Leviticus 14:22

וּשְׁתֵּי תֹרִים אוֹ שְׁנֵי בְּנֵי יוֹנָה אֲשֶׁר תַּשִּׂיג יָדוֹ וְהָיָה אֶחָד חַטָּאת וְהָאֶחָד עֹלָֽה׃

Hebrew interlinear

Tap a word to see its entry

The same verse in five languages

Hebrew

וּשְׁתֵּ֣י תֹרִ֗ים א֤וֹ שְׁנֵי֙ בְּנֵ֣י יוֹנָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר תַּשִּׂ֖יג יָד֑וֹ וְהָיָ֤ה אֶחָד֙ חַטָּ֔את וְהָאֶחָ֖ד עֹלָֽה׃

Greek (Septuagint)

καὶ δύο τρυγόνας ἢ δύο νοσσοὺς περιστερῶν, ὅσα εὗρεν ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἔσται ἡ μία περὶ ἁμαρτίας καὶ ἡ μία εἰς ὁλοκαύτωμα·

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

Latin (Vulgate)

duosque turtures sive duos pullos columbæ, quorum unus sit pro peccato, et alter in holocaustum:

Spanish

y dos tórtolas o dos pichones, según lo que pueda pagar. Una de las aves será para la ofrenda por el pecado y la otra para el holocausto.

Classic Spanish (Reina-Valera 1909)

Y dos tórtolas, ó dos palominos, lo que alcanzare su mano: y el uno será para expiación por el pecado, y el otro para holocausto;

English

and two turtledoves or two young pigeons, whichever he can afford, one to be a sin offering and the other a burnt offering.

What the text says

Summary

The verse specifies that a person completing purification rites may bring two turtledoves or two young pigeons, according to what he can afford, with one bird designated as a sin offering and the other as a burnt offering.

Key words

  • toRim ("turtle-doves", H8449) — common gender plural noun, the first bird option listed.
  • tasSig ("it will reach", H5381) — hiphil (causative) imperfect, third person feminine; the causative form conveys the idea of "causing to reach/attain," here referring to what one's means can attain.
  • yaD ("hand", H3027T) — construct form followed by the suffix -o ("his"), forming the idiom "his hand," i.e., his means or capacity.
  • chaTat ("a sin offering", H2403H) — feminine singular noun designating the purpose of one bird.
  • 'oLah ("a burnt offering", H5930A) — feminine singular noun designating the purpose of the second bird, preceded by the definite article ha- ("the") on the numeral in verse position 17-18.

What the text says

The Hebrew sentence opens with a construct pairing: shetei toRim ("two of turtledoves", H8147 + H8449), joined by 'o ("or", H0176A) to a second option, shenei benei yoNah ("two of young ones of a dove", H8147 + H1121H + H3123). Both expressions use dual/plural construct numerals governing the type of bird, allowing two possible species for the offering.

The relative clause 'aSher tasSig yaDo ("which his hand will reach", H0834A + H5381 + H3027T + H9023) qualifies this choice: the hiphil imperfect verb tasSig has a causative sense, literally "it causes to reach," with "hand" as the grammatical subject. This construction expresses capacity or means — what a person's resources can attain — rather than a fixed offering type, making the bird option economically conditioned.

The following clause shifts to sequential perfect verbs, a construction common in legal/procedural Hebrew narrative: ve-haYah 'eChad chaTat ("and it will be one, a sin offering", H1961 + H0259 + H2403H) and ve-ha-'eChad 'oLah ("and the one, a burnt offering", H0259 + H5930A). The second numeral takes the definite article (ha-, H9009), distinguishing "the [other/remaining] one" from the first 'eChad ("one"), which lacks the article. This grammatical distinction marks the two birds as sequentially assigned roles within the same pair, rather than introducing new referents.

Differences between versions

The LXX renders tasSig yaDo ("his hand will reach", H5381 + H3027T) as ὅσα εὗρεν ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ ("as much as his hand found"), using "found" instead of the causative "reach/attain" sense present in the Hebrew hiphil verb. The Vulgate's quorum unus sit... et alter ("of which one shall be... and the other") does not reflect the Hebrew's distinct treatment of the first 'eChad (without article) versus ha-'eChad (with article), rendering both simply as "one" and "the other" without marking the definiteness shift visible in the Hebrew construction.

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