Leviticus 13:3

13:3 The priest must then examine the infection ¹  on the skin of the body, and if the hair ²  in the infection has turned white and the infection appears to be deeper than the skin of the body, ³  then it is a diseased infection, ⁴  so when the priest examines it ⁵  he must pronounce the person unclean. ⁶ 

Leviticus 13:6

13:6 The priest must then examine it again on the seventh day, ⁷  and if ⁸  the infection has faded and has not spread on the skin, then the priest is to pronounce the person clean. ⁹  It is a scab, ¹⁰  so he must wash his clothes ¹¹  and be clean.

Leviticus 13:55

13:55 The priest must then examine it after the infection has been washed out, and if ¹²  the infection has not changed its appearance ¹³  even though the infection has not spread, it is unclean. You must burn it up in the fire. It is a fungus, whether on the back side or front side of the article. ¹⁴ 

Leviticus 14:48

14:48 “If, however, the priest enters ¹⁵  and examines it, and the ¹⁶  infection has not spread in the house after the house has been replastered, then the priest is to pronounce the house clean because the infection has been healed.

[13:3]  ¹ tn Heb “and the priest shall see the infection.”

[13:3]  ² tn There is no “if” expressed, but the contrast between the priestly finding in this verse and the next verse clearly implies it.

[13:3]  ³ tn Heb “and the appearance of the infection is deep ‘from’ (comparative מִן, min, “deeper than”) the skin of the his flesh.” See the note on v. 20 below.

[13:3]  ⁴ tn For the translation “diseased infection” see the note on v. 2 above. Cf. TEV “a dreaded skin disease”; NIV “an infectious skin disease”; NLT “a contagious skin disease.”

[13:3]  ⁵ tn The pronoun “it” here refers to the “infection,” not the person who has the infection (cf. the object of “examine” at the beginning of the verse).

[13:3]  ⁶ tn Heb “he shall make him unclean.” The verb is the Piel of טָמֵא (tame’) “to be unclean.” Here it is a so-called “declarative” Piel (i.e., “to declare unclean”), but it also implies that the person is put into the category of actually being “unclean” by the pronouncement itself (J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 175; cf. the corresponding opposite in v. 6 below).

[13:6]  ⁷ tn That is, at the end of the second set of seven days referred to at the end of v. 5, a total of fourteen days after the first appearance before the priest.

[13:6]  ⁸ tn Heb “and behold.”

[13:6]  ⁹ tn Heb “he shall make him clean.” The verb is the Piel of טָהֵר (taher, “to be clean”). Here it is a so-called “declarative” Piel (i.e., “to declare clean”), but it also implies that the person is put into the category of being “clean” by the pronouncement itself (J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 176; cf. the corresponding opposite in v. 3 above).

[13:6]  ¹⁰ tn On the term “scab” see the note on v. 2 above. Cf. NAB “it was merely eczema”; NRSV “only an eruption”; NLT “only a temporary rash.”

[13:6]  ¹¹ tn Heb “and he shall wash his clothes.”

[13:55]  ¹³ tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV).

[13:55]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “the infection has not changed its eye.” Smr has “its/his eyes,” as in vv. 5 and 37, but here it refers to the appearance of the article of cloth or leather, unlike vv. 5 and 37 where there is a preposition attached and it refers to the eyes of the priest.

[13:55]  ¹⁵ tn The terms “back side” and “front side” are the same as those used in v. 42 for the “back or front bald area” of a man’s head. The exact meaning of these terms when applied to articles of cloth or leather is uncertain. It could refer, for example, to the inside versus the outside of a garment, or the back versus the front side of an article of cloth or leather. See J. Milgrom, Leviticus (AB), 1:814, for various possibilities.

[14:48]  ¹⁹ 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]  ²⁰ tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV); NASB “and the mark has not indeed spread.”