14 A fool also multiplies words. Man doesn't know what will be; and that which will be after him, who can tell him?
*Minor differences ignored. Grouped by changes, with first version listed as example.
Full of words - Confident talking of the future is indicated rather than mere loquacity. Compare James 4:13.
A man cannot tell what shall be - A foolish babbling man will talk on every subject, though he can say as little on the past, as he can on the future.
A fool also is full of words,.... Or, "multiplies words" (y). Is very talkative, says the same thing over and over again; uses an abundance of waste words, that have no meaning in them; utters every thing that comes uppermost, without any order or judgment; affects to talk on every subject, whether he knows anything of it or not; and will engross all the conversation to himself, though of all in company the most unfit for it;
a man cannot tell what shall be; and what shall be after him who can tell him? what the fool is talking of; what is the drift of his discourse; or where it will end, and what he will bring it to, it is so noisy, confused, and incoherent: or no man can tell future things, or what will come to pass; nor can any man inform another of future events; and yet a fool boasts and brags of what he shall do, and what he shall have, as if he was master of the future, and knew for certain what would come to pass, which the wisest of men do not.
(y) "multiplicabit", Pagninus, Montanus; "multiplicat", Vatablus, Mercerus, Drusius, Amama, Gejerus, Rambachius, Cocceius.
full of words-- (Ecclesiastes 5:2).
a man cannot tell what shall be-- (Ecclesiastes 3:22; Ecclesiastes 6:12; Ecclesiastes 8:7; Ecclesiastes 11:2; Proverbs 27:1). If man, universally (including the wise man), cannot foresee the future, much less can the fool; his "many words" are therefore futile.
"And the fool maketh many words: while a man yet doth not know that which shall be; and what shall be when he is no more, who can show him that?" The vav at the beginning of this verse corresponds to the Lat. accedit quod. That he who in Ecclesiastes 10:12 was named kesil is now named hassachal, arises from this, that meanwhile sichluth has been predicated of him. The relation of Ecclesiastes 10:14 to Ecclesiastes 10:14, Geier has rightly defined: Probatur absurditas multiloquii a communi ignorantia ac imbecillitate humana, quae tamen praecipue dominatur apud ignaros stultos. We miss before lo-yeda' an "although" (gam, Nehemiah 6:1, or ki gam, Ecclesiastes 8:12); the clause is, after the manner of a clause denoting state or condition, subordinated to the principal clause, as at Psalm 5:10 : "an open grave is their throat יח לשׁ, although they smooth their tongue, i.e., speak flatteringly." The lxx, Syr., Symm., and Jerome seek to rectify the tautology id quod futurum est et quod futurum est (cf. on the other hand, Ecclesiastes 8:7), for they read יה מה שהיה. But the second quod futurum certainly preserves by מאץ its distinguishing nearer definition. Hitzig explains: "What is done, and what after this (that is done) is done." Scarcely correctly: aharav of the parallel passage, Ecclesiastes 6:12, cf. Ecclesiastes 7:14; Ecclesiastes 9:3, requires for the suffix a personal reference, so that thus meaharav, as at Deuteronomy 29:21, means "from his death and onwards." Thus, first, the knowledge of the future is denied to man; then the knowledge of what will be done after his death; and generally, of what will then be done. The fool, without any consciousness of human ignorance, acts as if he knew all, and utters about all and everything a multitude of words; for he uselessly fatigues himself with his ignorance, which remains far behind the knowledge that is possible for man.
Full of words - Forward to promise and boast what he will do, whereas none can be sure of future events, even during his own life, much more after his death.
*More commentary available at chapter level.