² tc The MT adjective חֲרִישִׁית (kharishit, “autumnal”) is a hapax legomenon with an unclear meaning (BDB 362 s.v. חֲרִישִׁי). Therefore, the BHS editors propose a conjectural emendation to the adjective, חֲרִיפִית (kharifit, “autumnal”), from the noun חֹרֶף (khoref, “autumn”; see BDB 358 s.v. חרֶף). However, this emendation would also create a hapax legomenon, and it would be no more clear than relating the MT’s חֲרִישִׁית to I חָרַשׁ (kharash, “to plough” [in autumn harvest]).

¹ tn Or “polish” or “clean.” The other three uses of the verb מָרַק (maraq) refer to scouring or polishing. The context refers to the final stages of battle preparations, so whether it was “polishing,” “drawing,” or “raising” spears (see tc note above), the main point seems to be to have them ready to use. Some translations say “sharpen” (NLT, NRSV), but this meaning does not fit the proposed readings and would be an earlier activity in battle preparations.

² tn Heb “to set before.” According to BDB 817 s.v. פָּנֶה II.4.b(g), this refers to “propounding to someone for acceptance or choice.” This is clearly the usage in Deut 30:15, 19 and Jer 21:8; it is likely the case here. However, to translate literally would not be good English idiom, and “proposed to” might not be correctly understood, so the basic translation of נָתַן (natan) has been used here.

¹ tn For the translation of this particle, which is normally translated “therefore” and often introduces an announcement of judgment, compare the usage at Jer 16:14 and the translator’s note there. Here as there it introduces a contrast, a rather unexpected announcement of salvation. For a similar use see also Hos 2:14 (2:16 HT). Recognition of this usage makes unnecessary the proposed emendation of BHS of לָכֵן כָּל (lakhen kol) to וְכָל (v^ekhol).

⁴ tc The translation follows the almost universally agreed upon correction of the MT. Instead of reading כֻּלֹּה מְקַלְלַונִי (kulloh m^eqal^elavni, “all of him is cursing me”) as the Masoretes proposed (Qere), one should read קִלְלוּנִי (qil^eluni) with the written text (Kethib) and redivide and repoint with the suggestion in BHS כֻּלְּהֶם (qull^ehem, “all of them are cursing me”).

¹ tn Or “They went backward and not forward”; Heb “They were to the backward and not to the forward.” The two phrases used here appear nowhere else in the Bible, and the latter preposition plus adverb elsewhere is used temporally meaning “formerly” or “previously.” The translation follows the proposal of J. Bright, Jeremiah (AB), 57. Another option is, “they turned their backs to me, not their faces,” understanding the line as a variant of a line in 2:27.

³ tc Or “Here they come!” Heb “Look!” or “Behold!” Or “Announce to the surrounding nations, indeed [or yes], proclaim to Jerusalem, ‘Besiegers…’” The text is very elliptical here. Some of the modern English versions appear to be emending the text from הִנֵּה (hinneh, “behold”) to either הֵנָּה (hennah, “these things”; so NEB), or הַזֶּה (hazzeh, “this”; so NIV). The solution proposed here is as old as the LXX, which reads, “Behold, they have come.”

³ tc The MT of this verse has two examples of the old second feminine singular perfect, שָׁבַרְתִּי (shavarti) and נִתַּקְתִּי (nittaqti), which the Masoretes mistook for first singulars leading to the proposal to read אֶעֱבוֹר (ʾeʿevor, “I will not transgress”) for אֶעֱבֹד (ʾeʿevod, “I will not serve”). The latter understanding of the forms is accepted in KJV but rejected by almost all modern English versions as being less appropriate to the context than the reading accepted in the translation given here.

² tc The Hebrew text reads “the one who formed him, the coming things.” Among various suggestions, some have proposed an emendation of יֹצְרוֹ (yots^ero, “the one who formed him”) to יֹצֵר (yotser, “the one who forms”; the suffixed form in the Hebrew text may be influenced by vv. 9-10, where the same form appears twice) and takes “coming things” as the object of the participle (either objective genitive or accusative): “the one who brings the future into being.”

² tn Elsewhere the noun חֹזֶה (khozeh) refers to a prophet who sees visions. In v. 18 the related term חָזוּת (khazut, “vision”) is used. The parallelism in both verses (note “treaty”) seems to demand a meaning “agreement” for both nouns. Perhaps חֹזֶה and חזוּת are used in a metonymic sense in vv. 15 and 18. Another option is to propose a homonymic root. See J. N. Oswalt, Isaiah (NICOT), 1:514, and HALOT 301 s.v. II חֹזֶה.

² sn This humorous portrayal is an exaggeration, but the point is that laziness opposes common sense and can thwart basic needs. It would have a wider application for anyone who would start a project and then lack the interest or energy to finish it (R. N. Whybray, Proverbs [CBC], 111). Ibn Ezra proposes that the dish was empty because the sluggard was too lazy to provide for himself.

² tc The MT reads אִוֶלֶת (ʾivelet, “folly”). The editors of BHS propose emending the text to וְלִוְיַת (v^elivyat) from לִוְיָה (livyah, “wreath, garland”). This would provide the same parallelism (“garland” and “crown”) as Prov 4:9. The LXX reads διατριβὴ (diatribē, “lifestyle”). See M. Rotenberg, “The Meaning of אִוֶּלֶת in Proverbs,” LesŒ 25 (1960-1961): 201. A similar emendation is followed by NAB (“the diadem”) and NRSV (“the garland”).

¹ tc The MT has דֶרֶך נְתִיבָה (derekh n^etivah) “a way, a path.” The duplication of meaning is awkward. If the first word is repointed as a Qal participle (דֹּרֵך, dorekh) it could be understood as “treading a path [that leads to…].” The editors of BHS propose that the second word be emended to מְשׁוּבָה (m^eshuvah, “[way of] apostacy”) or תּוֹעֵבָה (toʿevah, “[way of] abomination”). The LXX reads “the ways of the revengeful [lead] to death.”

² tc The word translated “woman” is modified by רַע (raʿ, “evil”) in the sense of violating the codes of the community and inflicting harm on others. The BHS editors propose changing it to read “strange woman” as before, but there is not support for that. Some commentaries follow the LXX and read רַע as “wife of a neighbor” (cf. NAB; also NRSV “the wife of another”; CEV “someone else’s wife”) but that seems to be only a clarification.

⁵ tn The verb יָדַע (yadaʿ, “to know”) is a stative verb in the imperfect form, which can be either future or modal. Here it is a modal abilitive: she is unable to know. DCH includes יָדַע II, “be quiet, at rest; be submissive” citing Jer 4:18 and Job 21:19. See also D. W. Thomas, “A Note on לא תדע in Proverbs v 6, ” JTS 37 (1936): 59, proposing “she is not tranquil.”

¹ tn Heb “you love all the words of swallowing.” Traditionally בַּלַּע (balaʿ) has been taken to mean “swallowing” in the sense of “devouring” or “destructive” (see BDB 118 s.v. בָּלַע). HALOT 135 s.v. III *בֶּלַע proposes a homonym here, meaning “confusion.” This would fit the immediate context nicely and provide a close parallel to the following line, which refers to deceptive words.

⁴ tn The usual form of the plural of יַעַר (yaʿar, “forest”) is יְעָרִים (y^eʿarim). For this reason some propose an emendation to יְעָלוֹת (y^e’alot, “female mountain goats”) which would fit nicely in the parallelism with “deer” (cf. NEB “brings kids early to birth”). In this case one would have to understand the verb חָשַׂף (khasaf) to mean “cause premature birth,” an otherwise unattested homonym of the more common חָשַׂף (“strip bare”).

² tc Heb “sons of gods,” or “sons of God.” Though אֵלִים (ʾelim) is vocalized as a plural form (“gods”) in the MT, it is likely that the final mem is actually enclitic, rather than a plural marker. In this case one may read “God.” Some, following a Qumran text and the LXX, also propose the phrase occurred in the original text of Deut 32:8.

¹ tn Heb “their fat they close.” The Hebrew term חֵלֶב (khelev, “fat”) appears to stand by metonymy for their calloused hearts. They attack the psalmist without feeling any pity or remorse. Some propose emending the text to חֵלֶב לִבָּמוֹ (khelev libbamo, “fat of their heart[s]; cf. Ps 119:70, “their heart is insensitive like fat”). This assumes haplography of the לב (lamed-bet) consonantal sequence.

² tn The precise meaning of the Hebrew term שִׁגָּיוֹן (shiggayon; translated here “musical composition”) is uncertain. Some derive the noun from the verbal root שָׁגָה (shagah, “swerve, reel”) and understand it as referring to a “wild, passionate song, with rapid changes of rhythm” (see BDB 993 s.v. שִׁגָּיוֹן). But this proposal is purely speculative. The only other appearance of the noun is in Hab 3:1, where it occurs in the plural.