| 20. Linguistic Exegesis The verse opens with the conditional protasis ve'ish {וְאִישׁ | və-ʾîš} ‘and a man’ plus asher {אֲשֶׁר־ | ă-šer} ‘who,’ establishing the requirement. The Qal imperfect yit-ma' {יִטְמָא֙ | yit-māʾ} ‘becomes unclean’ and Hithpael imperfect yit-hat-ta' {יִתְחַטָּא | yit-ḥaṭ-ṭāʾ} ‘purifies himself’ express the hypothetical action. The vav consecutive with the Nifal perfect venikhreta {וְנִכְרְתָה | wə-niḵ-re-tâ} ‘and be cut off’ marks the apodosis and covenantal penalty. The phrase ha-nefeš ha-hiu' {הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַהִוא | ha-nefeš ha-hi-ûʾ} ‘that soul’ specifies the individual, while mitokh haqahal {מִתּוֹךְ הַקָּהָל | mĭ-toḵ ha-qā-hāl} ‘from within the assembly’ defines communal scope. The conjunction kî {כִּי | kî} ‘because’ introduces the clause et-miqdash Yahweh {אֶת־מִקְדַּשׁ יְהוָה | ʾet-miḳ-dāš Yə-hō-wāh} ‘the sanctuary of the LORD,’ detailed by the Piel perfect ṭim-mēʾ {טִמֵּא | ṭim-mēʾ} ‘he has defiled.’ The absence of lozorak {לֹא־זֹרַק | lōʾ-zō-raq} ‘was not sprinkled’ with mey niddah {מֵי נִדָּה | mēy niddâh} ‘the cleansing water’ underscores ritual failure. The concluding predicate ṭame' hu' {טָמֵא הוּא | ṭā-mēʾ hûʾ} ‘he is unclean’ restates the outcome, illustrating Hebrew legal syntax that binds condition, consequence, and theological rationale. |