Introduction to Numbers 35:22
This verse introduces an exception within the laws of homicide: when a killing occurs unintentionally. The structure employs a disjunctive conditional clause, using וְאִם to contrast earlier cases of intentional murder. The verse also includes phrases that convey lack of intent, such as בְּלֹא־אֵיבָה (“without enmity”) and בְּלֹא צְדִיָּה (“without premeditation”). This lesson explores the grammatical construction of disjunctive conditions, the use of prepositional phrases to negate intent, and how Hebrew expresses legal nuance through clause structure.
וְאִם־בְּפֶ֥תַע בְּלֹא־אֵיבָ֖ה הֲדָפֹ֑ו אֹו־הִשְׁלִ֥יךְ עָלָ֛יו כָּל־כְּלִ֖י בְּלֹ֥א צְדִיָּֽה׃
Analysis of Key Words and Structures
- וְאִם (veʾim) – “But if” or “And if.”
– Disjunctive conditional marker introducing a new legal case, contrasting with the previous verse.
– In legal Hebrew, וְאִם often transitions to an alternative ruling. - בְּפֶ֥תַע (befetaʿ) – “Suddenly.”
– Preposition בְּ + noun פֶ֫תַע meaning “suddenness, accident.”
– Indicates lack of deliberation. - בְּלֹא־אֵיבָ֖ה (belo-ʾevah) – “without enmity.”
– בְּלֹא is a prepositional negation: “without.”
– אֵיבָה (“hatred, animosity”) highlights motive.
– Together, the phrase emphasizes absence of intent or hatred. - הֲדָפֹ֑ו (hadafo) – “he pushed him.”
– Hifil perfect 3ms from דחף (“to push”), with 3ms object suffix ־וֹ.
– Action described is simple, possibly accidental force. - אוֹ־הִשְׁלִ֥יךְ עָלָ֛יו כָּל־כְּלִ֖י (ʾo hishlikh ʿalav kol-keli) – “Or he threw upon him any object.”
– הִשְׁלִיךְ is Hifil perfect 3ms from שׁלך (“to throw”).
– עָלָיו = “upon him.”
– כָּל כְּלִי = “any utensil/object,” in construct, indicating an undefined instrument. - בְּלֹ֥א צְדִיָּֽה (belo-tsediyyah) – “without intent.”
– צְדִיָּה from the root צדי (“to lie in wait, to premeditate”), feminine abstract noun.
– Paired with בְּלֹא to negate purpose or strategy.
– This strengthens the contrast between accidental and premeditated harm.
Conditional Legal Clauses and Markers of Non-Intentionality
This verse structures a conditional legal statement with a clear contrast to cases of murder:
– The condition begins with וְאִם, signaling a new scenario.
– The apodosis (legal outcome) follows in subsequent verses, but here we get the protasis: the condition’s description.
Two main possibilities are given:
1. הֲדָפֹ֑ו – “he pushed him suddenly” (non-lethal intent implied).
2. הִשְׁלִ֥יךְ עָלָ֛יו כָּל־כְּלִ֖י – “or he threw an object on him.”
In both, the agent’s intent is qualified by:
– בְּפֶ֥תַע – “suddenly”
– בְּלֹא־אֵיבָ֖ה – “without hatred”
– בְּלֹ֥א צְדִיָּֽה – “without premeditation”
These intent-negating prepositional phrases are crucial in Biblical law. They delineate:
– Accidental manslaughter from
– Intentional homicide
Their presence defines legal category, which determines whether the killer is eligible for asylum in a city of refuge (as per context in Numbers 35).
How Hebrew Clause Structure Delineates Legal Intent in Torah Law
Numbers 35:22 demonstrates how Hebrew syntax defines legal accountability. By using:
– Disjunctive conditional structure (וְאִם)
– Prepositional negations of motive and intent
– Sequential hypothetical verbs
…the Torah creates an exact boundary between intentional murder and unintentional killing.
In this verse, grammar becomes jurisprudence:
– Each phrase narrows the definition of accidental death.
– Each clause contributes to the legal determination of guilt or eligibility for asylum.
Thus, Biblical Hebrew’s precision is not only theological—it is judicial, shaping the moral architecture of justice through clause design.
