Deuteronomy 21:15
כִּֽי־תִהְיֶיןָ לְאִישׁ שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים הָאַחַת אֲהוּבָה וְהָאַחַת שְׂנוּאָה וְיָֽלְדוּ־לוֹ בָנִים הָאֲהוּבָה וְהַשְּׂנוּאָה וְהָיָה הַבֵּן הַבְּכוֹר לַשְּׂנִיאָֽה׃
✦ Hebrew interlinear
Tap a word to see its entry
✦ The same verse in five languages
כִּֽי־תִהְיֶ֨יןָ לְאִ֜ישׁ שְׁתֵּ֣י נָשִׁ֗ים הָאַחַ֤ת אֲהוּבָה֙ וְהָאַחַ֣ת שְׂנוּאָ֔ה וְיָֽלְדוּ־ל֣וֹ בָנִ֔ים הָאֲהוּבָ֖ה וְהַשְּׂנוּאָ֑ה וְהָיָ֛ה הַבֵּ֥ן הַבְּכ֖וֹר לַשְּׂנִיאָֽה׃
Ἐὰν δὲ γένωνται ἀνθρώπῳ δύο γυναῖκες, μία αὐτῶν ἠγαπημένη καὶ μία αὐτῶν μισουμένη, καὶ τέκωσιν αὐτῷ ἡ ἠγαπημένη καὶ ἡ μισουμένη, καὶ γένηται υἱὸς πρωτότοκος τῆς μισουμένης.
Greek text from Swete's edition, CC BY-SA 4.0
Latin (Vulgate)
Si habuerit homo uxores duas, unam dilectam, et alteram odiosam, genuerintque ex eo liberos, et fuerit filius odiosæ primogenitus,
Si un hombre tiene dos esposas, una amada y otra odiada, y le han dado hijos, tanto la amada como la odiada, y si el hijo primogénito es de la odiada,
Classic Spanish (Reina-Valera 1909)
Cuando un hombre tuviere dos mujeres, la una amada y la otra aborrecida, y la amada y la aborrecida le parieren hijos, y el hijo primogénito fuere de la aborrecida;
If a man has two wives, one beloved and the other unloved, and both bear him sons, but the unloved wife has the firstborn son,
✦ What the text says
Summary
The verse sets up a legal scenario: a man has two wives, one described as loved and the other as hated, and both bear him sons. It specifies that the firstborn son belongs to the wife who is hated.
Key words
- tih.Yei.na ("they will belong", H1961) — qal imperfect, 3rd person feminine plural, referring to the two wives; the imperfect here signals a hypothetical/future condition introduced by ki ("if", H3588A).
- 'a.hu.Vah ("loved", H0157G) — qal passive participle, feminine singular; a participle describes a standing state or condition rather than a one-time action, so the wife is characterized as "one who is loved."
- se.nu.'Ah ("hated", H8130) — qal passive participle, feminine singular, paired antithetically with 'a.hu.Vah to mark the two wives' contrasting status.
- yal.du ("they will bear", H3205) — qal sequential perfect, 3rd person plural; this form continues the narrative sequence begun by the imperfect, moving the conditional scenario forward in time.
- se.ni.'Ah ("hated [wife]", H8146) — adjective, feminine singular, used at the end of the verse to name the wife of the firstborn son; it is a related but distinct form from the participle se.nu.'Ah used earlier.
What the text says
The verse opens with the conditional particle ki ("if", H3588A) followed by the imperfect verb tih.Yei.na ("they will belong", H1961), establishing a legal case format: "if it happens that two wives belong to a man." The two wives are then distinguished using a construct pattern: ha + 'a.Chat ("the one", H0259) paired with a passive participle — first 'a.hu.Vah ("loved", H0157G), then se.nu.'Ah ("hated", H8130) — creating a symmetrical antithetical structure "the one loved... and the one hated."
The narrative continues with a chain of sequential perfects introduced by the narrative vav (H9001): yal.du ("they will bear", H3205) and ha.Yah ("he will belong", H1961). This verb chain carries the conditional scenario forward: both wives bear sons, and then the outcome is stated — the firstborn son (ha.Ben ha.be.Khor, H1121A + H1060) belongs to the wife identified at the end by the adjective se.ni.'Ah ("hated", H8146), a form distinct from, but related to, the earlier participle se.nu.'Ah used to describe her status.
Differences between versions
The LXX renders the Hebrew participles 'a.hu.Vah and se.nu.'Ah with Greek participles ἠγαπημένη ("loved") and μισουμένη ("hated"), matching the Hebrew's participial structure closely. The Vulgate uses adjectives "dilectam" and "odiosam," which convey the same contrast but as descriptive adjectives rather than participial forms. The Hebrew text uses two slightly different forms for "hated" — the participle se.nu.'Ah (H8130) in the body of the verse and the adjective se.ni.'Ah (H8146) at the end — a distinction not preserved as a formal difference in the Greek or Latin versions, which use the same term throughout.
This explanation describes the text using linguistic data; it adds no doctrine or confessional interpretation.