Discovery BoxLeviticus 13:3 
Context13:3 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 13:19-20
Context13:19 and in the place of the boil there is a white swelling or a reddish white bright spot, he must show himself to the priest. 7 13:20 The priest will then examine it, 8 and if 9 it appears to be deeper than the skin 10 and its hair has turned white, then the priest is to pronounce the person unclean. 11 It is a diseased infection that has broken out in the boil. 12
Leviticus 13:42
Context13:42 But if there is a reddish white infection in the back or front bald area, it is a disease breaking out in his back or front bald area.
Leviticus 13:49
Context13:49 if the infection 13 in the garment or leather or warp or woof or any article of leather is yellowish green or reddish, it is a diseased infection and it must be shown to the priest.
1 tn Heb “and the priest shall see the infection.”
2 tn There is no “if” expressed, but the contrast between the priestly finding in this verse and the next verse clearly implies it.
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.
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.”
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).
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).
7 tn Some English versions translate “it shall be shown to [or “be seen by”] the priest,” taking the infection to be the subject of the verb (e.g., KJV, NASB, RSV, NRSV). Based on the Hebrew grammar there is no way to be sure which is intended.
8 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).
9 tn Heb “and behold.”
10 tn Heb “and behold its appearance is low (שָׁפָל, shafal) ‘from’ (comparative מִן, min, “lower than”) the skin.” Compare “deeper” in v. 3 above where, however, a different word is used (עָמֹק, ’amoq), and see the note on “swelling” in v. 1 above (cf. J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 192; note that, contrary to the MT, Tg. Onq. has עָמֹק in this verse as well as v. 4). 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. Some have argued that “this sore was lower than the surrounding skin” (J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:773, 788), in which case “swelling” would be an inappropriate translation of שְׂאֵת (sÿ’et) in v. 19. It seems unlikely, however, that the surface of a “boil” would sink below the surface of the surrounding skin. The infectious pus etc. that makes up a boil normally causes swelling.
11 tn The declarative Piel of the verb טָמֵא (tame’, cf. the note on v. 3 above).
12 tn Heb “It is an infection of disease. In the boil it has broken out.” For the rendering “diseased infection” see the note on v. 2 above.
13 tn Heb “and the infection is.” This clause is conditional in force, and is translated as such by almost all English versions.
