Leviticus 11:13
וְאֶת־אֵלֶּה תְּשַׁקְּצוּ מִן־הָעוֹף לֹא יֵאָכְלוּ שֶׁקֶץ הֵם אֶת־הַנֶּשֶׁר וְאֶת־הַפֶּרֶס וְאֵת הָעָזְנִיָּֽה׃
✦ Hebrew interlinear
Tap a word to see its entry
✦ The same verse in five languages
וְאֶת־אֵ֙לֶּה֙ תְּשַׁקְּצ֣וּ מִן־הָע֔וֹף לֹ֥א יֵאָכְל֖וּ שֶׁ֣קֶץ הֵ֑ם אֶת־הַנֶּ֙שֶׁר֙ וְאֶת־הַפֶּ֔רֶס וְאֵ֖ת הָעָזְנִיָּֽה׃
Καὶ ταῦτα ἃ βδελύξεσθε ἀπὸ τῶν πετεινῶν, κοὶ οὐ βρωθήσεται, βδέλυγμά ἐστιν· τὸν ἀετὸν καὶ τὸν γρῦπα καὶ τὸν ἁλιάετον,
Greek text from Swete's edition, CC BY-SA 4.0
Latin (Vulgate)
Hæc sunt quæ de avibus comedere non debetis, et vitanda sunt vobis: aquilam, et gryphem, et haliæetum,
“‘De las aves, detestarán las siguientes y no las comerán por ser asquerosas: el águila, el quebrantahuesos, el águila pescadora,
Classic Spanish (Reina-Valera 1909)
Y de las aves, éstas tendréis en abominación; no se comerán, serán abominación: el águila, el quebrantahuesos, el esmerejón,
Additionally, you are to detest the following birds, and they must not be eaten because they are detestable: the eagle, the bearded vulture, the black vulture,
✦ What the text says
Summary
This verse opens a list of birds that are to be considered sheqetz ("detestable thing", H8263) and must not be eaten. It introduces the category with a general statement and then begins naming specific birds, starting with the nesher ("eagle", H5404), the peres ("bearded vulture", H6538), and the 'azniyyah ("osprey", H5822).
Key words
- te.sha.ke.Tzu ("you will consider detestable", H8262) — Piel imperfect, 2nd person masculine plural. The Piel stem gives an intensive or causative nuance: the subject (the community addressed) is to actively treat these birds as detestable, not merely note a natural property.
- ye.'a.khe.Lu ("they will be eaten", H0398) — Niphal imperfect, 3rd person masculine plural. The Niphal is passive, shifting focus from an eating agent to the birds themselves as objects that must not undergo the action of eating.
- She.ketz ("detestable thing", H8263) — masculine singular noun, used here predicatively with Hem ("they", H1992) to state a classification: "detestable things they [are]."
- 'Et (H0853) — the direct object marker, appearing four times (positions 2, 12, 16, 20) without independent translation, but marking each following noun ('e.leh, ha.Ne.sher, ha.Pe.res, ha.'a.ze.ni.Yah) as the grammatical object of the governing verb te.sha.ke.Tzu.
- 'e.leh ("these", H0428) — demonstrative particle functioning as the object that anticipates the itemized list to follow, tying the general statement to the specific names.
What the text says
The verse begins with the object marker 'Et plus the demonstrative 'e.leh ("these"), placed before the verb te.sha.ke.Tzu. This fronting of the object pulls it forward for emphasis, so the sentence structure reads roughly "and these you shall detest" before specifying what "these" are. The verb itself is Piel imperfect, giving a durative or habitual sense of an ongoing action to be maintained by the addressees (grammatically plural "you all").
The second clause, lo' ye.'a.khe.Lu ("they will not be eaten"), uses the Niphal (passive) form of 'akhal, removing the human agent from the grammar entirely — the birds simply "are not to be eaten" as a state of affairs, followed by the nominal clause She.ketz Hem ("detestable things they [are]"), which restates the classification without a verb "to be" (as is standard in Hebrew nominal clauses). After this general framing, the list proper begins, marked by repeated 'Et before each bird name: ha.Ne.sher, ha.Pe.res, and ha.'a.ze.ni.Yah, each preceded by the definite article ha., indicating these are specific, known categories of birds rather than generic examples.
Differences between versions
The Hebrew Pe.res (H6538) is rendered as gryps ("griffin") in the Vulgate and as γρῦπα ("griffin") in the LXX, while the BSB and SBLIBRE render it "bearded vulture." The Hebrew 'a.ze.ni.Yah (H5822) appears as haliæetum ("sea-eagle") in the Vulgate and ἁλιάετον ("sea-eagle") in the LXX, while the BSB gives "black vulture" and SBLIBRE gives "osprey" — reflecting differing identifications of the exact species across traditions.
This explanation describes the text using linguistic data; it adds no doctrine or confessional interpretation.