tn Heb “And he (the Lord) called (וַיִּקְרָא, vayyiqra’) to Moses and the Lord spoke (וַיְדַבֵּר, vayédabber) to him from the tent of meeting.” The MT assumes “Lord” in the first clause but places it in the second clause (after “spoke”). This is somewhat awkward, especially in terms of English style; most English versions reverse this and place “Lord” in the first clause (right after “called”). The Syriac version does the same.

sn The best explanation for the MT of Lev 1:1 arises from its function as a transition from Exod 40 to Lev 1. The first clause, “And he (the Lord) called to Moses,” links v. 1 back to Exod 40:35, “But Moses was not able to enter into the tent of meeting because the cloud had settled on it and the glory of the Lord had filled the tabernacle” (cf. J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:134). Exod 40:36–38 is a parenthetical explanation of the ongoing function of the cloud in leading the people through the wilderness. Since Moses could not enter the tent of meeting, the Lord “called” to him “from” the tent of meeting.

sn The second clause of v. 1, “and the Lord spoke to him from the tent of meeting, saying,” introduces the following discourse. This is a standard introductory formula (see, e.g., Exod 20:1; 25:1; 31:1; etc.). The combination of the first and second clauses is, therefore, “bulky” because of the way they happen to be juxtaposed in this transitional verse (J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 8). The first clause of v. 1 connects the book back to the end of the Book of Exodus while the second looks forward the ritual legislation that follows in Lev 1:2ff. There are two “Tents of Meeting”: the one that stood outside the camp (see, e.g., Exod 33:7) and the one that stood in the midst of the camp (Exod 40:2; Num 2:2ff) and served as the Lord’s residence until the construction of the temple in the days of Solomon (Exod 27:21; 29:4; 1 Kgs 8:4; 2 Chr 5:5, etc.; cf. 2 Sam 7:6). Exod 40:35 uses both “tabernacle” and “tent of meeting” to refer to the same tent: “Moses could not enter the tent of meeting because the cloud had settled on it, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle.” It is clear that “tent of meeting” in Lev 1:1 refers to the “tabernacle.” The latter term refers to the tent as a “residence,” while the former refers to it as a divinely appointed place of “meeting” between God and man (see R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 2:873–77 and 2:1130–34). This corresponds to the change in terms in Exod 40:35, where “tent of meeting” is used when referring to Moses’ inability to enter the tent, but “tabernacle” when referring to the Lord taking up residence there in the form of the glory cloud. The quotation introduced here extends from Lev 1:2 through 3:17, and encompasses the burnt, grain, and peace offering regulations. Compare the notes on Lev 4:1; 5:14; and 6:1 [5:20 HT] below.

tn “When” here translates the MT’s כִּי (ki, “if, when”), which regularly introduces main clauses in legislative contexts (see, e.g., Lev 2:1, 4; 4:2, etc.) in contrast to אִם (’im, “if”), which usually introduces subordinate sections (see, e.g., Lev 1:3, 10, 14; 2:5, 7, 14; 4:3, 13, etc.; cf. כִּי in Exod 21:2 and 7 as opposed to אִם in vv. 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, and 11).

sn Lev 1:1–2 serves as a heading for Lev 1–3 (i.e., the basic regulations regarding the presentation of the burnt, grain, and peace offerings) and, at the same time, leads directly into the section on “burnt offerings” in Lev 1:3. In turn, Lev 1:3–17 divides into three subsections, all introduced by אִם “if” (Lev 1:3–9, 10–13, and 14–17, respectively). Similar patterns are discernible throughout Lev 1:2–6:7 [5:26 HT].

tn Heb “a man, human being” (אָדָם, ’adam), which in this case refers to any person among “mankind,” male or female, since women could also bring such offerings (see, e.g., Lev 12:6–8; 15:29–30; cf. HALOT 14 s.v. I אָדָם); cf. NIV “any of you.”

tn The verb “presents” is cognate to the noun “offering” in v. 2 and throughout the book of Leviticus (both from the root קרב [qrb]). One could translate the verb “offers,” but this becomes awkward and, in fact, inaccurate in some passages. For example, in Lev 9:9 this verb is used for the presenting or giving of the blood to Aaron so that he could offer it to the Lord. The blood is certainly not being “offered” as an offering to Aaron there.

tn The whole clause reads more literally, “A human being (אָדָם, ’adam), if he brings from among you an offering to the Lord.”

tn The shift to the second person plural verb here corresponds to the previous second person plural pronoun “among you.” It is distinct from the regular pattern of third person singular verbs throughout the rest of Lev 1–3. This too labels Lev 1:1–2 as an introduction to all of Lev 1–3, not just the burnt offering regulations in Lev 1 (J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:146; cf. note 3 above).

tn Heb “from the domesticated animal, from the herd, and from the flock.” It is clear from the subsequent division between animals from the “herd” (בָּקָר, baqar, in Lev 1:3–9) and the “flock” (צֹאן, tso’n; see Lev 1:10–13) that the term for “domesticated animal” (בְּהֵמָה, béhemah) is a general term meant to introduce the category of pastoral quadrupeds. The stronger disjunctive accent over בְּהֵמָה in the MT as well as the lack of a vav (ו) between it and בָּקָר also suggest בְּהֵמָה is an overall category that includes both “herd” and “flock” quadrupeds.

sn The bird category (Lev 1:14–17) is not included in this introduction because bird offerings were, by and large, concessions to the poor (cf., e.g., Lev 5:7–10; 12:8; 14:21–32) and, therefore, not considered to be one of the primary categories of animal offerings.

sn The burnt offering (עֹלָה, ’olah) was basically a “a gift of a soothing aroma to the Lord” (vv. 9, 13, 17). It could serve as a votive or freewill offering (e.g., Lev 22:18–20), an accompaniment of prayer and supplication (e.g., 1 Sam 7:9–10), part of the regular daily, weekly, monthly, and festival cultic pattern (e.g., Num 28–29), or to make atonement either alone (e.g., Lev 1:4; 16:24) or in combination with the grain offering (e.g., Lev 14:20) or sin offering (e.g., Lev 5:7; 9:7). See R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 4:996–1022.

tn Heb “door” (so KJV, ASV); NASB “doorway” (likewise throughout the book of Leviticus). The translation “door” or “doorway” may suggest a framed door in a casing to the modern reader, but here the term refers to the entrance to a tent.

tn The NIV correctly has “it” in the text, referring to the acceptance of the animal (cf., e.g., RSV, NEB, NLT), but “he” in the margin, referring to the acceptance of the offerer (cf. ASV, NASB, JB). The reference to a “flawless male” in the first half of this verse suggests that the issue here is the acceptability of the animal to make atonement on behalf of the offerer (Lev 1:4; cf. NRSV “for acceptance in your behalf”).

tn “To make atonement” is the standard translation of the Hebrew term כִּפֶּר, (kipper); cf. however TEV “as a sacrifice to take away his sins” (CEV similar). The English word derives from a combination of “at” plus Middle English “one[ment],” referring primarily to reconciliation or reparation that is made in order to accomplish reconciliation. The primary meaning of the Hebrew verb, however, is “to wipe [something off (or on)]” (see esp. the goal of the sin offering, Lev 4, “to purge” the tabernacle from impurities), but in some cases it refers metaphorically to “wiping away” anything that might stand in the way of good relations by bringing a gift (see, e.g., Gen 32:20 [21 HT], “to appease; to pacify” as an illustration of this). The translation “make atonement” has been retained here because, ultimately, the goal of either purging or appeasing was to maintain a proper relationship between the Lord (who dwelt in the tabernacle) and Israelites in whose midst the tabernacle was pitched (see R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 2:689–710 for a full discussion of the Hebrew word meaning “to make atonement” and its theological significance).

tn Heb “Then he”; the referent (the offerer) has been specified in the translation for clarity. The LXX has “they” rather than “he,” suggesting that the priests, not the offerer, were to slaughter the bull (cf. the notes on vv. 6a and 9a).

tn Heb “the son of the herd”; cf. KJV “bullock”; NASB, NIV “young bull.”

tn “Splash” (cf. NAB) or “dash” (cf. NRSV) is better than “sprinkle,” which is the common English translation of this verb (זָרַק, zaraq; see, e.g., KJV, NASB, NIV, NLT). “Sprinkle” is not strong enough (contrast נָזָה [nazah], which does indeed mean “to sprinkle” or “to splatter”; cf. Lev 4:6).

tn Heb “Then he”; the referent (the offerer) has been specified in the translation for clarity. The LXX and Smr have “they” rather than “he” in both halves of this verse, suggesting that the priests, not the offerer, were to skin and cut the carcass of the bull into pieces (cf. the notes on vv. 5a and 9a).

tc A few medieval Hebrew mss, Smr, LXX, Syriac, and Tg. Onq. have plural “priests” here (cf. 1:5, 8) rather than the MT singular “priest” (cf. NAB). The singular “priest” would mean (1) Aaron, the (high) priest, or (2) the officiating priest, as in Lev 1:9 (cf. 6:10 [3 HT], etc.). “The sons of Aaron” is probably a textual corruption caused by conflation with Lev 1:5, 8 (cf. the remarks in J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 13).

tc A few Hebrew mss, Smr, LXX, Syriac, and Tg. Onq. have the conjunction “and” before “the head,” which would suggest the rendering “and the head and the suet” rather than the rendering of the MT here, “with the head and the suet.”

sn “Suet” is the specific term used for the hard, fatty tissues found around the kidneys of sheep and cattle. A number of modern English versions have simplified this to “fat” (e.g., NIV, NCV, TEV, CEV, NLT).

tn Heb “on the wood, which is on the fire, which is on the altar.” Cf. NIV “on the burning wood”; NLT “on the wood fire.”

tn Heb “Finally, he”; the referent (the offerer) has been specified in the translation for clarity. Once again, the MT assigns the preparation of the offering (here the entrails and legs) to the offerer because it did not bring him into direct contact with the altar, but reserves the actual placing of the sacrifice on the altar for the officiating priest (cf. the notes on vv. 5a and 6a).

tn Heb “toward the altar,” but the so-called locative ה (hey) attached to the word for “altar” can indicate the place where something is or happens (GKC 250 §90.d and GKC 373–74 §118.g; cf. also J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:161). This is a standard way of expressing “on/at the altar” with the verb “to offer up in smoke” (Hiphil of קָטַר [qatar]; cf. also Exod 29:13, 18, 25; Lev 1:9, 13, 15, 17; 2:2, etc.).

tc A few Hebrew mss and possibly the Leningrad B19a ms itself (the basis of the BHS Hebrew text of the MT), under an apparent erasure, plus Smr, LXX, Syriac, and Tg. Ps.-J. suggest that Hebrew הוּא (hu’, translated as “it is”) should be added here as in vv. 13 and 17. Whether or not the text should be changed, the meaning is the same as in vv. 13 and 17, so it has been included in the translation here.

sn The standard English translation of “gift” (אִשֶּׁה, ’isheh) is “an offering [made] by fire” (cf. KJV, ASV). It is based on a supposed etymological relationship to the Hebrew word for “fire” (אֵשׁ, ’esh) and is still maintained in many versions (e.g., NIV, RSV, NRSV, NLT; B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 7–8). For various reasons, including the fact that some offerings referred to by this term are not burned on the altar (see, e.g., Lev 24:9), it is probably better to understand the term to mean “gift” (J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 22) or “food gift” (“food offering” in NEB and TEV; J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:161–62). See R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 1:540–49 for a complete discussion.

tn Heb “And if from the flock is his offering, from the sheep or from the goats, for a burnt offering.” Here “flock” specifies the broad category, with “sheep or goats” giving specific examples.

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

tn Heb “from the [category] ‘bird.’ ”

tn Heb “from the sons of the pigeon,” referring either to “young pigeons” (cf. KJV, NASB, NIV, NLT) or “various species of pigeon” (contrast J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:168, with J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 14).

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.”

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.

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

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).

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

tn Heb “he shall not divide it.” Several Hebrew mss, Smr, LXX, and Syriac have a vav on the negative, yielding the translation, “but he shall not divide it into two parts.” Cf. NIV “not severing it completely” (NRSV similar).

sn The “grain offering” (מִנְחָה [minkhah]; here קָרְבַּן מִנְחָה, [qorbban minkhah], “an offering of a grain offering”) generally accompanied a burnt or peace offering to supplement the meat with bread (the libation provided the drink; cf. Num 15:1–10), thus completing the food “gift” to the Lord. It made atonement (see the note on Lev 1:4) along with the burnt offering (e.g., Lev 14:20) or alone as a sin offering for the poor (Lev 5:11–13).

tn The Hebrew term for “choice wheat flour” (סֹלֶת, selet) is often translated “fine flour” (cf. KJV, NAB, NIV, NCV), but it refers specifically to wheat as opposed to barley (B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 10). Moreover, the translation “flour” might be problematic, since the Hebrew term may designate the “grits” rather than the more finely ground “flour” (see J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:179 as opposed to Levine, 10, and J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 30).

sn This is not just any “incense” (קְטֹרֶת, qétoret; R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 3:913–16), but specifically “frankincense” (לְבֹנָה, lévonah; R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 2:756–57).

tn Heb “and he”; the referent has been specified in the translation for clarity. The syntax is strange here and might suggest that it was the offerer who scooped out a handful of the grain offering for the memorial portion (G. J. Wenham, Leviticus [NICOT], 66), but based on v. 9 below it should be understood that it was the priest who performed this act (see, e.g., NRSV “After taking from it a handful of the choice flour and oil … the priest shall …”; see also J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:177, 181 and J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 30).

sn The “memorial portion” (אַזְכָרָה, ’azkharah) was the part of the grain offering that was burnt on the altar (see the previous clause), as opposed to the remainder, which was normally consumed by the priests (v. 3; see the full regulations in Lev 6:14–23[7–16]). It was probably intended to call to mind (i.e., memorialize) before the Lord the reason for the presentation of the particular offering (see the remarks in R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 1:335–39).

tn The words “it is” have been supplied. See the notes on Lev 1:9 and 2:3. There is no text critical problem here, but the syntax suggests the same translation.

tn Heb “… is to Aaron and to his sons.” The preposition “to” (לְ, lamed) indicates ownership. Cf. NAB, NASB, NIV and other English versions.

tn The words “it is” (הוּא, hu’) are not in the MT, but are supplied for the sake of translation into English. The Syriac also for translational reasons adds it between “most holy” and “from the gifts” (cf. 1:13, 17).

tn Heb “holy of holies”; KJV, NASB “a thing most holy.”

tn The insertion of the words “it must be made of” is justified by the context and the expressed words “it shall be made of” in vv. 7 and 8 below.

sn These “loaves” were either “ring-shaped” (HALOT 317 s.v. חַלָּה) or “perforated” (BDB 319 s.v. חַלָּה; cf. J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:184).

tn Heb “and.” Here the conjunction vav (ו) has an alternative sense (“or”).

tn The Hebrew word מְשֻׁחִים (méshukhim) translated here as “smeared” is often translated “anointed” in other contexts. Cf. TEV “brushed with olive oil” (CEV similar).

tn There is no vav (ו, “and”) in the MT at the beginning of v. 6 and the verb is pointed as an infinite absolute. The present translation has rendered it as an imperative (see GKC 346 §113.bb) and, therefore, the same for the following vav consecutive perfect verb (cf. NIV “Crumble it and pour oil on it”; cf. also NRSV, NEB, NLT, and J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:185, but note the objections to this rendering in J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 26). The LXX seems to suggest adding a vav (“and”) and pointing the verb as a consecutive perfect, which yields “and you shall break it in pieces” (cf. the BHS textual note; Hartley, 26, prefers the LXX rendering).

tn Heb “a grain offering of a pan”; cf. KJV “fryingpan”; NAB “pot”; CEV “pan with a lid on it.”

sn Lev 7:9 makes it clear that one cooked “on” a griddle but “in” a pan. This suggests that the oil in the pan served for deep fat frying, hence the translation “deep fried in olive oil” (see, e.g., J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:185); cf. also NAB.

tc There are several person, gender, and voice verb problems in this verse. First, the MT has “And you shall bring the grain offering,” but the LXX and Qumran have “he” rather than “you” (J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:185). Second, the MT has “which shall be made” (i.e., the 3rd person masculine Niphal passive verb which, in fact, does not agree with its feminine subject, מִנְחָה, minkhah, “grain offering”), while the LXX has “which he shall make” (3rd person Qal), thus agreeing with the LXX 3rd person verb at the beginning of the verse (see above). Third, the MT has a 3rd person vav consecutive verb “and he shall present it to the priest,” which agrees with the LXX but is not internally consistent with the 2nd person verb at the beginning of the verse in the MT. The BHS editors conjecture that the latter might be repointed to an imperative verb yielding “present it to the priest.” This would require no change of consonants and corresponds to the person of the first verb in the MT. This solution has been tentatively accepted here (cf. also J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 26–27), even though it neither resolves the gender problem of the second verb nor fits the general grammatical pattern of the chapter in the MT.

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.”

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).

tn See the note on “it is” in v. 9b.

tn Heb “Every grain offering which you offer to the Lord must not be made leavened.” The noun “leaven” is traditional in English versions (cf. KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV), but “yeast” is more commonly used today.

tc A few Hebrew mss, Smr, LXX, and Tg. Ps.-J. have the verb “present” rather than “offer up in smoke,” but the MT is clearly correct. One could indeed present leavened and honey sweetened offerings as first fruit offerings, which were not burned on the altar (see v. 12 and the note there), but they could not be offered up in fire on the altar. Cf. the TEV’s ambiguous “you must never use yeast or honey in food offered to the Lord.”

tn Heb “for all leaven and all honey you must not offer up in smoke from it a gift to the Lord.”

sn The “first fruit” referred to here was given to the priests as a prebend for their service to the Lord, not offered on the altar (Num 18:12).

tn Heb “from upon your grain offering.”

tn The translation of this whole section of the clause is difficult. Theoretically, it could describe one, two, or three different ways of preparing first ripe grain offerings (J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 27). The translation here takes it as a description of only one kind of prepared grain. This is suggested by the fact that v. 16 uses only one term “crushed bits” (גֶּרֶשׂ, geres) to refer back to the grain as it is prepared in v. 14 (a more technical translation is “groats”; see J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:178, 194). Cf. NAB “fresh grits of new ears of grain”; NRSV “coarse new grain from fresh ears.”

tn See the note on “it is” in 2:9b.