[14:2]  ¹ tn Heb “and.” Here KJV, ASV use a semicolon; NASB begins a new sentence with “Now.”

[14:2]  ² tn The alternative rendering, “when it is reported to the priest” may be better in light of the fact that the priest had to go outside the camp. Since he or she had been declared “unclean” by a priest (Lev 13:3) and was, therefore, required to remain outside the camp (13:46), the formerly diseased person could not reenter the camp until he or she had been declared “clean” by a priest (cf. Lev 13:6 for “declaring clean.”). See especially J. Milgrom, Leviticus (AB), 1:831, who supports this rendering both here and in Lev 13:2 and 9. B. A. Levine, however, prefers the rendering in the text (Leviticus [JPSTC], 76 and 85). It is the most natural meaning of the verb (i.e., “to be brought” from בּוֹא [bo’, “to come”] in the Hophal stem, which means “to be brought” in all other occurrences in Leviticus other than 13:2, 9, and 14:2; see only 6:30; 10:18; 11:32; and 16:27), it suits the context well in 13:2, and the rendering “to be brought” is supported by 13:7b, “he shall show himself to the priest a second time.” Although it is true that the priest needed to go outside the camp to examine such a person, the person still needed to “be brought” to the priest there. The translation of vv. 2-3 employed here suggests that v. 2 introduces the proceeding and then v. 3 goes on to describe the specific details of the examination and purification.

[14:3]  ³ tn Heb “and he shall be brought to the priest and the priest shall go out to from outside to the camp and the priest shall see [it].” The understood “it” refers to the skin infection itself (see the note on 13:3 above). The referent has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[14:3]  ⁴ tn Heb “And behold, the diseased infection has been healed from the diseased person.” The expression “diseased infection” has been translated as simply “infection” to avoid redundancy here in terms of English style.

[14:4]  ⁵ tn The term rendered here “crimson fabric” consists of two Hebrew words and means literally, “crimson of worm” (in this order only in Lev 14:4, 6, 49, 51, 52 and Num 19:6; for the more common reverse order, “worm of crimson,” see, e.g., the colored fabrics used in making the tabernacle, Exod 25:4, etc.). This particular “worm” is an insect that lives on the leaves of palm trees, the eggs of which are the source for a “crimson” dye used to color various kinds of cloth (B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 86). That a kind of dyed “fabric” is intended, not just the dye substance itself, is made certain by the dipping of it along with the other ritual materials listed here into the blood and water mixture for sprinkling on the person being cleansed (Lev 14:6; cf. also the burning of it in the fire of the red heifer in Num 19:6). Both the reddish color of cedar wood and the crimson colored fabric seem to correspond to the color of blood and may, therefore, symbolize either “life,” which is in the blood, or the use of blood to “make atonement” (see, e.g., Gen 9:4 and Lev 17:11). See further the note on v. 7 below.

[14:4]  ⁶ sn Twigs of hyssop (probably one or several species of marjoram thymus), a spice and herb plant that grows out of walls in Palestine (see 1 Kgs 4:33 [5:13 HT], HALOT 27 s.v. אֵזוֹב, and J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 195), were particularly leafy and therefore especially useful for sprinkling the purifying liquid (cf. vv. 5-7). Many of the details of the ritual procedure are obscure. It has been proposed, for example, that the “cedar wood” was a stick to which the hyssop was bound with the crimson material to make a sort of sprinkling instrument (Hartley, 195). In light of the burning of these three materials as part of the preparation of the ashes of the red heifer in Num 19:5-6, however, this seems unlikely.

[14:4]  ⁷ tn The MT reads literally, “And the priest shall command and he shall take.” Clearly, the second verb (“and he shall take”) contains the thrust of the priest’s command, which suggests the translation “that he take” (cf. also v. 5a). Since the priest issues the command here, he cannot be the subject of the second verb because he cannot be commanding himself to “take” up these ritual materials. Moreover, since the ritual is being performed “for the one being cleansed,” the antecedent of the pronoun “he” cannot refer to him. The LXX, Smr, and Syriac versions have the third person plural here and in v. 5a, which corresponds to other combinations with the verb וְצִוָּה (vÿtsivvah) “and he (the priest) shall command” in this context (see Lev 13:54; 14:36, 40). This suggests an impersonal (i.e., “someone shall take” and “someone shall slaughter,” respectively) or perhaps even passive rendering of the verbs in 14:4, 5 (i.e., “there shall be taken” and “there shall be slaughtered,” respectively). The latter option has been chosen here.

[14:4]  ⁸ tn Heb “the one cleansing himself” (i.e., Hitpael participle of טָהֵר, taher, “to be clean”).

[14:5]  ⁹ tn Heb “And the priest shall command and he shall slaughter.” See the note on “be taken up” (v. 4).

[14:5]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “into a vessel of clay over living water.” The expression “living [i.e., ‘fresh’] water” (cf. Lev 14:50; 15:13; Num 19:17) refers to water that flows. It includes such water sources as artesian wells (Gen 26:19; Song of Songs 4:15), springs (Jer 2:13, as opposed to cisterns; cf. 17:13), and flowing streams (Zech 14:8). In other words, this is water that has not stood stagnant as, for example, in a sealed-off cistern.

[14:6]  ¹¹ tc Heb “the live bird he [i.e., the priest] shall take it.” Although the MT has no ו (vav, “and”) at the beginning of this clause, a few medieval Hebrew mss and Smr have one and the LXX, Syriac, and Vulgate translate as if it is there. The “but” in the present translation reflects this text critical background, the object-first word order in the clause with the resumptive pronoun at the end, and the obvious contrast between the slaughtered bird in v. 5 and the live bird in v. 6.

[14:7]  ¹² tn Heb “the one cleansing himself” (i.e., Hitpael participle of טָהֵר [taher, “to be clean”]).

[14:7]  ¹³ tn Heb “and he shall make him clean.” The verb is the Piel of טָהֵר (taher, “to be clean”), here used as a so-called “declarative” Piel (i.e., “to declare clean”; cf. 13:6, etc.).

[14:7]  ¹⁴ sn The reddish color of cedar wood and the crimson colored fabric called for in v. 4 (see the note there, esp. the association with the color of blood) as well as the priestly commands to bring “two live” birds (v. 4a), to slaughter one of them “over fresh water” (literally “living water,” v. 5b), and the subsequent ritual with the (second) “live” bird (vv. 6-7) combine to communicate the concept of “life” and “being alive” in this passage. This contrasts with the fear of death associated with the serious skin diseases in view here (see, e.g., Aaron’s description of Miriam’s skin disease in Num 12:12, “Do not let her be like the dead one when it goes out from its mother’s womb and its flesh half eaten away”). Since the slaughtered bird here is not sacrificed at the altar and is not designated as an expiatory “sin offering,” this ritual procedure probably symbolizes the renewed life of the diseased person and displays it publicly for all to see. It is preparatory to the expiatory rituals that will follow (vv. 10-20, esp. vv. 18-20), but is not itself expiatory. Thus, although there are important similarities between the bird ritual here, the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement (Lev 16:20-22), and the red heifer for cleansing from corpse contamination (Num 19), this bird ritual is different in that the latter two constitute “sin offerings” (Lev 16:5, 8-10; Num 19:9, 17). Neither of the birds in Lev 14:4-7 is designated or treated as a “sin offering.” Nevertheless, the very nature of the live bird ritual itself and its obvious similarity to the scapegoat ritual suggests that the patient’s disease has been removed far away so that he or she is free from its effects both personally and communally.

[14:8]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “the one cleansing himself” (i.e., Hitpael participle of טָהֵר [taher, “to be clean”]).

[14:8]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “and he shall be clean” (so ASV). The end result of the ritual procedures in vv. 4-7 and the washing and shaving in v. 8a is that the formerly diseased person has now officially become clean in the sense that he can reenter the community (see v. 8b; contrast living outside the community as an unclean diseased person, Lev 13:46). There are, however, further cleansing rituals and pronouncements for him to undergo in the tabernacle as outlined in vv. 10-20 (see Qal “be[come] clean” in vv. 9 and 20, Piel “pronounce clean” in v. 11, and Hitpael “the one being cleansed” in vv. 11, 14, 17, 18, and 19). Obviously, in order to enter the tabernacle he must already “be clean” in the sense of having access to the community.

[14:9]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “And it shall be on the seventh day.”

[14:9]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “and he shall be clean” (see the note on v. 8).

[14:10]  ¹⁹ tn The subject “he” probably refers to the formerly diseased person in this case (see the notes on Lev 1:5a, 6a, and 9a).

[14:10]  ²⁰ tn This term is often rendered “fine flour,” but it refers specifically to wheat as opposed to barley (B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 10) and, although the translation “flour” is used here, it may indicate “grits” rather than finely ground flour (J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:179; see the note on Lev 2:1). The unit of measure is most certainly an “ephah” even though it is not stated explicitly (see, e.g., Num 28:5; cf. 15:4, 6, 8), and three-tenths of an ephah would amount to about a gallon, or perhaps one-third of a bushel (J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 196; Milgrom, 845). Since the normal amount of flour for a lamb is one-tenth of an ephah (Num 28:4-5; cf. 15:4), three-tenths is about right for the three lambs offered in Lev 14:10-20.

[14:10]  ²¹ tn A “log” (לֹג, log) of oil is about one-sixth of a liter, or one-third of a pint, or two-thirds of a cup.

[14:11]  ²² tn The MT here is awkward to translate into English. It reads literally, “and the priest who pronounces clean (Piel participle of טָהֵר, taher) shall cause to stand (Hiphil of עָמַד, ’amad) the man who is cleansing himself (Hitpael participle of טָהֵר) and them” (i.e., the offerings listed in v. 10; the referent has been specified in the translation for clarity). Alternatively, the Piel of טָהֵר could be rendered “who performs the cleansing/purification” (J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:827), perhaps even as a technical term for one who holds the office of “purification priest” (B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 87). It is probably better, however, to retain the same meaning here as in v. 7 above (see the note there regarding the declarative Piel use of this verb).

[14:12]  ²³ tn Heb “And the priest shall take the one lamb.”

[14:12]  ²⁴ tn See the note on Lev 5:15 above. The primary purpose of the “guilt offering” (אָשָׁם, ’asham) was to “atone” (כִּפֶּר, kipper, “to make atonement,” see v. 18 below and the note on Lev 1:4) for “trespassing” on the Lord’s “holy things,” whether sacred objects or sacred people. It is, therefore, closely associated with the reconsecration of the Lord’s holy people as, for example, here and in the case of the corpse contaminated Nazirite (Num 6:11b-12). Since the nation of Israel was “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” to the Lord (Exod 19:6; cf. the blood splashed on all the people in Exod 24:8), the skin diseased person was essentially a member of the “holy nation” who had been expelled from the community. Therefore, he or she had been desecrated and the guilt offering was essential to restoring him or her to the community. In fact, the manipulation of blood and oil in the guilt offering ritual procedure for the healed person (see vv. 14-18 below) is reminiscent of that employed for the ordination offering in the consecration of the holy Aaronic priests of the nation (Exod 29:19-21; Lev 8:22-30).

[14:12]  ²⁵ tn Heb “wave them [as] a wave offering before the Lord” (NAB similar). See the note on Lev 7:30 and the literature cited there. Other possible translations include “elevate them [as] an elevation offering before the Lord” (cf. NRSV) or “present them [as] a presentation offering before the Lord.” To be sure, the actual physical “waving” of a male lamb seems unlikely, but some waving gesture may have been performed in the presentation of the offering (cf. also the “waving” of the Levites as a “wave offering” in Num 8:11, etc.).

[14:13]  ²⁶ tn Heb “And he shall slaughter.”

[14:13]  ²⁷ tn Heb “in the place which.”

[14:13]  ²⁸ sn See the note on Lev 4:3 regarding the term “sin offering.”

[14:13]  ²⁹ sn See the note on Lev 1:3 regarding the “burnt offering.”

[14:13]  ³⁰ tn Since the priest himself presents this offering as a wave offering (v. 12), it would seem that the offering is already in his hands and he would, therefore, be the one who slaughtered the male lamb in this instance rather than the offerer. Smr and LXX make the second verb “to slaughter” plural rather than singular, which suggests that it is to be taken as an impersonal passive (see J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:852).

[14:13]  ³¹ tn Heb “the guilt offering, it [is] to the Lord.” Regarding the “guilt offering,” see the note on Lev 5:15.

[14:14]  ³² tn Heb “and the priest shall put [literally ‘give’] on the lobe of the ear of the one being cleansed, the right one.”

[14:14]  ³³ tn The term for “big toe” (בֹּהֶן, bohen) is the same as that for “thumb.” It refers to the larger appendage on either the hand or the foot.

[14:15]  ³⁴ tn Heb “And the priest…shall pour on the left hand of the priest.” As the Rabbis observe, the repetition of “priest” as the expressed subject of both verbs in this verse may suggest that two priests were involved in this ritual (see m. Nega’im 14:8, referred to by J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:852), but the seemingly unnecessary repetition of “priest” in several verses throughout the chapter argues against this (see esp. vv. 3, 14, 18, 20, 24, and 26). Moreover, in this case, “priest” may be repeated to avoid confusing the priest’s hand with that of the one being cleansed (cf. v. 14).

[14:16]  ³⁵ tn Heb “his right finger from the oil.”

[14:17]  ³⁶ tn Heb “on his hand.”

[14:18]  ³⁷ tn Heb “and the remainder in the oil.”

[14:19]  ³⁸ tn Heb “do [or “make”] the sin offering.”

[14:19]  ³⁹ tn Heb “And after[ward] he [i.e., the offerer] shall slaughter.” The LXX adds “the priest” as the subject of the verb (as do several English versions, e.g., NAB, NIV, NCV, NLT), but the offerer is normally the one who does the actually slaughtering of the sacrificial animal (cf. the notes on Lev 1:5a, 6a, and 9a).

[14:20]  ⁴⁰ tn Heb “cause to go up.”

[14:21]  ⁴¹ tn Heb “and his hand does not reach”; NAB, NRSV “and cannot afford so much (afford these NIV).”

[14:21]  ⁴² tn See the notes on v. 10 above.

[14:22]  ⁴³ tn Heb “from the sons of the pigeon,” referring either to “young pigeons” or “various species of pigeon” (contrast J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:168 with J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 14; cf. Lev 1:14 and esp. 5:7-10).

[14:22]  ⁴⁴ tn Heb “which his hand reaches”; NRSV “such as (which NIV) he can afford.”

[14:22]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “and one shall be a sin offering and the one a burnt offering.” The versions struggle with whether or not “one” should or should not have the definite article in its two occurrences in this verse (KJV, ASV, NAB, NASB all have the English definite article with both). The MT has the first without and the second with the article.

[14:23]  ⁴⁶ tn Heb “to the doorway of”; KJV, ASV “unto the door of.”

[14:24]  ⁴⁷ tn Heb “and the priest shall wave them.” In the present translation “priest” is not repeated a second time in the verse for stylistic reasons. With regard to the “waving” of the “wave offering,” see the note on v. 12 above.

[14:25]  ⁴⁸ tn Heb “and the priest shall put [literally ‘give’] on the lobe of the ear of the one being cleansed, the right one.”

[14:25]  ⁴⁹ tn The term for “big toe” (בֹּהֶן, bohen) is the same as that for “thumb.” It refers to the larger appendage on either the hand or the foot.

[14:26]  ⁵⁰ tn Heb “And from the oil the priest shall pour out on the left hand of the priest.” Regarding the repetition of “priest” in this verse see the note on v. 15 above.

[14:27]  ⁵¹ tn Heb “and the priest shall sprinkle with his right finger from the oil which is on his left hand.”

[14:28]  ⁵² tn Heb “on his hand.”

[14:29]  ⁵³ tn Heb “on the hand.”

[14:29]  ⁵⁴ tn Heb “give.”

[14:30]  ⁵⁵ tn Heb “the one from the turtledoves.”

[14:30]  ⁵⁶ tc Heb “from which his hand reaches.” The repetition of virtually the same expression at the beginning of v. 31 in the MT is probably due to dittography (cf. the LXX and Syriac). However, the MT may be retained if it is understood as “one of the turtledoves or young pigeons that are within his means – whichever he can afford” (see J. Milgrom’s translation in Leviticus [AB], 1:828, contra his commentary, 862; cf. REB).

[14:31]  ⁵⁷ tn Heb “and the one a burnt offering on the grain offering.”

[14:32]  ⁵⁸ tn Heb “This is the law of who in him [is] a diseased infection.”

[14:32]  ⁵⁹ tn Heb “who his hand does not reach in his purification”; NASB “whose means are limited for his cleansing”; NIV “who cannot afford the regular offerings for his cleansing.”

[14:34]  ⁶⁰ tn Heb “which I am giving” (so NAB, NIV).

[14:34]  ⁶¹ tn Heb “give.”

[14:34]  ⁶² tn Heb “in the house of the land of your possession” (KJV and ASV both similar).

[14:35]  ⁶³ tn Heb “who to him the house.”

[14:36]  ⁶⁴ tn Heb “And the priest shall command and they shall clear the house.” The second verb (“and they shall clear”) states the thrust of the priest’s command, which suggests the translation “that they clear” (cf. also vv. 4a and 5a above), and for the impersonal passive rendering of the active verb (“that the house be cleared”) see the note on v. 4 above.

[14:36]  ⁶⁵ tn Heb “to see the infection”; KJV “to see the plague”; NASB “to look at the mark (mildew NCV).”

[14:36]  ⁶⁶ tn Heb “all which [is] in the house.”

[14:36]  ⁶⁷ sn Once the priest pronounced the house “unclean” everything in it was also officially unclean. Therefore, if they emptied the house of its furniture, etc. before the official pronouncement by the priest those possessions would thereby remain officially “clean” and avoid destruction or purification procedures.

[14:36]  ⁶⁸ tn Heb “and after thus.”

[14:37]  ⁶⁹ tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV).

[14:37]  ⁷⁰ tn For “yellowish green and reddish” see Lev 13:49. The Hebrew term translated “eruptions” occurs only here and its meaning is uncertain. For a detailed summary of the issues and views see J. Milgrom, Leviticus (AB), 1:870. The suggestions include, among others: (1) “depressions” from Hebrew שׁקע (“sink”) or קער as the root of the Hebrew term for “bowl” (LXX, Targums, NAB, NASB, NIV; see also B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 90), (2) “streaks” (ASV, NJPS), (3) and “eruptions” as a loan-word from Egyptian sqr r rwtj (“eruption; rash”); cf. Milgrom, 870; J. E. Hartley, Leviticus (WBC), 198-99. The latter view is taken here.

[14:37]  ⁷¹ tn The Hebrew term קִיר (qir,“wall”) refers to the surface of the wall in this case, which normally consisted of a coating of plaster made of limestone and sand (see HALOT 1099 s.v. קִיר 1.a; J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:871; J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 199).

[14:38]  ⁷² tn Heb “and he shall shut up the house seven days.”

[14:39]  ⁷³ tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV); NASB “If the mark has indeed spread.”

[14:40]  ⁷⁴ tn Heb “and the priest shall command and they shall pull out the stones which in them is the infection, and they shall cast them.” The second and third verbs (“they shall pull out” and “they shall throw”) state the thrust of the priest’s command, which suggests the translation “that they pull out…and throw” (cf. also vv. 4a, 5a, and 36a above), and for the impersonal passive rendering of the active verb (“be pulled and thrown”) see the note on v. 4 above.

[14:40]  ⁷⁵ tn Heb “into from outside to the city.”

[14:41]  ⁷⁶ tn Or, according to the plurality of the verb in Smr, LXX, Syriac, and Targums, “Then the house shall be scraped” (cf. NAB, NLT, and the note on v. 40).

[14:41]  ⁷⁷ tn Heb “from house all around.”

[14:41]  ⁷⁸ tn Heb “dust” (so KJV) or “rubble”; NIV “the material”; NLT “the scrapings.”

[14:41]  ⁷⁹ tn Heb “which they have scraped off.” The MT term קִיר (qir, “wall” from קָצָה, qatsah, “to cut off”; BDB 892), the original Greek does not have this clause, Smr has הקיצו (with uncertain meaning), and the BHS editors and HALOT 1123-24 s.v. I קצע hif.a suggest emending the verb to הִקְצִעוּ (hiqtsi’u, see the same verb at the beginning of this verse; cf. some Greek mss, Syriac, and the Targums). The emendation seems reasonable and is accepted by many commentators, but the root קָצָה (qatsah, “to cut off”) does occur in the Bible (2 Kgs 10:32; Hab 2:10) and in postbiblical Hebrew (J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 179, notes 41c and 43d; J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:873; cf. also קָצַץ, qatsats, “to cut off”).

[14:41]  ⁸⁰ tn Heb “into from outside to the city.”

[14:42]  ⁸¹ tn Heb “and bring into under the stones.”

[14:43]  ⁸² tn Heb “after he has pulled out the stones, and after scraping (variant form of the Hiphil infinitive construct, GKC 531) the house, and after being replastered (Niphal infinitive construct).”

[14:44]  ⁸³ tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV); NASB “If he sees that the mark has indeed spread.”

[14:45]  ⁸⁴ tn Smr, LXX, Syriac, and Tg. Ps.-J. have the plural verb, perhaps suggesting a passive translation, “The house…shall be torn down” (cf. NAB, NIV, TEV, NLT, and see the note on v. 4b above).

[14:45]  ⁸⁵ tn Once again, Smr, LXX, and Syriac have the plural verb, perhaps to be rendered passive, “shall be brought.”

[14:46]  ⁸⁶ tn Heb “the one who comes into.”

[14:46]  ⁸⁷ tn Heb “he,” referring to the priest (see v. 38). The referent has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[14:48]  ⁸⁸ tn Heb “And if the priest entering [infinitive absolute] enters [finite verb]” For the infinitive absolute used to highlight contrast rather than emphasis see GKC 343 §113.p.

[14:48]  ⁸⁹ tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV); NASB “and the mark has not indeed spread.”

[14:49]  ⁹⁰ tn The pronoun “he” refers to the priest mentioned in the previous verse.

[14:49]  ⁹¹ tn Regarding these ritual materials, see the note on v. 4 above.

[14:49]  ⁹² tn Regarding the Piel of חָטָא (khata’, cf. v. 52) meaning to “decontaminate” or “perform a decontamination,” see the notes on Lev 8:15 and 9:15.

[14:50]  ⁹³ tn See the note on v. 5 above.

[14:53]  ⁹⁴ tn Heb “to from outside to the city.”

[14:54]  ⁹⁵ tn Heb “and for the scall”; NASB “a scale”; NIV “any infectious skin disease.” Cf. Lev 13:29-37.

[14:55]  ⁹⁶ sn Cf. Lev 13:47-59.

[14:55]  ⁹⁷ sn Cf. Lev 14:33-53.

[14:56]  ⁹⁸ sn Cf. Lev 13:9-28, 43.

[14:56]  ⁹⁹ sn Cf. Lev 13:2.

[14:56]  ¹⁰⁰ sn Cf. Lev 13:4, 18-28, 38-39. For explanations of all these terms for disease in Lev 14:56 see 13:2.

[14:57]  ¹⁰¹ tn Heb “to teach in the day of the unclean and in the day of the clean.”

[14:57]  ¹⁰² tn Heb “This is the law of the disease.” Some English versions specify this as “skin disease” (e.g., NIV, NLT), but then have to add “and (+ infectious NLT) mildew” (so NIV) because a house would not be infected with a skin disease.

[15:2]  ¹⁰³ tn Heb “Man man.” The reduplication is a way of saying “any man” (cf. Lev 17:3; 22:18, etc.; see the distributive repetition of the noun in GKC 395-96 §123.c).

[15:2]  ¹⁰⁴ tn The term “discharge” actually means “to flow,” whether referring to a full flow as at a spring of water (Ps 78:20 and parallels) or in reference to the promised land as “a land flowing with milk and honey” (Exod 3:8 and parallels).

[15:2]  ¹⁰⁵ tn Heb “man, man when there is a discharge from his flesh.” The repetition of the word “man” is distributive, meaning “any [or “every”] man” (GKC 395-96 §123.c). It is well-recognized that the term “flesh” (i.e., “body”) in this chapter refers regularly and euphemistically to the male and female genital members or areas of the body (HALOT 164 s.v. בָּשָׂר 5.b; see also, e.g., B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 93). The euphemism has been retained in this translation since it is, in fact, intended in the Hebrew text. Some English versions partially remove the euphemism (e.g., NAB “from his private parts”; NRSV “from his member”) while some remove it completely (e.g., NLT “a genital discharge”; TEV “from his penis”; CEV “with an infected penis”).

[15:3]  ¹⁰⁶ tn The LXX has “this the law of his uncleanness…” (cf. v. 32 and compare, e.g., 13:59; 14:2, 56).

[15:3]  ¹⁰⁷ tc Smr, LXX, and the Paleo-Hebrew Leviticus Scroll from Qumran (11QpaleoLev; Fragment G contains Lev 14:52-15:5 and 16:2-4, and agrees with the LXX of Lev 15:3b) are in essential (although not complete) agreement against the MT in Lev 15:3b and are to be preferred in this case. The shorter MT text has probably arisen due to a lengthy haplography. See K. A. Mathews, “The Leviticus Scroll (11QpaleoLev) and the Text of the Hebrew Bible,” CBQ 48 (1986): 177-78, 198; D. N. Freedman, “Variant Readings in the Leviticus Scroll from Qumran Cave 11,” CBQ 36 (1974): 528-29; D. N. Freedman and K. A. Mathews, The Paleo-Hebrew Leviticus Scroll, 32. The MT of Lev 15:3 reads: “Now this is his uncleanness in [regard to] his discharge – whether his body secretes his discharge or blocks his discharge, this is his uncleanness.” Smr adds after MT’s “blocks his discharge” the following: “he is unclean; all the days that his body has a discharge or his body blocks his discharge, this is his uncleanness.” Thus, the MT appears to skip from Smr טמא הוא “he is unclean” in the middle of the verse to יא/טמאתו הו “this is his uncleanness” at the end of the verse, leaving out “he is unclean; all the days that his body has a discharge or his body blocks his discharge” (cf. the BHS footnote). 11Q1 (paleoLev^a frag. G) is indeed fragmentary, but it does have ימי ז בו כל “…in him, all the days of the fl[ow],” supporting Smr and LXX tradition. The LXX adds after MT “blocks his discharge” the following: “all the days of the flow of his body, by which his body is affected by the flow,” followed by “it is his uncleanness” (i.e., the last two words of the MT).

[15:3]  ¹⁰⁸ tn Heb “it is his uncleanness,” but the last clause recapitulates the effect of the first clause in this verse, both of which introduce the regulations for such uncleanness in the following verses. In other words, whether his discharge flows from his penis or is blocked in it, he is still unclean and must proceed according to the following regulations (vv. 4ff).

[15:4]  ¹⁰⁹ tn Heb “All the bed which the man with a discharge sits on it shall be unclean”; cf. NLT “Any bedding.”

[15:4]  ¹¹⁰ tn Heb “and all the vessel which he sits on it shall be unclean”; NASB “everything on which he sits.”

[15:5]  ¹¹¹ tn Heb “And a man who touches in his bed”; NLT “touch the man’s bedding.”

[15:5]  ¹¹² tn Heb “he shall wash his clothes and bathe in water and be unclean until the evening” (cf. also vv. 6-8, 10-11, etc.).

[15:7]  ¹¹³ tn Heb “And the one who touches in the flesh.” In this instance, “flesh” (or “body”) probably refers literally to any part of the body, not the genitals specifically (see the discussion in J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:914).

[15:8]  ¹¹⁴ tn Heb “And if the man with a discharge spits in the clean one.”

[15:9]  ¹¹⁵ tn The Hebrew term for “means of riding” is a cognate noun from the verb “ride” later in this verse. It refers to anything on which one may ride without the feet touching the ground including, for example, a saddle, a (saddle) blanket, or a seat on a chariot (see, e.g., J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:916).

[15:10]  ¹¹⁶ tn Heb “which shall be under him.” The verb is perhaps a future perfect, “which shall have been.”

[15:10]  ¹¹⁷ tn Heb “them”; the referent (the previously mentioned items which were under the unclean person) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[15:11]  ¹¹⁸ tn Heb “And all who the man with the discharge touches in him and his hands he has not rinsed in water.”

[15:12]  ¹¹⁹ tn The Hebrew term כְּלִי (kÿli) can mean “vessel” (v. 12a) or “utensil, implement, article” (v. 12b). An article of clay would refer to a vessel or container of some sort, while one made of wood would refer to some kind of tool or instrument.

[15:13]  ¹²⁰ tn For the expression “fresh water” see the note on Lev 14:5 above.

[15:14]  ¹²¹ tn Heb “from the sons of the pigeon,” referring either to “young pigeons” or “various species of pigeon” (contrast J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:168 with J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 14; cf. Lev 1:14 and esp. 5:7-10).

[15:14]  ¹²² tc The MT has the Qal form of the verb בּוֹא (bo’) “to come” here, but the LXX (followed generally by the Syriac and Tg. Ps.-J.) reflects the Hiphil form of the same verb, “to bring” as in v. 29 below. In v. 29, however, there is no additional clause “and give them to the priest,” so the Hiphil is necessary in that context while it is not necessary here in v. 14.

[15:15]  ¹²³ sn See the note on Lev 4:3 regarding the term “sin offering.”

[15:15]  ¹²⁴ tn Heb “and the priest shall make them one a sin offering and the one a burnt offering.” See the note on Lev 1:3 regarding the “burnt offering.”

[15:15]  ¹²⁵ tn Heb “And the priest.” The Hebrew conjunction ו (vav, “and”) can be considered to have resultative force here.

[15:15]  ¹²⁶ tn Heb “from”; see the note on 4:26.

[15:16]  ¹²⁷ tn Heb “And a man when a lying of seed goes out from him”; KJV, ASV “any man’s seed of copulation”; NIV, NRSV, TEV, NLT “an emission of semen.”

[15:16]  ¹²⁸ tn Heb “and he shall bathe all his flesh in water.”

[15:18]  ¹²⁹ tn Heb “And a woman who a man lies with her a lying of seed.”

[15:19]  ¹³⁰ tn See the note on Lev 15:2 above.

[15:19]  ¹³¹ tn Heb “blood shall be her discharge in her flesh.” The term “flesh” here refers euphemistically to the female sexual area (cf. the note on v. 2 above).

[15:19]  ¹³² tn See the note on Lev 12:2 and R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 1:925-27.

[15:23]  ¹³³ tn Heb “and if on the bed it (הוּא, hu’) is or on the vessel which she sits on it, when he touches it….” The translation and meaning of this verse is a subject of much debate in the commentaries (see the summary in J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:938-40). It is difficult to determine what הוּא refers to, whether it means “he” referring to the one who does the touching, “it” for the furniture or the seat in v. 22, “she” referring to the woman herself (see Smr היא rather than הוא), or perhaps anything that was lying on the furniture or the bed of vv. 21-22. The latter view is taken here (cf. J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 202).

[15:23]  ¹³⁴ tn The MT accent suggest that “when he touches it” goes with the preceding line, but it seems to be better to take it as an introduction to what follows (see J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 202).

[15:24]  ¹³⁵ tn Heb “and if a man indeed lies with her and her menstrual impurity is on him.”

[15:25]  ¹³⁶ tn Heb “And a woman when the flow of her blood flows.”

[15:25]  ¹³⁷ tn Heb “in not the time of her menstruation or when it flows on her menstruation.”

[15:27]  ¹³⁸ tn See the note on v. 5 above.

[15:28]  ¹³⁹ tn Heb “And if…” Although this clause is parallel to v. 13 above, it begins with וְאִם (vÿ’im, “and if”) here rather than וְכִי (vÿkhi, “and when/if”) there.

[15:29]  ¹⁴⁰ tn Heb “from the sons of the pigeon,” referring either to “young pigeons” or “various species of pigeon” (contrast J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:168 with J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 14; cf. Lev 1:14 and esp. 5:7-10).

[15:30]  ¹⁴¹ tn Heb “And the priest shall make the one a sin offering and the one a burnt offering.”

[15:30]  ¹⁴² tn Heb “And the priest.” The Hebrew conjunction ו (vav, “and”) can be considered to have resultative force here.

[15:31]  ¹⁴³ tn Heb “And you shall.” The Hebrew conjunction ו (vav, “and”) can be considered to have resultative force here (cf. KJV, ASV, NASB, NCV, NRSV).

[15:31]  ¹⁴⁴ tn Heb “and they.” Here the Hebrew conjunction ו (vav, “and”) indicates a negative purpose (“lest,” so NAB, NASB).

[15:32]  ¹⁴⁵ tn Heb “and who a lying of seed goes out from him.”

[15:32]  ¹⁴⁶ tn Heb “to become unclean in it.”

[15:33]  ¹⁴⁷ tn Heb “and the one with a discharge, his discharge to the male and the female.”

[15:33]  ¹⁴⁸ tn Heb “and for a man.”

[16:1]  ¹⁴⁹ tn Heb “in their drawing near to the faces of the Lord.” The rendering here relies on the use of this expression for the very “presence” of God in Exod 33:14-15 and in the Lev 9:24-10:2 passage, where the Nadab and Abihu catastrophe referred to here is narrated.

[16:2]  ¹⁵⁰ tn Heb “into the holy place from house to the veil-canopy.” In this instance, the Hebrew term “the holy place” refers to “the most holy place” (lit. “holy of holies”), since it is the area “inside the veil-canopy” (cf. Exod 26:33-34). The Hebrew term פָּרֹכֶת (parokhet) is usually translated “veil” or “curtain,” but it seems to have stretched not only in front of but also over the top of the ark of the covenant which stood behind and under it inside the most holy place, and thus formed more of a canopy than simply a curtain (see R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 3:687-89).

[16:2]  ¹⁵¹ tn Heb “to the faces of the atonement plate.” The exact meaning of the Hebrew term כַּפֹּרֶת (kapporet) here rendered “atonement plate” is much debated. The traditional “mercy seat” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV) does not suit the cognate relationship between this term and the Piel verb כִּפֶּר (kipper, “to make atonement, to make expiation”). The translation of the word should also reflect the fact that the most important atonement procedures on the Day of Atonement were performed in relation to it. Since the Lord would “appear in the cloud over the atonement plate,” and since it was so closely associated with the ark of the covenant (the ark being his “footstool”; cf. 1 Chr 28:2 and Ps 132:7-8), one could take it to be the place of his throne at which he accepts atonement. See J. Milgrom, Leviticus (AB), 1:1014; J. E. Hartley, Leviticus (WBC), 234-35; and R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 2:691, 699. Cf. NIV “the atonement cover”; NCV “the lid on the Ark”; NLT “the Ark’s cover – the place of atonement.”

[16:3]  ¹⁵² tn Heb “with a bull, a son of the herd.”

[16:3]  ¹⁵³ sn See the note on Lev 4:3 regarding the term “sin offering.”

[16:3]  ¹⁵⁴ sn For the “burnt offering” see the note on Lev 1:3.

[16:4]  ¹⁵⁵ sn The term “tunic” refers to a shirt-like garment worn next to the skin and, therefore, put on first (cf. Exod 28:4, 39-40; 29:5, 8; 39:27). It covered the upper body only. For detailed remarks on the terminology for the priestly clothing in this verse (except the “linen leggings”) see the notes on Lev 8:7-9 and the literature cited there.

[16:4]  ¹⁵⁶ tn Heb “shall be on his flesh.” As in many instances in Lev 15, the term “flesh” or “body” here is euphemistic for the male genitals (J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:1017, and J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 222; cf. the note on Lev 15:2), which the priest must be careful not to expose during such ritual procedures (see Exod 20:26 with 28:42-43).

[16:4]  ¹⁵⁷ sn The sash fastened the tunic around the waist (Exod 28:4, 39; 29:9; 39:29).

[16:4]  ¹⁵⁸ tn Heb “and in a turban of linen he shall wrap.”

[16:4]  ¹⁵⁹ tn Heb “and he shall bathe….”

[16:5]  ¹⁶⁰ tn Heb “And he shall take.”

[16:5]  ¹⁶¹ tn Heb “he-goats of goats”; CEV “two goats, both of them males.”

[16:7]  ¹⁶² tn Heb “the two he-goats,” referred to as “two he-goats of goats” in v. 5.

[16:8]  ¹⁶³ tn Heb “and Aaron shall give lots on the two he-goats.” See the note on Lev 8:8 for the priestly casting of lots in Israel and the explanation in B. A. Levine, Leviticus (JPSTC), 102, on Lev 16:8-9. J. Milgrom, Leviticus (AB), 1:1019-20, suggests, however, that the expression here signifies that, the lots having been cast, the priest was to literally “place” (Heb “give”) the one marked “for the Lord” on the head of the goat to be sacrificed and the one marked “for Azazel” on the head of the one to be released in the wilderness in order to avoid confusing them later in the ritual sequence.

[16:8]  ¹⁶⁴ tn The meaning of the Hebrew term עֲזָאזֵל (’aza’zel, four times in the OT, all of them in this chapter; vv. 8, 10 [2 times], and 26) is much debated. There are three or perhaps four major views (see the summaries and literature cited in J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:1020-21; B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 102; J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 237-38; D. P. Wright, The Disposal of Impurity [SBLDS], 21-25; M. V. Van Pelt and W. C. Kaiser, NIDOTTE 3:362-63; and M. S. Moore, NIDOTTE 4:421-22). (1) Some derive the term from a combination of the Hebrew word עֵז (’ez, “goat”; i.e., the word for “goats” in v. 5) and אָזַל (’azal, “to go away”), meaning “the goat that departs” or “scapegoat” (cf., e.g., the LXX and KJV, NASB, NIV, NLT). This meaning suits the ritual practice of sending the so-called “scapegoat” away into the wilderness (vv. 10, 21-22, 26). Similarly, some derive the term from Arabic ’azala (“to banish, remove”), meaning “entire removal” as an abstract concept (see BDB 736 s.v. עֲזָאזֵל). (2) Some see the term as a description of the wilderness area to which the goat was dispatched, deriving it somehow from Arabic ’azazu (“rough ground”) or perhaps עָזָז, (’azaz, “to be strong, fierce”). (3) The most common view among scholars today is that it is the proper name of a particular demon (perhaps even the Devil himself) associated with the wilderness desert regions. Levine has proposed that it may perhaps derive from a reduplication of the ז (zayin) in עֵז combined with אֵל (’el, “mighty”), meaning “mighty goat.” The final consonantal form of עֲזָאזֵל would have resulted from the inversion of the א (aleph) with the second ז. He makes the point that the close association between עֵז and שְׂעִירִים (shÿ’irim), which seems to refer to “goat-demons” of the desert in Lev 17:7 (cf. Isa 13:21, etc.), should not be ignored in the derivation of Azazel, although the term ultimately became the name of “the demonic ruler of the wilderness.” The latter view is supported by the parallel between the one goat “for (לְ, lamed preposition) the Lord” and the one “for (לְ) Azazel” here in v. 8. The rendering as a proper name has been tentatively accepted here (cf. ASV, NAB, NRSV, TEV, CEV). Perhaps a play on words between the proper name and the term for “goat” has occurred so that the etymology has become obscure. Even if a demon or the demonic realm is the source for the name, however, there is no intention here of appeasing the demons. The goal is to remove the impurity and iniquity from the community in order to avoid offending the Lord and the repercussions of such (see esp. vv. 21-22 and cf. Lev 15:31).

[16:9]  ¹⁶⁵ tn Heb “which the lot has gone up on it for the Lord.”

[16:10]  ¹⁶⁶ tn The LXX has “he shall stand it” (cf. v. 7).

[16:10]  ¹⁶⁷ tn Heb “to make atonement on it to send it away to Azazel toward the wilderness.”

[16:12]  ¹⁶⁸ tn Heb “and he shall take the fullness of the censer, coals of fire, from on the altar from to the faces of the Lord.”

[16:12]  ¹⁶⁹ tn Heb “and the fullness of the hollow of his two hands, finely ground fragrant incense.”

[16:12]  ¹⁷⁰ tn Heb “and he shall bring from house to the veil-canopy.”

[16:13]  ¹⁷¹ tn The text here has only “above the testimony,” but this is surely a shortened form of “above the ark of the testimony” (see Exod 25:22 etc.; cf. Lev 16:2). The term “testimony” in this expression refers to the ark as the container of the two stone tablets with the Ten Commandments written on them (see Exod 25:16 with Deut 10:1, 5, etc.).

[16:13]  ¹⁷² tn Heb “and he will not die,” but it is clear that the purpose for the incense cloud was to protect the priest from death in the presence of the Lord (cf. vv. 1-2 above).

[16:14]  ¹⁷³ tn Heb “on the faces of the atonement plate toward the east.” Some have taken this to mean that the ark was stationed just behind the veil-canopy on the eastern side of the most holy place. Thus, the high priest would need to enter and walk toward the west end of the most holy place and then turn eastward in order to face the ark and sprinkle the blood in an eastward direction. The rendering here, however, requires that the ark was stationed on the western end, or perhaps in the middle of the area, so that as the priest entered he was already facing the ark and would sprinkle the blood on the eastern face of the atonement plate, in a westward direction (see, e.g., J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 239 versus J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:1032).

[16:14]  ¹⁷⁴ sn Presumably in this case the blood was sprinkled seven times on the ground in front of the ark on which the atonement plate was mounted.

[16:15]  ¹⁷⁵ tn Heb “and he shall bring its blood into from house to the veil-canopy.”

[16:16]  ¹⁷⁶ tn Heb “And.” The Hebrew conjunction ו (vav, “and”) can be considered to have resultative or even inferential force here.

[16:16]  ¹⁷⁷ tn Heb “to all their sins.”

[16:17]  ¹⁷⁸ tn Heb “And all man shall not be in the tent of meeting.” The term for “a man, human being” (אָדָם, ’adam; see the note on Lev 1:2) refers to any person among “mankind,” male or female.

[16:18]  ¹⁷⁹ tn Heb “And.” The Hebrew conjunction ו (vav, “and”) indicates the sequence of events here.

[16:18]  ¹⁸⁰ tn Heb “And he shall take.”

[16:19]  ¹⁸¹ tn Heb “and he shall purify it and he shall consecrate it.”

[16:20]  ¹⁸² tn Heb “And he shall finish from atoning the holy place.” In this case, the “holy place” etc. are direct objects of the verb “to atone” (cf. v. 33a below). In this case, therefore, the basic meaning of the verb (i.e., “to purge” or “wipe clean”) comes to the forefront. When the prepositions עַל (’al) or בֲּעַד (ba’ad) occur with the verb כִּפֶּר (kipper) the purging is almost always being done “for” or “on behalf of” priests or people (see the note on Lev 1:4 as well as R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 2:698, the literature cited there, and B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 110, for more details).

[16:21]  ¹⁸³ tn Heb “transgressions to all their sins.”

[16:21]  ¹⁸⁴ tn Heb “and he shall give them.”

[16:21]  ¹⁸⁵ tn The meaning of the Hebrew term עִתִּי (’itti) is uncertain. It is apparently related to עֵת (’et, “time”), and could perhaps mean either that he has been properly “appointed” (i.e., designated) for the task (e.g., NIV and NRSV) or “ready” (e.g., NASB and NEB).

[16:22]  ¹⁸⁶ tn The Hebrew term rendered “inaccessible” derives from a root meaning “to cut off” (cf. NAB “an isolated region”). Another possible translation would be “infertile land” (see HALOT 187 s.v. *גָּזֵּר and cf. NRSV “a barren region”; NLT “a desolate land.”

[16:22]  ¹⁸⁷ tn Heb “and he [the man (standing) ready, v. 21] shall send the goat away.”

[16:23]  ¹⁸⁸ tn Heb “And Aaron shall enter.”

[16:24]  ¹⁸⁹ tn Heb “And he shall make atonement.”

[16:24]  ¹⁹⁰ tn Heb “on behalf of himself and on behalf of the people.” After “on behalf of himself” the LXX adds the expected “and on behalf of his household” (cf. vv. 6, 11, and 17).

[16:25]  ¹⁹¹ tn Heb “And the fat of the sin offering he is to offer up.”

[16:26]  ¹⁹² tn For “Azazel” see the note on v. 8 above.

[16:27]  ¹⁹³ tn Heb “he shall bring into from outside to the camp.”

[16:27]  ¹⁹⁴ tn Heb “they shall burn with fire”; KJV “burn in the fire.” Because “to burn with fire” is redundant in contemporary English the present translation simply has “must be burned up.”

[16:29]  ¹⁹⁵ tn Heb “And it [feminine] shall be for you a perpetual statute.” Verse 34 begins with the same clause except for the missing demonstrative pronoun “this” here in v. 29. The LXX has “this” in both places and it suits the sense of the passage, although both the verb and the pronoun are sometimes missing in this clause elsewhere in the book (see, e.g., Lev 3:17).

[16:29]  ¹⁹⁶ tn Heb “you shall humble your souls.” The verb “to humble” here refers to various forms of self-denial, including but not limited to fasting (cf. Ps 35:13 and Isa 58:3, 10). The Mishnah (m. Yoma 8:1) lists abstentions from food and drink, bathing, using oil as an unguent to moisten the skin, wearing leather sandals, and sexual intercourse (cf. 2 Sam 12:16-17, 20; see the remarks in J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:1054; B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 109; and J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 242).

[16:29]  ¹⁹⁷ tn Heb “and all work you shall not do.”

[16:29]  ¹⁹⁸ tn Heb “the native and the sojourner who sojourns.”

[16:30]  ¹⁹⁹ tn The phrase “from all your sins” could go with the previous clause as the verse is rendered here (see, e.g., B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 109, and J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:1011), or it could go with the following clause (i.e., “you shall be clean from all your sins before the Lord”; see the MT accents as well as J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 221, and recent English versions, e.g., NASB, NIV, NRSV).

[16:31]  ²⁰⁰ tn See the note on v. 29 above.

[16:31]  ²⁰¹ tn Compare v. 29a above.

[16:32]  ²⁰² tn Heb “And the priest whom he shall anointed him and whom he shall fill his hand to act as priest under his father.” Imperfect active verbs are often used as passives (see, e.g., v. 27 above and the note on Lev 14:4).

[16:33]  ²⁰³ tn Heb “to atone” (also later in this verse); see the note on “purifying the holy place” in 16:20.

[16:33]  ²⁰⁴ tn Heb “the sanctuary of the holy place.” Although this is the only place this expression occurs in the OT, it clearly refers to the innermost shrine behind the veil-canopy, where the ark of the covenant was located.

[16:33]  ²⁰⁵ tn Heb “and the tent of meeting and the alter he shall atone.” The repetition of the verb כִּפֶּר (kipper, “to atone”) at the beginning and end of the sequence appears to be strange, but the MT accents suggest that only “the Most Holy Place” goes with the verb at the beginning of the verse. Of course, the purging of “the Most Holy Place” has been the main emphasis of this chapter from the start (see vv. 2-3 and 11-17).

[16:33]  ²⁰⁶ tn At this point in the verse the verb כִּפֶּר (kipper, “to make atonement”) takes its object with the preposition עַל (’al, “for”; literally, “upon”; contrast the first part of the verse and cf. the notes on Lev 1:4 and 16:20 above).

[16:34]  ²⁰⁷ tn Heb “And this shall be for you to a statute of eternity” (cf. v. 29a above). cf. NASB “a permanent statute”; NIV “a lasting ordinance.”

[16:34]  ²⁰⁸ tn Heb “from”; see note on 4:26.

[16:34]  ²⁰⁹ tn Heb “one [feminine] in the year.”

[16:34]  ²¹⁰ tn The MT of Lev 16:34b reads literally, “and he did just as the Lord had commanded Moses.” This has been retained here in spite of the fact that it suggests that Aaron immediately performed the rituals outlined in Lev 16 (see, e.g., J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 224 and 243; J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:1059; note that Aaron was the one to whom Moses was to speak the regulations in this chapter, v. 2). The problem is that the chapter presents these procedures as regulations for “the tenth day of the seventh month” and calls for their fulfillment at that time (Lev 16:29; cf. Lev 23:26-32 and the remarks in P. J. Budd, Leviticus [NCBC], 237), not during the current (first) month (Exod 40:2; note also that they left Sinai in the second month, long before the next seventh month, Num 10:11). The LXX translates, “once in the year it shall be done as the Lord commanded Moses,” attaching “once in the year” to this clause rather than the former one, and rendering the verb as passive, “it shall be done” (cf. NAB, NIV, etc.). We have already observed the passive use of active verbs in this context (see the note on v. 32 above). The RSV (cf. also the NRSV, TEV, CEV, NLT) translates, “And Moses did as the Lord commanded him,” ignoring the fact that the name Moses in the Hebrew text has the direct object indicator. Passive verbs, however, regularly take subjects with direct object indicators (see, e.g., v. 27 above). The NIV renders it “And it was done, as the Lord commanded Moses,” following the LXX passive translation. The NASB translates, “And just as the Lord had commanded Moses, so he did,” transposing the introductory verb to the end of the sentence and supplying “so” in order to make it fit the context.