Translation commentary on Ecclesiastes 9:11

Again marks another observation. It uses a Hebrew expression found in 4.1, literally “I turned and saw.” We may wish to use a verb like “observed” or “thought about” rather than saw, since Qoheleth is actually taking careful note of events in the world around him. Possibilities include: “I observed that…,” or more fully, “I observed events in this world and concluded that….”

For under the sun see comments on 1.3.

Five illustrations are given of how unpredictable life can be. Each illustration follows the same grammatical structure, and a very rhythmic pattern results. Each clause is introduced by the conjunction “and,” followed by a negative particle “not,” a prepositional phrase, “to the [people who are]…,” and a noun representing the reward that those people would normally expect to obtain. In the last three lines the particle “also” occurs as well.

Translating this part of the verse well is a challenge. If possible the translator should try to preserve the parallel structures, thus maintaining the rhythm. As can be seen in the outline above, the emphasis is on the negative component placed at the beginning of the verse:

• It is not to the swift, the race;
It is not to the strong, the battle; ….

In some languages, however, it will be necessary to change the order:

• The race does not always go to the swiftest runner;
The battle does not always go to the strongest warrior; ….

Note that in Hebrew we are dealing with noun clauses. There is no “be” verb or other linking element in the original. The translator will have to supply appropriate verbs, either “be” or other verbs such as “go to” or “win.” Also what appear to be adjectives in the Revised Standard Version translation, “the swift,” “the wise,” and so on, are really nouns in Hebrew: “the swift ones,” “the wise ones.” The translator may have to use fuller forms to preserve naturalness: “swift runners,” “wise people,” and so on. More detailed comments on each line follow below.

The race, though it has the definite article attached, does not identify a particular race, but means “any race.” The term used here occurs only once in the Bible and describes any running activity, not necessarily competitive athletics. It may also apply to the messenger who carries news from one place to another.

Is not to the swift is literally “does not belong to the swift.” The example used suggests that swift must be a superlative, “the swiftest [runner].” This is because it is unlikely that there will be more than one winner, though compare Good News Translation “fast runners.” Although this and the following examples are expressed as absolutes, suggesting that the swift never win, this is actually an example of what may happen sometimes. We can show this by adding the adverb “always” after is not, or by using “may” in place of is. This gives a translation like “The race is [or, Races are] not always won by the fastest runners” or “The fastest runner may not always win the race.”

In some cultures the whole idea of a race is unknown. If this is the case we can rephrase the verse: “It is not always the fastest runner who arrives at his destination first.”

Nor the battle to the strong similarly claims that a battle may also have unexpected results. The strong is parallel to the swift in the previous phrase; it describes those “who are mightiest.” Again we may have to supply a noun, in which case we can say “the strongest warrior” or “the strongest army.” Whether the encounter is person-to-person or between armies, the principle is the same. You cannot count on strength alone to determine who will win—other factors play a part in determining victory. So we may translate “the battle is [or, battles are] not always won by those who are strongest” or “the strongest one may not always win the fight.”

The two examples above focus on physical abilities, speed and strength. The next three examples speak about intellectual ability. The theme of the unexpected outcome continues. It is possible that the first two examples of physical speed and strength establish a principle, and then Qoheleth extends that principle to intellectual activity as well. This would account for the introduction of the particle “also” as a marker for these next examples.

Nor bread to the wise: following the principle set in the first two examples, Qoheleth argues that wise people do not always gain bread as a result of being wise. The wise is a plural with collective sense. There is no sense of competition between the sages, so a superlative sense (“the wisest”) is not appropriate. The point made here is that no matter how closely you follow the instruction of the wise, there is no guarantee that you will obtain bread as a result. Bread is used metaphorically. It may refer to any material reward, or to the basic requirement for staying alive, hence “livelihood” (so New American Bible). We can translate “In the same way the wise do not always get material reward” or “Wisdom will not always provide you with bread to eat.” Good News Translation has “The wise do not always earn a living.”

Nor riches to the intelligent is similar to the above. Intelligent applies to those who are discerning, those with understanding, not necessarily “shrewd,” which is the suggestion of New American Bible. Translation can be something like “the discerning don’t always get rich” or “clever people don’t always become rich.”

Nor favor to the men of skill: the Hebrew calls these people who have skill literally “those who know [things].” It is a general term for having information, but it also has a broader meaning, describing intimate relationships between people or between people and God. So there is another possible sense here, and that is “people who know someone,” or “people with connections.” Because of this sense we can understand why Revised Standard Version/New Revised Standard Version used the word favor. People with the gift of knowledge value relationships, and favor is appropriate to this setting. A word like “special treatment” or “special favors” will give the meaning. When Good News Translation says “… will not always rise to high positions,” it is like Jerusalem Bible “success.” Neither one is adequate. We suggest “people with knowledge do not always win favor,” or “people with connections don’t always get special treatment.” In some languages it may be necessary to name the agent of favor, as in “people do not always favor those with knowledge [or, connections].”

The principle is now established. Despite the fact that wisdom teachers often claimed a wise person would get rewards (Pro 13.15), and that obedience to the Law would bring material blessings (Deut 7.12-16), Qoheleth demonstrates convincingly that life is not so predictable. Often there are surprising results, something we do not expect, that can change the way things turn out. He explains this in the following statement, which is the climax of his argument.

But time and chance happen to them all: Revised Standard Version introduces this clause with but, showing why unexpected things happen. In Hebrew the clause begins with ki, which is be more correctly rendered as “because” or “for.” This clause interrupts the established rhythmic pattern outlined above, but the two elements, time and chance, have a rhythm of their own, bringing this minipoem to a proper closing.

In chapter 3 much was said about time. See comments there, especially 3.1. The second noun, chance, is a rare term (only in 1 Kgs 5.4, “misfortune”). It comes from the root meaning “to happen,” “to occur.” Although it seems as though Qoheleth is introducing the impersonal idea of “chance,” in the present context the word “outcome” or “result” may be used. The term is neutral and should not be given a negative sense. Qoheleth’s meaning appears to be that two things are at work when something happens The first is an appropriate time, and the second is the actual circumstances in which it takes place. We suggest time and chance be translated “what happens and when it happens.” For a closely related theme see 8.6.

Happen is how Revised Standard Version renders the verb from the same root as the noun translated “fate” in verse 3. It describes something that will happen (intransitive), or that will cause something to happen (transitive). Its object them is literally “all of them” in which case the reference is to the five examples above, each representing every event or situation. “Each” or “all of them” is a good translation.

Qoheleth’s point seems to be that the timing and the circumstances of any event or situation determine what the result is. This idea we can easily translate as “because time and circumstance will affect them all,” “the outcome is affected by what happens and when it happens,” or “because the time and the situation determine what actually happens.” Good News Translation “bad luck happens to everyone” is inadequate because it gives only a negative sense.

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 .

Translation commentary on Ecclesiastes 11:5

After stating an obvious truth that some things can be discovered by human experience, Qoheleth goes on then to illustrate the second theme, that other aspects of nature remain hidden to us. This is even more true with regard to what God does. We note the repetition of the verb do not know.

The basic structure of the verse is a form of parallelism in which the second half builds on the thought of the first half: “Just as you do not know…, so also you do not know….”

As you do not know introduces the great miracle of life, whose origin is hidden from human understanding even though we participate fully in it. As means “Just as” or “In the same way that….” You do not know is a participle form in Hebrew and so describes our state of not knowing.

How the spirit comes to the bones in the womb of a woman with child: this clause is especially difficult because its structure is complex and one of the key terms ruach (rendered in Revised Standard Version as spirit) is ambiguous. The first problem is to discover which of the three meanings of ruach is intended here; it can mean “spirit,” “breath,” or “wind.” Those taking “wind” as the meaning see two illustrations rather than one. Note, for example, New International Version and Jerusalem Bible, which take this approach:
“As you do not know the path of the wind or how the body is formed in a mother’s womb…” (New International Version).
“Just as you do not know the way of the wind or the mysteries of a woman with child…” (Jerusalem Bible).

However, if we take the meaning to be “breath” or “spirit,” there is only one illustration: how a baby in the womb “is quickened” or “made alive.” This is the interpretation of Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, and New Jerusalem Bible.

To the bones in the womb of a woman with child: bones refers more widely to the entire human body. Here it describes the child forming in its mother’s womb.

Revised Standard Version has resolved one of the difficulties of the structure of the clause by inserting the verb comes: you do not know how the spirit comes to the bones …. New Jerusalem Bible says “you do not know how the lifebreath passes into the limbs within the womb.” Both translations give the impression that something is made alive, and so serve as good models for translation. A general translation like Good News Translation “how new life begins” or Bible en français courant “how life is formed” are good solutions. We can also mention the baby or child, “how a baby comes to life,” or “how life comes to a child….”

In the womb of a woman with child is the obvious meaning of the phrase, which in Hebrew is literally “in the womb of one who is full.” It can be translated more simply as “in a [pregnant] woman’s womb.” The translator must be careful, however, in translating such terms. In many cultures it is not proper to refer directly to the womb. Other expressions can be used if this is the case; for example, “in the stomach of the mother” or “inside its mother.”

Translation may be as follows:

• Just as you are unaware of how life comes to a child in its mother’s womb….

• Just as you do not know how life enters a child in the womb….

So you do not know introduces the main affirmation of the sentence. The introductory so marks the relationship between the two parts of the saying. You do not know is an imperfect verb in Hebrew, with the possible sense that we can never know. We may observe what God does, but we shall never fully comprehend it. Thus not know points to what we cannot properly or fully understand; it does not mean we can know nothing at all.

The work of God is the object of the verb not know and is a phrase met before in 3.11 and 8.17. See comments in both places. The phrase can be expressed verbally rather than as a noun phrase, if that is more natural in the translator’s language.

Who makes everything: on the translation of everything see comments on 10.19. Two possible meanings are “everything” or “both.” The latter would direct attention back to the two elements mentioned in the first half of the verse, namely, “the breath of life” and “the work of God.” Makes can be given as “creates” or “does.” Good News Translation suggests a general theological principle, “God made everything.” Actually the relative clause describes God, so it can be expressed as “who is the creator of all.” The placement of this clause in translation will depend on the stylistic preferences of the language. Most languages will probably prefer placing it, as in Hebrew, at the end of the verse. But in some languages it may be more effective to place it before the main verb of the clause: “So you do not understand the work that God does. He is the one who creates everything.” In other languages a resumptive pronoun puts special emphasis on God’s creative powers. This is what Bible en français courant does: “… even less can you understand how God works, he who makes everything.”

A suggested translation is:

• … so [also] you cannot fully understand the work of God, who creates both [or, who is the creator of everything].

The strength of this statement may be made more forceful in some languages by expressing the sentence as a rhetorical question:

• … so how can you understand what God, the creator of all, does?

In Hebrew the two parts of the verse are introduced by comparative conjunctions: “[even] as … so….” The translator should find the most natural way of making the point. In English, for example, we can use “Just as…, so…”; or we can begin with an independent clause containing “even,” as follows:

• You do not even know how life comes to a child in its mother’s womb! So, you cannot possibly understand what God does—he who creates everything!

Using a rhetorical question, we can say:

• You do not know how life comes to a child in its mother’s womb. So, how can you understand what God—who is the creator of everything—does?

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 .