Leviticus 13-14

New English Translation

Footnotes

1. Leviticus 13:2 tn Heb “A man, if [or when] he has….” The term for “a man, human being” (אָדָם, ʾadam; 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.
2. Leviticus 13:2 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 (s^eʾet) as “swelling,” which has been retained here (see the explanation in J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 189). Some have argued that “deeper (עָמֹק, ʿamoq) 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.
3. Leviticus 13:2 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.
4. Leviticus 13:2 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.”
5. Leviticus 13:2 tn Heb “in the skin of his flesh” as opposed to the head or the beard (v. 29).
6. Leviticus 13:2 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 (tsaraʿat) 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”).
7. Leviticus 13:2 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.
8. Leviticus 13:3 tn Heb “and the priest shall see the infection.”
9. Leviticus 13:3 tn There is no “if” expressed, but the contrast between the priestly finding in this verse and the next verse clearly implies it.
10. Leviticus 13:3 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.
11. Leviticus 13:3 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.”
12. Leviticus 13:3 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).
13. Leviticus 13:3 tn Heb “he shall make him unclean.” The verb is the Piel of טָמֵא (tameʾ) “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).
14. Leviticus 13:4 tn Heb “and if.”
15. Leviticus 13:4 tn Heb “and deep is not its appearance from the skin”; cf. NAB “does not seem to have penetrated below the skin.”
16. Leviticus 13:4 tn Heb “and the priest will shut up the infection seven days.”
17. Leviticus 13:5 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV).
18. Leviticus 13:5 tn Heb “the infection has stood in his eyes”; ASV “if in his eyes the plague be at a stay.”
19. Leviticus 13:5 tn Although there is no expressed “and” at the beginning of this clause, there is in the corresponding clause of v. 6, so it should be assumed here as well.
20. Leviticus 13:5 tn Heb “a second seven days.”
21. Leviticus 13:6 tn That is, at the end of the second set of seven days referred to at the end of v. 5, a total of fourteen days after the first appearance before the priest.
22. Leviticus 13:6 tn Heb “and behold.”
23. Leviticus 13:6 tn Heb “he shall make him clean.” The verb is the Piel of טָהֵר (taher, “to be clean”). Here it is a so-called “declarative” Piel (i.e., “to declare clean”), but it also implies that the person is put into the category of being “clean” by the pronouncement itself (J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 176; cf. the corresponding opposite in v. 3 above).
24. Leviticus 13:6 tn On the term “scab” see the note on v. 2 above. Cf. NAB “it was merely eczema”; NRSV “only an eruption”; NLT “only a temporary rash.”
25. Leviticus 13:6 tn Heb “and he shall wash his clothes.”
26. Leviticus 13:7 tn Heb “And if spreading [infinitive absolute] it spreads [finite verb].” For the infinitive absolute used to highlight contrast rather than emphasis see GKC 343 §113.p.
27. Leviticus 13:8 tn The “it” is not expressed but is to be understood. It refers to the “infection” (cf. the note on v. 2 above).
28. Leviticus 13:8 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV).
29. Leviticus 13:8 tn This is the declarative Piel of the verb טָמֵא (tameʾ, cf. the note on v. 3 above).
30. Leviticus 13:9 tn Heb “When there is an infection of disease in a man.” The term for “a man; a human being” (אָדָם, ʾadam; see the note on Lev 1:2 and cf. v. 2 above) refers to any person among “mankind,” male or female. For the rendering “diseased infection” see the note on v. 2 above.
31. Leviticus 13:10 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).
32. Leviticus 13:10 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV).
33. Leviticus 13:10 tn Heb “and rawness [i.e., something living] of living flesh is in the swelling”; KJV, NASB, NRSV “quick raw flesh.”
34. Leviticus 13:11 tn The term rendered here “chronic” is a Niphal participle meaning “grown old” (HALOT 448 s.v. II ישׁן nif.2). The idea is that this is an old enduring skin disease that keeps on developing or recurring.
35. Leviticus 13:11 tn Heb “in the skin of his flesh” as opposed to the head or the beard (v. 29; cf. v. 2 above).
36. Leviticus 13:11 tn This is the declarative Piel of the verb טָמֵא (tameʾ, cf. the note on v. 3 above).
37. Leviticus 13:11 tn Heb “he”; the referent (the priest) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
38. Leviticus 13:11 sn Instead of just the normal quarantine isolation, this condition calls for the more drastic and enduring response stated in Lev 13:45-46. Raw flesh, of course, sometimes oozes blood to one degree or another, and blood flows are by nature impure (see, e.g., Lev 12 and 15; cf. J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 191).
39. Leviticus 13:12 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.
40. Leviticus 13:12 tn Heb “all the skin of the infection,” but see v. 4 above.
41. Leviticus 13:12 tn Heb “to all the appearance of the eyes of the priest.”
42. Leviticus 13:13 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).
43. Leviticus 13:13 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV, NASB).
44. Leviticus 13:13 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).
45. Leviticus 13:13 tn Heb “all of him has turned white, and he is clean.”
46. Leviticus 13:14 tn Heb “and in the day of there appears in it living flesh.” Some English versions render this as “open sores” (cf. NCV, TEV, NLT).
47. Leviticus 13:15 tn Heb “and the priest shall see the living flesh.”
48. Leviticus 13:15 tn This is the declarative Piel of the verb טָמֵא (tameʾ; cf. the note on v. 3 above).
49. Leviticus 13:16 tn Heb “Or if/when.”
50. Leviticus 13:16 tn Heb “the living flesh returns and is turned/changed to white.” The Hebrew verb “returns” is שׁוּב (shuv), which often functions adverbially when combined with a second verb as it is here (cf. “and is turned”) and, in such cases, is usually rendered “again” (see, e.g., GKC 386-87 §120.g). Another suggestion is that here שׁוּב means “to recede” (cf., e.g., 2 Kgs 20:9), so one could translate “the raw flesh recedes and turns white.” This would mean that the new “white” skin “has grown over” the raw flesh (B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 79).
51. Leviticus 13:17 tn Heb “and the priest shall see it.”
52. Leviticus 13:17 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV, NASB).
53. Leviticus 13:17 tn Heb “the priest 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).
54. Leviticus 13:18 tc Heb (MT) reads, “And flesh if/when there is in it, in its skin, a boil.” Smr has only “in it,” not “in its skin,” and a few medieval Hebrew mss as well as the LXX, Syriac, and Vulgate have only “in its skin” (cf. v. 24 below), not “in it.” It does not effect the meaning of the verse, but one is tempted to suggest that “in it” (בוֹ, vo) was added in error as a partial dittography from the beginning of “in its skin” (בְעֹרוֹ, v^eʿoro).
55. Leviticus 13:19 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.
56. Leviticus 13:20 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).
57. Leviticus 13:20 tn Heb “and behold.”
58. Leviticus 13:20 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, ʿamoq), and see the note on “swelling” in v. 1 above (cf. J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 192; note that, contrary to the MT, one Hebrew ms (Cairo Geniza) 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 (s^eʾet) 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.
59. Leviticus 13:20 tn The declarative Piel of the verb טָמֵא (tameʾ, cf. the note on v. 3 above).
60. Leviticus 13:20 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.
61. Leviticus 13:21 tn Heb “and if.”
62. Leviticus 13:21 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV, NASB).
63. Leviticus 13:21 tn Heb “and the priest will shut him up seven days.”
64. Leviticus 13:22 tn Heb “and if.”
65. Leviticus 13:22 tn Heb “is indeed spreading.”
66. Leviticus 13:22 tn This is the declarative Piel of the verb טָמֵא (tameʾ, cf. the note on v. 3 above).
67. Leviticus 13:23 tn Heb “and if under it the bright spot stands, it has not spread.”
68. Leviticus 13:23 tn This is the declarative Piel of the verb טָהֵר (taher, cf. the note on v. 6 above).
69. Leviticus 13:24 tn Heb “Or a body, if there is in its skin a burn of fire.”
70. Leviticus 13:25 tn Heb “and the priest shall see it.”
71. Leviticus 13:25 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV).
72. Leviticus 13:25 tn Heb “and its appearance is deep ‘from’ [comparative מִן (min) meaning ‘deeper than’] the skin.”
73. Leviticus 13:25 tn Heb “it is a disease. In the burn it has broken out.”
74. Leviticus 13:25 tn This is the declarative Piel of the verb טָמֵא (tameʾ; cf. the note on v. 3 above).
75. Leviticus 13:25 tn For the rendering “diseased infection” see the note on v. 2 above.
76. Leviticus 13:26 tn Heb “and if.”
77. Leviticus 13:26 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV); NASB “and indeed.”
78. Leviticus 13:26 tn Heb “and low it is not ‘from’ (comparative מִן, min, “lower than”) the skin.” See the note on v. 20 above. Cf. TEV “not deeper than the surrounding skin.”
79. Leviticus 13:26 tn Heb “and the priest will shut him up seven days.”
80. Leviticus 13:27 tn Heb “is indeed spreading.”
81. Leviticus 13:27 tn For the rendering “diseased infection” see the note on v. 2 above.
82. Leviticus 13:28 tn Heb “and if under it the bright spot stands, it has not spread in the skin.”
83. Leviticus 13:28 tn This is the declarative Piel of the verb טָהֵר (taher; cf. the note on v. 6 above).
84. Leviticus 13:29 tn Heb “And a man or a woman if there is in him an infection in head or in beard.” sn The shift here is from diseases that are on the (relatively) bare skin of the body to the scalp area of the male or female head or the bearded area of the male face.
85. Leviticus 13:30 tn Heb “and the priest shall see the infection.”
86. Leviticus 13:30 tn Heb “and behold.”
87. Leviticus 13:30 tn Heb “its appearance is deep ‘from’ (comparative מִן, min, “deeper than”) the skin.”
88. Leviticus 13:30 tn This is the declarative Piel of the verb טָמֵא (tameʾ; cf. the note on v. 3 above).
89. Leviticus 13:30 tn The exact identification of this disease is unknown. Cf. KJV “dry scall”; NASB “a scale”; NIV, NCV, NRSV “an itch”; NLT “a contagious skin disease.” For a discussion of “scall” disease in the hair, which is a crusty scabby disease of the skin under the hair that also affects the hair itself, see J. E. Hartley, Leviticus (WBC), 192-93, and J. Milgrom, Leviticus (AB), 1:793-94. The Hebrew word rendered “scall” (נֶתֶק, neteq) is related to a verb meaning “to tear; to tear out; to tear apart.” It may derive from the scratching and/or the tearing out of the hair or the scales of the skin in response to the itching sensation caused by the disease.
90. Leviticus 13:30 tn Heb “It is scall. It is the disease of the head or the beard.”
91. Leviticus 13:31 tn Heb “and behold there is not its appearance deep ‘from’ (comparative מִן, min, meaning “deeper than”) the skin.”
92. Leviticus 13:31 tn Heb “and the priest will shut up the infection of the scall seven days.”
93. Leviticus 13:32 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV).
94. Leviticus 13:32 tn Heb “and the appearance of the scall is not deep ‘from’ (comparative מִן, min, meaning “deeper than”) the skin.”
95. Leviticus 13:33 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).
96. Leviticus 13:33 tn Heb “but the scall shall he not shave” (so KJV, ASV); NIV “except for the diseased area.”
97. Leviticus 13:33 tn Heb “and the priest will shut up the scall a second seven days.”
98. Leviticus 13:34 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV).
99. Leviticus 13:34 tn Heb “and its appearance is not deep ‘from’ (comparative מִן, min, meaning “deeper than”) the skin.”
100. Leviticus 13:34 tn This is the declarative Piel of the verb טָהֵר (taher, cf. the note on v. 6 above).
101. Leviticus 13:35 tn Heb “And if spreading (infinitive absolute) it spreads further (finite verb).” For the infinitive absolute used to highlight contrast rather than emphasis see GKC 343 §113.p.
102. Leviticus 13:36 tn Heb “and behold.”
103. Leviticus 13:36 tn Heb “the priest shall not search to the reddish yellow hair.”
104. Leviticus 13:36 tn Heb “he”; the referent (the affected person) is specified in the translation for clarity (likewise in the following verse).
105. Leviticus 13:37 tn Heb “and if in his eyes the infection has stood.”
106. Leviticus 13:37 tn This is the declarative Piel of the verb טָהֵר (taher, cf. the note on v. 6 above).
107. Leviticus 13:39 tn Heb “and the priest shall see.”
108. Leviticus 13:39 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV).
109. Leviticus 13:39 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.
110. Leviticus 13:40 tn Heb “And a man, when his head is rubbed bare, he is bald-headed.” The translation offered here, referring to the back of the head (i.e., the area from the top of the head sloping backwards), is based on the contrast between this condition and that of the following verse. See also B. A. Levine, Leviticus (JPSTC), 82.
111. Leviticus 13:41 tn Heb “And if from the front edge of his face, his head is rubbed bare.” See the note on v. 40 above.
112. Leviticus 13:41 tn The rendering “balding in front” corresponds to the location of the bareness at the beginning of the verse.
113. Leviticus 13:43 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, negaʿ) in v. 42 (J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 172, 177). Smr has “her/it,” which would probably refer to “disease” (צָרַעַת, tsaraʿat) 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).
114. Leviticus 13:43 tn Heb “and behold.”
115. Leviticus 13:43 tn Heb “like appearance of disease of skin of flesh.”
116. Leviticus 13:44 tn Or perhaps translate, “His infection [is] on his head,” as a separate independent sentence (cf. KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV). There is no causal expression in the Hebrew text connecting these two clauses, but the logical relationship between them seems to be causal.
117. Leviticus 13:45 tn Heb “And the diseased one who in him is the infection.”
118. Leviticus 13:45 tn Heb “and his head shall be unbound, and he shall cover on [his] mustache.” Tearing one’s clothing, allowing the hair to hang loose rather than bound up in a turban, and covering the mustache on the upper lip are all ways of expressing shame, grief, or distress (cf., e.g., Lev 10:6 and Micah 3:7).
119. Leviticus 13:46 tn Heb “All the days which the infection is in him.”
120. Leviticus 13:47 tn Heb “And the garment, if there is in it a mark of disease.”
121. Leviticus 13:47 tn Heb “in a wool garment or in a linen garment.”
122. Leviticus 13:48 sn The warp (vertical) and woof (horizontal) thread may be two different sets of thread not yet woven together, or they may refer to two different kinds of thread already woven, in which case one might have the disease in it while the other does not. See the explanation in J. Milgrom, Leviticus (AB), 1:809-10.
123. Leviticus 13:48 tn Heb “in any handiwork of skin” (cf. KJV, ASV, NRSV); most other modern English versions have “leather.”
124. Leviticus 13:49 tn Heb “and the infection is.” This clause is conditional in force, and is translated as such by almost all English versions.
125. Leviticus 13:50 tn Heb “And the priest shall see the infection and he shall shut up the infection seven days.”
126. Leviticus 13:51 tn Heb “to all which the leather was made into a handiwork.”
127. Leviticus 13:53 tn Heb “And if the priest sees and behold”; NASB “and indeed.”
128. Leviticus 13:54 tn Heb “a second seven days.”
129. Leviticus 13:55 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV).
130. Leviticus 13:55 tn Heb “the infection has not changed its eye.” Smr has “its/his eyes,” as in vv. 5 and 37, but here it refers to the appearance of the article of cloth or leather, unlike vv. 5 and 37 where there is a preposition attached and it refers to the eyes of the priest.
131. Leviticus 13:55 tn The terms “back side” and “front side” are the same as those used in v. 42 for the “back or front bald area” of a man’s head. The exact meaning of these terms when applied to articles of cloth or leather is uncertain. It could refer, for example, to the inside versus the outside of a garment, or the back versus the front side of an article of cloth or leather. See J. Milgrom, Leviticus (AB), 1:814, for various possibilities.
132. Leviticus 13:56 tn Heb “And if the priest saw and behold….”
133. Leviticus 13:56 tn Heb “and he shall tear it from.”
134. Leviticus 13:57 tn Heb “And if”; NIV, NCV “But if”; NAB “If, however.”
135. Leviticus 13:58 tn Heb “and the infection turns aside from them.”
136. Leviticus 13:59 sn The Hebrew term translated “law” (תּוֹרָה, torah) introduces here a summary or colophon for all of Lev 13. Similar summaries are found in Lev 7:37-38; 11:46-47; 14:54-57; and 15:32-33.
137. Leviticus 13:59 tn These are declarative Piel forms of the verbs טָהֵר (taher) and טָמֵא (tameʾ) respectively (cf. the notes on vv. 3 and 6 above).
138. Leviticus 14:2 tn Heb “and.” Here KJV, ASV use a semicolon; NASB begins a new sentence with “Now.”
139. Leviticus 14:2 tn The alternative rendering, “when it is reported to the priest” may be better in light of the fact that the priest had to go outside the camp. Since he or she had been declared “unclean” by a priest (Lev 13:3) and was, therefore, required to remain outside the camp (13:46), the formerly diseased person could not reenter the camp until he or she had been declared “clean” by a priest (cf. Lev 13:6 for “declaring clean”). See especially J. Milgrom, Leviticus (AB), 1:831, who supports this rendering both here and in Lev 13:2 and 9. B. A. Levine, however, prefers the rendering in the text (Leviticus [JPSTC], 76 and 85). It is the most natural meaning of the verb (i.e., “to be brought” from בּוֹא [boʾ, “to come”] in the Hophal stem, which means “to be brought” in all other occurrences in Leviticus other than 13:2, 9, and 14:2; see only 6:30; 10:18; 11:32; and 16:27), it suits the context well in 13:2, and the rendering “to be brought” is supported by 13:7b, “he shall show himself to the priest a second time.” Although it is true that the priest needed to go outside the camp to examine such a person, the person still needed to “be brought” to the priest there. The translation of vv. 2-3 employed here suggests that v. 2 introduces the proceeding and then v. 3 goes on to describe the specific details of the examination and purification.
140. Leviticus 14:3 tn Heb “and he shall be brought to the priest and the priest shall go out to from outside to the camp and the priest shall see [it].” The understood “it” refers to the skin infection itself (see the note on 13:3 above). The referent has been specified in the translation for clarity.
141. Leviticus 14:3 tn Heb “And behold, the diseased infection has been healed from the diseased person.” The expression “diseased infection” has been translated as simply “infection” to avoid redundancy here in terms of English style.
142. Leviticus 14:4 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.
143. Leviticus 14:4 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.
144. Leviticus 14:4 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 (v^etsivvah) “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.
145. Leviticus 14:4 tn Heb “the one cleansing himself” (i.e., Hitpael participle of טָהֵר, taher, “to be clean”).
146. Leviticus 14:5 tn Heb “And the priest shall command and he shall slaughter.” See the note on “be taken up” (v. 4).
147. Leviticus 14:5 tn Heb “into a vessel of clay over living water.” The expression “living [i.e., ‘fresh’] water” (cf. Lev 14:50; 15:13; Num 19:17) refers to water that flows. It includes such water sources as artesian wells (Gen 26:19; Song of Songs 4:15), springs (Jer 2:13, as opposed to cisterns; cf. 17:13), and flowing streams (Zech 14:8). In other words, this is water that has not stood stagnant as, for example, in a sealed-off cistern. sn Although there are those who argue that the water and the blood rites are separate (e.g., E. S. Gerstenberger, Leviticus [OTL], 175-76), it is usually agreed that v. 5b refers to the slaughtering of the bird in such a way that its blood runs into the bowl, which contained fresh water (see, e.g., N. H. Snaith, Leviticus and Numbers [NCBC], 74; G. J. Wenham, Leviticus [NICOT], 208; J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:836-38; cf. esp. Lev 14:51b, “and dip them in the blood of the slaughtered bird and in the fresh water”). This mixture of blood and water was then to be sprinkled on the person being cleansed from the disease.
148. Leviticus 14:6 tc Heb “the live bird he [i.e., the priest] shall take it.” Although the MT has no ו (vav, “and”) at the beginning of this clause, a few medieval Hebrew mss and Smr have one and the LXX, Syriac, and Vulgate translate as if it is there. The “but” in the present translation reflects this text critical background, the object-first word order in the clause with the resumptive pronoun at the end, and the obvious contrast between the slaughtered bird in v. 5 and the live bird in v. 6.
149. Leviticus 14:7 tn Heb “the one cleansing himself” (i.e., Hitpael participle of טָהֵר [taher, “to be clean”]).
150. Leviticus 14:7 tn Heb “and he shall make him clean.” The verb is the Piel of טָהֵר (taher, “to be clean”), here used as a so-called “declarative” Piel (i.e., “to declare clean”; cf. 13:6, etc.).
151. Leviticus 14:7 sn The reddish color of cedar wood and the crimson colored fabric called for in v. 4 (see the note there, esp. the association with the color of blood) as well as the priestly commands to bring “two live” birds (v. 4a), to slaughter one of them “over fresh water” (literally “living water,” v. 5b), and the subsequent ritual with the (second) “live” bird (vv. 6-7) combine to communicate the concept of “life” and “being alive” in this passage. This contrasts with the fear of death associated with the serious skin diseases in view here (see, e.g., Aaron’s description of Miriam’s skin disease in Num 12:12, “Do not let her be like the dead one when it goes out from its mother’s womb and its flesh half eaten away”). Since the slaughtered bird here is not sacrificed at the altar and is not designated as an expiatory “sin offering,” this ritual procedure probably symbolizes the renewed life of the diseased person and displays it publicly for all to see. It is preparatory to the expiatory rituals that will follow (vv. 10-20, esp. vv. 18-20), but is not itself expiatory. Thus, although there are important similarities between the bird ritual here, the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement (Lev 16:20-22), and the red heifer for cleansing from corpse contamination (Num 19), this bird ritual is different in that the latter two constitute “sin offerings” (Lev 16:5, 8-10; Num 19:9, 17). Neither of the birds in Lev 14:4-7 is designated or treated as a “sin offering.” Nevertheless, the very nature of the live bird ritual itself and its obvious similarity to the scapegoat ritual suggests that the patient’s disease has been removed far away so that he or she is free from its effects both personally and communally.
152. Leviticus 14:8 tn Heb “the one cleansing himself” (i.e., Hitpael participle of טָהֵר [taher, “to be clean”]).
153. Leviticus 14:8 tn Heb “and he shall be clean” (so ASV). The end result of the ritual procedures in vv. 4-7 and the washing and shaving in v. 8a is that the formerly diseased person has now officially become clean in the sense that he can reenter the community (see v. 8b; contrast living outside the community as an unclean diseased person, Lev 13:46). There are, however, further cleansing rituals and pronouncements for him to undergo in the tabernacle as outlined in vv. 10-20 (see Qal “be[come] clean” in vv. 9 and 20, Piel “pronounce clean” in v. 11, and Hitpael “the one being cleansed” in vv. 11, 14, 17, 18, and 19). Obviously, in order to enter the tabernacle he must already “be clean” in the sense of having access to the community.
154. Leviticus 14:9 tn Heb “And it shall be on the seventh day.”
155. Leviticus 14:9 tn Heb “and he shall be clean” (see the note on v. 8).
156. Leviticus 14:10 tn The subject “he” probably refers to the formerly diseased person in this case (see the notes on Lev 1:5a, 6a, and 9a).
157. Leviticus 14:10 tn This term is often rendered “fine flour,” but it refers specifically to wheat as opposed to barley (B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 10) and, although the translation “flour” is used here, it may indicate “grits” rather than finely ground flour (J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:179; see the note on Lev 2:1). The unit of measure is most certainly an “ephah” even though it is not stated explicitly (see, e.g., Num 28:5; cf. 15:4, 6, 8), and three-tenths of an ephah would amount to about a gallon, or perhaps one-third of a bushel (J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 196; Milgrom, 845). Since the normal amount of flour for a lamb is one-tenth of an ephah (Num 28:4-5; cf. 15:4), three-tenths is about right for the three lambs offered in Lev 14:10-20.
158. Leviticus 14:10 tn A “log” (לֹג, log) of oil is about one-sixth of a liter, or one-third of a pint, or two-thirds of a cup.
159. Leviticus 14:11 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, ʿamad) 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).
160. Leviticus 14:12 tn Heb “And the priest shall take the one lamb.”
161. Leviticus 14:12 tn See the note on Lev 5:15 above. The primary purpose of the “guilt offering” (אָשָׁם, ʾasham) 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).
162. Leviticus 14:12 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.).
163. Leviticus 14:13 tn Heb “And he shall slaughter.”
164. Leviticus 14:13 tn Heb “in the place which.”
165. Leviticus 14:13 sn See the note on Lev 4:3 regarding the term “sin offering.”
166. Leviticus 14:13 sn See the note on Lev 1:3 regarding the “burnt offering.”
167. Leviticus 14:13 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).
168. Leviticus 14:13 tn Heb “the guilt offering, it [is] to the Lord.” Regarding the “guilt offering,” see the note on Lev 5:15.
169. Leviticus 14:14 tn Heb “and the priest shall put [literally ‘give’] on the lobe of the ear of the one being cleansed, the right one.”
170. Leviticus 14:14 tn The term for “big toe” (בֹּהֶן, bohen) is the same as that for “thumb.” It refers to the larger appendage on either the hand or the foot.
171. Leviticus 14:15 tn Heb “And the priest…shall pour on the left hand of the priest.” As the Rabbis observe, the repetition of “priest” as the expressed subject of both verbs in this verse may suggest that two priests were involved in this ritual (see m. Nega’im 14:8, referred to by J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:852), but the seemingly unnecessary repetition of “priest” in several verses throughout the chapter argues against this (see esp. vv. 3, 14, 18, 20, 24, and 26). Moreover, in this case, “priest” may be repeated to avoid confusing the priest’s hand with that of the one being cleansed (cf. v. 14).
172. Leviticus 14:16 tn Heb “his right finger from the oil.”
173. Leviticus 14:17 tn Heb “on his hand.”
174. Leviticus 14:18 tn Heb “and the remainder in the oil.”
175. Leviticus 14:19 tn Heb “do [or “make”] the sin offering.”
176. Leviticus 14:19 tn Heb “And after[ward] he [i.e., the offerer] shall slaughter.” The LXX adds “the priest” as the subject of the verb (as do several English versions, e.g., NAB, NIV, NCV, NLT), but the offerer is normally the one who does the actually slaughtering of the sacrificial animal (cf. the notes on Lev 1:5a, 6a, and 9a).
177. Leviticus 14:20 tn Heb “cause to go up.”
178. Leviticus 14:21 tn Heb “and his hand does not reach”; NAB, NRSV “and cannot afford so much (afford these NIV).”
179. Leviticus 14:21 tn See the notes on v. 10 above.
180. Leviticus 14:22 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).
181. Leviticus 14:22 tn Heb “which his hand reaches”; NRSV “such as (which NIV) he can afford.”
182. Leviticus 14:22 tn Heb “and one shall be a sin offering and the one a burnt offering.” The versions struggle with whether or not “one” should or should not have the definite article in its two occurrences in this verse (KJV, ASV, NAB, NASB all have the English definite article with both). The MT has the first without and the second with the article.
183. Leviticus 14:23 tn Heb “to the doorway of”; KJV, ASV “unto the door of.”
184. Leviticus 14:24 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.
185. Leviticus 14:25 tn Heb “and the priest shall put [literally ‘give’] on the lobe of the ear of the one being cleansed, the right one.”
186. Leviticus 14:25 tn The term for “big toe” (בֹּהֶן, bohen) is the same as that for “thumb.” It refers to the larger appendage on either the hand or the foot.
187. Leviticus 14:26 tn Heb “And from the oil the priest shall pour out on the left hand of the priest.” Regarding the repetition of “priest” in this verse see the note on v. 15 above.
188. Leviticus 14:27 tn Heb “and the priest shall sprinkle with his right finger from the oil which is on his left hand.”
189. Leviticus 14:28 tn Heb “on his hand.”
190. Leviticus 14:29 tn Heb “on the hand.”
191. Leviticus 14:29 tn Heb “give.”
192. Leviticus 14:30 tn Heb “the one from the turtledoves.”
193. Leviticus 14:30 tc Heb “from which his hand reaches.” The repetition of virtually the same expression at the beginning of v. 31 in the MT is probably due to dittography (cf. the LXX and Syriac). However, the MT may be retained if it is understood as “one of the turtledoves or young pigeons that are within his means—whichever he can afford” (see J. Milgrom’s translation in Leviticus [AB], 1:828, contra his commentary, 862; cf. REB).
194. Leviticus 14:31 tn Heb “and the one a burnt offering on the grain offering.”
195. Leviticus 14:32 tn Heb “This is the law of who in him [is] a diseased infection.”
196. Leviticus 14:32 tn Heb “who his hand does not reach in his purification”; NASB “whose means are limited for his cleansing”; NIV “who cannot afford the regular offerings for his cleansing.”
197. Leviticus 14:34 tn Heb “which I am giving” (so NAB, NIV).
198. Leviticus 14:34 tn Heb “give.”
199. Leviticus 14:34 tn Heb “in the house of the land of your possession” (KJV and ASV both similar).
200. Leviticus 14:35 tn Heb “who to him the house.”
201. Leviticus 14:36 tn Heb “And the priest shall command and they shall clear the house.” The second verb (“and they shall clear”) states the thrust of the priest’s command, which suggests the translation “that they clear” (cf. also vv. 4a and 5a above), and for the impersonal passive rendering of the active verb (“that the house be cleared”) see the note on v. 4 above.
202. Leviticus 14:36 tn Heb “to see the infection”; KJV “to see the plague”; NASB “to look at the mark (mildew NCV).”
203. Leviticus 14:36 tn Heb “all which [is] in the house.”
204. Leviticus 14:36 sn Once the priest pronounced the house “unclean” everything in it was also officially unclean. Therefore, if they emptied the house of its furniture, etc. before the official pronouncement by the priest those possessions would thereby remain officially “clean” and avoid destruction or purification procedures.
205. Leviticus 14:36 tn Heb “and after thus.”
206. Leviticus 14:37 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV).
207. Leviticus 14:37 tn For “yellowish green and reddish” see Lev 13:49. The Hebrew term translated “eruptions” occurs only here and its meaning is uncertain. For a detailed summary of the issues and views see J. Milgrom, Leviticus (AB), 1:870. The suggestions include, among others: (1) “depressions” from Hebrew שָׁקַע (shaqaʿ, “sink”) or קָעַר (qaʾar) as the root of the Hebrew term for “bowl” (LXX, Targums, NAB, NASB, NIV; see also B. A. Levine, Leviticus [JPSTC], 90), (2) “streaks” (ASV, NJPS), (3) and “eruptions” as a loan-word from Egyptian sqr r rwtj (“eruption; rash”); cf. Milgrom, 870; J. E. Hartley, Leviticus (WBC), 198-99. The latter view is taken here.
208. Leviticus 14:37 tn The Hebrew term קִיר (qir, “wall”) refers to the surface of the wall in this case, which normally consisted of a coating of plaster made of limestone and sand (see HALOT 1099 s.v. קִיר 1.a; J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:871; J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 199).
209. Leviticus 14:38 tn Heb “and he shall shut up the house seven days.”
210. Leviticus 14:39 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV); NASB “If the mark has indeed spread.”
211. Leviticus 14:40 tn Heb “and the priest shall command and they shall pull out the stones which in them is the infection, and they shall cast them.” The second and third verbs (“they shall pull out” and “they shall throw”) state the thrust of the priest’s command, which suggests the translation “that they pull out…and throw” (cf. also vv. 4a, 5a, and 36a above), and for the impersonal passive rendering of the active verb (“be pulled and thrown”) see the note on v. 4 above.
212. Leviticus 14:41 tc The MT reads “he shall scrape” or possibly “he shall have [it] scraped.” The Sam. Pentateuch, LXX, Syriac, and Targums read the plural.
213. Leviticus 14:41 tn Heb “from house all around.”
214. Leviticus 14:41 tn Heb “dust” (so KJV) or “rubble”; NIV “the material”; NLT “the scrapings.”
215. Leviticus 14:41 tc The MT reads הִקְצוּ (hiqtsu, possibly “they caused to be cut off”) seemingly from קָצָה, (qatsah “to cut off”; HALOT 1120 s.v. קָצָה 1). The original Greek does not have this clause. The Sam. Pentateuch has הקיצו (with uncertain meaning). The BHS editors and HALOT 1123-24 s.v. I קצע hif.a suggest emending the verb to הִקְצִעוּ (hiqtsiʿu, adding the ע (ʿayin) to match the same verb at the beginning of this verse; cf. some Greek mss, Syriac, and the Targums). The emendation seems reasonable and is accepted by many commentators, but the root קָצָה (qatsah, “to cut off”) does occur in the Bible (2 Kgs 10:32; Hab 2:10) and in postbiblical Hebrew (J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 179, notes 41c and 43d; J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:873; cf. also קָצַץ, qatsats, “to cut off”).
216. Leviticus 14:42 tn Heb “and bring into under the stones.”
217. Leviticus 14:43 tn Heb “after he has pulled out the stones, and after scraping (variant form of the Hiphil infinitive construct, GKC 531) the house, and after being replastered (Niphal infinitive construct).”
218. Leviticus 14:44 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV); NASB “If he sees that the mark has indeed spread.”
219. Leviticus 14:45 tn Smr, LXX, Syriac, and Tg. Ps.-J. have the plural verb, perhaps suggesting a passive translation, “The house…shall be torn down” (cf. NAB, NIV, TEV, NLT, and see the note on v. 4b above).
220. Leviticus 14:45 tn Once again, Smr, LXX, and Syriac have the plural verb, perhaps to be rendered passive, “shall be brought.”
221. Leviticus 14:46 tn Heb “the one who comes into.”
222. Leviticus 14:46 tn Heb “he,” referring to the priest (see v. 38). The referent has been specified in the translation for clarity.
223. Leviticus 14:48 tn Heb “And if the priest entering [infinitive absolute] enters [finite verb].” For the infinitive absolute used to highlight contrast rather than emphasis see GKC 343 §113.p.
224. Leviticus 14:48 tn Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV); NASB “and the mark has not indeed spread.”
225. Leviticus 14:49 tn The pronoun “he” refers to the priest mentioned in the previous verse.
226. Leviticus 14:49 tn Regarding these ritual materials, see the note on v. 4 above.
227. Leviticus 14:49 tn Regarding the Piel of חָטָא (khataʾ, cf. v. 52) meaning to “purify” or “decontaminate,” see the notes on Lev 8:15 and 9:15. sn In Lev 8:15, for example, the “sin offering” is used to “purify” the burnt offering altar. As argued above (see the note on v. 7 above), these ritual materials and the procedures performed with them do not constitute a “sin offering” (contrast vv. 19 and 31 above). In fact, no sin offering was required for the purification of a house.
228. Leviticus 14:50 tn See the note on v. 5 above.
229. Leviticus 14:53 tn Heb “to from outside to the city.”
230. Leviticus 14:54 tn Heb “and for the scall”; NASB “a scale”; NIV “any infectious skin disease.” Cf. Lev 13:29-37.
231. Leviticus 14:55 sn Cf. Lev 13:47-59.
232. Leviticus 14:55 sn Cf. Lev 14:33-53.
233. Leviticus 14:56 sn Cf. Lev 13:9-28, 43.
234. Leviticus 14:56 sn Cf. Lev 13:2.
235. Leviticus 14:56 sn Cf. Lev 13:4, 18-28, 38-39. For explanations of all these terms for disease in Lev 14:56 see 13:2.
236. Leviticus 14:57 tn Heb “to teach in the day of the unclean and in the day of the clean.”
237. Leviticus 14:57 tn Heb “This is the law of the disease.” Some English versions specify this as “skin disease” (e.g., NIV, NLT), but then have to add “and mildew” (NIV) or “and infectious mildew” (NLT) because a house would not be infected with a skin disease.sn For an explanation of the term “disease” see Lev 13:2.