Leviticus 13:42

וְכִֽי־יִהְיֶה בַקָּרַחַת אוֹ בַגַּבַּחַת נֶגַע לָבָן אֲדַמְדָּם צָרַעַת פֹּרַחַת הִוא בְּקָרַחְתּוֹ אוֹ בְגַבַּחְתּֽוֹ׃

Hebrew interlinear

Tap a word to see its entry

The same verse in five languages

Hebrew

וְכִֽי־יִהְיֶ֤ה בַקָּרַ֙חַת֙ א֣וֹ בַגַּבַּ֔חַת נֶ֖גַע לָבָ֣ן אֲדַמְדָּ֑ם צָרַ֤עַת פֹּרַ֙חַת֙ הִ֔וא בְּקָרַחְתּ֖וֹ א֥וֹ בְגַבַּחְתּֽוֹ׃

Greek (Septuagint)

ἐὰν δὲ γένηται ἐν τῷ φαλακρώματι αὐτοῦ ἢ ἐν τῷ ἀναφαλαντώματι αὐτοῦ ὄφη λευκὴ ἢ πυρρίζουσα, λέπρα ἐστὶν ἐν τῷ φαλακρώματι αὐτοῦ ἢ ἐν τῷ ἀναφαλαντώματι αὐτοῦ·

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

Latin (Vulgate)

Sin autem in calvitio sive in recalvatione albus vel rufus color fuerit exortus,

Spanish

Pero si en la parte calva, ya sea atrás o adelante, le sale una llaga de color blanco rojizo, es lepra que está brotando.

Classic Spanish (Reina-Valera 1909)

Mas cuando en la calva ó en la antecalva hubiere llaga blanca rojiza, lepra es que brota en su calva ó en su antecalva.

English

But if there is a reddish-white sore on the bald head or forehead, it is an infectious disease breaking out on it.

What the text says

Summary

This verse addresses a diagnostic case within the priestly instructions on skin conditions: if a white-reddish sore appears on a bald spot at the back or front of the head, the text identifies it as tzara'at ("a serious skin disease", H6883) that is actively spreading.

Key words

  • yihYeh ("it will be", H1961) — qal imperfect of the verb "to be," here functioning as the protasis marker of a conditional clause, signaling a future/hypothetical scenario the priest must evaluate.
  • tzaraAt ("skin disease", H6883) — feminine singular noun naming the condition being diagnosed; it is the predicate noun identifying what the sore actually is.
  • poRachat ("breaking out", H6524B) — qal active participle, feminine singular, agreeing with tzaraAt; the participle form marks ongoing, present action ("the one that is spreading"), not a completed state.
  • karaChto ("his bald spot", H7146 + H9023) — construct noun with 3rd person masculine singular suffix, tying the location explicitly to the afflicted individual ("his" bald spot), repeated for both karaChat (back) and gaBachat (front, H1372).
  • hi' ("it/she", H1931) — feminine personal pronoun resuming the subject tzaraAt, reinforcing the identification: "it is tzara'at."

What the text says

The verse opens with the conditional particle khi ("if", H3588A) combined with yihYeh ("it will be", H1961), establishing a hypothetical case grammatically parallel to other diagnostic clauses in Leviticus 13. The condition specifies two possible locations — baKarachat ("on the bald spot", H7146) and vaGabachat ("on the bald forehead", H1372) — joined by o ("or", H0176A), indicating either the back or front baldness area.

The core diagnostic statement uses a nominal clause: nega' lavan adamdam ("a plague, white, reddish") functions as the subject description, followed by the predicate tzara'at poRachat hi' — literally "it is a spreading tzara'at." The feminine pronoun hi' (H1931) agrees with the feminine noun tzara'at, creating a tight identification formula: the visible sign (white-reddish plague) is the named condition (tzara'at), and that condition is further qualified by the participle poRachat (H6524B), indicating it is presently active or expanding rather than static.

The final clause repeats the two locations, now with the possessive suffix -o ("his", H9023) attached to karachto and gabachto, grammatically confirming that the disease is located specifically on that individual's own bald areas — a structural echo of the opening clause that frames the diagnosis.

Differences between versions

The LXX renders nega' lavan adamdam as ὄφη λευκὴ ἢ πυρρίζουσα ("a white or reddish mark"), using a disjunctive "or" where the Hebrew places the two color terms in apposition without a conjunction. The Vulgate similarly separates the colors with vel ("or"): albus vel rufus color, differing from the Hebrew's juxtaposed lavan adamdam ("white, reddish") describing a single blended hue.

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