun tahinat means “molar tooth” (KBL 2:374).
¹⁰tn The verb wkvjw (conjunction + Qal perfect 3ms i?j from “to grow dim”) is used elsewhere in reference to failing eyesight (e.g., Ps 69:24; Lam 5:17) (KBL 1:361.2). Therefore, the phrase “those who look through the windows” is probably a figurative description of the eyes, picturing failing eyesight at the onset of old age.
¹¹tn The noun hnjf refers to a “grinding-mill” where grain is ground into flour (KBL 2:374). The term is here used as a double entendre, figuratively describing the loss of one’s teeth at the onset of old age. The figurative usage also draws upon the polysemantic nature of this noun; the related Arabic root tahinat means “molar tooth” (KBL 2:374).
¹²tn Heb “rises up.” The verb <wq (<wqyw conjunction + Qal imperfect 3ms <wq from “to arise”) refers to being awakened from sleep in the middle of the night by a sound (e.g., Exod 12:30; 1 Sam 3:6,8) and awaking up early in the morning (e.g., Gen 24:54; Judg 16:3; Ruth 3:14; Neh 2:12; Job 14:12; 24:14) (KBL 3:1086.1; BDB 877.1a). Here it describes one of the frustrations of old age: the elderly person is unable to get a full night’s sleep because every little sound awakens him in the middle of the night or too early in the morning.
¹³tn Heb “all the daughters of song.” The expression “the daughters of song” (ryvh twnb) is an idiom for “songs, musical sounds, melodious notes” (KBL 1:166.2; BDB 123.5; GKC 127v). The genitive ryvh (“song”) represents the nature, quality, character or condition of the construct twnb (“daughters”) (see Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 9.5.3b). The idiom refers to the musical songs sung during one’s youth or to the ability to hear songs that are sung. This line is lamenting the loss of hearing which occurs at the onset of old age.
¹⁴tn Heb “are brought low”
¹⁵tn The noun <ytjtj literally means “terrors” (KBL 1:363; BDB 369). Here it is used as a metonymy (cause for effect) to refer to dangers that cause the elderly to be fearful of going outside or walking along the streets. The noun tjtj (“terror”) is a reduplicated noun stem from the root ttj (“terror”) (KBL 1:363; BDB 369; BL 482d). The reduplication of the noun stem intensifies its meaning: the root noun ttj means “terror,” so the intensified reduplicated form tjtj connotes something such as “great terror” (see Sabatino Moscati, Comparative Grammar of the Semitic Languages, 12.9-13). The plural form <ytjtj (lit. “great terrors”) denotes plural of number (more than one) or plural of intensity (which would further intensify the experience of fear) (Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 7.4.3).
¹⁶tn The noun dqv is used in the OT in reference to the “almond-nut” (e.g., Gen 43:11; Num 17:23) and metonymically (product for thing producing it) for the “almond-tree” (e.g., Jer 1:11) (KBL³ 1007; BDB 1052.2).
¹⁷tn The verb Janyw (conjunction + Hiphil imperfect 3ms from Jxn “to blossom”) is a geminate verb (II=III) that, in this case, is written with a matres lectionis (plene spelling) rather than the normal spelling of Jnyw (GKC 73g). The Hiphil verb Janyw is from the root Jxn “to shine, sparkle; to blossom” (KBL 2:717; BDB 665). It is used in reference to almond blossoms whose color progresses from pink to white as they ripen (e.g., Song 6:11). This is an appropriate metaphor (comparison of sight) to describe white hair that often accompanies the onset of old age.
¹⁸tn Alternately, “locust”
¹⁹tn The verb lbstyw (conjunction + Hithpael imperfect 3ms from lbs “to bear a heavy load”) means “to drag oneself along” as a burden (BDB 687) or “to become thick, move slowly forwards, clear off” (KBL 2:741).
²⁰tn The noun hnwyba (“caper-berry, caper-fruit”) is a hapax legomena, occurring only here in the Hebrew Bible. It refers to the Capparis spinosa fruit which was eaten as an aphrodisiac in the ancient Near East (KBL 1:5; BDB 2-3). There are two options for the interpretation of this figure: (1) At the onset of old age, the sexual virility that marked one’s youth is nothing more than a distant memory, and even aphrodisiacs fail to stimulate sexual desire to allow for sexual intercourse. (2) The onset of old age is like the shriveling up of the caper-berry fruit; the once virile youth has passed his prime just like a shriveled caper-berry can no longer provide a sexual stimulant.
²¹tc The Masoretic Text vocalizes consonantal rptw as rpt*w+ (conjunction + Hiphil imperfect 3fs from rrp “to burst”). However, an alternate vocalization tradition of rp^t%w+ (conjunction + Hophal imperfect 3fs “to be broken down”) is reflected in LXX kai diaskedasqh (“is scattered”) and Symmachus kai dialuqh (“is broken up”) which is followed by Syriac. On the other hand, Aquilla kai karpeusei (“are enjoyed,” of fruits) reflects hr#p=t!w+ (Qal imperfect 3fs from hrp “to bear fruit”) - this does not reflect an alternate reading but a translator’s error in word division between hnwybah rptw (“the caper-berry bursts”) and hnwyba hrptw (“the caper-berry bears fruit”).
tn Alternately, “fails” or “bursts.” The meaning of the verb rptw (conjunction + Hiphil imperfect 3fs from rrp “to break, make ineffectual”) is debated: (1) “be ineffectual,” that is, to fail to provide sexual power as an aphrodisiac, or (2) “to break, burst,” that is, the caper-berry fruit shrivels as it lingers on its branch beyond its period of ripeness (KBL 3:975; BDB 830.2d).
²²tn In the construct phrase omlou tyb (lit. “house of his eternity”), the genitive <lou (“eternity”) functions as an attributive adjective: “his eternal home.” This is an idiom for the grave as the resident place of the body (e.g., Ps 49:12 [11]; Job 7:9; 14:10-12; Eccl 12:5) or Sheol as the residence of the dead (e.g., Job 17:13; 30:23) (KBL 1:124.2; 2:799.5; BDB 109.1d). For example, the term tyb (“house”) is used in Job 30:23 in parallelism with “death” (twm). The same idiom appears in post-biblical Hebrew: “the house of eternity” (<lu tyb) is a euphemism for burial ground or cemetery (Lamentations Rabbah 1:5; Leviticus Rabbah s. 12) (Jastrow 1085). This idiom is also found in a Moabite text in reference to the grave (Deir Alla Inscription 2:6). A similar idiom is found in Phoenician and Palmyrene in reference to the grave (DISO 35). The idiom appears to have originated in Egyptian literature (TDOT 2:113). See F. Cumont, Afterlife in Roman Paganism, 48-50; “<lou” in Ernest Jenni and Claus Westermann, eds., Theologisches Handworterbuch zum Alten Testament 2:79-81.
²³tn Heb “water-spring”
²⁴tn The term lglg (“wheel”) refers to the “water-wheel” or “paddle-wheel” for drawing water from a well (KBL 1:190.2; BDB 165.1b). This Hebrew noun is related to the Akkadian term gulgullu (“pot”), as well as Phoenician lglg (“wheel for drawing water”). The Latin term girgillus (“lever for the bucket”) is a late derivation from this term. Selected Bibliography: Gustav Dalman, Arbeit und Sitte in Palastina (Gutersloh, 1928-42), 2:225-28.
²⁵tn Literally “futility of futilities.” The phrase “absolutely futile” (<ylbh lbh) is a superlative genitive construction (GKC 133i). When a plural genitive follows a singular construct noun of the same root, it indicates the best or most outstanding example of the person or thing described. Examples: <yvdqh vdq “holy of holies” = “the most holy place” (Exod 26:33), <yryvh ryv “song of songs” = “the most excellent song” (Song 1:1), and <ydbu dbu “slave of slaves” = “the most abject slave” (Gen 9:25) (Ronald Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, 80; Waltke-O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 9.5.3j).
²⁶tn Elsewhere in the book, the author is identified with the anarthrous (non-articular) term tl#h#q) (Eccl 1:1,2,12; 7:27; 12:9,10); however, in 12:8 it is used with the article, indicating that it is a professional title rather than a personal surname: tl#h#oQh^ (“the Teacher”). Numerous English translations remder tl#h#q) as a professional title: “the Speaker” (NEB, Moffatt), “the Preacher” (KJV, RSV, YLT, BV, ASV, NASB), “the Teacher” (NIV, NRSV), “the Leader of the Assembly” (NIV margin), “the Assembler” (NJPS margin). Others render it as a personal surname: “Koheleth” (AB, JPS, NJPS) and “Qoheleth” (NAB, NRSV margin).
²⁷tn Although lK) (“everything, all”) is often used in an absolute or comprehensive sense (BDB 481.1), it is frequently used as a synecdoche of the general for the specific, that is, its sense is limited contextually to the topic at hand (BDB 482.2). This is particularly true of lK)h^ (BDB 482.2b) in which the article particularizes or limits the referent to the contextual or previously mentioned topic (e.g., Gen 16:12; 24:1; Exod 29:24; Lev 1:9,13; 8:27; Deut 2:36; Josh 11:19 [see 2 Sam 19:31; 1 Kgs 14:26=2 Chr 12:9]; 21:43; 1 Sam 30:19; 2 Sam 17:3; 23:5; 24:23; 1 Kgs 6:18; 2 Kgs 24:16; Isa 29:11; 65:8; Jer 13:7,10; Ezek 7:14; Pss 14:3; 49:18; 1 Chr 7:5; 28:19; 29:19; 2 Chr 28:6; 29:28; 31:5; 35:7; 36:17-18; Ezra 1:11; 2:42; 8:34-35; 10:17; Eccl 5:8). Thus, “all” does not always mean “all” absolutely or universally in comprehension. In several cases the context limits its reference to two classes of objects/issues being discussed, so lK)h^ means “both” (e.g., 2:14; 3:19: 9:1,2). Thus, lK)h^ (“all, everything”) refers only to what Qoheleth characterizes as “futile” (lb#h#) in the context. This does not mean that everything is futile. For example, fearing God is not “futile” (2:26; 3:14-15; 11:9-10; 12:1, 9, 13-14). Only those objects/issues that are contextually placed under lK) are designated as “futile” (lb#h#).
²⁸tn The term “futile” (lb#h#) is repeated three times within the six words of this verse for the sake of emphasis. The noun lbh (“futile”) is the key word in Ecclesiastes. The root is used in two ways in OT, literally and figuratively. The literal, concrete sense is used in reference to the wind, man’s transitory breath, evanescent vapor (Isa 57:13; Pss 62:10; 144:4; Prov 21:6; Job 7:16). In this sense, it is often a synonym for “breath, wind” (Eccl 1:14; Isa 57:13; Jer 10:14). The literal sense lent itself to metaphorical senses: (1) breath/vapor/wind is non-physical, evanescent, and lacks concrete substance thus, the connotation “unsubstantial” (Jer 10:15; 16:19; 51:18), “profitless, fruitless” (Ps 78:33; Prov 13:11), “worthless” (2 Kgs 17:15; Jer 2:5; 10:3), “pointless” (Prov 21:6), “futile” (Lam 4:17; Eccl 1:2,14; 2:1, 14-15), (2) breath/vapor/wind is transitory and fleeting - thus, the connotation “fleeting, transitory” (Prov 31:30; Eccl 6:12; 7:15; 9:9; 11:10; Job 7:16) and (3) breath/vapor/wind cannot be seen thus, the idea of “obscure, dark, difficult to understand, enigmatic” (Eccl 11:10) (see KBL 1:236-37; BDB 210-11; TWAT 2:334-43; TDOT 3:313-20; THAT 1:467-69; TWOT 1:204-05). The metaphorical sense is used with the following synonyms: Whotl= “for nothing, in vain, for no reason” (Isa 49:4), WhoT “empty, vanity” (Isa 44:25), qyr! “profitless, useless” (Isa 30:7; Eccl 6:11), and lyu!oh al) “worthless, profitless” (Is 30:6; 57:12; Jer 16:19). It is parallel to “few days” and “[days] which he passes like a shadow” (Eccl 6:12). It is used in reference to youth and vigor (11:10), life (6:12; 7:15; 9:9) which are “transitory” or “fleeting.” The most common parallels to lbh in Ecclesiastes are the phrases “chasing after the wind” (jwr twur) (2:11,17,26; 7:14); and “what profit?” (/wrty-hm) or “no profit” (/wrty /ya) (2:11; 3:19; 6:9,19). It is used in reference to enigmas in life (6:2; 8:10,14) and to the future which is obscure (11:8). It is often used in antithesis to terms connoting value: bof (“good, benefit, advantage”) and /ort=y{ (“profit, advantage, gain”). Because the concrete picture of the “wind” lends itself to the figurative connotation “futile,” the motto “This is futile” (lb#h# hz#) is often used with the metaphor, “like striving after the wind” (j^Wr tWur=) - a graphic picture of an expenditure of effort in vain because no one can catch the wind by chasing it (e.g., 1:14,17; 2:11,17,26; 4:4,6,16; 6:9). Although it is the key word in Ecclesiastes, it should not be translated the same way in every place.
sn This motto is the theme of the book. Its occurs at the beginning (1:2) and end of the book (12:8), forming an envelope structure (inclusio). Everything described in 1:2--12:8 is the supporting proof of the thesis of 1:2. With few exceptions (e.g., 2:24-26; 3:14-15; 11:9-12:1, 9), everything described in 1:2--12:8 is characterized as “futile” (lb#h#).
²⁹sn Fishbane suggests that 12:9-12 fits the pattern of a concluding colophon, that draws from a conventional stock of ancient Near Eastern scribal practices and vocabulary. See Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 29-31.
³⁰tn Heb “he weighed and studied.” The verbs rqjw /zaw (“he weighed and he explored”) form a hendiadys (a figurative expression in which two separate terms used in combination to convey a single idea): “he studiously weighed” or “carefully evaluated.” The verb /zaw (conjunction + Piel perfect 3ms from /za II “to weigh, balance”) is related to the noun /zam “balances, scales” used for weighing money or commercial items (e.g., Jer 32:10; Ezek 5:1). This is the only use of the verb in the OT. In this context, it means “to weigh” = “to test, prove” (BDB 24) or “to balance” (KBL 1:27). Cohen suggests, “He made an examination of the large number of proverbial sayings which had been composed, testing their truth and worth, to select those which he considered deserving of circulation” (A. Cohen, The Soncino Books of the Bible 12:189).
³¹tn The verb /qt (Piel perfect 3ms from /qt “to make straight”) connotes “to put straight” or “to arrange in order” (KBL³ 1039; BDB 1075). This may refer to Qoheleth’s activity in compiling a collection of wisdom sayings in an orderly manner or writing the wisdom sayings in a straightforward, direct manner.
³²tn In the construct phrase Jpj-yrbd (lit. “words of delight”) the noun Jpj (“delight”) functions as an attributive genitive (“delightful words”) or a genitive of estimation or worth (“words viewed as delightful by Qoheleth” or “words that he took delight in”). For another example of a genitive of estimation of worth, see <yhla yjbz “sacrifices of God” = “sacrifices viewed as acceptable to God” (Ps 51:19). In other words, Qoheleth wrote his proverbs so effectively that he was able to take moral and aesthetic delight in his words.
³³tc The consonantal form bwtkw has been revocalized in three ways: (1) The Masoretes read bWtk*w+ (conjunction + Qal passive participle ms from btk “to write”): “Qoheleth sought to find pleasant words, what was written uprightly, namely, words of truth.” This is supported by LXX kai gegrammenon (conjunction + perfect passive participle accusative ms from grafw “to write). (2) The BHS editors suggest the vocalization botk*w+ (conjunction + Qal infinitive absolute). The infinitive botk*w+ (“and to write”) in the B-line would parallel the infinitive of purpose ax)m=l! (“to find”) in the A-line: “Qoheleth sought to find pleasant words, and to write accurately words of truth.” (3) Several Hebrew manuscripts preserve an alternate textual tradition of bt^k*w+ (conjunction + Qal perfect 3ms). This is reflected in the Greek versions (Aquilla and Symmachus), Syriac Peshitta and Latin Vulgate. The major English versions are divided among these three textual options: (1) bWtk*w+ Qal passive participle: “and that which was written was upright, even words of truth” (KJV), “and what is written correctly, namely, true things” (AB), “and that which was written uprightly, even words of truth” (ASV), “and, written by the upright, words of truth” (YLT), “but what he wrote was the honest truth” (NEB), “and what he wrote was upright and true” (NIV). (2) botk*w+ Qal infinitive absolute: “and to write words of truth correctly” (NASB), “and to write correctly the reliable words of truth” (BV), “and to write down true sayings with precision” (NAB). (3) bt^k*w+ Qal perfect 3ms: “and uprightly he wrote words of truth” (RSV), “and he wrote words of truth plainly” (NRSV), “even as he put down plainly what was true” (Moffatt), “and he wrote words most right, and full of truth” (Douay), and “and he recorded genuinely truthful sayings” (NJPS). The editors of the Jerusalem Hebrew Bible project favor botk*w+ “and to write” (option #2): see Dominique Barthelemy, ed. et al., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (New York: United Bible Society, 1976), 3:596-97.
³⁴tn The construct phrase tma yrbd (lit. “words of truth”) features a genitive of content (“words containing truth”) or an attributive genitive (“truthful words”). Depending upon the vocalization of bwtkw (see study note above), the phrase functions in one of two ways: (1) direct object of rvy botk*w+ “and he accurately wrote truthful words” or (2) apposition to rvy bWtk*w+ “and what is written uprightly, namely, truthful words.”
³⁵sn For a discussion of this line, see Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 29-32.
³⁶sn There are two ways the exhortation of verse 12a may be understood: (1) The exhortation is to avoid any so-called wisdom sayings beyond those mentioned in verses 10-11: “The words of the wise … are given from one shephered. And of anything beyond these, my son, be warned!” (e.g., RSV, NRSV, NAB, Douay, NIV). This is paraphrased well by Moffatt: “My son, avoid anything beyond the scriptures of wisdom” (Moffatt). (2) The exhortation refers to the concerns of verse 12b, namely, diligent study is wearisome, i.e., “Furthermore, my son, be warned: there is no end to the making of books, and much study is wearisome to the body” (e.g., NEB, AB, ASV, NASB, BV).
³⁷tn The verb to?u (Qal infinitive absolute from h?u “to do”) may mean “to make” (KBL 2:890.3) or “to acquire” (KBL 2:891.6). LXX rendered it as poihsai (“making”), as do most English versions: “making” (KJV, YLT, RSV, NRSV, AB, NAB, ASV, BV, NIV, NJPS). However, several English versions broke ranks: “there is no end to the buying of books” (Moffatt), “the use of books is endless” (NEB), and “the writing of many books is endless” (NASB).
³⁸tn Heb “the flesh.” The term r?b (“flesh”) refers to the body, functioning as a synecdoche or part (=flesh, skin) for the whole (=body), e.g., Gen 17:13; Ps 16:9; Prov 14:30 (see E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, 642).
³⁹tn Alternately, “this is the whole [duty] of man.” The phrase <dah-lk hz (literally, “This is all men”) features rhetorical ellision of a key-word. The ambiguity over the ellided word has led to no less than five basic approaches: (1) “this is the whole duty of man” (KJV, ASV, RSV, NAB, NIV), (2) “this is the duty of all men” (BV, ASV margin, RSV margin), (3) “this applies to all men” (NASB, AB, NJPS), (4) “this is the whole duty of all men” (NRSV, Moffatt), and (5) “there is no more to man than this” (NEB). The four-fold repetition of lk (“all”) in 12:13-14 suggests that Qoheleth is emphasizing the “bottom-line,” that is, the basic duty of man is simply to fear and obey God: After “all” (lk) has been heard in the book, his conclusion is that the “whole” (lk) duty of man is to obey God because He will bring “all” (lk) acts into judgment, including “all” (lk) that is hidden, whether good or bad. See Dominique Barthelemy, ed. et al., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (New York: United Bible Society, 1976), 3:596.