You shall count: literally “you shall count for yourself.” The two pronouns are singular in form but should be understood collectively as referring to the people of Israel as a whole. In some languages the verb here will be better translated “wait,” as in the similar passage in 15.13.

Seven weeks of years: the word translated weeks is actually translated elsewhere as “sabbaths” and has the root meaning “seven” (see 16.31). So the phrases seven weeks of years (used twice) and “seven times seven years” have exactly the same meaning and can be translated once, if the repetition is stylistically unacceptable in the receptor language.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Verses 1-2 introduce chapters 1–3, or perhaps the entire section on offerings and sacrifices, chapters 1–7.

LORD: in order to translate the proper name of God from the Hebrew, Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation have adopted the solution chosen by numerous other English translations (New English Bible, New American Bible, New International Version [New International Version], New American Standard Bible [New American Standard Bible], and even King James Version [King James Version] in 1611). The word “LORD” with all capital letters is used when the Hebrew has YHWH, but “Lord” is used when the original has Adonay, meaning “Master,” “Lord,” or “Sovereign.” In this verse the name of God is written with four consonants, YHWH. Its pronunciation in ancient times is uncertain, but was probably Yahweh or Yahwoh. Many centuries before the Christian era, this name was considered to have such special power that the Jews avoided pronouncing it (in technical terms, this is referred to as a “positive taboo”; see Theory and Practice of Translation, pages 82-83). Instead, they pronounced the Hebrew title meaning “Lord.”

Some translations simply transcribe the Hebrew name YHWH as “Yahweh” (New Jerusalem Bible), and others use the artificial form “Jehovah” (King James Version in a few cases and American Standard Version consistently). The form “Jehovah” is based on a pronunciation that was first introduced in 1520 by Galatinus and was not the pronunciation of the ancient Jews. The transliteration of this form should therefore be avoided. There is, however, some merit in transliterating YHWH, since it is a proper noun. Other translators have made an effort to “translate” the supposed meaning of this name by “the Eternal” (Moffatt [Moffatt] and several French versions); but such renderings only replace a personal name by an impersonal abstraction. In some cultures there may be a personal name for God distinct from the generic term for “god” but quite similar in usage to the biblical term used here. In such cases it may be wise to adopt this name as the equivalent for YHWH. This possibility has often been overlooked in past translations of the Bible. But even though the commonly used name in the receptor language is not an exact equivalent of YHWH, it may be wise to use it in translation and give a full explanation of the biblical name in the glossary.

In some languages today it is also legitimate to add, if necessary, a possessive form such as “my LORD” or “their LORD” (according to the context), although this was never done with the personal name in Hebrew. For a more complete discussion of the divine name and other terms for God, see the April 1984 issue of The Bible Translator.

Called … spoke … saying …: these three verbs are very similar in meaning. The Hebrew word translated saying in Revised Standard Version often serves in Hebrew simply to mark the beginning of a quotation. So the use of quotation marks in the receptor language may adequately represent this word. But many languages have a similar word that can be used to introduce a quotation. Note that Good News Translation has reduced this to two verbal expressions: “called” and “gave … rules.” In Hebrew the subject of the verb called is not made explicit. It is only in the second clause, “the LORD spoke,” that the LORD is clearly given as the subject. Although the first verb does not have an expressed subject, it is obvious that it could only be the LORD himself. Most languages will probably require that the subject be stated with the first verb, as in the English versions. The meaning of the verb “call” is probably to “summon” or “call for attention.”

From: in some languages it may be necessary to indicate the position of Moses relative to the tent at the time when the LORD called him. Since this verse is connected with the end of the book of Exodus, where the cloud covered the Tent of the LORD’s presence so that Moses could not go in (Exo 40.35), it is most probable that he was standing at or near the entrance when he was called, and that the voice of the LORD came from within the Tent.

The tent of meeting: a literal translation like that of Revised Standard Version does not adequately convey the full meaning of this expression. It is the portable sanctuary of the people of Israel, described in Exodus 25–30, and in which God meets with Moses to communicate to him the divine will (see Exo 33.7-11). This tent was considered a very special place where God revealed himself to his people (Exo 29.42-46). The Good News Translation rendering, “Tent of the LORD’s presence,” highlights these facts and provides a better model for most languages. In some languages one may say “the tent where God lives” (although one must not give the impression that he is restricted to the tent), or “the tent where the LORD is,” or “the place where the LORD appears.”

In some languages the word tent itself presents problems. It has to be translated “a temporary (or, portable) shelter” or “a house made of skins.”

Saying: note that Good News Translation supplies implicit information by translating here “gave him the following rules.” This may be a good model to follow in the receptor language, although the word “rules” may be better rendered “instructions” or “laws.”

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

It will be noted that the structures of Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation in this verse differ considerably. In Hebrew the direct discourse begins at the beginning of verse 2, as in Revised Standard Version. In many languages it is not good to have a direct quotation (verse 2b) within another direct quotation (verse 2a). Good News Translation has adopted the solution of not marking anything at all as a direct quotation. The equivalent of the Revised Standard Version direct quotation is preceded in verse 1 by the words “gave him the following rules” in Good News Translation. At this point the translator should take into account what is most natural in the receptor language, either maintaining the direct discourse in verse 2a or shifting to indirect discourse.

Revised Standard Version includes within direct quotes certain information found in the introductory statement in Good News Translation. Good News Translation, on the other hand, leaves implicit the fact that sacrifices are made to the LORD, which the more literal Revised Standard Version makes explicit. If the translation uses direct speech for the rules, it may seem unnatural for the LORD to refer to himself, in “sacrifices to Yahweh,” and it may be better to follow Good News Translation as model. Translators should consider the requirements of their own language with regard to the arrangement of this verse and translate the meaning as naturally as possible. It should also be noted that this problem appears frequently throughout the book of Leviticus (compare, for example, the first verse in chapters 4, 11, 12, 15, 17, 18, and elsewhere).

Speak to the people of Israel, and say to them: in most languages such repetition is unnecessary after the three similar verbs in the previous verse. It should be adequate to say simply “say to the people of Israel.”

When …: in the first five chapters of Leviticus, there are two different words that may be translated “when” or “if.” The Hebrew word ki, normally translated “when,” is found here and in 2.1, 4; 5.1, 3, 4, 5, 15; 6.1, 4. The Hebrew word ʾim, usually rendered “if,” occurs in this chapter in verses 3, 10, and 14, as well as at 2.5, 7; 3.1, 6, 12; 4.3, 13, 27, 32; 5.5, 11, 17. These two words seem to be used almost interchangeably, but they serve as markers indicating paragraph breaks in the discourse. For example, the chapter begins by defining the general case, using the Hebrew conjunction ki, and then three subordinate cases introduced by ʾim (verses 3-9, 10-13, and 14-17), as indicated by Wenham. It is probably best to follow the example of Good News Translation, using “when” at the beginning of each section and “if” to introduce the paragraphs within the section, unless the receptor language has a better way of marking such features of discourse.

Brings an offering: the noun and the verb have the same root, literally “offer an offering.” Good News Translation has “offer their sacrifices.” In Numbers and Ezekiel as well as Leviticus, the Hebrew word for offering is a very general term used to designate anything given as a sacrifice to God. In Nehemiah 10.35 and 13.31 it is even used of nonsacrificial offerings made to God. In this context it should normally be translated by a very generic term in the receptor language rather than using terminology for a specific kind of sacrifice. Whatever term is chosen must cover both animals and plant products that may be burned or given to the priests.

Any man of you: this may be better translated in many languages as “anyone” or “a person.” This will leave implicit the words of you, meaning “among you [Israelites].”

Offering of cattle from the herd or from the flock: literally “offering from the animals from the herd or from the flock.” To translators who do not speak English as their first language, Revised Standard Version may give the impression that the offering only includes cattle. The word herd is usually used to refer to larger animals such as cattle or oxen. On the other hand, flock normally refers to smaller animals such as sheep or goats. And the word translated cattle in Revised Standard Version is actually a very generic word that can refer to domestic animals of any kind. By translating “one of his cattle or one of his sheep or goats,” Good News Translation has made explicit the fact that the larger animals are cattle and the smaller animals refer to sheep or goats. Naturalness in the receptor language should be the determining factor in deciding whether to translate using more specific terms such as cattle, sheep, and goats, or more generic expressions such as “larger animals and smaller animals.” While the terms herd and flock do not appear in Fauna and Flora of the Bible (FFB), the animals included in these groups are discussed.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Verses 3-9 describe the whole burnt offering of an animal taken from the group of larger animals referred to in verse 2.

If his offering is a burnt offering: this expression is similar to 3.1, “If a man’s offering is a sacrifice of peace offering….” In both cases the first term is the general one for anything offered to God, and the second is the more specific expression. The word translated burnt offering here has already been discussed under the heading for this section.

From the herd: Good News Translation has “one of his cattle.” This is parallel to “from the flock” (Good News Translation “one of his sheep or goats”) in verse 10 and “of birds” in verse 14. In each case the topic of the paragraph is introduced. If natural, the beginning of these three paragraphs should be made parallel in the receptor language in order to highlight the discourse structure of this chapter.

A male: in English the word “bull” contains the idea of maleness as well as a member of the group called cattle. The translator should use whatever conveys this idea naturally in the receptor language.

Without blemish: any kind of physical defect such as blindness, skin disease, or paralysis automatically excluded an animal from being offered in sacrifice to the LORD. The details of this requirement are given in 22.17-25. What is needed in this verse is a simple term that would include any kind of deformity. Some languages may have to say “that is not spoiled in the least,” or “that has not the slightest flaw,” or simply “flawless.”

He shall offer it: this does not refer to the act of killing the animal, as a literal translation may imply, but to bringing it near to the LORD for use as a sacrifice. Good News Translation “present it” is a good model.

At the door of the tent of meeting: the term door may be understood as referring either to the large entrance way leading into the court, or to the entrance way of the tent itself. In either case, it may not be appropriate to use the word “door” since this would give the idea of some kind of wooden or metal object used to close an entrance way. In this context the word probably refers to the opening or entrance way to the “Tent of the LORD’s presence” and was near the altar of sacrifices on the outside of the Tent (see Exo 40.6-7, 29-30). In some languages this may be expressed by a word meaning “mouth,” “hole,” or “opening.”

That he may be accepted before the LORD: literally “for his/its favor before the LORD.” Grammatically the Hebrew possessive may refer to the animal (“in order that it might be accepted”), as in New Jerusalem Bible and New International Version, or to the one who is offering the animal (“in order that he might be accepted”). The usage of this kind of expression elsewhere in the Old Testament leads many scholars to the latter meaning, which corresponds to what is found in Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation (see especially 19.5; 22.19,29; and 23.11, where the meaning is unambiguous). But the overall meaning of the passage is not radically changed if one accepts the other possibility. The person offering the sacrifice is accepted only if the sacrifice itself is acceptable. Compare the New Jewish Version (New Jerusalem Bible) rendering: “for acceptance in his behalf before the LORD.” A person who is “accepted” by the LORD in this context is one who is allowed to participate in this act of worship. He recognizes his unworthiness and his need to placate God. He is therefore considered “good enough” or “worthy” to offer the sacrifice.

It should be noted that here and throughout this passage, when the word LORD occurs, the translation will depend on the decision made about direct versus indirect discourse at the beginning of the chapter. If the translators have made this a direct quotation as in New International Version, for example, most languages will require that the LORD speak of himself in the first person rather than the third person. So this verse will then read “before me” or “before me, the LORD.” And verse 9 will then end with the words “pleasing to me” rather than “pleasing to the LORD.” Since the passage that may be translated as a direct quotation is very long, it is easy to forget this modification. But translators should pay attention each time the word LORD appears, and ask themselves whether it is part of a passage where God himself is speaking. If it is unnatural in the language for a person to speak of himself in the third person, then the proper changes must be made in the translation.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

He shall lay his hand upon the head: by means of this gesture the person offering the sacrifice identifies himself as the one who is offering the animal, and in a sense he offers himself to God through the sacrificial animal. This gesture is important when a larger animal is offered to the LORD, since there may be several persons who physically bring the animal to the altar (compare verses 10 and 14, where this gesture is not mentioned in connection with a smaller animal or a bird). In those languages where it is necessary to specify which hand is laid on the head of the animal, this should be the right hand.

By using the noun “man” in place of the pronoun he, Good News Translation makes it clear that it is the person offering the sacrifice and not the priest who places his hand on the head of the animal.

Upon the head of the burnt offering: the reference is clearly to the head of the animal which is brought as a burnt offering, but the gesture is made before it is actually burned.

It shall be accepted: this passive expression will have to be rendered actively in many languages. Since the implied subject is God, it may be translated “God will accept it….” Note that in the previous verse this verb is taken to refer to the person offering the sacrifice, but in this case it seems to refer to the animal that is “regarded as good” by the LORD.

To make atonement for him: the Hebrew verb translated by this phrase appears often in the ritual of sacrifices offered to obtain forgiveness from God. The original meaning of the root word in Hebrew seems to have been “cover” or possibly “wipe off,” but this meaning may have been lost. The idea of “atonement” is found nearly fifty times in Leviticus. It may signify either the means of undoing ritual defilement or the resultant reconciliation with God, who has been offended by a violation of his laws (or possibly both ideas may have been involved). The basic idea seems to be that of restoring harmony or putting things back in proper order. In this context it seems to indicate a particular ritual gesture on the part of the priest, who is charged to announce to the faithful that their sins have been forgiven (see 4.20). God is the one who pardons, and as a sign of forgiveness he accepts the animal sacrifice. In some languages it may be preferable to give a clearer statement by saying “Then the LORD will accept his offering and will pardon his sins.” In other languages the word “pardon” or “forgive” has been rendered by such idiomatic expressions as “turn his back on sin,” “heal the neck,” or “God has spat on the ground for us.”

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

He shall kill: literally “he shall slaughter.” While the general term kill is used by both Good News Translation and Revised Standard Version, other translations seek to capture the special meaning of this word by using such terms as “slaughter” (New English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New International Version, and New Jerusalem Bible) or “immolate” (Jerusalem Bible). According to ancient Jewish custom, it was the lay person who offered the sacrifice that actually cut the throat of the animal. But in the ancient Greek translation rendering of this verse, and in 2 Chronicles 29.22-24, this rite is reserved for the priests. In Ezekiel 44.11 and 2 Chronicles 35.6 it is the responsibility of the Levites.

The bull: literally “a son of the herd.” See verse 2 on “herd” and “flock.” In expressions of this type the Hebrew word that usually means “son” or “child” expresses the idea of membership in a group. Compare the very frequent Old Testament expression “children of Israel,” which means simply “Israelites,” or the expression “son of a prophet,” indicating membership in a group of prophets (see, for example, 1 Kings 20.35 and Amos 7.14). The idea of youth (translated “young bull” in New International Version) is not an essential component of the meaning here. What is important in this context is that a male animal of the category of larger animals must be sacrificed.

Before the LORD: in this context the expression before the LORD refers to a particular place which is made clear in 17.3-5. In Good News Translation the adverb “there” simply refers to “at the entrance of the Tent of the LORD’s presence” in verse 3. A literal translation as in Revised Standard Version runs the risk of hiding from the reader the implied reference to the location at the entrance to the Tent. In some languages this may be translated “there in my presence,” if direct discourse is being used. It should be noted that the aspect of physical location is of less importance than the fact of the presence of the LORD.

Aaron’s sons the priests: the expression “sons of Aaron” may be understood in its more literal sense as referring to Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar, the four sons born of Aaron’s wife Elisheba (see Exo 6.23; Lev 10.1, 6). Or it may refer more generally to “members of the group of Aaron’s descendants” (see the explanation above on “son of the herd”). It is very likely that the more general meaning is to be understood here. In some languages it may be necessary to say “priests in the order of Aaron” or “Aaron’s descendants who serve as priests.” This expression also occurs in verses 8 and 11 of this chapter as well as in 2.2; 3.2; 7.35; 13.2; and 21.1. The plural “priests” occurs without mention of Aaron in 6.29; 7.6; 16.33; and 22.15. All other occurrences of the word (about 175 of them in Leviticus) are singular in form. In some cases there is no obvious reason for the selection of the plural form, but usually it appears where more general statements are being made.

The term priest may present special difficulties in some languages. The Levitical priests were representatives of the people, and thus their position involved great responsibility as well as honor and certain privileges. The primary duty of the priest was to serve as an intermediary between the LORD and his people. The means by which this was done was sacrifice. Thus in some languages this word has been translated “sacrificer” or “intermediary.” But care should be taken to avoid negative connotations of a word like “sacrificer.” If it evokes ideas of pagan sacrifice quite different from those of the people of Israel, then another term should be sought; for example, “one who offers gifts to God (for the people).”

Present the blood: the expression “to the LORD” is added in Good News Translation because it is implied in the original. The Hebrew verb may be understood in the more technical sense of making a ritual presentation, or in the general sense of “take” or “bring.” Probably this was a separate ritual act done before the blood was thrown on the altar. In some languages one may have to say “hold the blood up before the LORD” or something similar.

Throw the blood …: this is different from placing the blood on the corners of the altar (4.25). In this case the priest caught the blood in a container as it flowed from the arteries of the animal. According to later Jewish tradition it was then tossed against the northeast corner in order to cover the north and east sides. Next he threw the remainder against the opposite corner to cover the other two sides so that all four sides were covered. The use of the verb “sprinkle” (as in the King James Version, New American Standard Bible, and New International Version) is probably somewhat off the mark. But if throw implies indiscriminate or accidental scattering of the blood in the receptor language, it will be necessary to find a verb meaning “deliberately pour out.”

Round about: the word translated round about may be understood in the sense of “in the general vicinity” (as in Exo 7.24), but in this context it almost certainly has reference to the four sides of the altar. See the comments in the previous paragraph, which explains how this was done.

Altar that is at the door of the tent of meeting: the Hebrew word for altar comes from the verb “to slaughter.” Eventually, however, it took on a more general meaning that included any place where any kind of sacrifice was offered to God. There are two altars related to the Tent of the LORD’s presence: (1) the altar of sacrifice, which stood directly in front of the entrance to the Tent (Exo 27.1-8; 38.1-7), and (2) the altar of incense, which was inside the Tent just in front of the “Holy of Holies.” Some languages require completely different words for these two objects. In this verse it is clearly the altar of sacrifice that the writer has in mind. In some cases a descriptive phrase may be required: “the place where offerings are given to God” or “the table where sacrifices are burned for God.”

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

He: the reference here is to the lay person who is making the offering and not to the priests mentioned in verse 5, since that would require a plural subject.

Flay the burnt offering: the reference is clearly to the bull which has not yet been burned, so Good News Translation says “the animal.” It also has the common language “skin” in place of the technical term flay. But in other languages it will be clearer to say “remove the skin of the animal” or “take away the skin from the animal.”

Cut it into pieces: the animal is simply cut into quarters, with the head and the suet (or fat) as separate pieces, so the translation should not give the impression that it is carved into many small pieces as if preparing to cook it for eating. Since it would be difficult to place the entire bull on the altar, it was a matter of practical necessity to cut it into manageable parts, but it was not necessary to cut it into small pieces.

The actions of verses 6 and 7 are probably simultaneous so that it is also possible to translate “While the man skins the animal … the priests light the fire….”

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The sons of Aaron the priest: or “the sons of the priest named Aaron.” Some Hebrew manuscripts and several ancient versions have the plural “sons of Aaron, the priests,” but the singular “priest” is recommended by the committee for the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (HOTTP). Nevertheless the meaning of the expression is not essentially different. Throughout this chapter there is an unusual alternation between the expression “the sons of Aaron, the priests” (found in verses 5, 8, and 11) and “the sons of Aaron, the priest” with the final word in the singular instead of the plural (here and in verses 9, 12, 13, and 15). But it is unnecessary to maintain this singular/plural distinction in translation. In most cases it is also pointless to repeat the expression Aaron’s sons every time priests are mentioned.

Put fire on the altar, and lay wood in order upon the fire: the Good News Translation has seen fit to reorder these two verbs (“arrange … and light…”), probably because it seems more logical (and less dangerous!) to arrange the wood before lighting the fire. But it is possible that the priest(s) placed hot coals on the altar of sacrifice and then put wood on top of them.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .