These words that begin the section are identical with those of verse 1, literally “I turned and saw.” As in verse 1, translators should consider using a standard discourse marker to signal the beginning of a new subsection. Adverbs of time like “Then” or Again may be appropriate.

Vanity describes a situation that is far from “meaningless” or “useless” as suggested by Good News Translation; rather it is an ironic situation, one that is opposite to what we would expect. It presents a brief case study of a person who is very successful in material terms, but who does not seem to ask about the purpose or goal of such success. That situation is what baffles Qoheleth, hence his description of the situation as hevel, that is, “ironic,” or “beyond comprehension.” See further in “Translating Ecclesiastes,” page 2, for the discussion of hevel.

Under the sun: refer to comments on 1.3.

For translation: “Then I observed something else that puzzled me,” or “I saw something else on this earth that is difficult to explain.”

Verse 7 is clearly introductory to verse 8. Some versions end it with a colon to indicate this relationship.

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Zogbo, Lynell. A Handbook on the Book of Ecclesiates. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Moreover it has not seen the sun: moreover is a conjunction-like word that means “also,” “furthermore,” “in addition.” It can be translated as such here, but other possible translations exist. It can be rendered as an emphatic “He has not even seen the sun,” or as a concessive “Even though….” In the present context the latter sense is certainly possible, “Even though he has not seen the sun, yet….” The phrase seen the sun again is not intended to be understood literally, though a living being generally gets to see and feel the effects of the sun. The sun, as in the phrase “under the sun,” means what we experience as human beings living in this world. Good News Translation uses an idiomatic expression, “sees the light of day,” meaning in this case “birth.”

Or known anything: here the Revised Standard Version translation does not seem correct. The grammatical structure suggests that sun is the object of this verb as well as of the previous one. In this case the stillborn child neither saw nor knew the sun. This view is made plain in New American Bible, “it has not seen or known the sun.” Like Revised Standard Version some other translations consider the object of “know” to be different from that of the verb “see,” as in New English Bible, “has never … known anything.” The first interpretation is to be preferred, however. “Know” usually has the fuller sense of intimate knowledge and experience (it is used of Adam “knowing” Eve and conceiving a child, Gen 4.1). So here too we can convey its meaning well as “Moreover it neither sees nor experiences anything of human life.” In some languages two verbal phrases may be too repetitive, in which case a simple statement can cover the two: “it has no experience of what it is like to live in this world.”

Yet it finds rest rather than he: this very short sentence is clearly an independent one. It acknowledges that rest is available only to one of two persons. The Hebrew is literally “rest [is] to this from this.” The first demonstrative pronoun “this” points to the stillborn or miscarried child; the second “this” indicates the wealthy but dissatisfied person spoken of in verses 1-3. The Revised Standard Version rendering can be improved with a translation identifying it as “the child” and he as “that wealthy person.”

Rest is used in 2.23 in the literal sense of being rested and refreshed. When applied to the stillborn child, it can only refer to the final rest of death. Rest then describes the release from toil, pain, and the enigmas of life in this world, especially if a person is unable to find satisfaction within it. After death that person enters “rest.” When Jerusalem Bible suggests “never knowing rest, the one no more than the other,” it seems to misunderstand rest as the object of the verb know. The translator should examine vocabulary in the local language that is used in describing the state after death. If the notion of “rest” does not apply, speaking of “peace” or the “sleep” of the dead may be appropriate. In some languages the context of “rest” may need to be spelled out: “Yet in death, this child finds more peace than that wealthy man.”

In translation we may say, for example:

• The stillborn is at rest, but not that rich person.

• That miscarried child and not the wealthy person is the one at rest.

• Only the stillborn knows what true rest is.

The whole verse can look something like:

• He never experienced life. He never knew what it is to live. Yet his rest is sweeter than that wealthy man’s.

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Zogbo, Lynell. A Handbook on the Book of Ecclesiates. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The inquiry into folly and evil leads Qoheleth to a conclusion. With this verse he begins to describe what he was able to discover. And I found is actually a participial phrase in Hebrew, giving the sense of an ongoing pattern in Qoheleth’s experience. This can be indicated by “I regularly find…” or “I always find….”

More bitter than death is a comparative phrase in which physical death is viewed in a negative light: it is bitter. Yet there is something else, woman, which is even more bitter. We shall return to this element shortly. For the present we note that the adjective bitter may describe the flavor of some thing (as it does when it describes the water in the desert in Exo 15.23), or it may be a metaphor for something painful and unpleasant (Num 5.24, 27). Here it has the second or metaphorical sense: death is unpleasant because it brings with it so much sadness. It also raises many questions that are difficult to answer.

The woman whose heart is snares and nets: death may be a bitter experience, but according to Qoheleth, woman is even more bitter. Immediately we are confronted with a very difficult problem of interpretation. Is this clause to be taken literally or figuratively? Who is this woman? And why is Qoheleth so negative? Is he a woman-hater, as some have claimed? If not, what is the meaning of the figure?

First we note that it is not just any woman who is more bitter than death. This is a particular woman whose heart is like a trap. In chapter 9 we find a similar image: death and “evil times” are compared to a trap waiting to fall on people. However, saying that death is more bitter than death does not make sense; so we must look to the wider wisdom tradition for an explanation. In the early part of the book of Proverbs, both “wisdom” and “folly” are presented as women. Wisdom is compared to a woman who should be embraced (Pro 4.4), but sin or folly is like a seducing woman who should be avoided (Proverbs 5 and 7). In these chapters of Proverbs we find the same expressions as in the part of Ecclesiastes we are now dealing with: her end is bitter (Pro 5.4), and her victim is taken (or, caught in a snare). Therefore the woman whose heart is snares and nets is most likely to be “folly,” which traps the sinner.

Earlier, when Qoheleth used the noun heart, it was equivalent to “mind.” That seems also to apply in this case: the woman desires or has the intention of trapping someone. Snares and nets are parallel terms with very similar meanings; they refer to the traps or nets used by fishermen and hunters. Without a reference to the heart, this connection is made directly in the New American Bible rendering, “the woman who is a hunter’s trap.” We may also say “the woman is like a snare or a trap,” or use a verb phrase, “her desire [or, will] is to snare and trap….”

Whose hands are fetters: this continues the image. Hands represent her grip on a person, and the term fetters describes anything that binds the hands and feet, preventing free movement. They may be chains or ropes. It indicates that there is no escape from her tight grip. Translators can choose between a noun clause using a comparison, “her hands are like chains,” or a verbal form, “she wants to bind [or, tie up] ….” More freely we can say “her heart will catch you like a snare or trap.” Good News Translation says “the love she offers you will catch you…,” which is a possible rendering but which goes a little farther than the text.

How do we render all this in translation? One possibility is to translate the figure literally as “woman,” but give an explanation of “the woman” in a footnote (see below). Another possibility is to mark the word woman in the text with quotes to show that it is not just any woman, or to say “that woman, folly.” We can also do away with the metaphor, if it is too difficult to understand, and render woman nonfiguratively as “folly.”

Translation can be as follows:

• I have always found that “woman,” folly, to be more bitter than death. Her desire is to entrap and bind a person.

Alternatively we can say:

• I find folly* more bitter than death. It longs to trap and bind a person.
*The Hebrew has “woman,” a reference to folly; see Pro 5 and 7.

Or:

• I realized that the woman who tries to trap you is more horrible than death.*
*This woman represents folly (see Proverbs 5 and 7).

He who pleases God escapes her: the first phrase he who pleases God has been used before in 2.26 and is equivalent to “the person who lives by wisdom” (see comments on 2.26). Qoheleth argues that the wise person will escape from the “woman,” that he will avoid the snares and other traps. Her refers to the woman in the previous clause, and this may be made clear. Alternatively we can say “her snares” or “her trap,” or perhaps best, “folly’s trap.”

But the sinner is taken by her: on the other hand the sinner or fool is captured by the woman. (See comments on “sinner” and “fool” in notes on 2.26.) Some commentators think taken means the man falls in love with the woman’s physical charms, but elsewhere this word is used in the context of a trap. So we can say “the sinner [or, fool] is trapped by her.” Here the verbal phrase in Hebrew is passive, but we can render it as an active if that will make the meaning clearer, “he will fall into her trap,” or as Good News Translation expresses it, “she will catch the sinner.”

Translation of the whole verse can be as follows:

• And I discovered the woman, Folly, who seeks to trap people and bind them. She is more bitter than death. The one who pleases God will escape her snares, but the sinner is trapped by them.

• I found folly—the “woman”—more horrible than death. Folly traps people and puts chains on them. The wise do not fall into her trap, but the fool [or, sinner] does.

A footnote to the word “woman” may possibly say:
*The Hebrew has “the woman.” In Pro 5–9 “woman” symbolized both wisdom and folly. Here the “woman” seems to represent folly.

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Zogbo, Lynell. A Handbook on the Book of Ecclesiates. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse introduces the case described in verses 14-15. Qoheleth’s focus is on the wisdom he saw demonstrated. Even though the wisdom displayed saved the city, the wise man’s success was not rewarded publicly.

I have also seen: on the importance of the verb “to see” in Qoheleth, refer to comments in 1.14. The connective also is significant because it marks the second subsection with its theme of “Wisdom’s power.” “Yet another” is a phrase that can highlight this aspect.

This example of wisdom is Revised Standard Version‘s way of dealing with a complex sentence, which is literally “Also this I saw: [a case of] wisdom under the sun.” Like Revised Standard Version, most translations will probably need to introduce a word like “example” or “case” to make the sentence flow naturally. If possible the sentence should be one that can introduce a short narrative.

Some scholars have suggested that this passage is not about the success of wisdom, and so they change the word “wisdom” in the text or omit it. Jerusalem Bible goes even further and translates “I observed another evil,” though it does point out in a footnote that the Hebrew text is different. We recommend preserving the word “wisdom,” since there is no good reason to omit it. The abstract noun can be maintained, “I also saw a case of what wisdom can do in this world,” or we can refer to some person’s wise action, “I observed how a wise man acts in this world.” Maintaining the abstract noun can be effective, however, since the concluding statement (verse 16) also speaks generally of “wisdom.”

Under the sun: see comments on 1.3. Omitting the phrase will not adversely affect the translation.

It is a feminine pronoun, referring back to the noun wisdom. Using the noun rather than the pronoun is probably helpful, so we can say “this wisdom.” For the adjective great New English Bible suggests “notable,” while Jerusalem Bible, following its change to “evil,” suggests “grave” or serious. New American Bible prefers “sublime.” Since we are recommending that translators give a positive rather than negative tone to the translation of this verse, we suggest “significant,” “notable,” or “important” as reasonable terms to use. New Jerusalem Bible gives us a good model: “it affected me profoundly.”

Instead of making a separate clause, it is also possible to combine the two clauses. We can render it seemed great to me as part of the description of wisdom in the first clause. Some translation possibilities are:

• I observed what I think is yet another significant [or, wonderful] example of wisdom.

• I saw another example of wisdom that impressed me very much.

• I also observed a case that really impressed me—an example of someone being really wise.

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Zogbo, Lynell. A Handbook on the Book of Ecclesiates. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Understanding the structure of the verse will help our translation. It speaks about two attitudes to life, each represented by a prepositional phrase, “concerning laughter,” and “concerning pleasure.” These stand at the head of each half of the verse. The one verb I said serves both halves. Such a structure reminds us that both halves of the verse say basically the same thing.

I said of laughter is literally “Concerning laughter, I said.” The expression I said here points to a conclusion Qoheleth is making: “I saw that,” “I found out that,” “I discovered.” By drawing the object to the front of each clause, the author draws special attention to it. Laughter is a term Qoheleth uses several times, usually with a negative sense (see 7.3). As laughter is generally our response to an amusing situation, we can recognize that Qoheleth is not testing laughter itself, but rather a light-hearted attitude to life. We must not lose sight of the question Qoheleth is asking as he examines these experiences. He wants to know what will provide the “lasting benefit.” He concludes that these two things, failure to take life seriously and seeking material success, cannot give lasting benefit, even though both are perfectly good and proper in themselves.

It is mad: note the discussion in 1.17 about the translation of “madness.” We need a word that suggests it is unable to give “lasting benefit.”

For translation: “Failure to take life seriously is dangerous” or “If we are too light-hearted we are being stupid.”

Of pleasure: again the noun is brought forward in the prepositional phrase heading the sentence. See the discussion in verse 1 for the meaning of “pleasure.”

Qoheleth varies his expression in the second half of the verse, using a rhetorical question to express the conclusion he reached. He asked himself What use is it? or “What did it accomplish?” We may wish to preserve the question form, or if a negative statement is more natural, we can say “It accomplished nothing either.” Again we remind ourselves that the background for the saying is the search for “lasting benefit,” so the meaning is that pleasure could not give such benefit.

For translation:

• I saw that it is foolish to be too light-hearted. What does pleasure accomplish anyway?

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Zogbo, Lynell. A Handbook on the Book of Ecclesiates. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

A time to love does not necessarily have sexual nuances and can be broader in meaning, speaking also of the love between a father and son, or between God and people. It denotes a caring attitude toward another person. Also in Scripture the word speaks more of loving action than of simple emotion: “A time to act lovingly [or, caringly].”

A time to hate should not be thought of as encouraging a person to hate someone else. When Good News Translation says “He sets the time for … hate,” it seems inappropriate, for Qoheleth never suggests that God agrees with that kind of activity. It is also not clear whether love and hate are to be used with human objects in mind. Quite possibly Qoheleth is thinking of the right time for these activities in a figurative sense. For example, we should “love good” and “hate evil.” Once again the translator should guard against making the translation more precise than the original.

Two models for translation are:

• There are times when people are loving, and there are times when they are hateful.

• There are right times for loving and right times for hating.

A time for war indicates that people go to war only at certain times and in response to certain situations. For example, battles in the ancient world were not usually fought when there were crops to be harvested (see 2 Sam 11.1).

A time for peace balances the saying and indicates that there are times when wholeness, security, and well-being are best attained. The Hebrew term rendered as peace (shalom) refers not just to the absence of war, but describes a situation of total well-being. However, in the present context a word like “peace” or “not fighting” can be used.

As noted earlier the last line of the poem differs from the rest of the poem in that it uses noun forms, “war” and “peace,” in place of verb forms. This is a stylistic way of marking the end of the poem. Indeed the question that follows in verse 9 clearly indicates a change in direction and thought and thus marks a new paragraph. If the translator’s language has a special way of noting the close of a poem, then that is what should be considered for use here.

What Qoheleth sets forth in these twenty-eight contrasting actions is a selection of general activities, all of which are undertaken at given moments in time. For those involved in these activities there are moments when one action is appropriate and others when it is not. Time and action are coordinated, says Qoheleth.

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Zogbo, Lynell. A Handbook on the Book of Ecclesiates. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This saying has all the features of a quotation, which Qoheleth uses to support the imperatives of verses 1-2. Verse 2 asserts that our words should be few. There is an element of contrast between the wise person and the fool who talks too much. A parallel structure is another feature of this verse: dream and fool’s voice balance each other, as do the adverbial phrases using much and many.

For a dream comes with much business: it is hard to see how this clause relates to the rest of the passage and its theme of worship (verses 1-7). If, however, Qoheleth is quoting a well-known proverb, it is probable that this line is part of that proverb. It’s function is to set the pattern for his own message in the second line. A similar example occurs in 10.1, where the first line introduces Qoheleth’s own thought in the second line.

A dream may come in the form of a vision while a person is asleep, or it may be a daytime activity as our thoughts wander. It can also signal our hopes or longings for the future. Which of these does Qoheleth have in mind? If the first line is a proverb providing the model for the second line, then dream has a negative sense. Good News Translation is then correct to say “bad dreams.”

Business: see comments at 3.9. It has the sense here of work with effort rather than a commercial sense. A word like “worry” seems an appropriate way to think of it. New Revised Standard Version suggests “many cares.”

And a fool’s voice with many words: the phrase a fool’s voice has a broader sense than the mere sound of his voice. It includes all that he says. Many words will refer to the great amount of talking that a fool often does, as well as the sense that it is not worth listening to. By adding the adjective “empty” we can convey Qoheleth’s idea adequately: “what a fool says is all empty chatter.” New English Bible is correctly neutral with its rendering “the fool talks and it is so much chatter.”

Translators should make sure that these two lines demonstrate this verse’s parallel thought and structure. “Much” and “many” are common to both lines. For example:

• As dreams go hand-in-hand with many cares,
So does foolish talk with many words.

• You worry too much, you dream bad dreams.
You speak too much, you speak foolishness.

• With many cares, you have nightmares.
With many words, you speak foolishness.

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Zogbo, Lynell. A Handbook on the Book of Ecclesiates. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .