Numbers 1:50

1:50 But appoint ¹  the Levites over the tabernacle of the testimony, ²  over all its furnishings and over everything in it. They must carry ³  the tabernacle and all its furnishings; and they ⁴  must attend to it and camp around it. ⁵ 

Numbers 4:15

4:15 “When Aaron and his sons have finished ⁶  covering ⁷  the sanctuary and all the furnishings of the sanctuary, when the camp is ready to journey, then ⁸  the Kohathites will come to carry them; ⁹  but they must not touch ¹⁰  any ¹¹  holy thing, or they will die. ¹²  These are the responsibilities ¹³  of the Kohathites with the tent of meeting.

Numbers 4:2

4:2 “Take a census ¹⁴  of the Kohathites from among the Levites, by their families and by their clans,

Numbers 6:3-7

6:3 he must separate ¹⁵  himself from wine and strong drink, he must drink neither vinegar ¹⁶  made from wine nor vinegar made from strong drink, nor may he drink any juice ¹⁷  of grapes, nor eat fresh grapes or raisins. ¹⁸  6:4 All the days of his separation he must not eat anything that is produced by the grapevine, from seed ¹⁹  to skin. ²⁰ 

6:5 “‘All the days of the vow ²¹  of his separation no razor may be used on his head ²²  until the time ²³  is fulfilled for which he separated himself to the Lord. He will be holy, ²⁴  and he must let ²⁵  the locks of hair on his head grow long.

6:6 “‘All the days that he separates himself to the Lord he must not contact ²⁶  a dead body. ²⁷  6:7 He must not defile himself even ²⁸  for his father or his mother or his brother or his sister if they die, ²⁹  because the separation ³⁰  for ³¹  his God is on his head.

[1:50]  ¹ tn The same verb translated “number” (פָּקַד, paqad) is now used to mean “appoint” (הַפְקֵד, hafqed), which focuses more on the purpose of the verbal action of numbering people. Here the idea is that the Levites were appointed to take care of the tabernacle. On the use of this verb with the Levites’ appointment, see M. Gertner, “The Masorah and the Levites,” VT 10 (1960): 252.

[1:50]  ² tn The Hebrew name used here is מִשְׁכַּן הָעֵדֻת (mishkan ha’edut). The tabernacle or dwelling place of the Lord was given this name because it was here that the tablets of the Law were kept. The whole shrine was therefore a reminder (הָעֵדוּת, a “warning sign” or “testimony”) of the stipulations of the covenant. For the ancient Near Eastern customs of storing the code in the sanctuaries, see M. G. Kline, Treaty of the Great King, 14-19, and idem, The Structure of Biblical Authority, 35-36. Other items were in the ark in the beginning, but by the days of Solomon only the tablets were there (1 Kgs 8:9).

[1:50]  ³ tn The imperfect tense here is an obligatory imperfect telling that they are bound to do this since they are appointed for this specific task.

[1:50]  ⁴ tn The addition of the pronoun before the verb is emphatic – they are the ones who are to attend to the tabernacle. The verb used is שָׁרַת (sharat) in the Piel, indicating that they are to serve, minister to, attend to all the details about this shrine.

[1:50]  ⁵ tn Heb “the tabernacle.” The pronoun (“it”) was used in the translation here for stylistic reasons.

[4:15]  ⁶ tn The verb form is the Piel perfect with a vav (ו) consecutive; it continues the future sequence, but in this verse forms a subordinate clause to the parallel sequential verb to follow.

[4:15]  ⁷ tn The Piel infinitive construct with the preposition serves as the direct object of the preceding verbal form, answering the question of what it was that they finished.

[4:15]  ⁸ tn Heb “after this.”

[4:15]  ⁹ tn The form is the Qal infinitive construct from נָשָׂא (nasa’, “to lift, carry”); here it indicates the purpose clause after the verb “come.”

[4:15]  ¹⁰ tn The imperfect tense may be given the nuance of negated instruction (“they are not to”) or negated obligation (“they must not”).

[4:15]  ¹¹ tn Here the article expresses the generic idea of any holy thing (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 19, §92).

[4:15]  ¹² tn The verb is the perfect tense with a vav (ו) consecutive, following the imperfect tense warning against touching the holy thing. The form shows the consequence of touching the holy thing, and so could be translated “or they will die” or “lest they die.” The first is stronger.

[4:15]  ¹³ tn The word מַשָּׂא (massa’) is normally rendered “burden,” especially in prophetic literature. It indicates the load that one must carry, whether an oracle, or here the physical responsibility.

[4:2]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “lift up the head.” The form נָשֹׂא (naso’) is the Qal infinitive absolute functioning here as a pure verb form. This serves to emphasize the basic verbal root idea (see GKC 346 §113.bb).

[6:3]  ¹⁵ tn The operative verb now will be the Hiphil of נָזַר (nazar); the consecration to the Lord meant separation from certain things in the world. The first will be wine and strong drink – barley beer (from Akkadian sikaru, a fermented beer). But the second word may be somewhat wider in its application than beer. The Nazirite, then, was to avoid all intoxicants as a sign of his commitment to the Lord. The restriction may have proved a hardship in the daily diet of the one taking the vow, but it spoke a protest to the corrupt religious and social world that used alcohol to excess.

[6:3]  ¹⁶ tn The “vinegar” (חֹמֶץ, homets) is some kind of drink preparation that has been allowed to go sour.

[6:3]  ¹⁷ tn This word occurs only here. It may come from the word “to water, to be moist,” and so refer to juice.

[6:3]  ¹⁸ tn Heb “dried” (so KJV, ASV, NRSV).

[6:4]  ¹⁹ tn This word also is rare, occurring only here.

[6:4]  ²⁰ sn Here is another hapax legomenon, a word only found here. The word seems linked to the verb “to be clear,” and so may mean the thin skin of the grape. The reason for the strictness with these two words in this verse is uncertain. We know the actual meanings of the words, and the combination must form a merism here, meaning no part of the grape could be eaten. Abstaining from these common elements of food was to be a mark of commitment to the Lord. Hos 3:1 even denounces the raisin cakes as part of a pagan world, and eating them would be a violation of the oath.

[6:5]  ²¹ tc The parallel expression in v. 8 (“all the days of his separation”) lacks the word “vow.” This word is also absent in v. 5 in a few medieval Hebrew manuscripts. The presence of the word in v. 5 may be due to dittography.

[6:5]  ²² sn There is an interesting parallel between this prohibition and the planting of trees. They could not be pruned or trimmed for three years, but allowed to grow free (Lev 20:23). Only then could the tree be cut and the fruit eaten. The natural condition was to be a sign that it was the Lord’s. It was to be undisturbed by humans. Since the Nazirite was to be consecrated to the Lord, that meant his whole person, hair included. In the pagan world the trimming of the beard and the cutting of the hair was often a sign of devotion to some deity.

[6:5]  ²³ tn Heb “days.”

[6:5]  ²⁴ tn The word “holy” here has the sense of distinct, different, set apart.

[6:5]  ²⁵ tn The Piel infinitive absolute functions as a verb in this passage; the Piel carries the sense of “grow lengthy” or “let grow long.”

[6:6]  ²⁶ tn The Hebrew verb is simply “enter, go,” no doubt with the sense of go near.

[6:6]  ²⁷ tn The Hebrew has נֶפֶשׁ מֵת (nefesh met), literally a “dead person.” But since the word נֶפֶשׁ can also be used for animals, the restriction would be for any kind of corpse. Death was very much a part of the fallen world, and so for one so committed to the Lord, avoiding all such contamination would be a witness to the greatest separation, even in a family.

[6:7]  ²⁸ tn The vav (ו) conjunction at the beginning of the clause specifies the cases of corpses that are to be avoided, no matter how painful it might be.

[6:7]  ²⁹ tn The construction uses the infinitive construct with the preposition and the suffixed subjective genitive – “in the dying of them” – to form the adverbial clause of time.

[6:7]  ³⁰ tn The word “separation” here is metonymy of adjunct – what is on his head is long hair that goes with the vow.

[6:7]  ³¹ tn The genitive could perhaps be interpreted as possession, i.e., “the vow of his God,” but it seems more likely that an objective genitive would be more to the point.