Numbers 15–17

Footnotes

1. 1 The wilderness wandering officially having begun, these rules were then given for the people to be used when they finally entered the land. That they would be provided here would be of some encouragement to the nation after their great failure. God still spoke of a land that was to be their land, even though they had sinned greatly. This chapter collects a number of religious rules. The first 16 verses deal with rulings for sacrifices. Then, vv. 17–36 concerns sins of omission. Finally, rules concerning tassels are covered (vv. 37–41). For additional reading, see G. B. Gray, Sacrifice in the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1925); B. A. Levine, In the Presence of the Lord (); D. J. McCarthy, “The Symbolism of Blood and Sacrifice,” 88 (1969): 166–76; “Further Notes on the Symbolism of Blood and Sacrifice,” 92 (1973): 205–10; J. Milgrom, “Sin Offering or Purification Offering,” 21 (1971): 237–39; N. H. Snaith, “Sacrifices in the Old Testament,” 7 (1957): 308–17; R. J. Thompson, Penitence and Sacrifice in Early Israel; R. de Vaux, Studies in Old Testament Sacrifice.
2. 2 Heb “the land of your habitations.”
3. 3 The Hebrew participle here has the futur instans use of the participle, expressing that something is going to take place. It is not imminent, but it is certain that God would give the land to Israel.
4. 4 The three words at the beginning of this verse are all etymologically related: “the one who offers his offering shall offer.”
5. 5 Obviously, as the wording of the text affirms, this kind of offering would be made after they were in the land and able to produce the grain and oil for the sacrifices. The instructions anticipated their ability to do this, and this would give hope to them. The amounts are difficult to determine, but it may be that they were to bring 4.5 liters of flour and 1.8 liters each of oil and wine.
6. 6 The drink-offering was an ancient custom, mentioned in the Ugaritic tablets of Ras Shamra (14th century b.c.). The drink offering was poured out at the base of the altar (see Sir 50:15 and Josephus, 3.9.4 [3.234]).
7. 7 Heb “for the one lamb,” but it clearly means “for each lamb.”
8. 8 The text changes from direct address here to the third person form of the verb. If the is correct, then to make a smooth translation it would need to be made a passive (in view of the fact that no subject is expressed).
9. 9 Heb “according to thus shall it be done.”
10. 10 The word גּוּר (gur) was traditionally translated “to sojourn,” i.e., to live temporarily in a land. Here the two words are from the root: “if a sojourner sojourns.”
11. 11 Heb “in your midst.”
12. 12 The Hebrew text just has “to your generations,” but it means in the future.
13. 13 The imperfect tenses must reflect the responsibility to comply with the law, and so the classifications of instruction or obligation may be applied.
14. 14 The word “apply” is supplied in the translation.
15. 15 Or “a statute forever.”
16. 16 Heb “as you, as [so] the alien.”
17. 17 The relative clause is literally, “which I am causing you to enter there.” The final adverb is resumptive, and must be joined with the relative pronoun.
18. 18 The verse has a temporal clause that actually continues or supplements the temporal clause of the preceding verse. It is made up of the temporal indicator, the infinitive construct with the preposition, and the suffixed subjective genitive: “and it shall be when you eat.” Here it is translated simply “and eat” since the temporal element was introduced in the last verse.
19. 19 This is the תְּרוּמָה (térumah), the “raised offering” or “heave offering” (cf. , ). It may simply be called a “contribution” (so ). The verb of the sentence is from the same root: “you shall lift up/raise up.” It was to be an offering separated from the rest and raised up to the Lord in the sight of all. It was designed to remind the Israelites that the produce and the land belonged to God.
20. 20 Or “the first of your dough.” The phrase is not very clear. N. H. Snaith thinks it means a batch of loaves from the kneading trough—the first batch of the baking (Leviticus and Numbers [], 251).
21. 21 These regulations supplement what was already ruled on in the Levitical code for the purification and reparation offerings. See those rulings in Lev 4–7 for all the details. Some biblical scholars view the rules in Leviticus as more elaborate and therefore later. However, this probably represents a misunderstanding of the purpose of each collection.
22. 22 The verb is the plural imperfect; the sin discussed here is a sin committed by the community, or the larger part of the community.
23. 23 Heb “hand.”
24. 24 The idea of לִשְׁגָגָה (lishgagah) seems to be that of “inadvertence” or “without intent.” The text gives no indication of how this offense might be committed, or what it might include. It probably describes any transgressions done in ignorance of the Law that involved a violation of tabernacle procedure or priestly protocol or social misdemeanor. Even though it was done unintentionally, it was still a violation and called for ritual purification.
25. 25 Heb “[away] from the eyes of the community.”
26. 26 The verb is the Piel perfect with vav (ו) consecutive (וְכִפֶּר, vékhipper) to continue the instruction of the passage: “the priest shall make atonement,” meaning the priest is to make atonement for the sin (thus the present translation). This verb means “to expiate,” “to atone for,” “to pacify.” It describes the ritual events by which someone who was separated from the holy Lord God could find acceptance into his presence through the sacrificial blood of the substitutionary animal. See Lev 1 and Num 17:6–13.
27. 27 Or “they will be forgiven.”
28. 28 Again, rather than translate literally “and it shall be forgiven [to] them” (all the community), one could say, “they (all the community) will be forgiven.” The meaning is the same.
29. 29 The Hebrew text has וְאִם־נֶפֶשׁ אַחַת (vé’im-nefesh ’akhat), sometime translated “and if any soul.” But the word describes the whole person, the soul in the body; it refers here to the individual who sins.
30. 30 Heb “soul.”
31. 31 The sin is described literally as acting “with a high hand”—בְּיָד רָמָה (béyad ramah). The expression means that someone would do something with deliberate defiance, with an arrogance in spite of what the Lord said. It is as if the sinner was about to attack God, or at least lifting his hand against God. The implication of the expression is that it was done in full knowledge of the Law (especially since this contrasts throughout with the sins of ignorance). Blatant defiance of the word of the Lord is dealt with differently. For similar expressions, see Exod 14:8 and Num 33:3.
32. 32 The verb occurs only in the Piel; it means “to blaspheme,” “to revile.”
33. 33 The word order in the Hebrew text places “Yahweh” first for emphasis—it is the Lord such a person insults.
34. 34 Heb “soul.”
35. 35 The clause begins with “and” because the verb is the perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive. As discussed with Num 9:13, to be cut off could mean excommunication from the community, death by the community, or death by divine intervention.
36. 36 The verb בָּזָה (bazah, “to despise”) means to treat something as worthless, to treat it with contempt, to look down the nose at something as it were.
37. 37 The verb פָּרַר (parar, “to break”) can mean to nullify, break, or violate a covenant.
38. 38 Heb “soul.”
39. 39 The construction uses the Niphal imperfect with the modifying Niphal infinitive absolute. The infinitive makes the sentence more emphatic. If the imperfect tense is taken as an instruction imperfect, then the infinitive makes the instruction more binding. If it is a simple future, then the future is certain. In either case, there is no exclusion from being cut off.
40. 40 The point is that the person’s iniquity remains with him—he must pay for his sin. The judgment of God in such a case is both appropriate and unavoidable.
41. 41 The preterite of the verb “to be” is here subordinated to the next, parallel verb form, to form a temporal clause.
42. 42 For this brief passage, see A. Phillips, “The Case of the Woodgatherer Reconsidered,” 19 (1969): 125–28; J. Weingreen, “The Case of the Woodgatherer (Numbers XV 32–36),” 16 (1966): 361–64; and B. J. Bamberger, “Revelations of Torah after Sinai,” 16 (1941): 97–113. Weingreen argues that there is something of the Rabbinic method of setting a fence around the Law here; in other words, if this sin were not punished, the Law would have been violated in greater ways. Gathering of wood, although seemingly harmless, is done with intent to kindle fire, and so reveals a culpable intent.
43. 43 The sentence begins with the emphatic use of the infinitive absolute with the verb in the Hophal imperfect: “he shall surely be put to death.” Then, a second infinitive absolute רָגוֹם (ragom) provides the explanatory activity—all the community is to stone him with stones. The punishment is consistent with other decrees from God (see Exod 31:14, 15; 35:2). Moses had either forgotten such, or they had simply neglected to (or were hesitant to) enact them.
44. 44 Heb “stoned him with stones, and he died.”
45. 45 The construction uses the imperative followed by perfect tenses with vav (ו) consecutives. The first perfect tense may be translated as the imperative, but the second, being a third common plural form, has to be subordinated as a purpose clause, or as the object of the preceding verb: “speak … and say … that they make.”
46. 46 This is a reference to the צִיצִת (tsitsit), the fringes on the borders of the robes. They were meant to hang from the corners of the upper garment (Deut 22:12), which was worn on top of the clothing. The tassel was probably made by twisting the overhanging threads of the garment into a knot that would hang down. This was a reminder of the covenant. The tassels were retained down through history, and today more elaborate prayer shawls with tassels are worn during prayer. For more information, see F. J. Stephens, “The Ancient Significance of Sisith,” 50 (1931): 59–70; and S. Bertman, “Tasselled Garments in the Ancient East Mediterranean,” 24 (1961): 119–28.
47. 47 The blue color may represent the heavenly origin of the Law, or perhaps, since it is a royal color, the majesty of the Lord.
48. 48 Heb “seek out, look into.”
49. 49 This last clause is a relative clause explaining the influence of the human heart and physical sight. It literally says, “which you go whoring after them.” The verb for “whoring” may be interpreted to mean “act unfaithfully.” So, the idea is these influences lead to unfaithful activity: “after which you act unfaithfully.”
50. 50 This clause also serves as a purpose/result clause of the preceding—“in order that you may remember.…” But because the line is so long, it is simpler to make this a separate sentence in the translation.
51. 1 There are three main movements in the story of ch. 16. The first is the rebellion itself (vv. 1–19). The second is the judgment (vv. 20–35). Third is the atonement for the rebels (vv. 36–50). The whole chapter is a marvelous account of a massive rebellion against the leaders that concludes with reconciliation. For further study see G. Hort, “The Death of Qorah,” 7 (1959): 2–26; and J. Liver, “Korah, Dathan and Abiram,” Studies in the Bible ( 8), 189–217.
52. 2 The reading is plural (“the sons of Reuben”); the and have the singular (“the son of Reuben”).
53. 3 In the Hebrew text there is no object for the verb “took.” The translation presented above supplies the word “men.” However, it is possible that the has suffered damage here. The has “and he spoke.” The and have “and he was divided.” The editor of suggests that perhaps the should be emended to “and he arose.”
54. 4 Heb “princes” (so , ).
55. 5 These men must have been counselors or judges of some kind.
56. 6 Heb “men of name,” or “men of renown.”
57. 7 The meaning of רַב־לָכֶם (rab-lakhem) is something like “you have assumed far too much authority.” It simply means “much to you,” perhaps “you have gone to far,” or “you are overreaching yourselves” (M. Noth, Numbers [], 123). He is objecting to the exclusiveness of the system that Moses has been introducing.
58. 8 Heb “fell on his face.”
59. 9 Heb “him.”
60. 10 Heb “his congregation” or “his community.” The expression is unusual, but what it signifies is that Korah had set up a rival “Israel” with himself as leader.
61. 11 The verb is the Piel perfect. There is no imperfect tense before this, which makes the construction a little difficult. If the vav (ו) is classified as a consecutive, then the form would stand alone as an equivalent to the imperfect, and rendered as a modal nuance such as “would you [now] seek,” or as a progressive imperfect, “are you seeking.” This latter nuance can be obtained by treating it as a regular perfect tense, with an instantaneous nuance: “do you [now] seek.” Moses discerned correctly the real motivation for the rebellion. Korah wanted to be the high priest because he saw how much power there was in the spiritual leadership in Israel. He wanted something like a general election with himself as the candidate and his supporters promoting him. The great privilege of being a Levite and serving in the sanctuary was not enough for him—the status did not satisfy him. Korah gave no rebuttal. The test would be one of ministering with incense. This would bring them into direct proximity with the Lord. If God honored Korah as a ministering priest, then it would be settled. But Moses accuses them of rebellion against the Lord, because the Lord had chosen Aaron to be the priest.
62. 12 The question indicates that they had been murmuring against Aaron, that is, expressing disloyalty and challenging his leadership. But it is actually against the Lord that they had been murmuring because the Lord had put Aaron in that position.
63. 13 Heb “Moses sent to summon.” The verb קָרָא (qara’) followed by the lamed (ל) preposition does not mean “call to” but “summon.” This is a command performance; for them to appear would be to submit to Moses’ authority. This they will not do.
64. 14 The imperfect tense נַעֲלֶה (na’aleh) expresses their unwillingness to report: “we are not willing,” or “we will not.” The verb means “to go up.” It is used in the sense of appearing before an authority or a superior (see, e.g., Gen 46:31; Deut 25:7; Judg 4:5).
65. 15 The question is rhetorical. It was not a small thing to them—it was a big thing.
66. 16 The modern scholar who merely sees these words as belonging to an earlier tradition about going up to the land of Canaan that flows with milk and honey misses the irony here. What is happening is that the text is showing how twisted the thinking of the rebels is. They have turned things completely around. Egypt was the land flowing with milk and honey, not Canaan where they will die. The words of rebellion are seldom original, and always twisted.
67. 17 The verb הִשְׂתָּרֵר (histarer) is the Hitpael infinitive absolute that emphasizes the preceding תִשְׂתָּרֵר (tistarer), the Hitpael imperfect tense (both forms having metathesis). The verb means “to rule; to act like a prince; to make oneself a prince.” This is the only occurrence of the reflexive for this verb. The exact nuance is difficult to translate into English. But they are accusing Moses of seizing princely power for himself, perhaps making a sarcastic reference to his former status in Egypt. The rebels here are telling Moses that they had discerned his scheme, and so he could not “hoodwink” them (cf. ).
68. 18 Here אַף (’af) has the sense of “in addition.” It is not a common use.
69. 19 Heb “will you bore out the eyes of these men?” The question is “Will you continue to mislead them?” (or “hoodwink” them). In Deut 16:19 it is used for taking a bribe; something like that kind of deception is intended here. They are simply stating that Moses is a deceiver who is misleading the people with false promises.
70. 20 The verb means “to turn toward”; it is a figurative expression that means “to pay attention to” or “to have regard for.” So this is a prayer against Dathan and Abiram.
71. 21 Heb “and take, a man, his censer.”
72. 22 This verb and the following one are both perfect tenses with vav (ו) consecutives. Following the imperative they carry the same force, but in sequence.
73. 23 This clause is clearly foundational for the clause that follows, the appearance of the Lord; therefore it should be subordinated to the next as a temporal clause (one preterite followed by another preterite may be so subordinated).
74. 24 The verb is הִבָּדְלוּ (hibbadélu), the Niphal imperative of בָּדַל (badal). This is the same word that was just used when Moses reminded the Levites that they had been separated from the community to serve the Lord.
75. 25 The group of people siding with Korah is meant, and not the entire community of the people of Israel. They are an assembly of rebels, their “community” consisting in their common plot.
76. 26 It is Moses and Aaron who prostrate themselves; they have the good of the people at heart.
77. 27 The expression “the God of the spirits of all humanity [flesh]” is somewhat difficult. The Hebrew text says אֱלֹהֵי הָרוּחֹת לְכָל־בָּשָׂר (’elohey harukhot lékhol-basar). This expression occurs in Num 27:16 again. It also occurs in some postbiblical texts, a fact which has prompted some scholars to conclude that it is a late addition. The words clearly show that Moses is interceding for the congregation. The appeal in the verse is that it is better for one man to die for the whole nation than the whole nation for one man (see also John 11:50).
78. 28 The verb is the Qal imperfect יֶחֱטָא (yekheta’); it refers to the sinful rebellion of Korah, but Moses is stating something of a principle: “One man sins, and will you be angry.…” A past tense translation would assume that this is a preterite use of the imperfect (without vav [ו] consecutive).
79. 29 The motif of “going up” is still present; here the Hebrew text says “go up” (the Niphal imperative—“go up yourselves”) from their tents, meaning, move away from them.
80. 30 Heb “rose up.”
81. 31 The word רָשָׁע (rasha’) has the sense of a guilty criminal. The word “wicked” sometimes gives the wrong connotation. These men were opposing the Lord, and so were condemned as criminals—they were guilty. The idea of “wickedness” therefore applies in that sense.
82. 32 The preposition bet (בְּ) in this line is causal—“on account of their sins.”
83. 33 The impression is that the people did not hear what the Lord said to Moses, but only what Moses said to the people as a result. They saw the brilliant cloud, and perhaps heard the sound of his voice, but the relaying of the instructions indicates they did not hear the actual instruction from the Lord himself.
84. 34 The verb נִצָּבִים (nitsavim) suggests a defiant stance, for the word is often used in the sense of taking a stand for or against something. It can also be somewhat neutral, having the sense of positioning oneself for a purpose.
85. 35 Heb “in this.”