Numbers 17–19

Footnotes

1. 1 Num 17:1 in the English Bible is 17:16 in the Hebrew text (). See also the note on .
2. 2 Heb “receive from them a rod, a rod from the house of a father.”
3. 3 Heb “from every leader of them according to their fathers’ house.”
4. 4 Heb “one rod for the head of their fathers’ house.”
5. 5 The verb is the Hiphil perfect of נוּחַ (nuakh, “to rest”), and so “to set at rest, lay, place, put.” The form with the vav (ו) consecutive continues the instruction of the previous verse.
6. 6 The Hebrew text simply reads “the covenant” or “the testimony.”
7. 7 Heb “a rod for one leader, a rod for one leader.”
8. 8 Heb “the house of their fathers.”
9. 9 The name of the tent now attests to the centrality of the ark of the covenant. Instead of the “tent of meeting” (מוֹעֵד, mo’ed) we now find the “the tent of the testimony” (הָעֵדֻת, ha’edut).
10. 10 Here too the deictic particle (“and behold”) is added to draw attention to the sight in a vivid way.
11. 11 There is no clear answer why the tribe of Levi had used an almond staff. The almond tree is one of the first to bud in the spring, and its white blossoms are a beautiful sign that winter is over. Its name became a name for “watcher”; Jeremiah plays on this name for God’s watching over his people (1:11–12).
12. 12 The words “at them” are not in the Hebrew text, but they have been added in the translation for clarity.
13. 13 The verb means “to finish; to complete” and here “to bring to an end.” It is the imperfect following the imperative, and so introduces a purpose clause (as a final imperfect).
14. 14 This is another final imperfect in a purpose clause.
15. 15 The use of הֵן (hen) and the perfect tense in the nuance of a prophetic perfect expresses their conviction that they were bound to die—it was certain (see §106.n).
16. 16 Num 17:13 in the English Bible is 17:28 in the Hebrew text (). See also the note on .
17. 17 The verse stresses the completeness of their death: “will we be consumed by dying” (הַאִם תַּמְנוּ לִגְוֹעַ, ha’im tamnu ligvoa’).
18. 1 This chapter and the next may have been inserted here to explain how the priests are to function because in the preceding chapter Aaron’s position was affirmed. The chapter seems to fall into four units: responsibilities of priests (vv. 1–7), their portions (vv. 8–19), responsibilities of Levites (vv. 20–24), and instructions for Levites (vv. 25–32).
19. 2 Heb “your father’s house.”
20. 3 The responsibility for the sanctuary included obligations relating to any violation of the sanctuary. This was stated to forestall any further violations of the sanctuary. The priests were to pay for any ritual errors, primarily if any came too near. Since the priests and Levites come near all the time, they risk violating ritual laws more than any. So, with the great privileges come great responsibilities. The bottom line is that they were responsible for the sanctuary.
21. 4 The verb forms a wordplay on the name Levi, and makes an allusion to the naming of the tribe Levi by Leah in the book of Genesis. There Leah hoped that with the birth of Levi her husband would be attached to her. Here, with the selection of the tribe to serve in the sanctuary, there is the wordplay again showing that the Levites will be attached to Aaron and the priests. The verb is יִלָּווּ (yillavu), which forms a nice wordplay with Levi (לֵוִי). The tribe will now be attached to the sanctuary. The verb is the imperfect with a vav (ו) that shows volitive sequence after the imperative, here indicating a purpose clause.
22. 5 The clause is a circumstantial clause because the disjunctive vav (ו) is on a nonverb to start the clause.
23. 6 Now the sentence uses the Niphal perfect with a vav (ו) consecutive from the same root לָוָה (lavah).
24. 7 The word is “stranger, alien,” but it can also mean Israelites here.
25. 8 The clause is a purpose clause, and the imperfect tense a final imperfect.
26. 9 Heb “taken.”
27. 10 The infinitive construct in this sentence is from עָבַד (’avad), and so is the noun that serves as its object: to serve the service.
28. 11 This is an uncommon root. It may be connected to the word “anoint” as here (see ). But it may also be seen as an intended parallel to “perpetual due” (see Gen 47:22; Exod 29:28; Lev 6:11 []).
29. 12 Heb “from the fire.” It probably refers to those parts that were not burned.
30. 13 This form may be classified as a perfect of resolve—he has decided to give them to them, even though this is a listing of what they will receive.
31. 14 The “ban” (חֵרֶם, kherem) in Hebrew describes that which is exclusively the Lord’s, either for his sanctuary use, or for his destruction. It seems to refer to an individual’s devoting something freely to God.
32. 15 The construction uses the infinitive absolute and the imperfect tense of the verb “to redeem” in order to stress the point—they were to be redeemed. N. H. Snaith suggests that the verb means to get by payment what was not originally yours, whereas the other root גָאַל (ga’al) means to get back what was originally yours (Leviticus and Numbers [], 268).
33. 16 Or “throw, toss.”
34. 17 Salt was used in all the offerings; its importance as a preservative made it a natural symbol for the covenant which was established by sacrifice. Even general agreements were attested by sacrifice, and the phrase “covenant of salt” speaks of such agreements as binding and irrevocable. Note the expression in Ezra 4:14, “we have been salted with the salt of the palace.” See further J. F. Ross, 4:167.
35. 18 The phrase “of property” is supplied as a clarification.
36. 19 The Hebrew text uses the infinitive construct of the verb “to bear” with the lamed (ל) preposition to express the result of such an action. “To bear their sin” would mean that they would have to suffer the consequences of their sin.
37. 20 The verse begins with the perfect tense of עָבַד (’avad) with vav (ו) consecutive, making the form equal to the instructions preceding it. As its object the verb has the cognate accusative “service.”
38. 21 The Levites have the care of the tent of meeting, and so they are responsible for any transgressions against it.
39. 22 Heb “they”; the referent (the Levites) has been supplied in the translation for clarity.
40. 23 The Hebrew text uses both the verb and the object from the same root to stress the point: They will not inherit an inheritance. The inheritance refers to land.
41. 24 The classification of the perfect tense here too could be the perfect of resolve, since this law is declaring what will be their portion—“I have decided to give.”
42. 25 In the Hebrew text the verb has no expressed subject (although the “Israelites” is certainly intended), and so it can be rendered as a passive.
43. 26 The verb in this clause is the Hiphil perfect with a vav (ו) consecutive; it has the same force as an imperfect of instruction: “when … then you are to offer up.”
44. 27 The verb is חָשַׁב (khashav, “to reckon; to count; to think”); it is the same verb used for “crediting” Abram with righteousness. Here the tithe of the priests will be counted as if it were a regular tithe.
45. 28 Heb “fullness,” meaning the fullness of the harvest, i.e., a full harvest.
46. 29 The construction is “every raised offering of the Lord”; the genitive here is probably to be taken as a genitive of worth—the offering that is due the Lord.
47. 30 Or “its hallowed thing.”
48. 31 The wording of this verse is confusing; it may be that it is addressed to the priests, telling them how to deal with the offerings of the Levites.
49. 32 The clause begins with the infinitive construct with its preposition and suffixed subject serving to indicate the temporal clause.
50. 33 The verb is the perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive; it functions as the equivalent of the imperfect of permission.
51. 34 The final clause could also be rendered “in order that you do not die.” The larger section can also be interpreted differently; rather than take it as a warning, it could be taken as an assurance that when they do all of this they will not be profaning it and so will not die (R. K. Harrison, Numbers [], 253).
52. 1 In the last chapter the needs of the priests and Levites were addressed. Now the concern is for the people. This provision from the sacrifice of the red heifer is a precaution to ensure that the purity of the tabernacle was not violated by pollutions of impurity or death. This chapter has two main parts, both dealing with ceremonial purity: the ritual of the red heifer (vv. 1–10), and the purification from uncleanness (vv. 11–22). For further study see J. Milgrom, “The Paradox of the Red Cow (Num 19),” 31 (1981): 62–72.
53. 2 Heb “speak to.”
54. 3 The line literally reads, “speak to the Israelites that [and] they bring [will bring].” The imperfect [or jussive] is subordinated to the imperative either as a purpose clause, or as the object of the instruction—speak to them that they bring, or tell them to bring.
55. 4 The color is designated as red, although the actual color would be a tanned red-brown color for the animal (see the usage in Isa 1:18 and Song 5:10). The reddish color suggested the blood of ritual purification; see J. Milgrom, “The Paradox of the Red Cow (Num 19),” 31 (1981): 62–72.
56. 5 Some modern commentators prefer “cow” to “heifer,” thinking that the latter came from the influence of the Greek. Young animals were usually prescribed for the ritual, especially here, and so “heifer” is the better translation. A bull could not be given for this purification ritual because that is what was given for the high priests or the community according to Lev 4.
57. 6 Heb “wherein there is no defect.”
58. 7 The clause is a little ambiguous. It reads “and he shall slaughter it before him.” It sounds as if someone else will kill the heifer in the priest’s presence. Since no one is named as the subject, it may be translated as a passive. Some commentators simply interpret that Eleazar was to kill the animal personally, but that is a little forced for “before him.” The Greek text gives a third person plural sense to the verb; the follows that reading.
59. 8 The verb is the perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive; it functions here as the equivalent of the imperfect of instruction.
60. 9 Seven is a number with religious significance; it is often required in sacrificial ritual for atonement or for purification.
61. 10 Again, the verb has no expressed subject, and so is given a passive translation.
62. 11 The imperfect tense is third masculine singular, and so again the verb is to be made passive.
63. 12 In addition to the general references, see R. K. Harrison, “The Biblical Problem of Hyssop,” 26 (1954): 218–24.
64. 13 There is no clear explanation available as to why these items were to be burned with the heifer. N. H. Snaith suggests that in accordance with Babylonian sacrifices they would have enhanced the rites with an aroma (Leviticus and Numbers [], 272). In Lev 14 the wood and the hyssop may have been bound together by the scarlet wool to make a sprinkling device. It may be that the symbolism is what is important here. Cedar wood, for example, is durable; it may have symbolized resistance to future corruption and defilement, an early acquired immunity perhaps (R. K. Harrison, Numbers [], 256).
65. 14 The sequence continues with the perfect tense and vav (ו) consecutive.
66. 15 Heb “his flesh.”
67. 16 This is the imperfect of permission.
68. 17 Here the text makes clear that he had at least one assistant.
69. 18 Heb “it will be.”
70. 19 The expression לְמֵי נִדָּה (léme niddah) is “for waters of impurity.” The genitive must designate the purpose of the waters—they are for cases of impurity, and so serve for cleansing or purifying, thus “water of purification.” The word “impurity” can also mean “abhorrent” because it refers to so many kinds of impurities. It is also called a purification offering; Milgrom notes that this is fitting because the sacrificial ritual involved transfers impurity from the purified to the purifier (pp. 62–72).
71. 20 The ashes were to be stored somewhere outside the camp to be used in a water portion for cleansing someone who was defiled. This is a ritual that was enacted in the wilderness; it is something of a restoring rite for people alienated from community.
72. 21 The form is the participle with the article functioning as a substantive: “the one who touches.”
73. 22 Heb “the dead.”
74. 23 The expression is full: לְכָל־נֶפֶשׁ אָדָם (lékhol-nefesh ’adam)—of any life of a man, i.e., of any person.
75. 24 The verb is a perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive; it follows only the participle used as the subject, but since the case is hypothetical and therefore future, this picks up the future time. The adjective “ceremonially” is supplied in the translation as a clarification.
76. 25 The verb is the Hitpael of חָטָא (khata’), a verb that normally means “to sin.” But the Piel idea in many places is “to cleanse; to purify.” This may be explained as a privative use (“to un-sin” someone, meaning cleanse) or denominative (“make a sin offering for someone”). It is surely connected to the purification offering, and so a sense of purify is what is wanted here.
77. 26 It is in passages like this that the view that being “cut off” meant the death penalty is the hardest to support. Would the Law prescribe death for someone who touches a corpse and fails to follow the ritual? Besides, the statement in this section that his uncleanness remains with him suggests that he still lives on.
78. 27 The word order gives the classification and then the condition: “a man, when he dies.…”