It: the pronoun here refers to any first-born animal. In some cases one will have to say “If the first-born animal happens to be unclean, then…” or, as in Good News Translation, the conditional may be transformed to a direct statement.

He shall buy it back: the pronoun he refers to the original owner. This should probably be made explicit in most languages. The verb buy … back has the same meaning as redeemed, so they may be translated the same, if synonyms are not available.

Your valuation: see verse 3.

Add a fifth: see verse 13 and 5.16.

Be sold: the passive formulation may be changed to say “they [indefinite] shall sell it,” or “the priest may sell it to someone else,” or simply “someone else may buy it.”

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 priest: the priest presides over the entire ritual; there is no apparent division of labor between the lay person and the priest, as in the case where a larger animal is offered. In this verse the priest seems to be the implied subject of all four verbs.

Wring off its head: the meaning of the Hebrew verb in this verse is uncertain. It is found only twice in the Old Testament (see 5.8). It is generally thought that it implies the idea of squeezing or pinching off the head with the fingernail. Apparently the Hebrew verb implies the idea of a complete break or separation in this verse, since the priest must burn the head on the altar. In some languages it may be more natural to say something like “twist off at the neck.” But in 5.8 it is explicitly stated that this gesture must be made “without pulling off its head.” The context of verse 15 puts more weight on the fact that the head is detached from the body than on the way in which it is actually done.

Burn it: this refers to the head (see Good News Translation) and not the entire bird. Compare verse 9.

Its blood shall be drained out: the verb used here is different from the one found in verses 5 and 11 regarding larger animals, and it should be translated differently here. The body of the bird was squeezed against the side of the altar, since there would not have been enough blood to perform the complete ritual described earlier. Moffatt translates “squeezed out.” Although HOTTP recommends the passive reading at this point, many languages will have to translate the meaning actively and make the priest the subject of the verb. New American Bible does so with “and [the priest shall] squeeze out its blood….”

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 first part of verse 16 corresponds to verse 11. The expression for a pleasing odor (compare 1.9 and 3.5) is then added.

Them: this corresponds in meaning to the pronoun “it” in verses 5 and 11. It refers to the totality of those items mentioned in the previous verses.

As food offered by fire: see verse 9 as well as 1.9.

All fat is the LORD’s: this is a concluding statement summing up an important aspect of chapter 3. It is a general rule that may have to be expressed more explicitly by saying something like “All the fat of the sacrificial animals belongs to the LORD as a special offering.” Some versions, such as Traduction oecuménique de la Bible, set it off as a separate paragraph. Compare also the French common language version (Bible en français courant), which makes this phrase the beginning of a new paragraph that includes verse 17 as well.

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 final part of this section (verses 7-13) deals with the question of those members of the community who may not have sufficient means to offer a sheep or a goat. It shows that the forgiveness of God is not absolutely bound to the type of victim offered. The sacrifice is a symbolic expression of the request for forgiveness and the desire for reconciliation, as well as the need for restitution involving the life of a sacrificial animal.

But: the Hebrew conjunction here is a very common one and does not necessarily have to be translated explicitly in every instance. The translators of Revised Standard Version (as well as New English Bible) apparently felt the need of a transition word here to mark the contrast between those who could afford the usual sacrificial animal and those who could not. New American Bible has “however.” But many translations (including Good News Translation, New International Version, New Jerusalem Bible, and An American Translation) move directly to the case of the person who cannot afford a sheep or a goat without any transition word. They do, however, begin a new paragraph at this point.

If he cannot afford: literally “if his hand does not reach the amount of….” In some languages this idea will be expressed quite differently. It may be necessary to say “if he does not have enough wealth (or, possessions)” or perhaps simply “if he cannot get a sheep or a goat.”

A lamb: that is, “a sheep or a goat.” See 3.7.

Two turtledoves or two young pigeons: see 1.14.

As his guilt offering: as in verse 6 above, this is another nontechnical use of the same word that is also used for the “guilt offering” later in this chapter. Here it means “what he is required to bring,” “as his penalty,” or “as his punishment,” as in the preceding verse.

One for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering: in addition to bringing a bird for a sin offering to replace the sheep or goat mentioned in verse 7, a second bird is required as a whole burnt offering. This is perhaps to acknowledge God’s gracious provision for those of lesser means.

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 .

Every male among the priests may eat of it: this expresses the same idea as verse 18, but in a slightly different form.

It is most holy: see verse 17 and 2.3.

Following the parenthetical information in verses 27-28, this verse picks up and clarifies what is said in verse 26. The meat is not reserved exclusively for the officiating priest but may be eaten by other priests as well, and even by men excluded from the active priesthood because of some physical defect (see 21.22).

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 35-36 are somewhat ambiguous in Hebrew. Do they form a part of the direct discourse begun in verse 29 as indicated by the punctuation of Revised Standard Version? Or are they rather a part of the conclusion to the section verses 28-34 (New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible and Bible en français courant)? If indirect discourse is used throughout this section, there is less of a problem here. But it may be wise to begin a new paragraph at this point, if the latter interpretation is accepted. By not starting a new paragraph here, Good News Translation seems to follow the first option.

The portion: this word may come from a verb “to measure” or “to distribute,” but the use of a similar form which means “to anoint” in the following verse has lead some to believe that it is related to anointing. However, it is probably best simply to translate with a word meaning “share” (New American Bible and Moffatt), “allotment,” or “due.” New Jerusalem Bible has “perquisites,” while An American Translation has the equally uncommon language “emolument.” While this term refers to the immediately preceding context, it may also have a more general meaning alluding to the priestly part of sacrifices as a whole.

Of Aaron and of his sons: in view of the historical perspective of the text at this point, it is preferable to retain the form of Aaron and of his sons here, rather than to translate it simply as “priests,” as in many other contexts.

The offerings made by fire: see 1.9.

Consecrated to them: there is no Hebrew equivalent for these words in Revised Standard Version, so there is no reason why they should be translated.

On the day they were presented to serve as priests: literally “on the day that he brought them forward to be priests to the LORD.” On the expression on the day, see 6.5, 20. This concluding verse (together with verse 36) is at the same time a transition to the next section of Leviticus, where the ordination or installation of the Aaronite priests is dealt with in detail (chapters 8–10). The expression may be translated “from the time they were installed (or, ordained) as priests.” New Jerusalem Bible has “once they have been inducted to serve the LORD as priests.”

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 .

And: some versions leave the transition implicit here (Good News Translation, New English Bible). Both New International Version and New Jerusalem Bible have “then.” Moffatt has “Moses further said….” But since this is considered the last in a long series of events, the most imaginative transition is found in New American Bible, “Finally….” This solution may well commend itself to those working in other languages.

Boil: this verb has a causative sense here, and some translators may prefer to say something like “Make (or, Cause) the meat to boil (in water)….” In some languages logic may require that the meat be taken to the entrance of the Tent before mentioning the boiling (Good News Translation). The Hebrew verb is a general term for “cooking” and does not actually indicate whether it is boiled, roasted, or fried. However, in most cases it is associated with some kind of container which would suggest boiling, and the majority of versions interpret it in this way. But it is also possible in some languages to use a more general term meaning simply “prepare for eating.”

The flesh: this refers to the meat of the second ram (verse 22). In some cases it may be wise to make this information explicit in the receptor language, as in Bible en français courant “the meat of the second ram.”

As I commanded …: the following direct quotation (‘Aaron and his sons shall eat it’) seems to emphasize the exclusiveness of the order. However, in many languages this emphasis may be better conveyed by means other than a direct quotation within another direct quotation. One may say, for example, “you alone are to eat it there….”

The use of the first person pronoun, as in 6.17 and 7.34, may be confusing in many languages. In most cases it is clearer to revert to “as the LORD commanded.”

Some scholars have proposed that the text may be understood in a passive sense, “I have been commanded” (as in verse 35 below), but this is rejected by HOTTP.

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 is what the LORD has said: this expression does not simply introduce a quotation. Rather it emphasizes that what happened was a kind of fulfillment of these words of the LORD. In some languages it may be better to translate “What has happened confirms what the LORD said….” New Jerusalem Bible renders it “This is what Yahweh meant when he said….” Another possibility may be to translate “This is what the LORD was warning (you) about when he said….”

The quotation which follows is an example of Hebrew parallelism, and most modern versions set it off as such and translate the two passive forms, using a similar structure. Good News Translation may not be a good model here, since the parallel structure is less evident.

I will show myself holy …: the source of this quotation is unknown, since it is not found anywhere else in the Old Testament. It may be understood in two different ways, depending on whether the Hebrew verbs are taken as reflexive or passive. 1. If it is understood as reflexive, the resulting translation will be similar to Revised Standard Version or New International Version: “among those who approach me I will show myself holy….” 2. But if taken as a passive, the meaning will be like that in Good News Translation or New English Bible: “among those who approach me I must be treated as holy….” This second interpretation is also the one followed by the Greek Septuagint and by rabbinic tradition. It is therefore this interpretation, rather than the first, that is recommended.

Those who are near me: this is clearly a reference to the priestly class and may be translated directly as “those who serve me as priests” or simply “the priests” if necessary.

Before all the people: that is, to the whole community of Israel, or in this context, “to all my people.”

I will be glorified: the verb used here has the same root as the noun “glory” considered in 9.6 and 23. In this context it means “to be recognized as having glory” or “to reveal glory.” And in many languages it will be necessary to avoid the passive formulation of Revised Standard Version. Some possible models are “all people will honor me as God,” or “all people will give me glory,” or “… will praise me.”

And: to begin the last sentence of this verse, some versions prefer to omit any transition word. However, since the response of Aaron following Moses’ remarks is not what may be expected, it is probably better to use a conjunction like “But” (Good News Translation, New American Bible, An American Translation).

Held his peace: the verb used here may be derived from two different roots: “remain silent” or “bemoan (lament).” Although the second possibility fits the context equally well, almost all versions prefer the first. In many languages it will be more natural to translate “But Aaron said nothing” (New American Bible, Moffatt) or “Aaron remained silent” (New International Version, New Jerusalem Bible). New English Bible is more vivid with “Aaron was dumbfounded” (following the Greek Septuagint).

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 .