Pengkhotbah 2:19

2:19 Who knows if he will be a wise man or a fool?

Yet ¹  he will be master over all the fruit of ²  my labor ³ 

for which I worked so wisely ⁴  on earth! ⁵ 

This also is futile!

Pengkhotbah 2:25

2:25 For no one ⁶  can eat and drink ⁷ 

or experience joy ⁸  apart from him. ⁹ 

Pengkhotbah 3:21-22

3:21 Who really knows if the human spirit ¹⁰  ascends upward,

and the animal’s spirit descends into the earth?

3:22 So I perceived there is nothing better than for people ¹¹  to enjoy their work, ¹² 

because that is their ¹³  reward;

for who can show them what the future holds? ¹⁴ 

Pengkhotbah 4:8

4:8 A man who is all alone with no companion, ¹⁵ 

he has no children nor siblings; ¹⁶ 

yet there is no end to all his toil,

and he ¹⁷  is never satisfied with riches.

He laments, ¹⁸  “For whom am I toiling and depriving myself ¹⁹  of pleasure?” ²⁰ 

This also is futile and a burdensome task! ²¹ 

Pengkhotbah 5:10

Covetousness

5:10 The one who loves money ²²  will never be satisfied with money, ²³ 

he who loves wealth ²⁴  will never be satisfied ²⁵  with his ²⁶  income.

This also is futile.

Pengkhotbah 6:12

6:12 For no one knows what is best for a person during his life ²⁷  –

during the few days of his fleeting life –

for ²⁸  they pass away ²⁹  like a shadow.

Nor can anyone tell him what the future will hold for him on earth. ³⁰ 

Pengkhotbah 7:13

Wisdom Acknowledges God’s Orchestration of Life

7:13 Consider the work of God:

For who can make straight what he has bent?

Pengkhotbah 7:24

7:24 Whatever has happened is beyond human ³¹  understanding; ³² 

it is far deeper than anyone can fathom. ³³ 

Pengkhotbah 8:1

Human Government Demonstrates Limitations of Wisdom

8:1 Who is ³⁴  a ³⁵  wise person? Who knows the solution ³⁶  to a problem? ³⁷ 

A person’s wisdom brightens his appearance, ³⁸  and softens ³⁹  his harsh countenance. ⁴⁰ 

Pengkhotbah 8:4

8:4 Surely the king’s authority ⁴¹  is absolute; ⁴² 

no one can say ⁴³  to him, “What are you doing?”

Pengkhotbah 8:7

8:7 Surely no one knows the future, ⁴⁴ 

and no one can tell another person what will happen. ⁴⁵ 

Pengkhotbah 9:4

Better to Be Poor but Alive than Rich but Dead

9:4 But whoever is among ⁴⁶  the living ⁴⁷  has hope;

a live dog is better than a dead lion.

Pengkhotbah 10:14

10:14 yet a fool keeps on babbling. ⁴⁸ 

No one knows what will happen;

who can tell him what will happen in the future? ⁴⁹ 

[2:19]  ¹ tn The vav on וְיִשְׁלַט (vÿyishlat, conjunction + Qal imperfect 3rd person masculine singular from שָׁלַט, shalat, “to be master”) is adversative (“yet”).

[2:19]  ² 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”).

[2:19]  ³ tn Heb “my labor.” As in 2:18, the term עֲמָלִי (’amali, “my labor”) is a metonymy of cause (i.e., my labor) for effect (i.e., 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 be master over all my possessions” (MLB).

[2:19]  ⁴ tn An internal cognate accusative construction (accusative and verb from same root) is used for emphasis: שֶׁעָמַלְתִּי עֲמָלִי (’amali she’amalti, “my toil for which I had toiled”); see IBHS 167 §10.2.1g. The two verbs שֶׁעָמַלְתִּי וְשֶׁחָכַמְתִּי (she’amalti vÿshekhakhamti, “for which I had labored and for which I had acted wisely”) form a verbal hendiadys (two separate verbs used in association to communicate 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.

[2:19]  ⁵ tn Heb “under the sun.”

[2:25]  ⁶ tn Heb “For who can…?” The rhetorical question is an example of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “No one can!” (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 949-51).

[2:25]  ⁷ tn The phrase “and drink” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for stylistic harmonization with v. 24.

[2:25]  ⁸ tn The verb II חוּשׁ (khush, “to enjoy”) is a hapax legomenon which BDB defines as “to feel; to enjoy [with the senses]” on the basis of the context, and the cognates: Arabic “to feel; to perceive [by senses]”; Aramaic חושׁ “to feel pain,” and New Hebrew חושׁ “to feel pain” (BDB 301 s.v. II חֹוּשׁ). HALOT relates the Hebrew root to Akkadian havavu “to be delighted with” (HALOT 300 s.v. II חושׁ 1). The 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,” making some sense of the line by filling out the parallelism “to eat [and drink]” (e.g., Eccl 8:15).

[2:25]  ⁹ tc The MT reads מִמֶּנִּי (mimmenni, “more than I”). However, an alternate textual tradition of מִמֶּנּוּ (mimmennu,“apart from him [= God]”) is preserved in several medieval Hebrew mss, and is reflected in most of the versions (LXX, Syriac, Syro-Hexapla, and Jerome). The textual deviation is a case of simple orthographic confusion between י (yod) and ו (vav) as frequently happened, e.g., MT צו לצו צו לצו (tsv ltsv tsv ltsv) versus 1QIsa^a 28:10 צי לצי צי לצי (tsy ltsy ts ltsy); see P. K. McCarter, Jr., Textual Criticism, 47. It is difficult to determine which reading is original here. The MT forms 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 textual tradition 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, apart from “the hand of God” in 2:24. It is possible that internal evidence supports the alternate textual tradition. In 2:24-26, Qoheleth is not emphasizing his own resources to enjoy life, as he had done in 2:1-11; but 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 D. Barthélemy, ed., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, 3:570. The English versions are split on the textual problem: a few retain MT מִמֶּנִּי (“more than I”), e.g., KJV, ASV, YLT, Douay, NJPS, while others adopt the alternate reading מִמֶּנּוּ, “apart from him” (NEB, NAB, MLB, NASB, RSV, NRSV, NIV, Moffatt).

[3:21]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “the spirit of the sons of man.”

[3:22]  ¹¹ tn Heb “man.”

[3:22]  ¹² tn Heb “his works.”

[3:22]  ¹³ tn Heb “his.”

[3:22]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “what will be after him” (cf. KJV, NASB, NIV) or “afterward” (cf. NJPS).

[4:8]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “There is one and there is not a second.”

[4:8]  ¹⁶ 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]  ¹⁷ 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]  ¹⁸ 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]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “my soul.”

[4:8]  ²⁰ 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]  ²¹ 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.”

[5:10]  ²² tn Heb “silver.” The Hebrew term כֶּסֶף (kesef, “silver”) refers to “money” (HALOT 490–91 s.v. כֶּסֶף 3). It is a synecdoche of specific (i.e., silver) for the general (i.e., money); see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 625-29.

[5:10]  ²³ sn The Hebrew term “silver” (translated “money”) is repeated twice in this line for rhetorical emphasis.

[5:10]  ²⁴ tn The term הָמוֹן (hamon, “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 (HALOT 250 s.v. הָמוֹן 1–6). Here, it refers to abundant wealth (related to “pomp”); cf. HALOT 250 s.v. הָמוֹן 6, that is, lavish abundant wealth (Ezek 29:19; 30:4; 1 Chr 29:16).

[5:10]  ²⁵ tn The phrase “will never be satisfied” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity. Note the previous line.

[5:10]  ²⁶ tn The word “his” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.

[6:12]  ²⁷ 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]  ²⁸ 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]  ²⁹ 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]  ³⁰ 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.

[7:24]  ³¹ tn The word “human” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[7:24]  ³² tn Heb “is far away.”

[7:24]  ³³ tn Heb “It is deep, deep – who can find it?” The repetition of the word “deep” emphasizes the degree of incomprehensibility. See IBHS 233-34 §12.5a.

[8:1]  ³⁴ tn The preposition כְּ (kaf) prefixed to כְּהֶחָכָם (kÿhekhakham, “wise man”) is traditionally taken in a comparative sense: “Who is like [or 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 R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 47, §261; IBHS 202-4 §11.2.9b).

[8:1]  ³⁵ tn The definite article on הֶחָכָם (hekhakham, “wise man”) may be taken in an individualizing (“the wise man”) or generic sense (“a wise man”).

[8:1]  ³⁶ tn Or “the explanation.” The noun פֵּשֶׁר (pesher) denotes “solution; explanation; interpretation; meaning” (HALOT 982–83 s.v. פֵּשֶׁר; BDB 833 s.v. פֵּשֶׁר). The Hebrew term is an Aramaic loanword from פִּשְׁרָא (pishra’, “diagnosis; meaning; solution”). The Aramaic noun פְּשַׁר (pÿshar, “interpretation of a dream or prophecy”) and verb פְּשַׁר (pÿshar, “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).

[8:1]  ³⁷ tn Heb “a thing.”

[8:1]  ³⁸ tn Heb “makes his face shine.”

[8:1]  ³⁹ tc The MT vocalizes the consonantal form ישנא as יְשֻׁנֶּא (yÿshunne’, Pual imperfect 3rd person masculine singular from I שָׁנָה, shana, “to change”). However, the LXX μισθήσεται (misqhsetai) reflects an alternate vocalization tradition of יִשָּׂנֵא (yissane’, Niphal imperfect 3rd person masculine singular from שָׂנֵא, sane’, “to hate”), while the Vulgate’s commutabit reflects יְשַׁנֶּה (yÿshanneh, Piel imperfect 3rd person masculine singular from II שָׁנָה, shanah, “to repeat”).

[8:1]  tn Heb “the strength of his face is changed.”

[8:1]  ⁴⁰ tn Heb “the strength of his face is changed.” The expression עֹז פָּנָיו (’oz panayv, “strength of his face”) is an idiom for “boldness; impudence” (BDB 739 s.v. עֹז 4) or “hard face” = harsh countenance (HALOT 805 s.v. I עֹז 1.c).

[8:4]  ⁴¹ tn Heb “word.”

[8:4]  ⁴² tn Heb “supreme.”

[8:4]  ⁴³ tn Heb “Who can say…?”

[8:7]  ⁴⁴ tn Heb “what will be.”

[8:7]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “Who can tell him what will be?”

[9:4]  ⁴⁶ tn The consonantal text (Kethib) has “is chosen, selected.” The translation follows the marginal reading (Qere), “is joined.” See BDB 288 s.v. חָבַר Pu.

[9:4]  ⁴⁷ tn Heb “all the living.”

[10:14]  ⁴⁸ tn Heb “and the fool multiplies words.” This line is best taken as the third line of a tricola encompassing 10:13-14a (NASB, NRSV, NJPS, Moffatt) rather than the first line of a tricola encompassing 10:14 (KJV, NEB, RSV, 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!” (NJPS).

[10:14]  ⁴⁹ tn Heb “after him”; or “after he [dies].”