Pengkhotbah 1:14

1:14 I reflected on everything that is accomplished by man ¹  on earth, ² 

and I concluded: Everything ³  he has accomplished ⁴  is futile ⁵  – like chasing the wind! ⁶ 

Pengkhotbah 2:17-18

2:17 So I loathed ⁷  life ⁸  because what

happens ⁹  on earth ¹⁰  seems awful to me;

for all the benefits of wisdom ¹¹  are futile – like chasing the wind.

Futility of Being a Workaholic

2:18 So I loathed all the fruit of ¹²  my effort, ¹³ 

for which I worked so hard ¹⁴  on earth, ¹⁵ 

because ¹⁶  I must leave it ¹⁷  behind ¹⁸  in the hands of my successor. ¹⁹ 

Pengkhotbah 2:20-21

2:20 So I began to despair ²⁰  about all the fruit of ²¹  my labor ²² 

for which I worked so hard ²³  on earth. ²⁴ 

2:21 For a man may do his work with wisdom, knowledge, and skill;

however, he must hand over ²⁵  the fruit of his labor ²⁶  as an inheritance ²⁷ 

to someone else who did not work for it.

This also is futile, and an awful injustice! ²⁸ 

Pengkhotbah 4:7-8

Labor Motivated by Greed

4:7 So ²⁹  I again considered ³⁰  another ³¹  futile thing on earth: ³² 

4:8 A man who is all alone with no companion, ³³ 

he has no children nor siblings; ³⁴ 

yet there is no end to all his toil,

and he ³⁵  is never satisfied with riches.

He laments, ³⁶  “For whom am I toiling and depriving myself ³⁷  of pleasure?” ³⁸ 

This also is futile and a burdensome task! ³⁹ 

Pengkhotbah 6:11-12

6:11 The more one argues with words, the less he accomplishes. ⁴⁰ 

How does that benefit him? ⁴¹ 

6:12 For no one knows what is best for a person during his life ⁴²  –

during the few days of his fleeting life –

for ⁴³  they pass away ⁴⁴  like a shadow.

Nor can anyone tell him what the future will hold for him on earth. ⁴⁵ 

Pengkhotbah 12:8

Concluding Refrain: Qoheleth Restates His Thesis

12:8 “Absolutely futile!” ⁴⁶  laments the Teacher, ⁴⁷ 

“All of these things ⁴⁸  are futile!” ⁴⁹ 

Pengkhotbah 12:13

12:13 Having heard everything, I have reached this conclusion: ⁵⁰ 

Fear God and keep his commandments,

because this is the whole duty ⁵¹  of man.

Yesaya 55:2

55:2 Why pay money for something that will not nourish you? ⁵² 

Why spend ⁵³  your hard-earned money ⁵⁴  on something that will not satisfy?

Listen carefully ⁵⁵  to me and eat what is nourishing! ⁵⁶ 

Enjoy fine food! ⁵⁷ 

Lukas 10:40-42

10:40 But Martha was distracted ⁵⁸  with all the preparations she had to make, ⁵⁹  so ⁶⁰  she came up to him and said, “Lord, don’t you care ⁶¹  that my sister has left me to do all the work ⁶²  alone? Tell ⁶³  her to help me.” 10:41 But the Lord ⁶⁴  answered her, ⁶⁵  “Martha, Martha, ⁶⁶  you are worried and troubled ⁶⁷  about many things, 10:42 but one thing ⁶⁸  is needed. Mary has chosen the best ⁶⁹  part; it will not be taken away from her.”

Lukas 12:20-21

12:20 But God said to him, ‘You fool! This very night your life ⁷⁰  will be demanded back from ⁷¹  you, but who will get what you have prepared for yourself?’ ⁷²  12:21 So it is with the one who stores up riches for himself, ⁷³  but is not rich toward God.”

Lukas 12:29

12:29 So ⁷⁴  do not be overly concerned about ⁷⁵  what you will eat and what you will drink, and do not worry about such things. ⁷⁶ 

Lukas 12:1

Fear God, Not People

12:1 Meanwhile, ⁷⁷  when many thousands of the crowd had gathered so that they were trampling on one another, Jesus ⁷⁸  began to speak first to his disciples, “Be on your guard against ⁷⁹  the yeast of the Pharisees, ⁸⁰  which is hypocrisy. ⁸¹ 

Pengkhotbah 5:7

5:7 Just as there is futility in many dreams,

so also in many words. ⁸² 

Therefore, fear God!

[1:14]  ¹ tn The phrase “by man” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.

[1:14]  ² tn Heb “under the sun.”

[1:14]  ³ tn As mentioned in the note on “everything” in 1:2, the term הַכֹּל (hakkol, “everything”) is often limited in reference to the specific topic at hand in the context (e.g., BDB 482 s.v. כֹּל 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 עָשַׂה (’asah, “do, work, accomplish, achieve”) in 1:12-13.

[1:14]  ⁴ tn The phrase “he has accomplished” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.

[1:14]  ⁵ tn This usage of הֶבֶל (hevel) 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; see HALOT 236–37 s.v. I הֶבֶל; BDB 210–11 s.v. I הֶבֶל). The term is used with the simile “like striving after the wind” (רְעוּת רוּחַ, rÿ’ut ruakh) – 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: לְתֹהוּ (lÿtohu, “for nothing, in vain, for no reason”; Isa 49:4); רִיק (riq, “profitless; useless”; Isa 30:7; Eccl 6:11); לֹא הוֹעִיל (“worthless, profitless”; Is 30:6; 57:12; Jer 16:19); “what profit?” (מַה־יִּתְרוֹןֹ, mah-yyitron); and “no profit” (אֵין יִּתְרוֹן, en yyitron; e.g., 2:11; 3:19; 6:9). It is also used in antithesis to terms connoting value: טוֹב (tov, “good, benefit, advantage”) and יֹתְרוֹן (yotÿron, “profit, advantage, gain”). Despite everything that man has accomplished in history, it is ultimately futile because nothing on earth really changes.

[1:14]  ⁶ tn Heb “striving of wind.” The word “like” does not appear in the Hebrew text; it has been added in the translation to make the comparative notion clear.

[2:17]  ⁷ tn Or “I hated.”

[2:17]  ⁸ tn The term הַחַיִּים (hakhayyim, “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.

[2:17]  ⁹ tn Heb “the deed that is done.” The root עָשָׂה (’asah, “to do”) is repeated in הַמַּעֲשֶׂה שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה (hamma’aseh shenna’asah, “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” that is “done” to man.

[2:17]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “under the sun.”

[2:17]  ¹¹ tn Heb “all,” referring here to the relative advantage of wisdom.

[2:18]  ¹² tn The phrase “the fruit of” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity (see the following note on the phrase “hard labor”).

[2:18]  ¹³ tn Heb “I hated all my toil for which I had toiled.” The term עֲמָלִי (’amali, “my toil”) is repeated throughout 2:18-21. In each case, it functions as a metonymy of cause (i.e., toil) for effect (i.e., fruit of labor). See, e.g., Ps 105:44; BDB 765 s.v עָמַל 3. The metonymy is indicated by several factors: (1) The 3rd person masculine singular suffix (“it”) on אַנִּיחֶנּוּ (’annikhennu, “I must leave it”) in 2:18, and on יִתְּנֶנּוּ (yittÿnennu, “I must give it”) in 2:21 refer to his wealth, that is, the fruit of his labor. (2) In 2:21 the 3rd person masculine singular suffix on שֶׁלֹּא עָמַל־בּוֹ (shello’ ’amal-bo, “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 עֲמָלִי 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).

[2:18]  ¹⁴ tn Qoheleth uses an internal cognate accusative construction (accusative noun and verb from the same root) for emphasis: עֲמָלִי שֶׁאֲנִי עָמֵל (’amali she’ani ’amel, “my toil for which I had toiled”). See IBHS 167 §10.2.1g.

[2:18]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “under the sun.”

[2:18]  ¹⁶ tn The relative pronoun שֶׁ (she) on שֶׁאַנִּיחֶנּוּ (she’annikhennu, relative pronoun שֶׁ + Hiphil imperfect 1st person common singular from נוּחַ, nuakh, “to leave” + 3rd person masculine singular suffix) is causal: “Because I must leave it behind.”

[2:18]  ¹⁷ tn The 3rd person masculine singular suffix on אַנִּיחֶנּוּ (’annikhennu, “I must leave it”) refers to Qoheleth’s wealth, that is, the fruit of his labor (see the note on the phrase “hard labor” in 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).

[2:18]  ¹⁸ tn The verb נוּחַ (nuakh, “to rest”) denotes “to leave [something] behind” in the hands of someone (e.g., Ps 119:121; Eccl 2:18); see HALOT 680 s.v. נוח B.2.c. 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.

[2:18]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “to a man who will come after me.”

[2:20]  ²⁰ tn Heb “I turned aside to allow my heart despair.” The term לִבִּי (libbi, “my heart”) is a synecdoche of part (i.e., heart) for the whole (i.e., whole person); see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 648.

[2:20]  ²¹ tn The phrase “the fruit of” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity (see the following note on the word “labor”).

[2:20]  ²² tn Heb “all my toil.” As in 2:18-19, the term עֲמָלִי (’amali, “my labor”) is a metonymy of cause (i.e., my labor) for effect (i.e., 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).

[2:20]  ²³ tn Here the author uses an internal cognate accusative construction (accusative noun and verb from the same root) for emphasis: שֶׁעָמַלְתִּי הֶעָמָל (he’amal she’amalti, “the toil for which I had toiled”); see IBHS 167 §10.2.1g.

[2:20]  ²⁴ tn Heb “under the sun.”

[2:21]  ²⁵ tn Heb “he must give.” The 3rd person masculine singular suffix on יִתְּנֶנּוּ (yittÿnennu, Qal imperfect 3rd person masculine singular from נָתַן, natan, “to give” + 3rd person masculine singular suffix) refers back to עֲמָלוֹ (’amalo, “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.”

[2:21]  sn As in 2:18-19, Qoheleth laments the injustice that a person who works diligently in wisdom must one day hand over the fruit of his labor (i.e., 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 this wealth, or be foolish and squander it – in which case, the former man’s entire life’s work would be in vain.

[2:21]  ²⁶ tn Heb “it”; the referent (“the fruit of his labor”) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:21]  ²⁷ tn Or “he must turn over an inheritance”; or “he must turn it over, namely, an inheritance.” There are two approaches to the syntax of חֶלְקוֹ (khelqo, “his inheritance”): (1) The 3rd person masculine singular suffix is a subjective genitive: “his inheritance” = the inheritance which he must give to his heir. The referent of the 3rd person masculine singular suffix is Qoheleth in 2:21a who worked hard to amass the fortune. The noun חֵלֶק (kheleq, “inheritance”) functions as an adverbial accusative of state (GKC 372 §118.a) or a predicate accusative (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 12-13, §57): “He must give it [i.e., his fortune] as an inheritance.” (2) The 3rd person masculine singular suffix is an objective genitive: “his inheritance” = the inheritance which the heir will receive from Qoheleth. The referent of the 3rd person masculine singular suffix is the heir in 2:21b. The noun חֵלֶק (“inheritance”) functions as the accusative direct object in apposition (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 15-16, §71) to the 3rd person masculine singular suffix on יִתְּנֶנּוּ (yittÿnennu, “he must give it”; Qal imperfect 3rd person masculine singular from נָתַן, natan, + 3rd person masculine singular suffix): “He must give it, namely, his inheritance, to one who did not work for it.”

[2:21]  ²⁸ tn The noun רָעָה (ra’ah, “evil”) probably means “misfortune” (HALOT 1263 s.v. רָעָה 4) or “injustice; wrong” (HALOT 1262 s.v. רָעָה 2.b). The phrase רָעָה רַבָּה (ra’ah rabbah) 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, MLB) and “utterly wrong!” (NEB).

[2:21]  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!”

[4:7]  ²⁹ tn The prefixed vav on וְשַׁבְתִּי (vÿshavti, vav + perfect 1st person common singular from שׁוּב, shuv, “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….”

[4:7]  ³⁰ tn Heb “I turned and I saw…”; or “I again considered.” The Hebrew phrase וָאֶרְאֶה…וְשַׁבְתִּי (vÿshavti…va’er’eh, “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 שׁוּב (shuv, “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); see HALOT 1430 s.v. שׁוב 5; BDB 998 s.v. שׁוּב 8; GKC 386 §120.e: “I observed again” or “I repeatedly observed.” On the other hand, the shift from the perfect וְשַׁבְתִּי (vav + perfect 1st person common singular from שׁוּב, “to turn”) to the preterite וָאֶרְאֶה (vav + Qal preterite 1st person common singular from רָאָה, ra’ah, “to see”) might indicate a purpose clause: “I turned [my mind] to consider….” The preterite וָאֶרְאֶה follows the perfect וְשַׁבְתִּי. When a wayyiqtol form (vav + 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 IBHS 554-55 §33.3.1a.

[4:7]  ³¹ tn The word “another” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.

[4:7]  ³² tn Heb “under the sun.”

[4:8]  ³³ tn Heb “There is one and there is not a second.”

[4:8]  ³⁴ tn 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).

[4:8]  ³⁵ tn Heb “his eye.” The term “eye” is a synecdoche of part (i.e., the eye) for the whole (i.e., the whole person); see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 647.

[4:8]  ³⁶ tn The phrase “he laments” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity. The direct discourse (“For whom am I toiling and depriving myself of pleasure?”) is not introduced with an introductory structure. As in the LXX, some translations suggest that these words are spoken by a lonely workaholic, e.g., “He says…” (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, MLB, YLT, Douay, NASB, Moffatt).

[4:8]  ³⁷ tn Heb “my soul.”

[4:8]  ³⁸ tn This rhetorical question is an example of negative affirmation, that is, it expects a negative answer: “No one!” (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 949-51).

[4:8]  ³⁹ tn The adjective רָע (ra’, “evil”) here means “misfortune” (HALOT 1263 s.v. רָעָה 4) or “injustice, wrong” (HALOT 1262 s.v. רָעָה 2.b). The phrase עִנְיַן רָע (’inyan ra’, “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 הֶבֶל (hevel, “futile”) in 4:8, and describes a “grave misfortune” in 5:13. The noun עִנְיַן (’inyan, “business”) refers to something that keeps a person occupied or busy: “business; affair; task; occupation” (HALOT 857 s.v. עִנְיָן; BDB 775 s.v. עִנְיָן). The related verb עָנָה (’anah) means “to be occupied; to be busy with (בְּ, bet),” e.g., Eccl 1:13; 3:10; 5:19 (HALOT 854 s.v. III עָנָה; BDB 775 s.v. II עָנָה). The noun is from the Aramaic loanword עִנְיָנָא (’inyana’, “concern; care.” The verb is related to the Aramaic verb “to try hard,” the Arabic verb “to be busily occupied; to worry; to be a matter of concern,” and the Old South Arabic root “to be troubled; to strive with” (HALOT 854 s.v. III ענה). HALOT 857 s.v. עִנְיָן renders the phrase as “unhappy business” here. The phrase עִנְיַן רָע, is treated creatively by English versions: KJV, ASV “sore travail”; YLT “sad travail”; Douay “grievous vexation”; RSV, NRSV, NJPS “unhappy business”; NEB, Moffatt “sorry business”; NIV “miserable business”; NAB “worthless task”; NASB “grievous task”; MLB “sorry situation”; NLT “depressing.”

[6:11]  ⁴⁰ tn Heb “The more the words, the more the futility.”

[6:11]  ⁴¹ tn Or “What benefit does man have [in that]?”

[6:12]  ⁴² tn Heb “For who knows what is good for a man in life?” The rhetorical question (“For who knows…?”) is a negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “For no one knows…!” (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 949-51). The translation renders this rhetorical device as a positive affirmation.

[6:12]  ⁴³ tn The vav prefixed to וְיַעֲשֵׂם (vÿya’asem, conjunction + Qal imperfect 3rd person masculine singular from עָשַׂה, ’asah, “to do” + 3rd person masculine plural suffix) functions in an explanatory or epexegetical sense (“For …”).

[6:12]  ⁴⁴ tn The 3rd person masculine plural suffix on the verb וְיַעֲשֵׂם (vÿya’asem, conjunction + Qal imperfect 3rd person masculine singular from ָָעשַׂה, ’asah, “to do” + 3rd person masculine plural suffix) refers to מִסְפַּר יְמֵי־חַיֵּי הֶבְלוֹ (mispar yÿme-khayye hevlo, “the few days of his fleeting life”). The suffix may be taken as an objective genitive: “he spends them [i.e., the days of his life] like a shadow” (HALOT 891 s.v. I ָָעשַׂה 8) or as a subjective genitive: “they [i.e., the days of his life] pass like a shadow” (BDB 795 s.v. ָָעשַׂה II.11).

[6:12]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “Who can tell the man what shall be after him under the sun?” The rhetorical question (“For who can tell him…?”) is a negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “For no one can tell him…!” (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 949-51). The translation renders this rhetorical device as a positive affirmation.

[12:8]  ⁴⁶ tn Heb “futility of futilities.” The phrase “absolutely futile” (הֲבֶל הֲבָלִים, havel havalim) is a superlative genitive construction (GKC 431 §133.i). See note on “futile” at 1:2.

[12:8]  ⁴⁷ tn Elsewhere in the book, the author is identified with the anarthrous term קֹהֶלֶת (qohelet, 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: הַקּוֹהֶלֶת (haqqohelet, “the Teacher”). Numerous English translations render קֹהֶלֶת as a professional title: “the Speaker” (NEB, Moffatt); “the Preacher” (KJV, RSV, YLT, MLB, 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” (JPS, NJPS) and “Qoheleth” (NAB, NRSV margin).

[12:8]  ⁴⁸ tn Heb “Everything.” The term is rendered “all of these things” for clarity. Although כֹּל (kol, “everything; all”) is often used in an absolute or comprehensive sense (BDB 481 s.v. כֹּל 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 s.v. 2). This is particularly true of הַכֹּל (hakkol, BDB 482 s.v. 2.b) 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 הַכֹּל means “both” (e.g., 2:14; 3:19: 9:1, 2). Thus, הַכֹּל (“all; everything”) refers only to what Qoheleth characterizes as “futile” (הֶבֶל, hevel) 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 כֹּל are designated as “futile” (הֶבֶל).

[12:8]  ⁴⁹ tn The term הֶבֶל (hevel, “futile”) is repeated three times within the six words of this verse for emphasis. See footnote on “futile” at 1:2.

[12:8]  sn Absolutely futile!…All of these things are futile! 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” (הֶבֶל, hevel).

[12:13]  ⁵⁰ tn Heb “The end of the matter, everything having been heard.”

[12:13]  ⁵¹ tn Heb “This is all men”; or “This is the whole of man.” The phrase זֶה כָּל־הָאָדָם (zeh kol-ha’adam, “this is all men”) features rhetorical elision of a key word. The ambiguity over the elided 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” (MLB, ASV margin, RSV margin); (3) “this applies to all men” (NASB, 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 כֹּל (kol, “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” (כֹּל) has been heard in the book, his conclusion is that the “whole” (כֹּל) duty of man is to obey God because God will bring “all” (כֹּל) acts into judgment, including “all” (כֹּל) that is hidden, whether good or bad. See D. Barthélemy, ed., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, 3:596.

[55:2]  ⁵² tn Heb “for what is not food.”

[55:2]  ⁵³ tn The interrogative particle and the verb “spend” are understood here by ellipsis (note the preceding line).

[55:2]  ⁵⁴ tn Heb “your labor,” which stands by metonymy for that which one earns.

[55:2]  ⁵⁵ tn The infinitive absolute follows the imperative and lends emphasis to the exhortation.

[55:2]  ⁵⁶ tn Heb “good” (so NASB, NIV, NRSV).

[55:2]  ⁵⁷ tn Heb “Let your appetite delight in fine food.”

[55:2]  sn Nourishing, fine food here represents the blessings God freely offers. These include forgiveness, a new covenantal relationship with God, and national prominence (see vv. 3-6).

[10:40]  ⁵⁸ sn The term distracted means “to be pulled away” by something (L&N 25.238). It is a narrative comment that makes clear who is right in the account.

[10:40]  ⁵⁹ tn Grk “with much serving.”

[10:40]  ⁶⁰ tn Here δέ (de) has been translated as “so” to indicate that the following was a result of Martha’s distraction.

[10:40]  ⁶¹ tn The negative οὐ (ou) used with the verb expects a positive reply. Martha expected Jesus to respond and rebuke Mary.

[10:40]  ⁶² tn Grk “has left me to serve alone.”

[10:40]  ⁶³ tn The conjunction οὖν (oun, “then, therefore”) has not been translated here.

[10:41]  ⁶⁴ tc Most mss (A B* C D W Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 Ï it) read “Jesus” instead of “the Lord” here, but κύριος (kurios, “Lord”) has the support of some weighty papyri, uncials, and other witnesses (Ì^3,[45],75 א B² L 579 892 pc lat sa).

[10:41]  ⁶⁵ tn Grk “answering, said to her.” This is redundant in contemporary English and has been simplified to “answered her.”

[10:41]  ⁶⁶ sn The double vocative Martha, Martha communicates emotion.

[10:41]  ⁶⁷ tn Or “upset.” Here the meanings of μεριμνάω (merimnaw) and θορυβάζομαι (qorubazomai) reinforce each other (L&N 25.234).

[10:42]  ⁶⁸ tc Or, with some mss (̳ [א] B C² L 070^vid ˹ 33 [579] pc), “few things are needed – or only one” (as well as other variants). The textual problem here is a difficult one to decide. The shorter reading is normally preferred, but it is not altogether clear how the variants would arise from it. However, the reading followed in the translation has good support (with some internal variations) from a number of witnesses (Ì^45,75 A C* W Θ Ψ Ë¹³ Ï lat sa).

[10:42]  ⁶⁹ tn Or “better”; Grk “good.” This is an instance of the positive adjective used in place of the superlative adjective. According to ExSyn 298, this could also be treated as a positive for comparative (“better”).

[12:20]  ⁷⁰ tn Grk “your soul,” but ψυχή (yuch) is frequently used of one’s physical life. It clearly has that meaning in this context.

[12:20]  ⁷¹ tn Or “required back.” This term, ἀπαιτέω (apaitew), has an economic feel to it and is often used of a debt being called in for repayment (BDAG 96 s.v. 1).

[12:20]  ⁷² tn Grk “the things you have prepared, whose will they be?” The words “for yourself” are not in the Greek text, but are implied.

[12:21]  ⁷³ sn It is selfishness that is rebuked here, in the accumulation of riches for himself. Recall the emphasis on the first person pronouns throughout the parable.

[12:29]  ⁷⁴ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “so” to indicate a conclusion drawn from the previous illustrations.

[12:29]  ⁷⁵ tn Grk “do not seek,” but this could be misunderstood to mean that people should make no attempt to obtain their food. The translation “do not be overly concerned” attempts to reflect the force of the original.

[12:29]  ⁷⁶ tn The words “about such things” have been supplied to qualify the meaning; the phrase relates to obtaining food and drink mentioned in the previous clause.

[12:1]  ⁷⁷ tn The phrase ἐν οἷς (en Jois) can be translated “meanwhile.”

[12:1]  ⁷⁸ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[12:1]  ⁷⁹ tn According to L&N 27.59, “to pay attention to, to keep on the lookout for, to be alert for, to be on your guard against.” This is another Lukan present imperative calling for constant vigilance.

[12:1]  ⁸⁰ sn See the note on Pharisees in 5:17.

[12:1]  ⁸¹ sn The pursuit of popularity can lead to hypocrisy, if one is not careful.

[5:7]  ⁸² tn The syntax of this verse is difficult. Perhaps the best approach is to classify the vav on וַהֲבָלִים (vahavalim, “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 s.v. ו 5.c.γ: “There is futility….” The phrase בְרֹב הֲלֹמוֹת (vÿrob halomot) is an adverbial modifier (“in many dreams”), as is דְבָרִים הַרְבֵּה (dÿvarim harbeh, “many words”). The vav prefixed to וּדְבָרִים (udÿvarim) and the juxtaposition of the two lines suggests a comparison: “just as…so also…” (BDB 253 s.v. ו 1.j). The English versions reflect a variety of approaches: “In the multitude of dreams and many words there are also diverse vanities” (KJV); “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” (MLB); “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).