Deuteronomy 33:9
הָאֹמֵר לְאָבִיו וּלְאִמּוֹ לֹא רְאִיתִיו וְאֶת־אֶחָיו לֹא הִכִּיר וְאֶת־בָּנָיו לֹא יָדָע כִּי שָֽׁמְרוּ אִמְרָתֶךָ וּבְרִֽיתְךָ יִנְצֹֽרוּ׃
✦ Hebrew interlinear
Tap a word to see its entry
✦ The same verse in five languages
הָאֹמֵ֞ר לְאָבִ֤יו וּלְאִמּוֹ֙ לֹ֣א רְאִיתִ֔יו וְאֶת־אֶחָיו֙ לֹ֣א הִכִּ֔יר וְאֶת־בָּנָ֖יו לֹ֣א יָדָ֑ע כִּ֤י שָֽׁמְרוּ֙ אִמְרָתֶ֔ךָ וּבְרִֽיתְךָ֖ יִנְצֹֽרוּ׃
λέγων τῷ πατρὶ καὶ τῇ μητρί οὐχ ἑόρακά σε, καὶ τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς αὐτοῦ οὐκ ἐπέγνω, κοὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτοῦ ἀπέγνω· ἐφύλαξεν τὰ λήιά σου, καὶ τὴν διαθήκην σου διετήρησεν.
Greek text from Swete's edition, CC BY-SA 4.0
Latin (Vulgate)
Qui dixit patri suo et matri suæ: Nescio vos: et fratribus suis: Ignoro vos: et nescierunt filios suos. Hi custodierunt eloquium tuum, et pactum tuum servaverunt.
Quien dijo de su padre y de su madre: ‘No los he visto’. No reconoció a sus hermanos, ni conoció a sus propios hijos; porque han guardado tu palabra, y mantienen tu pacto.
Classic Spanish (Reina-Valera 1909)
El que dijo á su padre y á su madre: Nunca los vi: ni conoció á sus hermanos, ni conoció á sus hijos: por lo cual ellos guardarán tus palabras, y observarán tu pacto.
He said of his father and mother, ‘ I do not consider them.’ He disregarded his brothers and did not know his own sons, for he kept Your word and maintained Your covenant.
✦ What the text says
Summary
The verse describes someone who, in speaking of his father and mother, brothers, and sons, denied recognizing or acknowledging them, using three parallel negated verbs of increasing relational weight. The following clause introduced by ki ("that/because", H3588A) states the reason or result: they kept your imrah ("word", H0565A) and observed your berit ("covenant", H1285).
Key words
- ha.'Omer ("said", H0559) — qal participle with definite article, functioning as a substantive: "the one who says/said," identifying the subject as a type or an unnamed party rather than a finite past action.
- re.'i.Ti ("I saw", H7200G) — qal perfect, first-person, with the 3ms suffix -v ("him") attached, giving "I have not seen him" as reported direct speech embedded in the participle clause.
- hi.Kir ("he recognized", H5234A) — hiphil (causative) perfect, third-person; the causative stem intensifies the verb beyond simple "seeing" toward formal recognition.
- ya.Da' ("he acknowledged", H3045) — qal perfect, third-person, completing the sequence: see → recognize → acknowledge, each verb marking a stronger degree of relational denial.
- ki ("that/because", H3588A) — a particle that can function as causal ("because") or as a subordinating "that," introducing the clause about keeping imrah ("word") and berit ("covenant").
What the text says
The Hebrew sentence is built as a chain of three negated perfect-tense clauses, each governed by lo' ("not", H3808), describing denial toward father/mother, brothers, and sons in turn. The first clause quotes direct speech ("I have not seen him"), while the second and third shift to third-person narration ("he did not recognize... he did not acknowledge"), creating a grammatical shift within the verse from first-person quotation to third-person report. The final clause, introduced by ki (H3588A), presents two qal verbs — shamru ("they kept", perfect, H8104G) and yintzoru ("they observe/will observe", imperfect, H5341) — differing in aspect: the first is a completed action, the second an ongoing or future one, describing observance of "your word" and "your covenant" with second-person singular suffixes (-kha, H9021) referring to Yehovah.
Differences between versions
The LXX renders the first clause in second person ("οὐχ ἑόρακά σε" — "I have not seen you"), matching the Hebrew's embedded direct speech but shifting the object from "him" (Hebrew suffix) to "you." The Vulgate treats the ki clause not as causal but as a separate statement ("Hi custodierunt eloquium tuum" — "These have kept your word"), differing from the BSB and SBLIBRE, which render ki causally ("for/because they kept"). The Vulgate also translates yada' ("he acknowledged") as "nescierunt" (negated, "they did not know"), diverging from the Hebrew's third-person singular subject implied by the participle chain.
This explanation describes the text using linguistic data; it adds no doctrine or confessional interpretation.