¹tn The Hebrew term vp#n\ (“soul; person; life”) can sometimes refer to a “dead person” (cf. Lev 19:28 above and the literature cited there).
²tn Heb “no one,” but “priest” has been used in the translation to clarify that these restrictions are limited to the priests, not to the Israelites in general (note the introductory formula, “say to the priests, the sons of Aaron”).
³tc The MT has “in his peoples,” but the Samaritan Pentateuch, LXX, Syriac, Targum, and Tg. Ps.-J. have “in his people,” referring to the Israelites as a whole.
⁴tn Heb “except for his flesh, the one near to him.”
⁵tn Cf. v. 2a.
⁶tn Heb “He shall not defile himself a husband in his peoples, to profane himself.” The meaning of the line is disputed, but it appears to prohibit a priest from burying any relative by marriage (as opposed to the flesh relatives of vv. 2-3), including his wife (compare Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 142-143 with Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 343 and 348).
⁷tn Heb “they”; the referent (priests, see the beginning of v. 1) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
⁸tn Heb “and in their body they shall not [cut] slash[es]” (cf. Lev 19:28). The context connects these sorts of mutilations with mourning rites (cf. Lev 19:27-28 above).
⁹sn Regarding “profane,” see the note on Lev 10:10 above.
¹⁰sn Regarding the Hebrew term for “gifts,” see the note on Lev 1:9 above (cf. also 3:11 and 16 in combination with the word for “food” that follows in the next phrase here).
¹¹tc The Samaritan Pentateuch and all early versions have the plural adjective “holy” rather than the MT singular noun “holiness.”
¹²tn Heb “A wife harlot and profaned they shall not take.” The structure of the verse (e.g., “wife” at the beginning of the two main clauses) suggests that “harlot and profaned” constitutes a hendiadys, meaning “a wife defiled by harlotry” (see the explanation Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 143 as opposed to that in Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 343 and 348; cf. v. 14 below).
¹³sn For a helpful discussion of divorce in general and as it relates to this passage see Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 143-44.
¹⁴tn Heb “he”; the referent (the priest) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
¹⁵tn The pronoun “he” in this clause refers to the priest, not the former husband of the divorced woman.
¹⁶tn The three previous second person references in this verse are all singular, but this reference is plural. By adding “all” this grammatical distinction is preserved in the translation.
¹⁷tn The adjective “high” has been supplied in the translation for clarity.
¹⁸tn Heb “and he has filled his hand.” For this expression see the note on Lev 8:33.
¹⁹tn Regarding these signs of mourning see the note on Lev 10:6. His head had been anointed (v. 10a) so it must not be unkempt (v. 10b), and his garments were special priestly garments (v. 10a) so he must not tear them (v. 10b).
²⁰tc Although the MT has “persons” (plural), the LXX and Syriac have the singular “person” corresponding to the singular adjectival participle “dead” (cf. also Num 6:6).
²¹sn Regarding “profane,” see the note on Lev 10:10 above.
²²tn Heb “And he, a wife in her virginity he shall take.”
²³tn Heb “take.”
²⁴tc The MT has literally, “from his peoples,” but the Samaritan Pentateuch, LXX, Syriac, Targum, and Tg. Ps.-J. have “from his people,” referring to the Israelites as a whole.
²⁵tc The MT has literally, “in his peoples,” but the Samaritan Pentateuch, LXX, Syriac, Targum, and Tg. Ps.-J. have “in his people,” referring to the Israelites as a whole.
²⁶tn Heb “to their generations.”
²⁷tn Heb “who in him is a flaw.” The rendering “physical flaw” is used to refer to any birth defect or physical injury of the kind described in the following verses (cf. the same Hebrew word also in Lev 24:19-20). The same term is used for “flawed” animals, which must not be offered to the Lord in Lev 22:20-25.
²⁸tn The particle yK! in this context is asseverative, indicating absolutely certainty (GKC §159.ee).
²⁹tn Lexically, the Hebrew term <r|j* seems to refer to a split nose or perhaps any number of other facial defects (HALOT 354; cf. Wenham, Leviticus, NICOT, 292 n. 7). The NJPS translation is “a limb too short” as a balance to the following term which means “extended; raised,” and apparently refers to “a limb too long” (see the explanation in Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 146).
³⁰tn Heb “who there is in him a broken leg or a broken arm,” or perhaps “broken foot or broken hand.” The Hebrew term lg\r\ is commonly rendered “foot,” but it can also refer to the “leg,” and the Hebrew dy` is most often translated “hand,” but can also refer to the “[fore]arm” (as opposed to [K^ “palm of the hand” or “hand”). See HALOT 386 and 1184, respectively (cf. the NJPS translation). In this context, these terms probably apply to any part of the limb that was broken, including hand and the foot. Levine (Leviticus [JPSTC], 146) points out that such injuries often did not heal properly in antiquity because they were not properly set and, therefore, remained a “physical flaw” permanently.
³¹tn Heb “thin.” This could refer to either an exceptionally small (i.e., dwarfed) man (Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 146) or perhaps one with a “withered limb” (Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 342 and 344).
³²tn The term rendered “spot” derives from a root meaning “mixed” or “confused.” It apparently refers to any kind of marked flaw in the eye that can be seen by others. The Samaritan Pentateuch, Syriac, Targum Onqelos, and Tg. Ps.-J. have plural “his eyes.”
³³sn The exact meaning and medical reference of the terms rendered “festering eruption” and “feverish rash” is unknown, but see the translations and remarks in Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 146; Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 342, 344, 349-350; and NIDOTTE 1:890 and 2:461.
³⁴tn Or “shall approach” (see HALOT 670).
³⁵sn See the note on Lev 16:2 for the rendering “veil-canopy.”
³⁶tn Heb “And.”
³⁷tn Heb “And.”
³⁸tn The words “these things” are not in the Hebrew text, but have been supplied in the translation for clarity.