Pengkhotbah 4:4

Labor Motivated by Envy

4:4 Then I considered ¹  all the skillful work ²  that is done:

Surely it is nothing more than ³  competition ⁴  between one person and another. ⁵ 

This also is profitless – like ⁶  chasing the wind.

Pengkhotbah 5:11

5:11 When someone’s ⁷  prosperity ⁸  increases, those who consume it also increase;

so what does its owner ⁹  gain, except that he gets to see it with his eyes? ¹⁰ 

Pengkhotbah 7:15

Exceptions to the Law of Retribution

7:15 During the days of my fleeting life ¹¹  I have seen both ¹²  of these things:

Sometimes ¹³  a righteous person dies prematurely ¹⁴  in spite of ¹⁵  his righteousness,

and sometimes ¹⁶  a wicked person lives long ¹⁷  in spite of his evil deeds.

Pengkhotbah 7:25

True Righteousness and Wisdom are Virtually Nonexistent

7:25 I tried ¹⁸  to understand, examine, and comprehend ¹⁹ 

the role of ²⁰  wisdom in the scheme of things, ²¹ 

and to understand the stupidity of wickedness ²²  and the insanity of folly. ²³ 

Pengkhotbah 8:1

Human Government Demonstrates Limitations of Wisdom

8:1 Who is ²⁴  a ²⁵  wise person? Who knows the solution ²⁶  to a problem? ²⁷ 

A person’s wisdom brightens his appearance, ²⁸  and softens ²⁹  his harsh countenance. ³⁰ 

Pengkhotbah 9:15

9:15 However, a poor but wise man lived in the city, ³¹ 

and he could have delivered ³²  the city by his wisdom,

but no one listened ³³  to that poor man.

[4:4]  ¹ tn Heb “saw.”

[4:4]  ² tn Heb “all the toil and all the skill.” This Hebrew clause (אֶת־כָּל־עָמָל וְאֵת כָּל־כִּשְׁרוֹן, ’et-kol-’amal vÿ’et kol-kishron) 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.”

[4:4]  ³ tn The phrase “nothing more than” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.

[4:4]  ⁴ tn The noun קִנְאַה (qin’ah, “competition”) has a wide range of meanings: “zeal; jealousy; envy; rivalry; competition; suffering; animosity; anger; wrath” (HALOT 1110 s.v.; BDB 888 s.v.). Here, as in 9:6, it denotes “rivalry” (BDB 888 s.v. 1) or “competitive spirit” (HALOT 1110 s.v. 1.b). The LXX rendered it ζῆλος (zhlos, “envy; jealousy”). The English versions reflect this broad range: “rivalry” (NEB, NAB, NASB), “envy” (KJV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, MLB, NIV, NJPS), and “jealousy” (Moffatt).

[4:4]  ⁵ tn Heb “a man and his neighbor.”

[4:4]  ⁶ tn The word “like” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.

[5:11]  ⁷ tn The word “someone’s” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.

[5:11]  ⁸ tn The term טוֹבָה (tovah, “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); cf. HALOT 372 s.v. טוֹבָה 2. The related term טוֹב (tov, “good”) connotes “prosperity” as well (Prov 11:10; Job 20:21; 21:16); cf. HALOT 372 s.v. טוֹבָה 1.b. 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 economic law of “supply and demand,” as some versions seem to imply, e.g., “As goods increase, so do those who consume them” (NIV); “When goods increase, those who eat them increase” (NRSV); cf. also KJV, ASV, RSV, MLB, NASB.

[5:11]  ⁹ tn The form is plural in the Hebrew text, but the plural is one of intensification; it is used here to emphasize the owner’s authority over his wealth. See GKC 399 §124.i. See v 13 as well.

[5:11]  ¹⁰ tn The rhetorical question is an example of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “There is no ultimate advantage!” (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 947-48).

[7:15]  ¹¹ tn The word “life” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for smoothness and clarity.

[7:15]  ¹² tn As is the case throughout Ecclesiastes, the term הַכֹּל (hakkol) should be nuanced “both” rather than “all.”

[7:15]  ¹³ tn Heb “There is.” The term יֵשׁ (yesh, “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; 7:15 [2x]; 8:14 [3x]).

[7:15]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “perishes.”

[7:15]  ¹⁵ tn Or “in his righteousness.” The preposition בְּ (bet) on the terms בְּצִרְקוֹ (bÿtsirqo, “his righteousness”) and בְּרָעָתוֹ (bÿra’ato, “his evil-doing”) in the following line are traditionally taken in a locative sense: “in his righteousness” and “in his wickedness” (KJV, NASB, NIV). However, it is better to take the בְּ (bet) 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); cf. HALOT 104 s.v. בְּ 7; BDB 90 s.v. בְּ 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, D. R. Glenn (“Ecclesiastes,” BKCOT, 993–94) 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).”

[7:15]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “There is.” The term יֵשׁ (yesh,“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; 7:15 [2x]; 8:14 [3x]).

[7:15]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “a wicked man endures.”

[7:25]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “I turned, I, even my heart.”

[7:25]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “to seek.”

[7:25]  ²⁰ tn The phrase “the role of” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity and smoothness.

[7:25]  ²¹ tn The phrase חָכְמָה וְחֶשְׁבּוֹן (khokhmah vÿkheshbon, “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 עִצְּבוֹנֵךְ וְהֵרֹנֵךְ (’itsÿvonekh vÿheronekh, “pain and childbearing”) which connotes “pain in childbearing” (Gen 3:16).

[7:25]  ²² tn Or “the evil of folly” The genitive construct phrase רֶשַׁע כֶּסֶל (resha’ kesel) 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 in various ways: “wickedness of folly” (KJV); “wrong of folly” (YLT); “evil of folly” (NASB); “stupidity of wickedness” (NIV); “wickedness, stupidity” (NJPS); “wickedness is folly [or foolish]” (ASV, NAB, NRSV, MLB, Moffatt), and “it is folly to be wicked” (NEB).

[7:25]  ²³ tn Or “the folly of madness” The genitive construct phrase וְהַסִּכְלוּת הוֹלֵלוֹת (vÿhassikhlut holelot) 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 [or folly] is madness” (ASV, NAB, NRSV, MLB, Moffatt).

[8:1]  ²⁴ 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]  ²⁵ 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]  ²⁶ 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]  ²⁷ tn Heb “a thing.”

[8:1]  ²⁸ tn Heb “makes his face shine.”

[8:1]  ²⁹ 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]  ³⁰ 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).

[9:15]  ³¹ tn Heb “was found in it”; the referent (the city) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[9:15]  ³² tn Or “he delivered.” The verb וּמִלַּט (umillat, from מָלַט, malat, “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 זָכַר (zakhar, “to remember”) in the following line harmonizes with the indicative: “but no one remembered that poor man [afterward].” However, the modal is supported by v. 16: “A poor man’s wisdom is despised; no one ever listens to his advice.” This approach must nuance זָכַר (“to remember”) as “[no one] listened to [that poor man].” Most translations favor the indicative approach: “he delivered” or “he saved” (KJV, RSV, NRSV, NAB, ASV, NASB, MLB, NIV); however, some adopt the modal nuance: “he might have saved” (NEB, NJPS, NASB margin).

[9:15]  ³³ tn Heb “remembered.”