| 7. Linguistic Exegesis The verse employs the negative particle lo {לֹא | lōʾ} ‘not’ with the Qal imperfect yik-kā-ḥû {יִקָּחוּ | yik-kā-ḥû} ‘they will take’ to form a prohibitive jussive. The first prohibition links ishšâh zōnāh va-ḥă-lā-lāh {אִשָּׁה זֹנָה וַחֲלָלָה | ʾiš-šāh zō-nāh va-ḥă-lā-lāh} in a hendiadys through the coordinating vav, grouping two disqualifying categories. The second prohibition repeats lo yik-kā-ḥû and applies to wə-ʾiš-šāh gə-rû-šāh mē-ʾîš-šâh {וְאִשָּׁה גְּרוּשָׁה מֵאִישָׁהּ | wə-ʾiš-šāh gə-rû-šāh mē-ʾîš-šâh}, emphasizing exclusion of a divorced woman by means of the prepositional suffix. The causal clause kî qā-dôš hûʾ lê-ʾĕ-lō-hāyw {כִּי־קָדֹשׁ הוּא לֵאלֹהָיו | kî qā-dôš hûʾ lê-ʾĕ-lō-hāyw} explains the reason: the pronoun hûʾ refers to the priest, qā-dôš predicates his consecration, and the prepositional phrase lê-ʾĕ-lō-hāyw marks the divine focus of his service. The parallel structure and repeated prohibition underscore the elevated standards of priestly marriage. |