Mazmur 119:21

119:21 You reprimand arrogant people.

Those who stray from your commands are doomed. ¹ 

Mazmur 119:118

119:118 You despise ²  all who stray from your statutes,

for they are deceptive and unreliable. ³ 

Mazmur 119:133

119:133 Direct my steps by your word! ⁴ 

Do not let any sin dominate me!

Mazmur 119:176

119:176 I have wandered off like a lost sheep. ⁵ 

Come looking for your servant,

for I do not forget your commands.

Mazmur 23:3

23:3 He restores my strength. ⁶ 

He leads me down ⁷  the right paths ⁸ 

for the sake of his reputation. ⁹ 

Mazmur 125:5

125:5 As for those who are bent on traveling a sinful path, ¹⁰ 

may the Lord remove them, ¹¹  along with those who behave wickedly! ¹² 

May Israel experience peace! ¹³ 

Mazmur 143:8-10

143:8 May I hear about your loyal love in the morning, ¹⁴ 

for I trust in you.

Show me the way I should go, ¹⁵ 

because I long for you. ¹⁶ 

143:9 Rescue me from my enemies, O Lord!

I run to you for protection. ¹⁷ 

143:10 Teach me to do what pleases you, ¹⁸ 

for you are my God.

May your kind presence ¹⁹ 

lead me ²⁰  into a level land. ²¹ 

Amsal 2:13

2:13 who leave ²²  the upright ²³  paths

to walk on the dark ²⁴  ways,

Amsal 21:16

21:16 The one who wanders ²⁵  from the way of wisdom ²⁶ 

will end up ²⁷  in the company of the departed. ²⁸ 

Yesaya 35:8

35:8 A thoroughfare will be there –

it will be called the Way of Holiness. ²⁹ 

The unclean will not travel on it;

it is reserved for those authorized to use it ³⁰  –

fools ³¹  will not stray into it.

Yehezkiel 34:6

34:6 My sheep wandered over all the mountains and on every high hill. My sheep were scattered over the entire face of the earth with no one looking or searching for them.

Yehezkiel 34:2

34:2 “Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds ³²  of Israel; prophesy, and say to them – to the shepherds: ‘This is what the sovereign Lord says: Woe to the shepherds of Israel who have been feeding themselves! Should not shepherds feed the flock?

Pengkhotbah 2:15-22

2:15 So I thought to myself, “The fate of the fool will happen even to me! ³³ 

Then what did I gain by becoming so excessively ³⁴  wise?” ³⁵ 

So I lamented to myself, ³⁶ 

“The benefits of wisdom ³⁷  are ultimately ³⁸  meaningless!”

2:16 For the wise man, like ³⁹  the fool, will not be remembered for very long, ⁴⁰ 

because ⁴¹  in the days to come, both will already have been forgotten. ⁴² 

Alas, ⁴³  the wise man dies – just like ⁴⁴  the fool!

2:17 So I loathed ⁴⁵  life ⁴⁶  because what

happens ⁴⁷  on earth ⁴⁸  seems awful to me;

for all the benefits of wisdom ⁴⁹  are futile – like chasing the wind.

Futility of Being a Workaholic

2:18 So I loathed all the fruit of ⁵⁰  my effort, ⁵¹ 

for which I worked so hard ⁵²  on earth, ⁵³ 

because ⁵⁴  I must leave it ⁵⁵  behind ⁵⁶  in the hands of my successor. ⁵⁷ 

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

Yet ⁵⁸  he will be master over all the fruit of ⁵⁹  my labor ⁶⁰ 

for which I worked so wisely ⁶¹  on earth! ⁶² 

This also is futile!

2:20 So I began to despair ⁶³  about all the fruit of ⁶⁴  my labor ⁶⁵ 

for which I worked so hard ⁶⁶  on earth. ⁶⁷ 

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

however, he must hand over ⁶⁸  the fruit of his labor ⁶⁹  as an inheritance ⁷⁰ 

to someone else who did not work for it.

This also is futile, and an awful injustice! ⁷¹ 

Painful Days and Restless Nights

2:22 What does a man acquire from all his labor

and from the anxiety that accompanies his toil on earth? ⁷² 

[119:21]  ¹ tn Heb “accursed.” The traditional punctuation of the Hebrew text takes “accursed” with the previous line (“arrogant, accursed ones”), but it is preferable to take it with the second line as the predicate of the statement.

[119:118]  ² tn The Hebrew verb סָלָה (salah, “to disdain”) occurs only here and in Lam 1:15. Cognate usage in Aramaic and Akkadian, as well as Lam 1:15, suggest it may have a concrete nuance of “to throw away.”

[119:118]  ³ tn Heb “for their deceit [is] falsehood.”

[119:133]  ⁴ tn God’s “word” refers here to his law (see v. 11).

[119:176]  ⁵ tn Heb “I stray like a lost sheep.” It is possible that the point of the metaphor is vulnerability: The psalmist, who is threatened by his enemies, feels as vulnerable as a straying, lost sheep. This would not suggest, however, that he has wandered from God’s path (see the second half of the verse, as well as v. 110).

[23:3]  ⁶ tn The appearance of the Hebrew term נַפְשִׁי (nafshi), traditionally translated “my soul,” might suggest a spiritualized interpretation for the first line of v. 3. However, at the surface level of the shepherd/sheep metaphor, this is unlikely. When it occurs with a pronominal suffix נֶפֶשׁ (nefesh) is often equivalent to a pronoun, especially in poetry (see BDB 660 s.v. 4 נֶפֶשׁ.a). In this context, where the statement most naturally refers to the physical provision just described, the form is best translated simply “me.” The accompanying verb (a Polel form [factitive use] of שׁוּב [shuv]), if referring to the physical provision just described, carries the nuance “refresh, restore strength.”

[23:3]  ⁷ tn The imperfect verbal forms in v. 3 (יְשׁוֹבֵב [yÿshovev] and יַנְחֵנִי [yakheniy]), like those in vv. 1-2, highlight what is typical of the shepherd/sheep relationship.

[23:3]  ⁸ tn The attributive genitive צֶדֶק (tsedeq) is traditionally translated “righteousness” here, as if designating a moral or ethical quality. But this seems unlikely, for it modifies מַעְגְּלֵי (ma’ggÿley, “paths”). Within the shepherd/sheep metaphor, the phrase likely refers to “right” or “correct” paths, i.e. ones that lead to pastures, wells, or the fold. While צֶדֶק usually does carry a moral or ethical nuance, it can occasionally refer to less abstract things, such as weights and offerings. In this context, which emphasizes divine provision and protection, the underlying reality is probably God’s providential guidance. The psalmist is confident that God takes him down paths that will ultimately lead to something beneficial, not destructive.

[23:3]  ⁹ tn The Hebrew term שֶׁם (shem, “name”) refers here to the shepherd’s reputation. (The English term “name” is often used the same way.) The statement לְמַעַן שְׁמוֹ (lÿma’an shÿmo, “for the sake of his name”) makes excellent sense within the framework of the shepherd/sheep metaphor. Shepherds, who sometimes hired out their services, were undoubtedly concerned about their vocational reputation. To maintain their reputation as competent shepherds, they had to know the “lay of the land” and make sure they led the sheep down the right paths to the proper destinations. The underlying reality is a profound theological truth: God must look out for the best interests of the one he has promised to protect, because if he fails to do so, his faithfulness could legitimately be called into question and his reputation damaged.

[125:5]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “and the ones making their paths twisted.” A sinful lifestyle is compared to a twisting, winding road.

[125:5]  ¹¹ tn Heb “lead them away.” The prefixed verbal form is understood as a jussive of prayer here (note the prayers directly before and after this). Another option is to translate, “the Lord will remove them” (cf. NIV, NRSV).

[125:5]  ¹² tn Heb “the workers of wickedness.”

[125:5]  ¹³ tn Heb “peace [be] upon Israel.” The statement is understood as a prayer (see Ps 122:8 for a similar prayer for peace).

[143:8]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “cause me to hear in the morning your loyal love.” Here “loyal love” probably stands metonymically for an oracle of assurance promising God’s intervention as an expression of his loyal love.

[143:8]  sn The morning is sometimes viewed as the time of divine intervention (see Pss 30:5; 59:16; 90:14).

[143:8]  ¹⁵ sn The way probably refers here to God’s moral and ethical standards and requirements (see v. 10).

[143:8]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “for to you I lift up my life.” The Hebrew expression נָאָשׂ נֶפֶשׁ (na’as nefesh, “to lift up [one’s] life”) means “to desire; to long for” (see Deut 24:15; Prov 19:18; Jer 22:27; 44:14; Hos 4:8, as well as H. W. Wolff, Anthropology of the Old Testament, 16).

[143:9]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “to you I cover,” which makes no sense. The translation assumes an emendation to נַסְתִּי (nastiy, “I flee,” a Qal perfect, first singular form from נוּס, nos). Confusion of kaf (כ) and nun (נ) is attested elsewhere (see P. K. McCarter, Textual Criticism [GBS], 48). The collocation of נוּס (“flee”) with אֶל (’el, “to”) is well-attested.

[143:10]  ¹⁸ tn Or “your will.” See Ps 40:8.

[143:10]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “your good spirit.” God’s “spirit” may refer here to his presence (see the note on the word “presence” in Ps 139:7) or to his personal Spirit (see Ps 51:10).

[143:10]  ²⁰ tn The prefixed verbal form is taken as a jussive. Taking the statement as a prayer fits well with the petitionary tone of vv. 7-10a.

[143:10]  ²¹ sn A level land (where one can walk free of obstacles) here symbolizes divine blessing and protection. See Pss 26:12 and 27:11 for similar imagery.

[2:13]  ²² tn The articular plural active participle functions as attributive adjective for אִישׁ (’ish, “man”) in v. 12b, indicating that אִישׁ (“man”) is collective.

[2:13]  ²³ tn Heb “paths of uprightness.” The noun יָשָׁר (yashar, “uprightness; straightness”) is an attributive genitive. The moral life is described in Proverbs as the smooth, straight way (2:13; 4:11). The wicked abandon the clear straight path for an evil, crooked, uncertain path.

[2:13]  ²⁴ tn Heb “ways of darkness.” Darkness is often metaphorical for sinfulness, ignorance, or oppression. Their way of life lacks spiritual illumination.

[21:16]  ²⁵ tn The text uses “man” as the subject and the active participle תּוֹעֶה (to’eh) as the predicate. The image of “wandering off the path” signifies leaving a life of knowledge, prudence, and discipline.

[21:16]  ²⁶ tn Or “prudence”; KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV “understanding”; NLT “common sense.”

[21:16]  ²⁷ tn Heb “will remain” or “will rest.” The Hebrew word נוּחַ (nuakh) does not here carry any of the connotations of comforting repose in death that the righteous enjoy; it simply means “to remain; to reside; to dwell.” The choice of this verb might have an ironic twist to it, reminding the wicked what might have been.

[21:16]  ²⁸ sn The departed are the Shades (the Rephaim). The literal expression “will rest among the Shades” means “will be numbered among the dead.” So once again physical death is presented as the punishment for folly.

[35:8]  ²⁹ tc The Hebrew text reads literally, “and there will be there a road and a way, and the Way of Holiness it will be called.” וְדֶרֶךְ (vÿderekh, “and a/the way”) is accidentally duplicated; the Qumran scroll 1QIsa^a does not reflect the repetition of the phrase.

[35:8]  ³⁰ tn The precise meaning of this line is uncertain. The text reads literally “and it is for them, the one who walks [on the] way.” In this context those authorized to use the Way of Holiness would be morally upright people who are the recipients of God’s deliverance, in contrast to the morally impure and foolish who are excluded from the new covenant community.

[35:8]  ³¹ tn In this context “fools” are those who are morally corrupt, not those with limited intellectual capacity.

[34:2]  ³² tn The term shepherd is applied to kings in the ancient Near East. In the OT the Lord is often addressed as shepherd of Israel (Gen 49:24; Ps 8:1). The imagery of shepherds as Israel’s leaders is also employed (Jer 23:1-2).

[2:15]  ³³ tn The emphatic use of the 1st person common singular personal pronoun אֲנִי (’ani, “me”) with the emphatic particle of association גַּם (gam, “even, as well as”; HALOT 195–96 s.v. גַּם) appears to emphasize the 1st person common singular suffix on יִקְרֵנִי (yiqreni) “it will befall [or “happen to”] me” (Qal imperfect 3rd person masculine singular + 1st person common singular suffix from קָרָה, qarah, “to befall; to happen to”); see GKC 438 §135.e. 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 fare no better in the end than the most foolish.

[2:15]  ³⁴ tn The adjective יוֹתֵר (yoter) means “too much; excessive,” e.g., 7:16 “excessively righteous” (HALOT 404 s.v. יוֹתֵר 2; BDB 452 s.v. יוֹתֵר). It is derived from the root יֶתֶר (yeter, “what is left over”); see HALOT 452 s.v. I יֶתֶר. It is related to the verbal root יתר (Niphal “to be left over”; Hiphil “to have left over”); see HALOT 451–52 s.v. I יתר. The adjective is related to יִתְרוֹן (yitron, “advantage; profit”) which is a key-term in this section, creating a word-play: The wise man has a relative “advantage” (יִתְרוֹן) over the fool (2:13-14a); however, there is no ultimate advantage because both share the same fate, i.e., 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.

[2:15]  ³⁵ tn Heb “And why was I wise (to) excess?” The rhetorical question is an example of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “I gained nothing!” (E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 949).

[2:15]  ³⁶ tn Heb “So I said in my heart.”

[2:15]  ³⁷ tn Heb “and also this,” referring to the relative advantage of wisdom over folly.

[2:15]  ³⁸ tn The word “ultimately” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.

[2:16]  ³⁹ tn The preposition עִם (’im, “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; see HALOT 839 s.v. עִם 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; Pss 26:9; 28:3; 69:29; Isa 38:11), hence “like” (Pss 73:5; 106:6; Eccl 2:16; see BDB 767–68 s.v. עִם 1.e).

[2:16]  ⁴⁰ tn As HALOT 798–99 s.v. עוֹלָם and BDB 762-64 s.v. עוֹלָם note, עוֹלָם (’olam) 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. The context here suggests the nuance “a long time.”

[2:16]  ⁴¹ tn The preposition בְּ (bet) on בְּשֶׁכְּבָר (bÿshekkÿvar, the adverb כְּבָר [kÿvar,“already”] + relative pronoun שֶׁ [she] + preposition בְּ) is probably best classified as causal: “Because…already.”

[2:16]  ⁴² tn The verb נִשְׁכָּח (nishkakh) 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 כְּבָר (kÿvar) “already” (HALOT 459 s.v. I כְּבָר; BDB 460 s.v. I כְּבָר); see, e.g., Eccl 1:10; 2:12, 16; 3:15; 4:2; 6:10; 9:6-7.

[2:16]  ⁴³ tn The particle אֵיךְ (’ekh, “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); see HALOT 39 s.v. אֵיךְ 5; BDB 32 s.v. אֵיךְ 2; also E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 955.

[2:16]  ⁴⁴ tn The preposition עִם (’im, “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); see HALOT 839 s.v. עִם 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); see BDB 767–68 s.v. עִם 1.e.

[2:17]  ⁴⁵ tn Or “I hated.”

[2:17]  ⁴⁶ 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]  ⁴⁷ 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]  ⁴⁸ tn Heb “under the sun.”

[2:17]  ⁴⁹ tn Heb “all,” referring here to the relative advantage of wisdom.

[2:18]  ⁵⁰ 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]  ⁵¹ 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]  ⁵² 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]  ⁵³ tn Heb “under the sun.”

[2:18]  ⁵⁴ 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]  ⁵⁵ 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]  ⁵⁶ 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]  ⁵⁷ tn Heb “to a man who will come after me.”

[2:19]  ⁵⁸ tn The vav on וְיִשְׁלַט (vÿyishlat, conjunction + Qal imperfect 3rd person masculine singular from שָׁלַט, shalat, “to be master”) is adversative (“yet”).

[2:19]  ⁵⁹ 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]  ⁶⁰ 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]  ⁶¹ 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]  ⁶² tn Heb “under the sun.”

[2:20]  ⁶³ 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]  ⁶⁴ 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]  ⁶⁵ 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]  ⁶⁶ 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]  ⁶⁷ tn Heb “under the sun.”

[2:21]  ⁶⁸ 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]  ⁶⁹ tn Heb “it”; the referent (“the fruit of his labor”) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:21]  ⁷⁰ 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]  ⁷¹ 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!”

[2:22]  ⁷² tn Heb “under the sun.” The rhetorical question is an example of negative affirmation, expecting a negative answer: “Man acquires nothing” (see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 949-51).