² tn The present translation follows R. B. Y. Scott (Proverbs, Ecclesiastes [AB], 64). This third colon of the verse would usually be rendered, “fetters to the chastening of a fool” (KJV, ASV, and NASB are all similar). But there is no support that עֶכֶס (ʿekhes) means “fetters.” It appears in Isaiah 3:16 as “anklets.” The parallelism here suggests that some animal imagery is required. Thus the ancient versions have “as a dog to the bonds.”

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.

³ tn Or “your young wife”; Heb “in the wife of your youth” (so NIV, NLT, HCSB). The genitive may function as an attributive adjective: “young wife” or “youthful wife.” Or the genitive may be temporal in that it refers to the age in which a man married his wife: “the wife you married in your youth” (cf. NCV, CEV). The temporal genitive is supported by parallel passages with similar constructions in Prov 2:17 and Mal 2:14.

² tc The translation follows the consonantal Hebrew text (Kethib), which has a Pual (passive) prefixed form, regarded here as a jussive. The Pual of the verb אָשַׁר (ʾashar) also appears in Prov 3:18. The marginal reading (Qere) assumes a vav (ו) consecutive and Pual perfect. Some, with the support of the LXX, change the verb to a Piel (active) form with an objective pronominal suffix, “and may he bless him,” or “and he will bless him” (cf. NIV).

² tn Heb “who does not lift up for emptiness my life.” The first person pronoun on נַפְשִׁי (nafshi, “my life”) makes little sense here; many medieval Hebrew mss support the ancient versions in reading a third person pronoun “his.” The idiom “lift the life” here means to “long for” or “desire strongly.” In this context (note the reference to an oath in the following line) “emptiness” probably refers to speech (see Ps 12:2).

¹ tn The verb חָפַץ (khafats) occurs only here. It may have the meaning “to make stiff; to make taut” (Arabic). The LXX and the Syriac versions support this with “erects.” But there is another Arabic word that could be cognate, meaning “arch, bend.” This would give the idea of the tail swaying. The other reading seems to make better sense here. However, “stiff” presents a serious problem with the view that the animal is the hippopotamus.

² tn The root is נָדַף (nadaf, “to drive away; to drive off”). Here it is in the abstract sense of “succeed in doing something; confound,” and so “refute; rebut.” Dhorme wants to change the meaning of the word with a slight emendation in the text, deriving it from אָלַף (ʾalaf, “instruct”) the form becoming יַלְּפֶנוּ (yall^efenu) instead of יִדְּפֶנּוּ (yidd^efenu), obtaining the translation “God will instruct us.” This makes a smoother reading, but does not have much support for it.

¹ tn The verb סָכַן (sakhan) meant “to be useful; to be profitable” in v. 2. Now, in the Hiphil it means “to be accustomed to” or “to have experience with.” Joined by the preposition “with” it means “to be reconciled with him.” W. B. Bishai cites Arabic and Ugaritic words to support a meaning “acquiesce” (“Notes on hskn in Job 22:21, ” JNES 20 [1961]: 258-59).

¹ tn The meaning of “his archers” is supported for רַבָּיו (rabbayv) in view of Jer 50:29. The LXX, Syriac, Vulgate, Targum Job, followed by several translations and commentators prefer “arrows.” They see this as a more appropriate figure without raising the question of who the archers might be (see 6:4). The point is an unnecessary distinction, for the figure is an illustration of the affliction that God has brought on him.

³ tn This use of the imperfect as potential imperfect assumes that the human is the subject, that in a dispute with God he could not answer one of God’s questions (for which see the conclusion of the book when God questions Job). On the other hand, if the interpretation were that God does not answer the demands of mortals, then a simple progressive imperfect would be required. In support of this is the frustration of Job that God does not answer him.

¹ sn The text of Esther does not disclose exactly how Mordecai learned about the plot against the king’s life. Ancient Jewish traditions state that Mordecai overheard conspiratorial conversation, or that an informant brought this information to him, or that it came to him as a result of divine prompting. These conjectures are all without adequate support from the biblical text. The author simply does not tell the source of Mordecai’s insight into this momentous event.

³ sn So Hadad asked Pharaoh…. This lengthy description of Hadad’s exile in Egypt explains why Hadad wanted to oppose Solomon and supports the author’s thesis that his hostility to Solomon found its ultimate source in divine providence. Though Hadad enjoyed a comfortable life in Egypt, when the Lord raised him up (apparently stirring up his desire for vengeance) he decided to leave the comforts of Egypt and return to Edom.

¹ tn Heb “he made the pillars, and two rows surrounding one latticework to cover the capitals which were on top of the pomegranates, and so he did for the second latticework.” The translation supplies “pomegranates” after “two rows,” and understands “pillars,” rather than “pomegranates,” to be the correct reading after “on top of.” The latter change finds support from many Hebrew mss and the ancient Greek version.

² tc Heb “two of the leaves of the first door were folding, and two of the leaves of the second door were folding.” In the second half of the description, the MT has קְלָעִים (q^elaʿim, “curtains”), but this probably should be emended to צְלָעִים (ts^elaʿim, “leaves”), which appears in the first half of the statement. One Hebrew ms, the LXX, Syriac, and Vulgate support צְלָעִים (ts^elaʿim, “leaves”).

² tc In place of the MT (“and it was like one being silent”) the LXX has “after about a month,” taking the expression with the first part of the following chapter rather than with 10:27. Some Hebrew support for this reading appears in the corrected hand of a Qumran ms of Samuel, which has here “about a month.” However, it seems best to stay with the MT here even though it is difficult.

⁸ tc Several English versions (NAB, NEB, RSV, NRSV, JB, CEV) suggest deleting MT הַבַּיִת (habbayit, lit. “the house”) due to dittography with בתה in שִׁבְתָּהּ (shivtah) which precedes; however, several ancient textual witnesses support the MT (medieval Hebrew manuscripts, Syriac, Targum). The LXX reading ἐν τῷ ἀγρῷ (en tō agrō, “in the field”) probably does not represent an alternate Hebrew textual tradition, but merely the translator’s attempt to smooth out a difficult Hebrew text.

² tc Heb “and attacked the army, while the army was secure.” The Hebrew term בֶטַח (vetakh, “secure”) may means the army was undefended (see R. G. Boling, Judges [AB], 156), not suspecting an attack at that time and place. A few mss supported by the LXX read the participle form from the same root, בֹטֵחַ (voteakh) “trustingly,” the implication being that they were not attentive to defense.

² sn The oracle compares Israel first to a lion, or better, lioness, because she does the tracking and hunting of food while the lion moves up and down roaring and distracting the prey. But the lion is also the traditional emblem of Judah, Dan and Gad, as well as the symbol of royalty. So this also supports the motif of royalty as well as power for Israel.

¹ tn The Hebrew text has “he/one shall bring him”; since there is no expressed subject, this verb should be taken in the passive sense—“he shall be brought.” Since the context suggests an obligatory nuance, the translation “he must be brought” has been used. Some scholars solve the problem by emending the Hebrew text here, but there is no manuscript evidence to support the emendation.

³ tn The passive form simply reads “those numbered by him.” Because of the cryptic nature of the word, some suggest reading a preterite, “and they were numbered.” This is supported by the Greek, Syriac, Targum, and Vulgate. It would follow in the emendation that the relative pronoun be changed to “just as” (כַּאֲשֶׁר, kaʾasher). The MT is impossible the way it stands; it can only be rendered into smooth English by adding something that is missing.