This sentence shows links with verses 8-9. This is seen in the mention of tools used in the various occupations referred to in those verses. Here the term iron has the meaning “tools made from metal.” Unfortunately for the translator the precise meaning of this verse as well as of verse 11 is unclear because of problems in the Hebrew text itself.

If the iron is blunt: the element If identifies this as a conditional phrase indicating another possible situation. The verb here is used only once in the Old Testament and has the meaning “be blunt” or “not sharp.” The iron refers to the metal from which a tool is made. We can assume this is a cutting tool, so if possible we should use a general term like “iron tool” or “cutting instrument.” If a general term does not exist, we may have to choose one tool that is known both in the Biblical culture and to our readers. Good News Translation, New International Version, Jerusalem Bible and New Jerusalem Bible all render the word as “ax,” and this is a good model to follow. We should not misunderstand iron as the thing we use to press clothes!

And one does not whet the edge: here we have what appears to be a clause that adds further information about using the iron tool. The Hebrew clause begins with the demonstrative pronoun (literally “he”) and appears to refer back to iron. Assuming that the verb whet or “sharpen” can be understood in a passive or intransitive sense, we are allowed to translate the pronoun as “it.” Jerusalem Bible and New International Version seem to take this approach by rendering an impersonal verbal expression, “for want of sharpening” (Jerusalem Bible), or “its edge unsharpened” (New International Version). However, there is another possibility, namely, that the Hebrew demonstrative identifies the general subject of the verb. This view is taken by Revised Standard Version, which then renders the subject as one, meaning “a person.” Good News Translation also sees the demonstrative as a subject. It begins the first line with “you” and continues this second person reference throughout: “If your ax is blunt and you don’t sharpen it….” New Jerusalem Bible takes yet another view, that the demonstrative refers back to “the one who splits logs” in verse 9. They translate the demonstrative as “he”: (9b) “he who splits wood will be harmed by it. (10) If the ax has become dull and he has not whetted the edge….” However, most commentators agree that verse 10 is a separate saying, unconnected with verse 9. In view of this it is best not to relate the opening demonstrative pronoun back to things referred to there.

Revised Standard Version translates the Hebrew panim “face” as edge, as do most versions. While in some languages the word “face” can be used to refer to the edge of a cutting instrument (knife, ax, machete), this use in Hebrew is unusual. Normally in the Old Testament the word “mouth” is used when referring to the sharp edge of a sword or ax. Another curious feature of this clause is that the negative particle is attached to the noun rather than to the following verb. This opens up another possibility; it may be that the phrase loʾ panim should be read as lepanim, an adverbial phrase meaning “beforehand” or “previously.” This would solve the problem of the unusual use of “face” and the unusual positioning of the negative particle. If we follow this interpretation we can translate “and it has not been sharpened beforehand” or “no one has previously sharpened it.” Though there is no manuscript evidence to support this suggestion, it makes good sense here.

The verb that Revised Standard Version renders as whet is from the root meaning “be swift, light.” Though some may think it is odd for the verb “swift” to have the derived meaning “sharp,” the association of “swift” and “sharp” is in fact made by other languages—for example, by Chinese. Although problems with the text prevent us from being certain about its meaning, a possible solution is to translate as “… and no one has first sharpened it.”

He must put forth more strength marks the consequence or result of this conditional clause; it expresses what will happen if the situation described in the first part of the verse is true. The Hebrew expression here is very brief, literally “and warriors become powerful.” There are several problems here. The first is the order of the words. We note the noun “warriors” standing before the verb. This can mean that “warriors” is the subject of the verb, placed first for emphasis. However, it seems that most commentators treat it as the object of the verb, not its subject. A second problem has to do with the noun “warriors” itself, though it is widely held that it simply means “strength.” This gives the general sense that “[the person using the ax] must exert [or, use] more strength [or, energy].”

But wisdom helps one to succeed: the third element in this verse is the conclusion Qoheleth draws. It is something he believes will remain true even if the conditions in the previous clause are fulfilled. While there is no major textual problem, the relationship between this statement and the conditional clause is difficult to establish. What is more, the actual construction of the verse is not straightforward, as can been seen by the varying translations:
Good News Translation — It is more sensible to plan ahead.
New International Version — But skill will bring success.
Revised English Bible — The skilled worker has a better chance of success.
New Jerusalem Bible — Thus the advantage of a skill depends on the exercise of prudence.

The sentence begins with the conjunction waw followed by the important key term yithron, which we have been interpreting and translating as “lasting benefit” (see comments in 1.3 and other places). The sentence contains only two more words. The first word is a verbal form that describes the successful completion of a task. It is in what is known as a construct form, meaning it is a dependent form. It seems to be linked with the second last word, wisdom. This gives a sense like “The successful completion of [acts of] wisdom [gives lasting benefits].” We can translate the whole clause as “Lasting benefit is the reward of wisdom,” or more simply, “Wisdom gives lasting benefits.”

The connection between this conclusion and the previous conditional sentence may perhaps be understood in the following way: just as the workman knows that with sharp tools his work will be made easier and more efficient, so too wisdom will lead to “lasting benefit.” Failure to keep your tools sharp will frustrate attempts to cut anything hard. So without wisdom you cannot expect to attain “lasting benefit.”

The initial conjunction but is subject to interpretation. If the previous statement shows that a blunt cutting tool is ineffective, then a contrast with the effectiveness of wisdom can be expressed by “but” (as in the Revised Standard Version rendering). If, on the other hand, a comparison is being made and the focus is on how to make a task easier, then “and” may be appropriate. Revised English Bible is one translation that treats this as an independent saying and so does not translate the conjunction.

For translation we can propose:

• If an iron cutting tool [or, ax] is dull and no one has sharpened it, you have to use more force to make it cut. But wisdom [always] brings good results.

Translating more freely we can say:

• If the ax you are using is blunt because no one has sharpened it, you have to use more force. Wisdom, however, is an effective tool. It always accomplishes its task.

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 .