He who dedicates it: instead of repeating the information given in the previous verse, it may be stylistically more appropriate to use a synonymous expression like “the owner.”

Wishes to redeem his house: see verse 13.

And it shall be his: this information is left implicit in Good News Translation, but in many languages there will be no harm in making it explicit. In some cases a separate sentence may be preferable: “If he does this, it will belong to him again.”

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 16-24 deal with fields that have been promised to God by a special vow. The first part concerns fields owned due to a family inheritance (verses 16-21), and the second has to do with land bought from another person.

In order to understand this paragraph properly, it is necessary to know what the usual practice would have been in such a case. If all the land dedicated to God, even during a limited period of time, had been given over to the priests, they would not have been able to take care of it. It is likely that, except in unusual cases, the land remained under the control of the owner. He would then fulfill his vow by the payment of a sum of money equivalent to the value of the land for the period of dedication. This had the important social consequence of allowing a poor person to keep on using the land and producing crops for a relatively small price (see the end of this verse). If this were not the case, he might have lost his land to a merciless creditor (compare 25.25 and following). In view of all this, it is easier to understand the existence of the “base price” (verses 16-18), the restrictions on the owner’s selling the land to someone else (verse 20), and the obligation to make the payment on the very same day that the price was fixed (verse 23).

By inheritance: this is left implicit in Good News Translation but should probably be made explicit with something like “part of his ancestral land” (New English Bible), or “part of his family land,” or “some of the land which his ancestors gave him.”

According to the seed for it: according to the majority interpretation of this expression, the value of the land would be determined by its size. But instead of measuring the field’s length and width, it was measured by the amount of seed required to plant the entire area. Jerusalem Bible, on the other hand, understands this expression to mean “according to its productivity” (New Jerusalem Bible has “… its yield”). That is, according to the amount of seed (or grain) it would produce rather than the amount it would require for sowing. This latter interpretation seems to be more in keeping with what agricultural experts would expect. So translators are advised to follow the model provided by New Jerusalem Bible, in which seed is understood as referring to the amount of grain produced rather than the amount planted.

Homer: according to Ezekiel 45.11 this dry measure was equal to ten “ephahs.” And it is also said to be the same as the “kor.” But this tells us nothing that the modern reader can relate to. Estimates of its value vary from 220 kilograms or 6 bushels (see New International Version note) to 400 kilograms or about 11 bushels (see Snaith, page 117). Bible en français courant has 300 kilograms, and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch has 150 kilograms. The Good News Translation rendering is based on the homer being equal to one hundred kilograms (British Good News Translation), or five bushels (American Good News Translation). But see the discussion below on the amount, fifty shekels.

Barley: a kind of grain used as food for both human beings and animals.

Fifty shekels: or “fifty pieces of silver” (see verse 3). The dynamic restructuring of Good News Translation has “ten pieces of silver per bushel” (US edition) or “ten pieces of silver for every twenty kilograms” (British edition). Given the uncertainty of the value of the homer, this may be correct, but Bible en français courant retains the figure “fifty” for the pieces of silver while translating the homer as “three hundred kilograms.” Even if we are unable to give exact equivalents for the shekel or for the homer, it seems clear that the price of fifty shekels over a period of fifty years (see verse 17), or a shekel per year, is a relatively small price to pay.

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 .

From: the preposition used here may be understood as meaning “in,” “during” (New Jerusalem Bible and New International Version), or “immediately after” (Good News Translation). Since the cycle began again after the Year of Jubilee was over, it is probably better to translate the idea “beginning as soon as the Year of Restoration is over.”

The year of jubilee: see 25.10.

It shall stand at your full valuation: the verb used here is the same as at the end of verse 14. There is no word in the Hebrew text corresponding to full, but it is clearly implied. On the expression your valuation, see verse 2.

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 .

But: since there is a clear contrast between the dedication of a field during or immediately after the Year of Restoration, and a dedication which takes place later (after the restoration year is over), it will be preferable in some languages to use a conjunction like but, indicating contrast here.

After the jubilee: this is clearly not immediately after the Year of Restoration but some time later in the fifty-year cycle. It may be necessary to translate it “some time later, after the end of the Year of Restoration.”

Until the year of jubilee: or “until the next Year of Restoration.”

A deduction shall be made from your valuation: or “you must subtract the value of the years that have passed (since the last Year of Restoration) from the set price.” This phrase actually repeats information already given, so that the last two phrases of this verse may be translated as one in some languages. For example, “the priest must fix a lower price, considering the number of years that are left until the next Year of Restoration.”

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 .

Although the wording is slightly different, the meaning of this verse is equivalent to verse 15, where the subject is “house” in place of “land.”

Add a fifth: see verse 13 and 5.16.

And it shall remain his: compare verse 15, where the same idea is expressed with the verb “to be” in place of the verb remain. This is the same difference noted at the end of verses 12 and 14.

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 .

This verse is difficult to understand. There are two possible interpretations that are quite different: it is grammatically possible that the subject of the verb “sell” is not the same as the subject of “redeem.” In this case the verse means “If he [the owner] does not want to buy the field back, and someone [one of the priests?] sells it, it can no longer be redeemed.” But it is much more likely that the owner is the subject of both verbs. The meaning is then that the owner, after having dedicated his field to God, then sold it to someone else. This of course implies that the field was not really under the control of the priests but remained in the hands of the person who dedicated it (see verse 16). So the owner, who had failed to fulfill his agreement, would be punished by never again being able to buy the land back. This is the interpretation followed by almost all versions consulted.

But: since the description of the sale of the field, which follows, contrasts with its redemption in the previous verses, it is advisable in some languages to use a connecting word that marks this contrast.

It shall not be redeemed any more: this passive construction may be rendered actively as “they [indefinite] will never allow him to redeem it” or “he can never buy it back.”

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 .

When it is released: literally “in its going out.” That is, at the time when things normally revert to their original owners. But since this land cannot go back to its owner, it goes to the priests, who hold it for the LORD. Compare 25.28.

Holy to the LORD: clearly meaning “belong to the LORD” or “the LORD’s possession” in this context.

Devoted: this is different from “consecrated” (in 8.15, for example) or “dedicates” (verses 14 and following). It means “set apart absolutely and irrevocably.” The corresponding Hebrew word is a kind of technical term for something that must be completely withdrawn from human use. Anything that was so “devoted” to another god had to be totally destroyed (Josh 6.18-21). But what was “devoted” to the LORD was considered so absolutely his that it could never be redeemed. The Good News Translation rendering at this point seems weak. Others have translated “proscribed” (New Jerusalem Bible), “under ban” (Jerusalem Bible), “vowed unconditionally” (New Jerusalem Bible), and “doomed” (New American Bible). Translators should look for as strong a term as possible to express the idea of something absolutely and forever given over to the LORD. And it should be clearly distinguished from the verb “dedicate,” used elsewhere in this chapter.

The priest: the singular form here has a collective value and should therefore be translated as a plural. The land does not become the property of any individual priest but of the entire priestly family.

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 subject pronoun here refers to the same hypothetical “man” mentioned in verse 16. But since this really means “any person,” it may be better in some languages to repeat the noun in place of the pronoun here. New American Bible has “some man.”

Dedicates: see verse 14. And the translation should be sure to make a distinction between this word and “devoted” in verse 21.

Not a part of his possession by inheritance: this has been left implicit in Good News Translation, since the words “that he has bought” convey this idea. However, in many languages it will be quite acceptable to reemphasize the fact that the field in question is not inherited land.

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 .