FOREWORD
This chapter contains three vignettes dealing with how people interact with one another. Each vignette describes an action, attitude, or conduct that is just as common today as it was when the text was first written. Additionally, verse 4:17 begins a fourth vignette that continues into chapter 5. Consequently, this verse will be considered with the content of that chapter.
Chapter 4
vm,V;h'
tj'T' μyci[}n" rv,a} μyqivu[}h;AlK;Ata, ha,r“a,w: ynIa} yTib]v'w“ 1
.μjen"m]
μh,l; ˆyaew“ j'Ko μh,yqev][o dY"miW μjen"m] μh,l; ˆyaew“ μyqivu[}h;
t['m]DI hNEhiw“
So I returned and considered all
of the oppression that is done under the sun. Behold, the tears of the oppressed, and there was no one to
comfort them; and there was strength from the hand of the ones oppressing them,
but there was no one to comfort them.
ha,r“a,w: ynIa} yTib]v'w“ Formally, this verbal string consists of a 1cs qal perfect of bwv followed by a 1cs imperfect
with vav consecutive of har. The
combination constitutes a hendiadys, and the presence of the 1cs personal
pronoun between the two verbs is emphatic. μyqivu[}h;AlK; is the definite direct
object of the second verb in the pair.
The term μyqivu[} is formally a mp form of qWv[;. The singular form occurs just once in the Hebrew bible and
is rendered ‘extortioner, oppressor;’ the plural form occurs three times
and is rendered as an abstract noun: ‘extortion, oppression.’ The focus is what is being done under
the sun between people.
The second half of the verse consists of four
verbless clauses that are structurally parallel but describe opposite sides of a
single type of conflict. The first
pair draws attention to the reaction of those who are oppressed. The only response described is that of
tears – h[;m]di – whether prompted by pain, sorrow, anger, or frustration. Solomon’s observation concerning the oppressed
- μjen"m] μh,l; ˆyaew“ – suggests that not only are the oppressed ones
alone and helpless, but that nobody else cares, helps, or sympathizes with
them, at least not in any meaningful way. The second pair examines those who
practice oppression: j'Ko μh,yqev][o dY"miW – ‘And from the hand of
those oppressing them is strength.’
This part has been regularly experienced during every generation. Those who possess strength, whether
physical, financial, or persuasive, regularly use that strength to their
personal advantage on those who are less strong. The repetition of μjen"m] μh,l; ˆyaew“ is less expected, but
psychologists over the past 100 years have found that bullies, those who abuse
others, often are tormented souls who may act out their need for release and
relief by inflicting pain on others.
.hn:d<[}
μyYij' hM;he rv,a} μyYIj'h'Aˆmi Wtme rb;K]v, μytiMeh'Ata, ynIa} j'Bev'w“ 2
So I congratulated the dead
who are already dead more than those still living.
μyYIj'h'Aˆmi Wtme rb;K]v,
μytiMeh'Ata, ynIa} j'Bev'w“ This clause set up a peculiar comparison that is addressed again in
verses 6:3 and 7:1. j'Bev'w“ is a 3ms qal perfect from
the root jbv meaning ‘praise, commend, congratulate.’ The overall expression seems
incongruous regardless of which meaning is chosen for the verb root, because
the object of the verb – those who are dead – are incapable of receiving
any commendation expressed here under the sun. The living have the advantage of life (verse 8:13); the dead
have no further part in anything that transpires under the sun, but neither are
they subject to its uncertainties, hurts, and injustices. In that latter respect – and that only
– is the state of the dead better than that of the living from the perspective
of those still alive.
hn:d<[} μyYij' hM;he The form hn:d<[} occurs only here in the Hebrew scriptures and has
been explained as a contraction for hN:heAd[' ‘until now.’ It is not attested in later rabbinic
Hebrew, but it is similar to the Syriac (a western dialect of Aramaic) an:d:[e, which is used to refer to
a period of time (possibly brief).
The apparent influence of Syriac (or Aramaic) on this book has been one
reason for the late date commonly assigned for its authorship. However, the content of the Hebrew
scriptures is too sparse to prove the lack of dialectical variations that goes
back to the time of Solomon or before, so the time when Aramaic/Syriac first
started to influence classical Hebrew cannot be established with any certainty.
hy:h;
alo ˆd<[}Arv,a} ta, μh,ynEV]mi b/fw“
3
.vm,V;h' tj'T' hc;[}n" rv,a} [r:h; hc,[}M'h'Ata,
ha;r:Aalo rv,a}
And better than both of them
is one who has not yet existed, one who never has seen the unpleasant work that
is being done under the sun.
μh,ynEV]mi b/fw“ This is one of several common Hebrew expressions for the comparative
degree of an adjective.
hy:h; alo ˆd<[}Arv,a} ta, The use of ta, here is extremely peculiar. ta, may be understood as the
preposition ‘with’ or as the marker for a definite direct object. However, because the stative verb hy:h; cannot take a direct
object, it must be understood as a preposition. Grammatically, the rv,a} must be the object of the
preposition. BDB classifies ˆd<[} as an adverb meaning ‘hetherto,
still,’ and as an adverb it must modify the verb of the subordinate
clause. Consequently, the possible
force of the verse might be: ‘And the advantage over both of them is with
the one who still has not existed….’ Compare this comparison with the
expression in verse 6:3.
Wh[erEme
vyaiAta'n“qi ayhi yKi hc,[}M'h' ˆ/rv]KiAlK; taew“ lm;[;AlK;Ata, ynIa}
yTiyair:w“ 4
.j'Wr tW[r“W lb,h,
hz<AμG"
Now, I myself have observed
every kind of toil and skillful work - that a man’s zeal is more than his
friend's. This too is futile and
striving after wind.
ynIa} yTiyair:w“ The verb root har can be used to express ‘see, consider, perceive,’ all of which are
transitive and reflects mental evaluation of circumstances. The presence of the pronoun following
the verb is emphatic.
hc,[}M'h' ˆ/rv]KiAlK; taew“
lm;[;AlK;Ata Formally, this consists of two construct chains
that serve as direct objects for the transitive verb. Again, the use of ta, is peculiar because both
objects are expressed as indefinite phrases. Both are introduced by lK;. The construct form of lKo. lKo is a noun signifying ‘whole, entirety,’ but
it is most commonly used to express ‘all, every, each.’ lm;[; is a noun meaning ‘labor,
toil, trouble.’ ˆ/rv]Ki is a noun meaning ‘skill,
success;’ and hc,[}m' is a noun meaning ‘work, deed.’ Clearly, Solomon had not
observed or considered the entirety of work or other activities that are done
under the sun, not even during his own day; but he was able to observe a
cross-section (every kind) of these activities. He includes two types of activities in his consideration – toil
(work viewed as burdensome or troublesome), and skillful work.
Wh[erEme vyaiAta'n“qi ayhi yKi This clause is intended to summarize the result of his observation
with respect to toil and skillful work as it affects relations between
people. The clause is introduced
by yKi,
which has three major uses – ‘that, when, because (or for).’ The temporal and causal senses of yKi clearly do not fit this
context. The term ha'n“qi is a feminine noun meaning
‘ardor, zeal, jealousy,’ so this same term may be used positively or
negatively. The term Wh[erEme consists of the prefix Ame (from), ['rE (friend), and a 3ms
suffix. The specific force of the
expression depends on the preposition, which has a wide variety of specific
uses. Its fundamental meaning is ‘separation
from,’ but this construction is also used to express comparison, which
semantically is a kind of separation into categories. So this expression may mean that ‘toil and skilled work’
involve zeal (or jealousy) that produces separation between a man and his
friend or that one man's zeal for his labor exceeds that of his friend. Depending on circumstances, one or both
conditions may exist simultaneously.
j'Wr tW[r“W lb,h, hz<AμG Previously I had stated that the term lb,h, is generally used in this
book to refer to something that may be observable but proves to be
insubstantial. However, the cases
mentioned above are both observable and highly substantial from the standpoint
of the persons involved. In such
cases, the translation futile fits the context better than illusory,
because this form of separation is generally unproductive in the short term as
well as the long term.
./rc;B]Ata,
lkeaow“ wyd:y:Ata, qbejo lysiK]h' 5
The fool folds his hands and
eats his meat. (or The fool folds his hands and devours
his own flesh.)
.j'Wr
tW[r“W lm;[; μyIn"p]j; aloM]mi tj'n: 5k' aloom] b/f 6
One hand full of rest is
better than two hands full of toil and striving after wind.
In my opinion, verses 5 and 6 contain two proverbs
that present Solomon's conclusion from the preceding four verses. The translation of the first proverb is
somewhat uncertain due to the last word in the verse -- /rc;B]. Most English translations render it as presented
parenthetically; however, my translation presented above is equally
possible. The prior context
asserted that both oppression and zeal for one’s toil and skillful work produce
separation. If the 'fool'
does not participate in this type of activity (toil or skillful work along with
the associated zeal), he can indulge himself in peace; however, if he conducts
himself as a fool in other respects, he may end up dissipating his own
substance because of his self-indulgence.
Verse 5 is neither ambiguous nor syntactically difficult. Combining the two into a single modern
English form: A little rest and comfort is better than hard work with lots
of strife.
.vm,V;h'
tj'T' lb,h, ha,r“a,w: ynIa} yTib]v'w“
7
Then I returned and
considered a futility under the sun.
ha,r“a,w: ynIa} yTib]v'w“ This clause is a repetition of the introductory
clause in verse 1, and it introduces a new topic for consideration. In this case, Kohelet asserts his
assessment of the situation in advance: vm,V;h' tj'T' lb,h, -- it is something that is
futile under the sun. Again I have
used the term 'futile' rather than 'illusory' as a translation
for lb,h,,
because numerous concrete examples of this situation have existed and continue
to exist under the sun.
/lm;[}Alk;l]
6qe ˆyaew“ /lAˆyae ja;w: ˆBe μG" ynIve ˆyaew“ dj;a, vyE 8
hb;/Fmi
yvip]n"Ata, rSej'm]W lme[; ynIa} ymil]W rv,[o [B'c]tiAalo /yny[eAμG"
.aWh [r; ˆy"n“[iw“ lb,h, hz<AμG"
There is a man who has no
associate, also he has neither son nor brother. Yet, there is no end to all of his toil; moreover, his eyes
are not satisfied with wealth.
‘So, for whom have I toiled and denied myself what is good?’ This is also futile and a bad
business.
ynIve ˆyaew“ dj;a, vyE Literally: There
is one and not two… This
expression introduces the case of an individual who by choice or circumstance
is completely alone. This solitary
status is amplified by three clauses:
·
/lAˆyae ja;w: ˆBe μG Also he has no son and no brother
·
/lm;[}Alk;l] 6qe ˆyaew“ And there is no end to all his toil
· rv,[o
[B'c]tiAalo /ny[eAμG Also his eye is not satisfied
with riches
/yny[eAμG The consonantal text is 'also his eyes,' but
the masoretic vowel points constitute a k'tiv-k're for /ny[eAμG 'also his eye.'
The next clause expresses the assessment of the
hypothetical loner – ‘So, for whom have I toiled and denied myself what is
good?’ This is similar to the
rhetorical question in 2:15 – 'So why have I become so wise?' If there is no benefit or advantage
comparable to the effort expended, then why bother?
.μl;m;[}B'
b/f rk;c; μh,l;AvyE rv,a} dj;a,h;Aˆmi μyIn"V]h' μybi/f 9
Two are better than the one,
because they have good profit in their toil.
If rivalries and jealousies produce isolation and a
futile existence, verses 9 through 12 present the positive alternative.
dj;a,h;Aˆmi μyIn"V]h'
μybi/f This clause clearly expresses a comparison
using numbers to represent individuals.
The peculiar thing is that both μyIn"V]h' and dj;a,h; are written with definite
articles, which generally is not represented in an English translation. Clearly, the comparison is with the
one (the solitary individual) and the second (one having a son or
brother as a close associate) mentioned in the previous verse.
μl;m;[}B' b/f rk;c; μh,l;AvyE In the previous example, the one expressed exasperation over
gaining wealth without having either himself or anyone else as beneficiary of
that wealth. In contrast, the
two both have a good return for their toil, as described in the following
three verses, each of which presents a hypothetical condition in which the two
benefit one another.
./myqih}l'
ynIve ˆyaew“ l/PYIv, dj;a,h; /lyaiw“ /rbej}Ata, μyqiy: dj;a,h; WlPoyIAμai
yKi 10
For if they should fall, the
one will raise up his companion; but woe to the one who falls and there is no
second to raise him up.
WlPoyIAμai yKi Life under the sun is filled with uncertainties and potential
traps. Anyone may falter
physically, financially, morally, or otherwise. In this case, the verb is an imperfect plural form,
suggesting that both may fall together.
Having a loyal companion facilitates recovery, but the one alone is left
to his own resources. Recovery by
the one alone is always much more difficult and may prove impossible.
/lyaiw“ This term does not correspond to any known form in classical
Hebrew. Three possibilities exist:
·
/l yaiw“ (LXX, Syriac, Vulgate) – But woe to him, the one, …
·
/Lyaiw“ (Targum) – Whereas the one who falls …
· /lyaiw“
corresponds to
a dialectical form in ancient Hebrew not otherwise attested.
The interpretation of the LXX fits the context
better than that of the Targum, and the existing Hebrew text could be the
result of a simple scribal error.
.μj;yE
Ëyae dj;a,l]W μh,l; μj'w“ μyIn"v] WbK]v]yIAμai μG" 11
Also, if two lie together
they will be warm, but how can one be warm?
Homes in ancient Israel were mostly constructed of
stone with plaster on the interior surface, and there was no insulation other
than dirt fill. As a result, the
temperature inside a house would generally be nearly the same as the
temperature outside. In the winter
only the cooking fire would be available to supply heat, so remaining warm
could be a significant issue, especially in winter. (See 1 Kings 1:1 f.)
.qteN:yI
hr:hem]bi alo vL;vuM]h' fWjh'w“ /Dg“n< Wdm]['y" μyIn"V]h' dh;a,h;
/pq]t]yIAμaiw“ 12
And if someone (or
something) should overpower the one, the two could stand against him (the
adversary or adversity); indeed, a cord of three strands cannot be quickly torn
apart.
dh;a,h; /pq]t]yIAμaiw“ The verb in this clause is a 3ms imperfect form from the root of pqt with a 3ms pronominal
suffix. The root meaning of this
verb is 'prevail over, overpower.'
The subject is unstated and so could be another individual or a
catastrophic event. The object is dh;a,h;, which is in apposition to
the pronominal suffix attached to the verb, and μyIn"V]h' introduces the apodosis
(statement following a condition) to the hypothetical situation. The implication is that if the solitary
individual can be overpowered by an adversary (or catastrophic circumstance),
the two standing together can withstand that adversity.
vL;vuM]h' fWjh'w“ vL;vuM]h' is a definite ms pual participle from the root vlv. Since this is a passive participle, this construction is
generally understood to represent a cord composed of three strands. This clause should probably be
understood as a proverb that summarizes these verses: One alone is bad; a
fellowship of two is good, but three is even better.
.d/[
rheZ:hil] [d"y:Aalo rv,a} lysik]W ˆqez: Ël,M,miii μk;j;w“ ˆKes]mi dl,y<
b/f 13
A poor wise lad is better
than an old stupid king who no longer knows how to accept admonishment.
Verses 13 - 16 introduces a final comparison based
on a similar theme. The comparison
is based on at least two individuals – a poor wise lad and an old foolish (or
stupid) king – but three or more individuals may be included, depending on how
one identifies antecedents to the pronominal suffixes in subsequent
verses.
μk;j;w“ ˆKes]mi dl,y< The term ˆKes]mi is an ms adjective meaning 'poor' that
occurs only here in the Hebrew scriptures. It is used with some frequency in rabbinic Hebrew with the
meaning of poor, scanty, scarce.
Here the lad lacks material resources but possesses wisdom.
} lysik]W ˆqez: Ël,M,miii The second individual is a king, old and foolish. The term lysiK] literally means stupid
but is usually translated by foolish. Though a stupid individual may – and sometimes in the past
has – become heir to the throne of various countries, such an individual seldom
is able to hold supreme power for long.
This individual is described as old. If he did not ascend to power as an old man, then in what
sense is he stupid?
d/[ rheZ:hil] [d"y:Aalo Prov 11:14 and 24:6 both indicate the value of good counsel, and 1
Kings 12:6-11 describes the consequence of poor counsel. Either this king has become so demented
that he can no longer recognize good counsel or so arrogant that he rejects all
counsel.
.vr:
dl'/n /tWkl]m'B] μG" yKi Ëlom]li ax;y: μyrIWsh; tyBemiAyKi 14
Indeed, he came out from a
prison to rule even though he had been born poor in his kingdom.
μyrIWsh; tyBemi μyrIWsh; is explained as a shortened form of μyrIWsaÄh;, which is a definite qal
passive participle from the root rIsa. The literal meaning of the construct chain is the house
of the bound, which is descriptive of a prison.
yKi … yKi This is the first example in which clause after clause is introduced
by yKi,
and sometimes this usage does not fit the standard lexical categories for this
word well. In some instances, the
term can be understood as introducing an emphatic force, but most of the time
it appears merely to be linking the passages together into a single
context. Here the clauses are
clearly describing the origin of the old king. He had a lowly origin in his kingdom, he had been imprisoned
for some unstated reason, and following his release from prison he had risen to
the throne by some unstated means.
Aside from the mention of a prison, this could be a parable built from
the experiences Saul and David.
vr: This is a qal ms participle from the root vwr meaning 'poor,
impoverished.' This root is
uncommon in the Hebrew scriptures but became more widely used in rabbinic writings. There it was used to describe someone
who is lacking either in wisdom or material resources.
vm,V;h' tj'T' μykiL]h'm]h'
μyYIj'h'AlK;Ata, ytiyair: 15
.wyT;j]T' dmo[}y"
rv,a} ynIeVh' dl,Y<h' μ[i
I saw all the living who march (piel part. of 9lh) under the sun with the
usurping lad that will stand against him (the old foolish/stupid king).
wyT;j]T' dmo[}y" rv,a}
ynIeVh' dl,Y<h' μ[ This clause contains two
ambiguities. First,
ynIeVh' dl,Y<h'
– the second young man – could be the poor wise lad of verse 13, the old
king in his youth, or somebody else who has not previously been mentioned. Second, wyT;j]T' – against him –
probably refers to the old stupid king or the one he replaced in his
youth, since the antecedent is ambiguous.
The simplest analysis maintains the contrast introduced in verse 13
between the wise lad and the stupid king.
/bAWjm]c]yI
alo μynI/rj}a'h; μG" μh,ynEp]li hy:h;Arv,a} lkol] μ[;h;Alk;l] 6qeAˆyae 16
.j'Wr ˆ/[r"w“
lb,h, hz<Aμg"AyKi
There was no end to all the
people, to all that were before him (lit., them); yet those who come
later will take no pleasure in him, for this also is illusory and striving
after wind.
μh,ynEp]li hy:h;Arv,a} lkol]
μ[;h;Alk;l] 6qeAˆyae This clearly refers to some kind
of popular uprising, but the details are cloudy. The first clause is relatively simple – there is no end
to all the people. The next clause
begins with lkol], and the simplest approach is to take this reference as the same as
the reference in the previous clause.
The expression μh,ynEp]li hy:h;Arv,a} lkol] – to all that were
before them – could express popular support, subservience, or opposition,
but the real interpretive question is the 3mp suffix on μh,ynEp]li. All of the early translations except Syriac keep the plural
form, making the overall scenario more difficult to interpret. The change in the Syriac text reduces
the scenario to the poor wise youth supplanting or replacing the old stupid
king with overall popular support.
/bAWjm]c]yI alo μynI/rj}a'h;
μG" Here μG" is used in the unusual
sense of expressing a seeming contradiction. Although the usurping youth came to power with ultimate
popular support, those who come later will take no pleasure in him. This could reflect the experiences of
David during the time of Absalom's revolt.
j'Wr ˆ/[r"w“ lb,h,
hz<Aμg"AyKi Here I have returned to the
translation of illusory for lb,h,, because the durability of popular support is
always something of a temporary illusion for those who depend on it.
No comments:
Post a Comment