² tn The expression מַרְאֵה עֵינַיִם (marʾeh ʿenayim, “the seeing of the eyes”) is a metonymy of cause (i.e., seeing an object) for effect (i.e., being content with what the eyes can see); see E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 552-54.

² tn The phrase “what would become” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity. However, it is not altogether clear whether the third person masculine singular suffix (“his”) on בְּמַלְכוּתוֹ (b^emalkhuto, “his kingdom”) refers to the old foolish king or to the poor but wise youth of 4:13.

¹ tn Heb “the fool folds his hands.” The Hebrew idiom means that he does not work (e.g., Prov 6:10; 24:33). In the translation the words “and does no work” (which do not appear in the Hebrew text) have been supplied following the idiom to clarify what is meant.

⁸ tn The noun יִתְרוֹן (yitron, “profit”) has a two-fold range of meanings: (1) “what comes of [something]; result” (Eccl 1:3; 2:11; 3:9; 5:8, 15; 7:12; 10:10) and (2) “profit; advantage” (Eccl 2:13; 10:11); see HALOT 452-53 s.v. יִתְרוֹי. It is derived from the noun יֶתֶר (yeter, “what is left behind; remainder”; HALOT 452 s.v. I יֶתֶר). The related verb יָתַר (yatar) denotes “to be left over; to survive” (Niphal) and “to have left over” (Hiphil); see HALOT 451-52 s.v. יתר. When used literally, יִתְרוֹן refers to what is left over after expenses (gain or profit); when used figuratively, it refers to what is advantageous or of benefit. Though some things have relative advantage over others (e.g., light over darkness, and wisdom over folly in 2:13), there is no ultimate profit in man’s labor due to death.

⁶ sn The phrase “to see what is good” (רָאָה, raʾah, “to see” plus טוֹב, tov, “good”) is repeated twice in 2:1-3. This is the key phrase in this section of Ecclesiastes. Qoheleth sought to discover (רָאָה) whether merry-making offered any value (טוֹב) to mankind.

³ tn Heb “from the fruit of her hands.” The expression employs two figures. “Hands” is a metonymy of cause, indicating the work she does. “Fruit” is a hypocatastasis, an implied comparison meaning what she produces, the income she earns. She is able to plant a vineyard from her income.

² sn The Bible frequently joins these two words, “good” and “evil,” (or “benefit” and “harm”). They contrast the prosperity and well-being of her contribution with what would be devastating and painful. The way of wisdom is always characterized by “good”; the way of folly is associated with “evil.”

¹ sn The word translated “strength” refers to physical powers here, i.e., “vigor” (so NAB) or “stamina.” It is therefore a metonymy of cause; the effect would be what spending this strength meant—sexual involvement with women. It would be easy for a king to spend his energy enjoying women, but that would be unwise.

² sn The questions are filled with anthropomorphic language. The questioner is asking what humans have ever done this, but the meaning is that only God has done this. “Gathering the wind in his fists” is a way of expressing absolute sovereign control over the forces of nature.

⁴ tn There is a tendency among commentators and English versions to translate אַשְׁרֵהוּ (ʾashrehu) as “happy is he!” (cf. KJV, ASV, NAB, NASB, TEV, NLT). But “happy” can be a misleading translation. The Hebrew word refers to a heavenly bliss, an inner joy, that comes from knowing one is right with God and experiencing his blessing. “Happiness,” on the other hand, depends on what happens.

¹ tn Heb “the fear of man.” This uses an objective genitive to describe a situation where fearing what people might do or think controls one’s life. There is no indication in the immediate context that this should be limited only to males, so the translation uses the more generic “people” here.

³ sn The proverb is saying that there will be no possibility of settling the matter in a calm way, no matter what mood the fool is in (e.g., Prov 26:4). R. N. Whybray says one can only cut the losses and have no further dealings with the fool (Proverbs [CBC], 168).

¹ tn Heb “men of bloods.” The Hebrew word for “blood” is written in the plural to reflect the shedding of blood. So the expression “men of bloods” means people who shed blood—murderers, bloodthirsty men, or those who would not hesitate to commit murder in order to get what they want.

³ tn The construction uses the participle בּוֹטֵחַ (boteakh) followed by עַל־יְהוָה (ʿal y^ehvah), which gives the sense of “relying confidently on the Lord.” This is the antithesis of the greedy person who pushes to get what he desires.

⁴ tn The construction uses the Hiphil participle מַחֲלִיק (makhaliq, “makes smooth”) followed by the adverbial accusative of means, the metonymy “tongue”—he makes what he says smooth. This will be pleasing for the moment, but it will offer no constructive help like the rebuke would.

¹ tn The Hebrew word could refer (1) to “instruction” by the father (cf. NCV) or (2) the Mosaic law (so most English versions). The chapter seems to be stressing religious obedience, so the referent is probably the law. Besides, the father’s teaching will be what the law demands, and the one who associates with gluttons is not abiding by the law.

⁴ tn This last line is difficult. The MT has כֵּן יַאֲרִיךְ (ken yaʾarikh). The verb means “to prolong,” but כֵּן (ken) is open to several possibilities for meaning. J. H. Greenstone’s interpretation of it as a noun from the Hollow root כּוּן (kun) with a meaning of “established order” is what is expected here (Proverbs, 293).

² sn The proverb gives the outcome and the evidence of those who forsake the law—they “praise the wicked.” This may mean (1) calling the wicked good or (2) justifying what the wicked do, for such people are no longer sensitive to evil.

² tn This noun is plural, while the earlier substantival adjective “shrewd” is singular. The contrast may suggest that the naive are in a group, each one doing what the others do, while insightful person had to go against the flow. That is, the naive go along with the bandwagon; but the shrewd person thinks for his/herself and makes good decisions accordingly.

² sn The verse makes it clear that only pain and ruin can come from deception. The statement that the lying tongue “hates those crushed by it” suggests that the sentiments of hatred help the deceiver justify what he says about people. The ruin that he brings is probably on other people, but it could also be taken to include his own ruin.