2is vanity, since the same fate comes to all, to the righteous and the wicked, to the good and the evil, to the clean and the unclean, to those who sacrifice and those who do not sacrifice. As are the good, so are the sinners; those who swear are like those who shun an oath.
In Bauzi “swear” can be translated in various ways. In Hebrews 6:13, for instance, it is translated with “bones break apart and decisively speak.” (“No bones are literally broken but by saying ‘break bones’ it is like people swear by someone else in this case it is in relation to a rotting corpse’ bones falling apart. If you ‘break bones’ so to speak when you make an utterance, it is a true utterance.”) In other passages, such as in Matthew 26:72, it’s translated with an expression that implies taking ashes (“if a person wants everyone to know that he is telling the truth about a matter, he reaches down into the fireplace, scoops up some ashes and throws them while saying ‘I was not the one who did that.'”). So in Matthew 26:72 the Bauzi text is: “. . . Peter took ashes and defended himself saying, ‘I don’t know that Nazareth person.'” (Source: David Briley)
The Hebrew and Greek that is typically translated as “sin” in English has a wide variety of translations.
The Greek ἁμαρτάνω (hamartanō) carries the original verbatim meaning of “miss the mark” and likewise, many translations contain the “connotation of moral responsibility.”
Loma: “leaving the road” (which “implies a definite standard, the transgression of which is sin”)
Navajo (Dinė): “that which is off to the side” (source for this and above: Bratcher / Nida)
Toraja-Sa’dan: kasalan, originally meaning “transgression of a religious or moral rule” and in the context of the Bible “transgression of God’s commandments” (source: H. van der Veen in The Bible Translator 1950, p. 21ff. )
Bariai: “bad behavior” (source: Bariai Back Translation)
Sandawe: “miss the mark” (like the original meaning of the Greek term) (source for this and above: Ursula Wiesemann in Holzhausen / Riderer 2010, p. 36ff., 43)
In Shipibo-Conibo the term is hocha. Nida (1952, p. 149) tells the story of its choosing: “In some instances a native expression for sin includes many connotations, and its full meaning must be completely understood before one ever attempts to use it. This was true, for example, of the term hocha first proposed by Shipibo-Conibo natives as an equivalent for ‘sin.’ The term seemed quite all right until one day the translator heard a girl say after having broken a little pottery jar that she was guilty of ‘hocha.’ Breaking such a little jar scarcely seemed to be sin. However, the Shipibos insisted that hocha was really sin, and they explained more fully the meaning of the word. It could be used of breaking a jar, but only if the jar belonged to someone else. Hocha was nothing more nor less than destroying the possessions of another, but the meaning did not stop with purely material possessions. In their belief God owns the world and all that is in it. Anyone who destroys the work and plan of God is guilty of hocha. Hence the murderer is of all men most guilty of hocha, for he has destroyed God’s most important possession in the world, namely, man. Any destructive and malevolent spirit is hocha, for it is antagonistic and harmful to God’s creation. Rather than being a feeble word for some accidental event, this word for sin turned out to be exceedingly rich in meaning and laid a foundation for the full presentation of the redemptive act of God.”
Martin Ehrensvärd, one of the translators for the DanishBibelen 2020, comments on the translation of this term: “We would explain terms, such that e.g. sin often became ‘doing what God does not want’ or ‘breaking God’s law’, ‘letting God down’, ‘disrespecting God’, ‘doing evil’, ‘acting stupidly’, ‘becoming guilty’. Now why couldn’t we just use the word sin? Well, sin in contemporary Danish, outside of the church, is mostly used about things such as delicious but unhealthy foods. Exquisite cakes and chocolates are what a sin is today.” (Source: Ehrensvärd in HIPHIL Novum 8/2023, p. 81ff. )
The Greek, Hebrew, and Latin terms that are translated in English mostly as “righteous” as an adjective or personified noun or “righteousness” (also as “upright(ness)” and “just(ice)”) are most commonly expressed with concept of “straightness,” though this may be expressed in a number of ways. (Click or tap here to see the details)
Following is a list of (back-) translations of various languages:
Paasaal: “white heart” (source: Fabian N. Dapila in The Bible Translator 2024, p. 415ff.)
(San Mateo del Mar Huave: “completely good” (the translation does not imply sinless perfection)
Nuer: “way of right” (“there is a complex concept of “right” vs. ‘left’ in Nuer where ‘right’ indicates that which is masculine, strong, good, and moral, and ‘left’ denotes what is feminine, weak, and sinful (a strictly masculine viewpoint!) The ‘way of right’ is therefore righteousness, but of course women may also attain this way, for the opposition is more classificatory than descriptive.”) (This and all above from Bratcher / Nida except for Bilua: Carl Gross; Tiv: Rob Koops; Muna: René van den Berg)
Yatzachi Zapotec: “walk straight” (source for this and four previous: John Beekman in Notes on Translation November 1964, p. 1-22)
Makonde: “doing what God wants” (in a context of us doing) and “be good in God’s eyes” (in the context of being made righteous by God) (note that justify / justification is translated as “to be made good in the eyes of God.” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific notes in Paratext)
Aari: The Pauline word for “righteous” is generally rendered by “makes one without sin” in the Aari, sometimes “before God” is added for clarity. (Source: Loren Bliese)
Ekari: maakodo bokouto or “enormous truth” (the same word that is also used for “truth“; bokouto — “enormous” — is being used as an attribute for abstract nouns to denote that they are of God [see also here]; source: Marion Doble in The Bible Translator 1963, p. 37ff. ).
Guhu-Samane: pobi or “right” (also: “right (side),” “(legal) right,” “straightness,” “correction,” “south,” “possession,” “pertinence,” “kingdom,” “fame,” “information,” or “speech” — “According to [Guhu-Samane] thinking there is a common core of meaning among all these glosses. Even from an English point of view the first five can be seen to be closely related, simply because of their similarity in English. However, from that point the nuances of meaning are not so apparent. They relate in some such a fashion as this: As one faces the morning sun, south lies to the right hand (as north lies to the left); then at one’s right hand are his possessions and whatever pertains to him; thus, a rich man’s many possessions and scope of power and influence is his kingdom; so, the rich and other important people encounter fame; and all of this spreads as information and forms most of the framework of the people’s speech.”) (Source: Ernest Richert in Notes on Translation 1964, p. 11ff.)
German New Testament translation by Berger / Nord (publ. 1999): Gerechtheit, a neologism to differentiate it from the commonly-used Gerechtigkeit which can mean “righteousness” but is more often used in modern German as “fairness” (Berger / Nord especially use Gerechtheit in Letter to the Romans) or Gerechtestun, also a neologism, meaning “righteous deeds” (especially in Letter to the Ephesians)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Ecclesiastes 9:2:
Kupsabiny: “Things come to all people regardless of who they are. They come to the righteous, to sinners, the gentle and the rebellious, the holy/clean and those who are not clear/holy, those who bring gifts/sacrifices and those who do not bring. The things that a good person will meet with will also come to the sinner, and a person who makes a promise to God is like the one who does not promise.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “The righteous and the wicked, the good and the bad, the clean and the unclean to those who offer sacrifices and to those who do not offer sacrifices, in the end it will happen to all in the same way. As to the good people so in the same way it will also happen to the sinful people. As to people who take oaths so in the same way it will also happen to people who are afraid to take them.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “Just the same is the end-result/fate/future of all kinds of people — the righteous and the wicked, the good and the bad-one, the clean and the dirty, and the (one-who) offers and the (one-who) does- not -offer. Just the same is the good person and the sinner, and the (one-who) swears and the (one who) does- not -swear.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “But we know that some time in the future we will all die; it does not matter whether we act righteously or wickedly, whether we are good or whether we are bad, whether we are acceptable for worshiping God or whether we have done things to cause us to be unacceptable; it does not matter if we offer sacrifices to God or if we do not; it does not matter if we do what we have promised God that we will do or if we do not; we all die. The same thing will happen to good people and to sinful people, to those who solemnly promise to do things for God and to those who are afraid to make such promises.” (Source: Translation for Translators)
The Septuagint, or Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, along with Jerusalem Bible and New Jerusalem Bible, regard the first part of this verse as belonging with the previous verse. They also take the first word to be hevel (“vanity”) and so give a different reading than Revised Standard Version. However, taking the Hebrew text literally we have “all things [hakol] are alike for all one fate.” “All things are alike for all” is probably a well-known saying, stating a principle that will be illustrated in the following examples. It is followed by the comment “one fate.” We can express the idea by “Everything is alike [or, the same] for everybody. We all share the same fate.” Good News Translation translates rather freely: “It makes no difference. The same fate comes to….”
One fate: see comments on 2.14. Fate is a euphemism for the final end, death. One does not function here as a numeral but expresses the fact that it is a shared or common fate; we may translate as “the same fate” or “a common fate.” In some languages figurative expressions exist to express the idea of fate. For example, in one West African language we can say “everyone holds one stick.” It is quite acceptable to use such idiomatic expressions, if the level of language matches the serious tone here.
Comes to all is supplied by Revised Standard Version and means that death “comes to” or “meets” every living thing. Here all is not restricted to people but embraces every living creature.
A series of contrasting terms describing individuals follows. We have seen this device in the poem of 3.2-8. The use of opposing terms is a feature of wisdom literature enabling the simple classification of all aspects of life. In this verse they describe liturgical or religious practices.
With the exception of one line (“to the good”), this passage is very rhythmic, with the same beat of alternating senses that we have seen elsewhere. The translator should try to retain some of the rhythm if possible.
We note a slight shift in the form of expression toward the end of the list. The first elements in the list (“righteous” through “those not sacrificing”) follow the preposition “to,” while the last elements (“good” and “sinner”; “one swearing” and “one not swearing”) are combined with “as … so” particles in a comparative expression. The translator can decide whether to follow this shift in the form (see Good News Translation), or whether putting all elements in a parallel structure will be more acceptable.
To the righteous and the wicked: for comment on the term righteous, see verse 1 and 3.17. It is appropriate to begin the list with the righteous or law-abiding persons, since it was the circumstances surrounding their death that caught Qoheleth’s attention (verse 1). The wicked describes the person who disobeys God’s Law (see comments on 3.17). Both kinds of people die, even though from the human viewpoint we might expect some distinction to be made.
To the good and the evil: as the Revised Standard Version footnote indicates, the Hebrew lacks the words “and the evil.” However, later in the verse there is a reference to both the good and the evil. Should we omit the good, or add the evil as Revised Standard Version has? Qoheleth’s meaning will not be lost if we omit “good” at this point, because it is repeated later in the verse. We suggest that the entire phrase should not be translated at this point.
To the clean and the unclean represents those who are prepared for worship and those who are not, those who are worthy for worship and those who are defiled and unable to join in. Uncleanness was normally a temporary state caused by touching something considered unclean (for example, a dead body), or by certain sicknesses and the like. See the information given in Leviticus 12–15. A person could become clean again by undergoing a cleansing ritual. The two contrasting terms clean and unclean are a way of describing all Israelites, defining them in terms of those who are able to join in worship and those who cannot. The translator should use the same vocabulary used in translating the terms in Leviticus. Some languages will use words like “pure” and “impure,” while others will need longer phrases such as “acceptable [or, not acceptable] in God’s eyes” or “acceptable [or, not acceptable] for worship.” We can translate as:
• those who are ready for worship and those who are not.
• those who have cleansed themselves for worship and those who have not.
To him who sacrifices and him who does not sacrifice: this contrasting pair is also based in Israel’s religious life. The person who sacrifices probably is meant to identify someone who takes religious practice seriously; conversely, the person who does not sacrifice is someone who is not serious about worship. Regardless of how religious a person is, Qoheleth says that person will ultimately die. Religious devotion, or lack of it, will not save anyone from death. Although the verb “to sacrifice” is only one of many used to describe the various Old Testament rituals, here it probably represents all kinds of sacrificial activity. However, to translate it as “religious” (Good News Translation) can be misleading, because our translation needs to reflect the Old Testament ritual background. “Religious” is far too general a term to do that. We can simply say “to the person who [regularly or habitually] offers sacrifice and to the person who does not.” In some languages an object for the verb “sacrifice” will have to be mentioned. In this case the translator should try to use the most general term possible, such as “the person who offers a sacrifice [to God]” or “the person who sacrifices something.”
As is the good man, so is the sinner compares people of two opposing moral standards. Though very different morally, they stand together because they share a single fate. Moral factors do not determine whether a person lives or dies. The good man may carry several meanings, so it may be better to say “the person who does good,” while the sinner is “the person who does wrong.” The entire phrase can be clearly set forth as:
• the person who does good and the person who does evil share the same fate [or, both end the same].
• the fate of the person who does good and of the person who does wrong is the same.
And he who swears is as he who shuns an oath: again the liturgical context of the examples is clear, this time returning to an example used previously in chapter 5. The Revised Standard Version text can be misunderstood as comparing two kinds of people, when in fact Qoheleth is talking about their fates. “Swearing an oath” means making a solemn promise to someone or to God that you will do a certain thing. See comments on 5.4-5. The context suggests that Qoheleth has in mind promises made to God rather than to a friend or someone else. However, we cannot rule out both meanings being present. Our translation needs to reflect that religious setting, whereas Good News Translation “one who takes an oath” may have a purely secular or legal sense in many cultures. He who shuns an oath describes someone who is afraid or unwilling to make a commitment. In translation we can convey the broader meaning with:
• the person who makes a promise to God is treated the same as the person who refuses to promise anything.
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 .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.