Leviticus 5:4
אוֹ נֶפֶשׁ כִּי תִשָּׁבַע לְבַטֵּא בִשְׂפָתַיִם לְהָרַע׀ אוֹ לְהֵיטִיב לְכֹל אֲשֶׁר יְבַטֵּא הָאָדָם בִּשְׁבֻעָה וְנֶעְלַם מִמֶּנּוּ וְהוּא־יָדַע וְאָשֵׁם לְאַחַת מֵאֵֽלֶּה׃
✦ Hebrew interlinear
Tap a word to see its entry
✦ The same verse in five languages
א֣וֹ נֶ֡פֶשׁ כִּ֣י תִשָּׁבַע֩ לְבַטֵּ֨א בִשְׂפָתַ֜יִם לְהָרַ֣ע׀ א֣וֹ לְהֵיטִ֗יב לְ֠כֹל אֲשֶׁ֨ר יְבַטֵּ֧א הָאָדָ֛ם בִּשְׁבֻעָ֖ה וְנֶעְלַ֣ם מִמֶּ֑נּוּ וְהוּא־יָדַ֥ע וְאָשֵׁ֖ם לְאַחַ֥ת מֵאֵֽלֶּה׃
ἢ ψυχὴ ἡ ἄνομος ἡ διαστέλλουσα τοῖς χείλεσιν κακοποιῆσαι ἢ καλῶς ποιῆσαι κατὰ πάντα ὅσα ἐὰν διαστείλῃ ὁ ἄνθρωπος μεθ' ὅρκου, καὶ λάθῃ αὐτὸν πρὸ ὀφθαλμῶν, καὶ οὗτος γνῷ, καὶ ἁμάρτῃ ἔν τι τούτων·
Greek text from Swete's edition, CC BY-SA 4.0
Latin (Vulgate)
Anima, quæ juraverit, et protulerit labiis suis, ut vel male quid faceret, vel bene, et idipsum juramento et sermone firmaverit, oblitaque postea intellexerit delictum suum,
“‘O si alguien jura a la ligera con sus labios para hacer el mal o para hacer el bien, cualquier cosa que una persona pueda decir sin pensar mediante un juramento, y le pasa inadvertido; cuando se dé cuenta, entonces será culpable de una de estas cosas.
Classic Spanish (Reina-Valera 1909)
También la persona que jurare, pronunciando con sus labios hacer mal ó bien, en cualesquiera cosas que el hombre profiere con juramento, y él no lo conociere; si después lo entiende, será culpado en una de estas cosas.
Or if someone swears thoughtlessly with his lips to do anything good or evil — in whatever matter a man may rashly pronounce an oath — even if he is unaware of it, when he realizes it, he is guilty in the matter.
✦ What the text says
Summary
Leviticus 5:4 describes a case of a rash oath: a person swears with the lips to do good or evil in any matter, the content of the oath escapes his awareness, and later he comes to know it — at which point he bears guilt for one of these matters.
Key words
- tishaVa' ("she will swear an oath", H7650) — niphal imperfect, third person feminine (agreeing with nefesh, "anyone"), describing the ongoing/future act of oath-taking.
- baTe' ("speaking rashly", H0981) — piel infinitive, an intensive verbal stem denoting rapid, unconsidered speech with the lips.
- ne'Lam ("it will be hidden", H5956) — niphal sequential perfect, continuing the narrative chain begun by the oath; the matter becomes concealed from the swearer (mimenu, "from him").
- yaDa' ("he knew", H3045) — qal perfect, a completed state of knowing that follows the concealment in the sequence, marking the moment realization occurs.
- 'aShem ("he will be guilty", H0816) — qal sequential perfect, the resulting legal state once the sequence (oath → concealment → knowledge) is complete.
What the text says
The verse is built as a chain of sequential perfects following an initial conditional clause introduced by ki ("if", H3588A). The subject is nefesh ("anyone", H5315J), grammatically feminine, governing the feminine verb tishaVa'. The oath itself is defined by two paired infinitives, baTe' ("speaking rashly") and its parallel hara'/heitiv ("to do evil"/"to do good", H7489A/H3190), both hiphil or piel infinitives expressing the content of what is rashly spoken "with lips" (bisfatayim, H8193G, dual form — the two lips as the organ of speech).
After the oath is stated, the narrative vav (ve) links three consecutive qal/niphal perfects: ne'lam ("it will be hidden"), yada' ("he knew"), and 'ashem ("he will be guilty"). This sequence encodes a temporal order — the matter is first hidden from the person, then he comes to know it, and only then does the state of guilt ('ashem) apply. The phrase le'achat me'elleh ("to one of these", H0259/H0428) closes the verse by tying guilt back to the two alternatives named earlier (doing evil or doing good) sworn about.
Differences between versions
The Hebrew verb 'ashem (H0816, "he will be guilty," qal) denotes an existing legal/cultic state of liability. The LXX renders this with hamartē ("he sins"), an aorist subjunctive describing an act of sinning rather than a resulting state. The Vulgate uses intellexerit delictum suum ("shall have understood his fault"), which foregrounds cognition of fault rather than a declared guilt-status, differing from both the Hebrew's stative 'ashem and the LXX's verb of committing sin.
This explanation describes the text using linguistic data; it adds no doctrine or confessional interpretation.