⁵ tn Heb “the bread of men.” The translation follows the suggestion accepted by M. Greenberg (Ezekiel [AB], 2:509) that this refers to a meal brought by comforters to the one mourning. Some repoint the consonantal text to read “the bread of despair” (see L. C. Allen, Ezekiel [WBC], 2:56), while others, with support from the Targum and Vulgate, emend the consonantal text to read “the bread of mourners” (see D. I. Block, Ezekiel [NICOT], 1:784).

³ tn Heb “has laid it on him.” The verb נָטַל (natal) is used four times in Biblical Hebrew; the related noun refers to heaviness or a burden. The entry of BDB 642 s.v. is outdated, while HALOT 694 s.v. נטל is acceptable for the Qal. See D. R. Hillers, Lamentations (AB), 57. Hillers’ suggestion of a stative meaning for the Qal is followed here, although “impose” is also possible based on 2 Sam 24:12.

¹ tn Heb “They [the Babylonians] all roar like lions. They growl like the cubs of lions.” For the usage of יַחְדָו (yakhdav) meaning “all,” see Isa 10:8; 18:6; 41:20. The translation strives to convey in clear terms what is the generally accepted meaning of the simile (cf., e.g., J. Bright, Jeremiah [AB], 358, and J. A. Thompson, Jeremiah [NICOT], 762).

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.

³ tn The meaning of this word is somewhat uncertain. It occurs only here in the Hebrew Bible. BDB 1045 s.v. שֹׁעָר relates it to the noun “horrible thing” (translated “something shocking”) in Jer 5:30 and 23:14 and defines it as “horrid, disgusting.” HALOT 1495 s.v. שֹׁעָר relates it to the same noun and defines it as “rotten; corrupt.” That nuance is accepted here.

² tn Heb “Your skirt has been uncovered, and your heels have been treated with violence.” This is the generally accepted interpretation of these phrases. See, e.g., BDB 784 s.v. עָקֵב a and HALOT 329 s.v. I חָמַס Nif. The significance of the actions here are part of the metaphor (i.e., personification) of Jerusalem as an adulteress having left her husband and have been explained in the translation for the sake of readers unfamiliar with the metaphor.

¹ tn The words, “I said” are not in the text. It is not clear that a shift in speaker has taken place. However, the words of the verse are very unlikely to be a continuation of the Lord’s threat. It is generally assumed that these are the words of Jeremiah and that a dialogue is going on between him and the Lord in vv. 9-14. That assumption is accepted here.

¹ tn The form for “queen” (מְלֶכֶת [m^elekhet]), occurring 5 times in Scripture and all in Jeremiah, is not the expected construct form (מַלְכַּת [malkat]). It is as though the Masoretes wanted to read with “heaven” the word for “work” (מְלֶאכֶת [m^eleʾkhet]), i.e., the “hosts of,” a word that several Hebrew mss read and an understanding the LXX reflects. The other ancient and modern versions generally, however, accept it as a biform for the word “queen.”

³ tn Heb “Your burnt offerings are not acceptable, and your sacrifices are not pleasing to me.” The shift from “their” to “your” is an example of the figure of speech (apostrophe) where the speaker turns from talking about someone to addressing him/her directly. Though common in Hebrew style, it is not common in English. The shift to the third person in the translation is an accommodation to English style.

² tn The Hebrew text reads literally, “Or like the killing of his killed ones is he killed?” If one accepts the interpretation of the parallel line outlined in the previous note, then this line too would contain a rhetorical question suggesting that Israel has not experienced destruction to the same degree as its enemies. In this case “his killed ones” refer to the ones who struck Israel down, and Israel would be the subject of the final verb (“is he killed”).

¹ tn The syntax of this verse is difficult. The best approach is to view הִשְׁלִיטוֹ (hishlito, “he has given him the ability”) as governing the three following infinitives: לֶאֱכֹל (leʾekhol, “to eat”), וְלָשֵׂאת (v^elaseʾt, “and to lift” = “to accept [or receive]”), and וְלִשְׂמֹחַ (v^elismoakh, “and to rejoice”). This statement parallels 2:24-26 which states that no one can find enjoyment in life unless God gives him the ability to do so.

¹ tn Heb “the sacrifice of the wicked” (so KJV, NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV). This is a subjective genitive. The foundational clause states that ritual acts of worship brought by the wicked (thus a subjective genitive) are detestable to God. The “wicked” refers here to people who are not members of the covenant (no faith) and are not following after righteousness (no acceptable works). But often they participate in sanctuary ritual, which amounts to hypocrisy.

⁴ tn Heb “what is pleasing; what brings delight.” The noun רָצוֹן (ratson, “what is pleasing”). This is not the specific religious sense of finding acceptance before the Lord (when bringing a sacrifice, e.g. Lev 1:3) but the general sense of delight. Yet this fortunate condition of having a virtuous, cheerful wife is described as providentially from God, cf. CEV “she is a gift from the Lord.”

² tn The Hebrew לֹא־כֵן (loʾ khen) could be “not so” (HALOT 482 s.v. II כֵּן) or “not right, incorrect, wrong” (HALOT 482 s.v. I כֵּן), which is supported by the LXX: “hearts of fools are unstable.” If לֵב (lev, “heart, mind”) is understood to represent thinking, then, accepting the emendation in the first line, the proverb may say, “The lips of the wise preserve knowledge, but the thoughts of fools are incorrect.”

² tn Or “makes knowledge acceptable” (so NASB). The verb תֵּיטִיב (tetiv, Hiphil imperfect of יָטַב [yatav, “to be good”]) can be translated “to make good” or “to treat in a good [or, excellent] way” (C. H. Toy, Proverbs [ICC], 303). M. Dahood, however, suggests emending the text to תֵּיטִיף (tetif) which is a cognate of נָטַף (nataf, “drip”), and translates “tongues of the sages drip with knowledge” (Proverbs and Northwest Semitic Philology, 32-33). But this change is gratuitous and unnecessary.

³ tc In the MT the verb lacks agreement with the two nouns in either gender or number so that there is no clear subject: “but he breathes lies, deceit.” Revocalizing the consonants from וְיָפִחַ (v^eyafiakh, “and he breathes/testifies”) to וִיפֵחַ (vifeakh, “and a witness [of lies]”) and from מִרְמָה (mirmah, “deceit”) to the Piel participle מְרַמֶּה (m^erammeh, “betrays, deceives, leads astray”) produces a grammatically acceptable text. One may also supply by parallelism “…betrays lives.”

¹ tc The MT reads “a wise son, discipline of a father.” Instead of מוּסָר (musar, “discipline”), G. R. Driver suggested reading this word as מְיֻסַּר (m^eyussar, “allows himself to be disciplined”); see his “Hebrew Notes on Prophets and Proverbs,” JTS 41 (1940): 174. A few Medieval Hebrew manuscripts, the LXX, and the Syriac read יִשְׁמַע (yishmaʿ) “a wise son listens to/obeys his father.” The translation, “accepts…discipline,” reflects the notion intended by either.

⁵ tn Heb “the house of the Lord.” The phrase may be purely metaphorical here, referring to the royal palace where the royal host of v. 5 holds his banquet and lives. If one takes the phrase more literally, it would refer to the earthly tabernacle (if one accepts Davidic authorship) or the later temple (see Judg 19:18; 1 Sam 1:7, 24; 2 Sam 12:20; 1 Kgs 7:12, 40, 45, 51).

² tc For חוֹל (khol, “sand”) the LXX has a word that is “like the palm tree,” but which could also be translated “like the phoenix” (cf. NAB, NRSV). This latter idea was developed further in rabbinical teaching (see R. Gordis, Job, 321). See also M. Dahood, “Nest and phoenix in Job 29:18, ” Bib 48 (1967): 542-44. But the MT yields an acceptable sense here.

¹ tc The verb is the Niphal יֵאָסֵף (yeʾasef), from אָסַף (ʾasaf, “to gather”). So, “he lies down rich, but he is not gathered.” This does not make much sense. It could mean “he will not be gathered for burial,” but that does not belong here. Many commentators accept the variant יֹאסִף (yoʾsif) stood for יוֹסִיף (yosif, “will [not] add”). This is what the LXX and the Syriac have. This leads to the interpretive translation that “he will do so no longer.”