| 4. Linguistic Exegesis The verse opens with the protasis marked by the conditional conjunction weim {וְאִם | wə-ʾim} ‘and if’, establishing a legal hypothetical. The infinitive absolute ha'alem {הַעְלֵם | ha-ʿālem} paired with the imperfect yaleemu {יַעְלִימוּ | yaʿlîmu} intensifies the deliberate concealment. The construct phrase am ha'arets {עַם הָאָרֶץ | ʿam hā-ʾāreṣ} ‘people of the land’ designates the corporate subject responsible for enforcement. The accusative et-einehem {אֶת־עֵינֵיהֶם | ʾet-ʿênêhem} ‘their eyes’ highlights intentional disregard. The chained construction betitto mizra'o la-molekh {בְּתִתּוֹ מִזַּרְע֖וֹ לַמֹּלֶךְ | bə-ṯittô miz-zaʿô la-Mōleḵ} links the sacrificial act as the triggering event. The apodosis begins with the negative purpose lə-vi-lṯî hamit oto {לְבִלְתִּי הָמִית אֹתֽוֹ | lə-vi-lṯî hammît ʾôtô} ‘so as not to kill him’. This protasis–apodosis pattern, typical of Hebrew legal texts, underscores causality and communal accountability by foregrounding the omission of justice before the prescribed penalty. |