This verse and the one that follows close the section leading up to the important conclusion in verses 18-20. It is clear from the repetition of the expression “a sickening evil” that the entire unit, verses 13-15, is being referred to in this summary verse. This is a term that points back to the situation just discussed. This relationship can be made clear in our translation by referring back to verse 13 in the following manner: “So this is a second terrible thing that I observed,” “This too is a painful thing,” or “Here is another terrible thing:….” Note that what follows this clause is a repetition of what has already been said in verse 15, with expansion on these ideas to be given in verse 17.

A grievous evil: see the notes on verse 13.

Just as he came, so shall he go begins with an Aramaic idiom that Qoheleth borrows. The phrase means “in the exact same manner,” “exactly.” The verbs came and shall … go are repeated from verse 14, referring again to a person’s birth and subsequent death. In the context of the previous discussion, Qoheleth reminds us that a person arrives in and departs from this world in a “naked” state, free of all material possessions. These meanings and the reference to birth and death can be spelled out precisely in our translation if there is any likelihood of their being misunderstood.

This clause is the statement that identifies the focus of the entire unit 5.13-17. Thus we see that it is not the rich person’s sudden and unfortunate loss of wealth that is a “grievous evil.” Actually that is only one episode. The crucial fact in the entire section is that, no matter how much money we make or lose during our lives, we cannot take any of it with us. We depart this life with exactly the same amount we brought into it—nothing. It is this fact that raises the primary question about yithron and the meaning of a life spent in toil.

Because this clause contains the essence of the problem that Qoheleth is dealing with, it may be best to use general language, which means he can be rendered as “a person” or “we.”

Some possible models for translation are:

• Just as a person is born without possessions, so too do we depart this life with nothing.

• We enter this life empty-handed, and we depart it in the same way.

• The same way a person comes [or, people come] into this world, the same way he leaves it [or, they leave it].

What gain has he that he toiled for the wind…?: all the illustrative material, that is to say, each problem identified from 4.1 to this point in chapter 5, forms the context for asking the question about “lasting benefit” for the third time. What gain is a rhetorical question expecting a negative answer, “None.” Refer to comments on “gain” in 1.3 and 3.9. It is apparent once again that yithron, “lasting benefit,” does not describe the material benefits available to people. Here especially Qoheleth is thinking in terms of some benefit that cannot be snatched away by either misfortune or death, something that has value from the moment we are born to the time of death and possibly beyond.

That he toiled for the wind: in Hebrew this clause is introduced by a relative pronoun, which refers back to the pronoun “him” (Revised Standard Version he); that is to say, “[what gain is there for] him who toiled….” The imperfect of the verb “toil” indicates continuous labor. For the wind uses “wind” metaphorically. The Hebrew term ruach has several meanings, “wind,” “breath,” “spirit,” and our problem is to decide which is in mind here. Is it related to the phrase “shepherding the wind” in 1.14, 17, etc.? If Qoheleth is here likening our toil to shepherding the wind, then “wind” is an appropriate translation. Or does for the wind mean he worked only for the air he breathed? If he is thinking of the breath of life that we receive at birth and surrender at death, then “breath” is a better translation. In this case we might consider a translation such as “What lasting benefit does a person have who has toiled only for his life and breath?”

It is unfortunate that translators have to make a choice between the three alternative meanings, when Qoheleth probably was happy to have it mean all three. We suggest using the term “wind” and putting “breath” in a footnote as the alternative.

The sentence order in Hebrew, also reflected in Revised Standard Version, may be quite unnatural in some cases. Translators may prefer to put the relative clause at the beginning of the verse, followed by the question: “And a person who works without ceasing for a mere puff of wind, what lasting benefit does he get [out of life]?”

In certain languages this rhetorical question may have to be expressed in another way, as a negative statement. This will give something like “There is no lasting benefit for someone who has toiled for the wind.” However, this rhetorical question is not a conclusion; it is only a step on the way to the conclusion spelled out in verses 18-20. Therefore, if the question form cannot be retained, it may be preferable to add something like: “It would seem that there is no lasting benefit….” This allows for Qoheleth’s argument to continue, building up to the conclusion in the last part of the chapter.

Translators may also feel the need to rearrange the sentences to give a more logical argument through the verse as a whole. The following may convey the meaning well:

• What lasting benefit is there for a person who works for a mere puff of wind? He comes into this world empty-handed and he leaves the same way. This is a distressing fact.

• It seems there’s no lasting benefit for the person who works to gain only wind. As he comes, so he goes. He can’t take his work with him. This really is a terrible thing.

• It seems there is no lasting benefit for someone who works for a breath of air. A person enters this world with nothing and leaves the same way. This whole state of affairs is very painful.

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 .