1tn Heb and.
2tn 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 , 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 esp. Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16 [AB], 831, who supports this rendering both here and in Lev 13:2 and 9. Levine, however, prefers our rendering (Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 76 and 85). It is the most natural meaning of the verb (i.e., to be brought from aoB 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 here suggests that v. 2 introduces the proceeding and then v. 3 proceeds to
3tn 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.
4tn 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 in terms of English style.
5tn 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 clothe (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 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.
6sn 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, and 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, Leviticus [WBC], 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.
7tn 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 priests 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, Samaritan Pentateuch, and Syriac versions have the third person plural here and in v. 5a, which corresponds to other combinations with the verb hW`x!w+ 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.
8tn Heb the one cleansing himself (i.e., Hitpael participle of rh@f* to be clean).
9tn Heb And the priest shall command and he shall slaughter. See the note on be taken up (v. 4).
10tn 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.
sn Although there are those who argue that the water and the blood rites are separate (e.g., Gerstenberger, Leviticus, OTL, 175-176), it is usually agreed that v. 5b refers to the slaughtering of the bird in such a way that its blood runs into the bowl, which contained fresh water (see, e.g., Snaith, Leviticus and Numbers, NCB, 74; Wenham, Leviticus, NICOT, 208; Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16 [AB], 836-838; cf. esp. Lev 14:51b, and dip them in the blood of the slaughtered bird and in the fresh water). This mixture of blood and water was then to be sprinkled on the person being cleansed from the disease.
11tc Heb the live bird he [i.e., the priest] shall take it. Although the MT has no w+ (vav, and) at the beginning of this clause, a few medieval Hebrew mss and the Samaritan Pentateuch 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 clause word order 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.
12tn Heb the one cleansing himself (i.e., Hitpael participle of rh@f* to be clean).
13tn Heb and he shall make him clean. The verb is the Piel of rhf to be clean, here used as a so-called declarative Piel (i.e., to declare clean; cf. 13:6, etc.).
14sn 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., Aarons description of Miriam skin disease in Num 12:12, Do not let her be like the dead one when it goes out from its mothers 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 patients disease has been removed far away so that he or she is free from its effects both personally and communally.
15tn Heb the one cleansing himself (i.e., Hitpael participle of rh@f* to be clean).
16tn Heb and he shall be clean. 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 enter 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.
17tn Heb And it shall be on the seventh day.
18tn Heb and he shall be clean (see the note on v. 8).
19tn The subject he probably refers to the formerly diseased person in this case (see the notes on Lev 1:5a, 6a, and 9a).
20tn This term is often rendered fine flour, but it refers specifically to wheat as opposed to barley (Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 10) and, although the translation flour is used here, it may indicate grits rather than finely ground flour (Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16 [AB], 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 (Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 196; Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16 [AB], 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.
21tn A log (gO) of oil is about one-sixth of a liter, or one-third of a pint, or two-thirds of a cup.
22tn The MT here is awkward to translate into English. It reads literally, and the priest who pronounces clean [Piel participle of rhf] shall cause to stand [Hiphil of dmu] the man who is cleansing himself [Hitpael participle of rhf] and them (i.e., the offerings listed in v. 10; the referent has been specified in the translation for clarity). Alternatively, the Piel of rhf could be rendered who performs the cleansing/purification (Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16 [AB], 827), perhaps even as a technical term for one who holds the office of purification priest (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).
23tn Heb And the priest shall take the one lamb.
24tn See the note on Lev 5:15 above. The primary purpose of the guilt offering (<v*a*) was to atone (rP#K! to make atonement, see v. 18 below and the note on Lev 1:4) for trespassing on the Lords holy things, whether sacred objects or sacred people. It is, therefore, closely associated with the reconsecration of the Lords 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).
25tn Heb wave them [as] a wave offering before the Lord. 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, 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.).
26tn Heb And he shall slaughter.
27tn Heb in the place which.
28sn See the note on Lev 4:3 regarding the term sin offering.
29sn See the note on Lev 1:3 regarding the burnt offering.
30tn 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. The Samaritan Pentateuch 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 Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16 [AB], 852).
31tn Heb the guilt offering, it [is] to the Lord. Regarding the guilt offering, see the note on Lev 5:15.
32tn Heb and the priest shall put [literally give] on the lobe of the ear of the one being cleansed, the right one.
33tn The term for big toe (/h#B)) is the same as that for thumb. It refers to the larger appendage on either the hand or the foot.
34tn 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 Mishnah Negaim 14:8 referred to by Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16 [AB], 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 priests hand with that of the one being cleansed (cf. v. 14).
35tn Heb his right finger from the oil.
36tn Heb on his hand.
37tn Heb and the remainder in the oil.
38tn Heb do [or make] the sin offering.
39tn Heb And after[ward] he [i.e., the offerer] shall slaughter. The LXX adds the priest as the subject of the verb, 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).
40tn Heb cause to go up.
41tn Heb and his hand does not reached.
42tn See the notes on v. 10 above.
43tn Heb from the sons of the pigeon, referring either to young pigeons or various species of pigeon (contrast Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16 [AB], 168 with Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 14; cf. Lev 1:14 and esp. 5:7-10).
44tn Heb which his hand reaches.
45tn 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. The MT has the first without and the second with the article.
46tn Heb to the doorway.
47tn Heb and the priest shall wave them. With regard to the waving of the wave offering, see the note on v. 12 above.
48tn Heb and the priest shall put [literally give] on the lobe of the ear of the one being cleansed, the right one.
49tn The term for big toe (/h#B)) is the same as that for thumb. It refers to the larger appendage on either the hand or the foot.
50tn 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.
51tn Heb and the priest shall sprinkle with his right finger from the oil which is on his left hand.
52tn Heb on his hand.
53tn Heb on the hand.
54tn Heb give.
55tn Heb the one from the turtledoves.
56tc 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 meanswhichever he can afford (see Milgroms translation, 828, contra his commentary, 862; cf. REB).
57tn Heb and the one a burnt offering on the grain offering.
58tn Heb This is the law of who in him [is] a diseased infection.
59tn Heb who his hand does not reach in his purification.
60tn Heb which I am giving.
61tn Heb give.
62tn Heb in the house of the land of your possession.
63tn Heb who to him the house.
64tn Heb And the priest shall command and they shall clear the house. The second verb (and they shall clear) states the thrust of the priests 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 see the note on v. 4 above.
65tn Heb to see the infection.
66tn Heb all which [is] in the house.
67sn 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.
68tn Heb and after thus.
69tn Heb and behold.
70tn For yellowish green and reddish see Lev 13:49. The Hebrew term rendered eruptions occurs only here and its meaning is uncertain. For a detailed summary of the issues and views see Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16 [AB], 870. The suggestions include, among others: (1) depressions from Hebrew vqu (sink) or qur as the root of the Hebrew term for bowl (LXX, Targums, NASB, NIV; see also Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 90), (2) streaks (NJPS), (3) and eruptions as a loan-word from Egyptian sqr r rwtj (eruption; rash); cf. Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16 [AB], 870; Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 198-199. The latter view is taken here.
71tn The Hebrew term ryq! (wall) refers to the surface of the wall in this case, which consisted of a coating of plaster made of limestone and sand (see HALOT 1099 [a]; Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16 [AB], 871; Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 199).
72tn Heb and he shall shut up the house seven days.
73tn Heb and behold.
74tn 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 priests 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 see the note on v. 4 above.
75tn Heb into from outside to the city.
76tn Or, according to the plurality of the verb in the Samaritan Pentateuch, LXX, Syriac, and Targums, Then the house shall be scraped (cf. the note on v. 40).
77tn Heb from house all around.
78tn Heb dust or rubble.
79tn Heb which they have scraped off. The MT has Wxq=h! (perhaps from hxq, to cut off; BDB 892), the original Greek does not have this clause, the Samaritan Pentateuch has wxyqh (?), and the BHS editors and HALOT 1123-24 suggest emending the verb to Wux!q=h! (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 hxq (to cut off) does occur in the Bible (2 Kgs 10:32; Hab 2:10) and in postbiblical Hebrew (Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 179 notes 41c and 43d; Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16 [AB], 873; cf. also Jxq [to cut off]).
80tn Heb into from outside to the city.
81tn Heb and bring into under the stones.
82tn Heb after he has pulled out the stones, and after scraping [variant form of the Hiphil infinitive construct, GKC §53l] the house, and after being replastered [Niphal infinitive construct].
83tn Heb and behold.
84tn The Samaritan Pentateuch, LXX, Syriac, and Tg. Ps.-J. have the plural verb, perhaps suggesting a passive translation, The house
shall be torn down (see the note on v. 4b above).
85tn Once again, the Samaritan Pentateuch, LXX, and Syriac have the plural verb, perhaps to be rendered passive, shall be brought.
86tn Heb the one who comes into.
87tn The pronoun he refers the priest (see v. 38).
88tn Heb And if the priest entering [infinitive absolute] enters [finite verb] For the infinitive absolute used to highlight contrast rather than emphasis see GKC §113.p.
89tn Heb and behold.
90tn The pronoun he refers to the priest mentioned in the previous verse.
91tn Regarding these ritual materials, see the note on v. 4 above.
92tn Regarding the Piel of afj (cf. v. 52) meaning to decontaminate or perform a decontamination, see the notes on Lev 8:15 and 9:15.
sn In Lev 8:15, for example, the sin offering is used to decontaminate the burnt offering altar. As we have argued above (see the note on v. 7 above), these ritual materials and the procedures performed with them do not constitute a sin offering (contrast vv. 19 and 31 above). In fact, no sin offering was required for the purification of a house.
93tn See the note on v. 5 above.
94tn Heb to from outside to the city.
95sn Heb and for the scall. Cf. Lev 13:29-37.
96sn Cf. Lev 13:47-59.
97sn Cf. Lev 14:33-53.
98sn Cf. Lev 13:9-28, 43.
99sn Cf. Lev 13:2.
100sn Cf. Lev 13:4, 18-28, 38-39. For explanations of all these terms for disease in Lev 14:56 see 13:2.
101tn Heb to teach in the day of the unclean and in the day of the clean.
102tn Heb This is the law of the disease.
sn For an explanation of the term disease see Lev 13:2.