¹ tn Heb “Then he”; the referent (the offerer) has been specified in the translation for clarity (so also in v. 13).

² tn The action here seems to involve both a twisting action, breaking the neck of the bird and severing its vertebrae, as well as pinching or nipping the skin to sever the head from the main body. Cf. NASB, NRSV “wring off its head”; NAB “snap its head loose”; NLT “twist off its head.”

³ tn Many English versions have “it” here, referring to the head of the bird, which the priest immediately tossed on the altar fire. However, “it” could be misunderstood to refer to the bird’s body, so “head” is repeated in the present translation for clarity. As the following lines show, certain things needed to be done to the body of the bird before it could be placed on the altar.

⁴ tn Heb “Then he”; the referent (apparently still the priest) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

⁵ tn This translation (“remove its entrails by [cutting off] its tail feathers”) is based on the discussion in J. Milgrom, Leviticus (AB), 1:169-71, although he translates, “remove its crissum by its feathers.” Others possibilities include “its crop with its contents” (Tg. Onq., cf. NIV, NRSV; J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 23) or “its crop with its feathers” (LXX, NASB, RSV; “crop” refers to the enlarged part of a bird’s gullet that serves a pouch for the preliminary maceration of food).

⁶ tn The pronoun “them” here is feminine singular in Hebrew and refers collectively to the entrails and tail wing which have been removed.

⁷ tn The Hebrew verb הֵרִים (herim, “to take up”; cf. NAB “lift”) is commonly used for setting aside portions of an offering (see, e.g., Lev 4:8-10 and R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 4:335-36). A number of English versions employ the more normal English idiom “take out” here (e.g., NIV, NCV); cf. NRSV “remove.”

⁸ tn The words “it is” (הוּא, hu’) both here and in vv. 10 and 16 are not in the MT, but are assumed. (cf. vv. 2b and 3b and the notes there).

⁹ tn See the note on “it is” in 2:9b.

¹⁰ tn Heb “the anointed priest” (so ASV, NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV). This refers to the high priest (cf. TEV, CEV, NLT).

¹¹ tn Heb “to the guilt of the people”; NRSV “thus bringing guilt on the people.”

¹² tn Heb “and he shall offer on his sin which he sinned, a bull, a son of the herd, flawless.”

¹³ sn The word for “sin offering” (sometimes translated “purification offering”) is the same as the word for “sin” earlier in the verse. One can tell which rendering is intended only by the context. The primary purpose of the “sin offering” (חַטָּאת, khatta’t) was to “purge” (כִּפֶּר, kipper, “to make atonement,” see 4:20, 26, 31, 35, and the notes on Lev 1:4 and esp. Lev 16:20, 33) the sanctuary or its furniture in order to cleanse it from any impurities and/or (re)consecrate it for holy purposes (see, e.g., Lev 8:15; 16:19). By making this atonement the impurities of the person or community were cleansed and the people became clean. See R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 2:93-103.

¹⁴ tn The Hebrew verb וְהִזָּה (vÿhizzah, Hiphil of נָזָה, nazah) does indeed mean “sprinkle” or “splatter.” Contrast the different Hebrew verb meaning “splash” in Lev 1:5 (זָרָק, zaraq).

¹⁵ tn Heb “of the blood.” The relative pronoun (“it”) has been used in the translation here for stylistic reasons.

¹⁶ tn The particle here translated “toward” usually serves as a direct object indicator or a preposition meaning “with.” With the verb of motion it probably means “toward,” “in the direction of” (J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:234; J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 60); cf. NAB, CEV.

¹⁷ tn The Hebrew term פָּרֹכֶת (parokhet) is usually translated “veil” (e.g., ASV, NAB, NASB) or “curtain” (e.g., NIV, NRSV), 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 (see R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 3:687-89).

¹⁸ tn The words “in the blood” are not repeated in the Hebrew text at this point, but must be supplied in the English translation for clarity.

¹⁹ tn The Hebrew verb וְהִזָּה (vÿhizzah, Hiphil of נָזָה, nazah) does indeed mean “sprinkle” or “splatter.” Contrast the different Hebrew verb translated “splash” in Lev 1:5 (זָרָק, zaraq).

²⁰ tc The MT reads literally, “and the priest shall dip his finger from the blood and sprinkle seven times.” This is awkward. Compare v. 6, which has literally, “and the priest shall dip his finger in the blood and sprinkle from the blood seven times.” The MT appears to be corrupt by haplography (i.e., assuming v. 6 to be the correct form, in v. 17 the scribe skipped from “his finger” to “from the blood,” thus missing “in the blood”) and metathesis (i.e., this also resulted in a text where “from the blood” stands before “sprinkle” rather than after it; J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 47).

²¹ tn See the note on v. 6 above.

²² tn See the note on v. 6 above.

²³ tn The word “bird” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarity.

²⁴ sn The term “[standard] regulation” (מִשְׁפָּט, mishppat) here refers to the set of regulations for burnt offering birds in Lev 1:14-17.

²⁵ sn The focus of sin offering “atonement” was purging impurities from the tabernacle (see the note on Lev 1:4).

²⁶ tn See the note on 4:26 with regard to מִן, min.

²⁷ tn Heb “there shall be forgiveness to him” or “it shall be forgiven to him” (KJV similar).

²⁸ tn Heb “And the anointed priest under him.”

²⁹ tn Heb “he”; the referent (the officiating priest) has been specified in the translation for clarity. This priest was responsible for any actions involving direct contact with the altar (e.g., the splashing of the blood).

³⁰ tn See the note on Lev 1:5.

³¹ tn Here the Hebrew text reads “offering” (קָרְבָּן, qorbban), not “grain offering” (מִנְחָה, minkhah), but in this context the term refers once again to the list in 7:12.

³² tn The term rendered “contribution offering” is תְּרוּמָה (tÿrumah), which generally refers to that which is set aside from the offerings to the Lord as prebends for the officiating priests (cf. esp. Lev 7:28-34 and R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 4:335-37). Cf. TEV “as a special contribution.”

³³ tn Heb “A man, if [or when] he has….” The term for “a man, human being” (אָדָם, ’adam; see the note on Lev 1:2) in this case refers to any person among “mankind,” male or female, since either could be afflicted with infections on the skin.

³⁴ tn Some of the terms for disease or symptoms of disease in this chapter present difficulties for the translator. Most modern English versions render the Hebrew term שְׂאֵת (sÿ’et) as “swelling,” which has been retained here (see the explanation in J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 189). Some have argued that “deeper (עָמֹק, ’amoq) than the skin of his body” in v. 3 means that “this sore was lower than the surrounding skin” (J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:773), in which case “swelling” would be an inappropriate translation of שְׂאֵת in v. 2. Similarly, שְׂאֵת also occurs in v. 19, and then v. 20 raises the issue of whether or not it appears to be “lower (שָׁפָל, shafal) than the skin” (cf. also 14:37 for a mark on the wall of a house), which may mean that the sore sinks below the surface of the skin rather than protruding above it as a swelling would (B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 76-77). Thus, one could translate here, for example, “discoloration” (so Milgrom and II שְׂאֵת “spot, blemish on the skin” in HALOT 1301 s.v. II שְׂאֵת) or “local inflammation, boil, mole” (so Levine). However, one could interpret “lower” as “deeper,” i.e., visibly extending below the surface of the skin into the deeper layers as suggested by J. E. Hartley, Leviticus (WBC), 188, 192. “Swelling” often extends deeply below the surface of the skin, it is certainly a common symptom of skin diseases, and the alternation of these two terms (i.e., “deeper” and “lower”) in vv. 25-26 below shows that they both refer to the same phenomenon (see also the note on v. 20 below), so it is retained in the present translation.

³⁵ tn The etymology and meaning of this term is unknown. It could mean “scab” (KJV, ASV, NASB) or possibly “rash” (NIV, NLT), “flaking skin,” or an “eruption” (NRSV) of some sort.

³⁶ tn Heb “shiny spot” or “white spot,” but to render this term “white spot” in this chapter would create redundancy in v. 4 where the regular term for “white” occurs alongside this word for “bright spot.”

³⁷ tn Heb “in the skin of his flesh” as opposed to the head or the beard (v. 29).

³⁸ tn Heb “a mark [or stroke; or plague] of disease.” In some places in this context (vv. 2, 3) it could be translated “a contagious skin disease.” Although the Hebrew term צָרָעַת (tsara’at) rendered here “diseased” is translated in many English versions as “leprosy,” it does not refer to Hanson’s disease, which is the modern technical understanding of the term “leprosy” (HALOT 1057 s.v. צָרְעַת a). There has been much discussion of the proper meaning of the term and the disease(s) to which it may refer (see, e.g., J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:774-76, 816-26; J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 187-89; and the literature cited by them). The further description of the actual condition in the text suggests that the regulations are concerned with any kind of infectious diseases that are observable on the surface of the skin and, in addition to that, penetrate below the surface of the skin (vv. 3-4) or spread further across the surface of the skin (vv. 5-8). It is true that, in the OT, the term “disease” is often associated specifically with white “scaly” skin diseases that resemble the wasting away of the skin after death (see Milgrom who, in fact, translates “scale disease”; cf., e.g., Exod 4:6-7 and Num 12:9-12, esp. v. 12), but here it appears to be a broader term for any skin disease that penetrates deep or spreads far on the body. Scaly skin diseases would be included in this category, but also other types. Thus, a “swelling,” “scab,” or “bright spot” on the skin might be a symptom of disease, but not necessarily so. In this sense, “diseased” is a technical term. The term “infection” can apply to any “mark” on the skin whether it belongs to the category of “disease” or not (compare and contrast v. 3, where the “infection” is not “diseased,” with v. 4, where the “infection” is found to be “diseased”).

³⁹ tn Or “it shall be reported to Aaron the priest.” This alternative rendering may be better in light of the parallel use of the same expression in Lev 14:2, where the priest had to go outside the camp in order to inspect the person who had been diseased. Since the rendering “he shall be brought to Aaron the priest” might confuse matters there, this expression should be rendered “it shall be reported” both here in 13:2 (cf. also v. 9) and in 14:2. See, however, the further note on 14:2 below, where it is argued that the diseased person would still need to “be brought” to the priest even if this happened outside the camp. Most English versions retain the idea of the afflicted person being “brought” to the priest for inspection.

⁴⁰ tn Heb “and the priest shall see.” The pronoun “it” is unexpressed, but it should be assumed and it refers to the infection (cf. the note on v. 8 above).

⁴¹ tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV).

⁴² tn Heb “and rawness [i.e., something living] of living flesh is in the swelling”; KJV, NASB, NRSV “quick raw flesh.”

⁴³ tn Heb “And if spreading [infinitive absolute] it spreads out [finite verb].” For the infinitive absolute used to highlight contrast rather than emphasis see GKC 343 §113.p.

⁴⁴ tn Heb “all the skin of the infection,” but see v. 4 above.

⁴⁵ tn Heb “to all the appearance of the eyes of the priest.”

⁴⁶ tn Heb “and the priest shall see.” The pronoun “it” is unexpressed, but it should be assumed and it refers to the infection (cf. the note on v. 8 above).

⁴⁷ tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV, NASB).

⁴⁸ tn Heb “he shall pronounce the infection clean,” but see v. 4 above. Also, this is another use of the declarative Piel of the verb טָהֵר (taher; cf. the note on v. 6 above).

⁴⁹ tn Heb “all of him has turned white, and he is clean.”

⁵⁰ tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV).

⁵¹ tn Heb “and the appearance of the scall is not deep ‘from’ (comparative מִן, min, meaning “deeper than”) the skin.”

⁵² tn The shaving is done by the one who has the infection. Although KJV, ASV have the passive “he shall be shaven” here, most modern English versions have the reflexive “shall shave himself” (so NAB).

⁵³ tn Heb “but the scall shall he not shave” (so KJV, ASV); NIV “except for the diseased area.”

⁵⁴ tn Heb “and the priest will shut up the scall a second seven days.”

⁵⁵ tn Heb “and the priest shall see.”

⁵⁶ tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV).

⁵⁷ tn Heb “he,” but the regulation applies to a man or a woman (v. 38a). In the translation “the person” is used to specify the referent more clearly.

⁵⁸ tn Heb “and the priest shall see it” (cf. KJV). The MT has “him/it” which some take to refer to the person as a whole (i.e., “him”; see, e.g., J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:770; NIV, NRSV, etc.), while others take it as a reference to the “infection” (נֶגַע, nega’) in v. 42 (J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 172, 177). Smr has “her/it,” which would probably refer to “disease” (צָרַעַת, tsara’at) in v. 42. The general pattern in the chapter suggests that “it,” either the infection or the disease, is the object of the examination (see, e.g., v. 3 above and v. 50 below).

⁵⁹ tn Heb “and behold.”

⁶⁰ tn Heb “like appearance of disease of skin of flesh.”

⁶¹ tn Heb “and the infection is.” This clause is conditional in force, and is translated as such by almost all English versions.

⁶² tn Heb “And if the priest sees and behold”; NASB “and indeed.”

⁶³ tn Heb “And if the priest saw and behold….”

⁶⁴ tn Heb “and he shall tear it from.”

⁶⁵ 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.

⁶⁶ 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.

⁶⁷ 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.

⁶⁸ tn Heb “the one cleansing himself” (i.e., Hitpael participle of טָהֵר, taher, “to be clean”).

⁶⁹ 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).

⁷⁰ tn Heb “And the priest shall take the one lamb.”

⁷¹ 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).

⁷² 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.).

⁷³ tn Heb “And he shall slaughter.”

⁷⁴ tn Heb “in the place which.”

⁷⁵ sn See the note on Lev 4:3 regarding the term “sin offering.”

⁷⁶ sn See the note on Lev 1:3 regarding the “burnt offering.”

⁷⁷ 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).

⁷⁸ tn Heb “the guilt offering, it [is] to the Lord.” Regarding the “guilt offering,” see the note on Lev 5:15.

⁷⁹ tn Heb “his right finger from the oil.”

⁸⁰ 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.

⁸¹ tn Heb “on the hand.”

⁸² tn Heb “give.”

⁸³ tn Heb “and the one a burnt offering on the grain offering.”

⁸⁴ 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).

⁸⁵ 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.

⁸⁶ 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).

⁸⁷ tn For the translation “splash” see the note on Lev 1:5.

⁸⁸ tn The LXX adds “all around” (i.e., Hebrew סָבִיב [saviv, “all around”]), which is normal for this overall construction (see, e.g., Lev 1:5; 3:8, etc.).

⁸⁹ tn Heb “on his sin which he has sinned.”

⁹⁰ tn Heb “there shall be forgiveness to him” or “it shall be forgiven to him.”

⁹¹ tn Heb “from his sin.”

⁹² tn The Hebrew term נֶפֶשׁ (nefesh, “soul, person, life”) can sometimes refer to a “dead person” (cf. Lev 19:28 above and the literature cited there).

⁹³ tn 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”).

⁹⁴ tc The MT has “in his peoples,” but Smr, LXX, Syriac, Targum, and Tg. Ps.-J. have “in his people,” referring to the Israelites as a whole.

⁹⁵ tn The adjective “high” has been supplied in the translation for clarity, as in many English versions.

⁹⁶ tn Heb “and he has filled his hand.” For this expression see the note on Lev 8:33.

⁹⁷ tn 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). In the translation “garments” has been employed rather than “clothes” to suggest that the special priestly garments are referred to here; cf. NRSV “nor tear his vestments.”

⁹⁸ tn Heb “And if.” The Hebrew conjunction ו (vav, “and”) can be considered to have adversative force here.

⁹⁹ tn Heb “the silver.”

¹⁰⁰ tn Heb “give” (so KJV, ASV, NASB, NLT).