Genesis 35:5

וַיִּסָּעוּ וַיְהִי׀ חִתַּת אֱלֹהִים עַל־הֶֽעָרִים אֲשֶׁר סְבִיבֹתֵיהֶם וְלֹא רָֽדְפוּ אַחֲרֵי בְּנֵי יַעֲקֹֽב׃

Hebrew interlinear

Tap a word to see its entry

The same verse in five languages

Hebrew

וַיִּסָּ֑עוּ וַיְהִ֣י׀ חִתַּ֣ת אֱלֹהִ֗ים עַל־הֶֽעָרִים֙ אֲשֶׁר֙ סְבִיבֹ֣תֵיהֶ֔ם וְלֹ֣א רָֽדְפ֔וּ אַחֲרֵ֖י בְּנֵ֥י יַעֲקֹֽב׃

Greek (Septuagint)

καὶ ἐξῆρεν Ἰσραὴλ ἐκ Σικίμων· καὶ ἐγένετο φόβος θεοῦ ἐπὶ τὰς πόλεις τὰς κύκλῳ αὐτῶν, καὶ οὐ κατεδίωξαν ὀπίσω τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ.

Greek text from Swete's edition, CC BY-SA 4.0

Latin (Vulgate)

Cumque profecti essent, terror Dei invasit omnes per circuitum civitates, et non sunt ausi persequi recedentes.

Spanish

Cuando reanudaron su viaje, un pánico enviado por Dios se apoderó de las ciudades vecinas, de modo que nadie persiguió a los hijos de Jacob.

Classic Spanish (Reina-Valera 1909)

Y partiéronse, y el terror de Dios fué sobre las ciudades que había en sus alrededores, y no siguieron tras los hijos de Jacob.

English

As they set out, a terror from God fell over the surrounding cities, so that they did not pursue Jacob ’s sons.

What the text says

Summary

The verse narrates that after Jacob's group set out on their journey, a "terror of God" fell upon the surrounding cities, with the result that no one pursued the sons of Jacob. The Hebrew presents this as a divinely-caused paralysis that prevented retaliation for the events at Shechem.

Key words

  • chi.Tat ("terror of", H2847) — feminine singular construct noun; grammatically bound to the following word, forming the phrase "terror of God" rather than a standalone noun.
  • 'E.lo.Him ("God", H0430G) — masculine plural noun (a common plural form used for the divine name); here functions as the genitive completing the construct chain "terror of ___".
  • 'a.Sher ("which", H0834A) — relative particle introducing a subordinate clause that specifies which cities are meant: those surrounding Jacob's group.
  • ra.de.Fu ("people pursued", H7291) — qal perfect, third person plural; the perfect aspect marks this as a completed (non-)action, negated by the preceding lo' ("not", H3808).
  • be.Nei ("sons of", H1121A) — masculine plural construct noun, linking to ya.'a.Ko ("Jacob", H3290) to form "sons of Jacob," the object of the pursuit that did not occur.

What the text says

The verse opens with two narrative-vav clauses: va-yissa'u ("and they set out") and va-yehi ("and it was"), both typical of Hebrew storytelling sequence, marking consecutive events. The second clause introduces the construct phrase chittat 'Elohim, "terror of God" — a genitive construction where chittat ("terror of") cannot stand alone grammatically but requires 'Elohim ("God") to complete its meaning. This construct chain describes the terror as originating from or belonging to God, though the Hebrew does not specify the mechanism by which this terror operates.

The relative clause 'asher sevivotei-hem ("which were around them") modifies "the cities," using a construct noun sevivotei ("around of") with a third-person plural suffix -hem ("them") to indicate whose surroundings are meant — the cities surrounding Jacob's group. The final clause uses lo' radefu ("not they pursued"), a qal perfect negated by lo', expressing a completed non-event: the pursuit simply did not happen. The phrase acharei benei Ya'aqov ("after the sons of Jacob") specifies the object of the non-pursuit, using benei ("sons of") in construct with the proper name Ya'aqov ("Jacob").

Differences between versions

The LXX specifies the subject of departure as "Israel" (Ἰσραὴλ) and adds a geographic detail, "out of Shechem" (ἐκ Σικίμων), neither of which appears in the Hebrew text provided. The LXX also renders the final clause as "did not pursue after the sons of Israel" (τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ) rather than "sons of Jacob," differing from the Hebrew benei Ya'aqov. The Vulgate's non sunt ausi persequi recedentes ("they did not dare to pursue those departing") introduces the notion of "daring," a nuance of fear or hesitation not explicitly present in the Hebrew lo' radefu ("they did not pursue"), which states only the absence of the act.

This explanation describes the text using linguistic data; it adds no doctrine or confessional interpretation.