Ecclesiastes 1:5–11

Footnotes

1. 20 The Hebrew text has a perfect verbal form, but it should probably be emended to the participial form, which occurs in the last line of the verse. Note as well the use of participles in vv. 4–7 to describe what typically takes place in the natural world. The participle זוֹרֵחַ (zoreakh, “to rise”) emphasizes continual, durative, uninterrupted action (present universal use of participle): the sun is continually rising (and continually setting) day after day.
2. 21 Heb “the sun goes.” The participle בָּא (ba’, “to go”) emphasizes continual, durative, uninterrupted action (present universal use of participle): the sun is continually rising and continually setting day after day. The repetition of בָּא in 1:4–5 creates a comparison between the relative futility of all human endeavor (“a generation comes and a generation goes [בָּא]”) with the relative futility of the action of the sun (“the sun rises and the sun goes” [i.e., “sets,” בָּא]).
3. 22 Heb “hastens” or “pants.” The verb שָׁאַף (sha’af) has a three-fold range of meanings: (1) “to gasp; to pant,” (2) “to pant after; to long for,” and (3) “to hasten; to hurry” ( שׁאף; 983 I שָׁאַף). The related Aramaic root שׁוף means “to be thirsty; to be parched.” The Hebrew verb is used of “gasping” for breath, like a woman in the travail of childbirth (Isa 42:14); “panting” with eagerness or desire (Job 5:5; 7:2; 36:20; Ps 119:131; Jer 2:24) or “panting” with fatigue (Jer 14:6; Eccl 1:5). Here שָׁאַף personifies the sun, panting with fatigue, as it hastens to its destination ( 983 I שָׁאַף 1). The participle form depicts continual, uninterrupted, durative action (present universal use). Like the sun, man—for all his efforts—never really changes anything; all he accomplishes in his toil is to wear himself out.
4. 23 The verb זוֹרֵחַ (zoreakh, “to rise”) is repeated in this verse to emphasize that the sun is locked into a never changing, ever repeating monotonous cycle: rising, setting, rising, setting.
5. 24 The word “again” does not appear in Hebrew, but is supplied in the translation for clarity and smoothness.
6. 25 The Hebrew root סָבַב (savav, “to circle around”) is repeated four times in this verse to depict the wind’s continual motion: “The wind circles around (סוֹבֵב, sovev) … round and round (סוֹבֵב סֹבֵב) … its circuits (סְבִיבֹתָיו, sévivotayv).” This repetition is designed for a rhetorical purpose—to emphasize that the wind is locked into a never ending cycle. This vicious circle of monotonous action does not change anything. The participle form is used three times to emphasize continual, uninterrupted action (present universal use of participle). Despite the fact that the wind is always changing direction, nothing really new ever happens. The constant shifting of the wind cannot hide the fact that this is nothing but a repeated cycle; nothing new happens here (e.g., 1:9–10).
7. 26 The use of שָׁב (shav, Qal active participle masculine singular from שׁוּב, shuv, “to return”) creates a wordplay (paronomasia) with the repetition of סָבַב (savav, “to circle around”). The participle emphasizes continual, durative, uninterrupted action (present universal use).
8. 27 Heb “are going” or “are walking.” The term הֹלְכִים (holékhim, Qal active participle masculine plural from הָלַךְ, halakh,“to walk”) emphasizes continual, durative, uninterrupted action (present universal use of participle). This may be an example of personification; this verb is normally used in reference to the human activity of walking. Qoheleth compares the flowing of river waters to the action of walking to draw out the comparison between the actions of man (1:4) and the actions of nature (1:5–11).
9. 28 Heb “there they are returning to go.” The term שָׁבִים (shavim, Qal active participle masculine plural from שׁוּב, shuv, “to return”) emphasizes the continual, durative action of the waters. The root שׁוּב is repeated in 1:6–7 to emphasize that everything in nature (e.g., wind and water) continually repeats its actions. For all of the repetition of the cycles of nature, nothing changes; all the constant motion produces nothing new. This verse does not refer to the cycle of evaporation or the return of water by underground streams, as sometimes suggested. Rather, it describes the constant flow of river waters to the sea. For all the action of the water—endless repetition and water constantly in motion—there is nothing new accomplished.
10. 29 The word “this” is not in Hebrew, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.
11. 30 Heb “the things.” The Hebrew term דְּבָרִים (dévarim, masculine plural noun from דָּבָר, davar) is often used to denote “words,” but it can also refer to actions and events ( דָּבָר 3.a; 183 דָּבָר IV.4). Here, it means “things,” as is clear from the context: “What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done” (1:9). Here דְּבָרִים can be nuanced “occurrences” or even “[natural] phenomena.”
12. 31 Heb “is able.”
13. 32 The Hebrew text has no stated object. The translation supplies “it” for stylistic reasons and clarification. The statement no one can bear to describe it probably means that Qoheleth could have multiplied examples (beyond the sun, the wind, and the streams) of the endless cycle of futile events in nature. However, no tongue could ever tell, no eye could ever see, no ear could ever hear all the examples of this continual and futile activity.
14. 33 The term מָלֵא (male’, “to be filled, to be satisfied”) is repeated in 1:7–8 to draw a comparison between the futility in the cycle of nature and human secular accomplishments: lots of action, but no lasting effects. In 1:7 אֵינֶנּוּ מָלֵא (’enennu male’, “it is never filled”) describes the futility of the water cycle: “All the rivers flow into the sea, yet the sea is never filled.” In 1:8 וְלֹא־תִמָּלֵא (vélo-timmale’, “it is never satisfied”) describes the futility of human labor: “the ear is never satisfied with hearing.”
15. 34 Heb “what is.” The Hebrew verbal form is a perfect. Another option is to translate, “What has been.” See the next line, which speaks of the past and the future.
16. 35 The Hebrew verbal form is an imperfect.
17. 36 Heb “under the sun.”
18. 37 Alternately, “[Even when] there is something of which someone might claim …” The terms יֵשׁ דָּבָר שֶׁיֹּאמַר (yesh davar sheyyo’mar) may be an interrogative clause without an introductory interrogative particle ( §150.a). In questions, יֵשׁ often implies doubt about the existence of something ( 441 יֵשׁ 2.b). The rendered it as a question, as do most English versions: “Is there anything of which it can be said …?” (, , , , , , , ). On the other hand, יֵשׁ is used elsewhere in the Book of Ecclesiastes as a predication of existence (“There is …”) to assert the existence of something (2:13, 21; 4:8, 9; 5:13[12]; 6:1, 11; 7:15; 8:6, 14; 9:4; 10:5). יֵשׁ 2 renders יֵשׁ דָּבָר as “There is something.…” This view is taken by several translations: “Even the thing of which we say …” (), “Men may say of something …” (), and “Sometimes there is a phenomena of which they say …” ().
19. 38 The perfect tense verb הָיָה (hayah) refers to a past perfect situation: It describes an action that is viewed as a remote past event from the perspective of the past. This past perfect situation is brought out by the temporal adverb כְּבָר (kévar, “already”; I כְּבָר; 460 I כְּבָר; cf. 1:10; 2:12, 16; 3:15; 4:2; 6:10; 9:6–7). The expression כְּבָר + הָיָה connotes a past perfect nuance: “it has already been” (Eccl 1:10; see 460 ).
20. 39 This does not deny man’s creativity or inventiveness, only the ultimate newness of his accomplishments. For example, there is no essential difference between the first voyage to the moon and the discovery of America (different point of arrival, different vehicles of travel, but the same essential action and results).
21. 40 Heb “in the ages long ago before us.”
22. 41 Heb “There is no remembrance of former things.” The term רִאשֹׁנִים (ri’shonim, “former things”) is the masculine plural form of the adjective רִאשׁוֹן (ri’shon,“former, first, chief”; 911 רִאשׁוֹן). When used in a temporal sense, the singular denotes “former” in time ( 911 1.a) or “first” in time ( 911 2.a). The plural form is only used to denote “former” in time: “former persons,” i.e., ancestors, men of old (e.g., Lev 26:45; Deut 19:14; Job 18:20; Isa 61:4; Ps 79:8; Sirach 4:16) or “former things,” i.e., past events (e.g., Isa 41:22; 42:9; 43:9, 18; 46:9; 48:3). See 911 1.a, which suggests that this usage refers to “former persons.” This approach is adopted by several translations: “men of old” (, , , ), “people of long ago” (), “earlier ones” (), and “former generations” (). On the other hand, this Hebrew phrase may be nuanced “former things” or “earlier things” ( ן(וֹ)רִאשֹׁ). This is adopted by some translations: “former things” (, ) and “earlier things” (). Although future generations are mentioned in 1:11, what they will not remember is the past events. The context of 1:3–11 focuses on human achievement, that is, former things.
23. 42 The term “remember” is not in the Hebrew text, but has been supplied in the translation for clarity.
24. 43 Heb “and also of the last things which will be.” The term אַחֲרֹנִים (’akharonim, “the future things”) is the masculine plural form of the adjective אַחֲרוֹן (’akharon) which means “coming after” ( 30 אַחֲרוֹן) or “at the back” ( אַחֲרוֹן). When used in a temporal sense, it may mean (1) “later one; (2) “in the future”; (3) “last”; or (4) “at the last” or “in the end” ( 2). The plural form may be used in reference to (1) future generations, e.g., Deut 29:21; Pss 48:14; 78:4, 6; 102:19; Job 18:20; Eccl 4:16, or (2) future events, e.g., Neh 8:18 ( 30 ). 30 b suggests that this usage refers to “future generations,” while 2.c suggests future events. As mentioned in the previous note, it probably refers to future events rather than future generations. The Hebrew terms translated former events and future events create a merism (two polar extremes encompass everything in between). This encompasses all secular achievements in human history past to future things yet to be done.
25. 44 Heb “There will not be any remembrance of them among those who come after.” According to Qoheleth, nothing new really happens under the sun (1:9). Apparent observations of what appears to be revolutionary are due to a lack of remembrance by subsequent generations of what happened long before their time in past generations (1:10–11a). And what will happen in future generations will not be remembered by the subsequent generations to arise after them (1:11b).