21st Century Bible Hebrew -- imperfect examples, part 3

The uses of imperfect aspect are as follows.

1.                  vav plus imperfect in VS order is “narrative past”, used within an episode to track the progress of the plot.

2.                  vav plus subject plus imperfect is a relative or coordinate clause.

3.                  without vav in SV order is possibly a true future tense usage.

4.                  without vav may also be an imperfect of process; this first turns up in Leviticus and may be a clue to the relationship between imperfect and progressive aspects.

5.                  vav plus imperfect in the 2nd singular or plural define the generalized or definitional envelope of commandments or refer to a known cultural feature.

6.                  in the 3rd person, in portions about sacrificial ritual, imperfect provides the framework for the ritual actions like the generalization envelope for a k’lal u-prat [u-k’lal] structure.

7.                  Preceded by ki or im is the “if” clause in a law, usually a tort. Again, this is an envelope to a klal uprat [uklal] structure.

8.                  part of a parallel structure in poetry and prophecy following a perfect verb as a parallel. They will not use the same verb root and sometimes not the same binyan.

We’re up to #6, rituals.  Imperfect aspect commandments in 3^rd person usually are followed by perfect aspect verbs. The imperfect aspect verbs are about an action that happens to a specific sacrifice: yaqriv/u, taqriv.

The earliest of these are Leviticus 1:1-3. 

א  א וַיִּקְרָ֖א אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֑ה וַיְדַבֵּ֤ר יְהוָֹה֙ אֵלָ֔יו מֵאֹ֥הֶל מוֹעֵ֖ד לֵאמֹֽר:

ב דַּבֵּ֞ר אֶל־בְּנֵ֤י יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ וְאָֽמַרְתָּ֣ אֲלֵהֶ֔ם אָדָ֗ם כִּֽי־יַקְרִ֥יב מִכֶּ֛ם קָרְבָּ֖ן לַֽיהוָֹ֑ה מִן־הַבְּהֵמָ֗ה מִן־הַבָּקָר֙ וּמִן־הַצֹּ֔אן תַּקְרִ֖יבוּ אֶת־קָרְבַּנְכֶֽם:

ג אִם־עֹלָ֤ה קָרְבָּנוֹ֙ מִן־הַבָּקָ֔ר זָכָ֥ר תָּמִ֖ים יַקְרִיבֶ֑נּוּ אֶל־פֶּ֜תַח אֹ֤הֶל מוֹעֵד֙ יַקְרִ֣יב אֹת֔וֹ לִרְצֹנ֖וֹ לִפְנֵ֥י יְהוָֹֽה:

He called to Mosheh; the Lord spoke to him from the tent of notice saying

Speak to the Israelites and say to them The man among you in the situation of offering a qorban to the Lord -- bring your qorbans from the domestic animals, from the cattle or from the flocks --

If his qorban is a whole offering from the cattle, a perfect male he offers; at the door of the tent of notice he offers it for its acceptance, before the Lord.

Verse 3 defines this offering as an olah so it has to be performed in the same way as the tamid in Exodus 29:38-42 which is also called olah. 

The ki-yaqriv phrase with the hyphen is crucial here. That shows this is not an “if” or a “when” statement. We’re already past the “if” or “when”, we already decided that this is an offering. Now we’re up to how it has to be processed. How it has to be processed depends on what kind of offering it is. Verse 3 defines it as an olah, defines that he has to bring an unblemished male, defines that he has to bring it to the door of the tabernacle (not perform it somewhere out in the camp), l’r’tsono for the purpose of accepting it at his hands.

It’s important that these are all definitions, the klal. A Jewish court can’t start a case unless the klal applies. But it can’t convict somebody on the klal, only on the prat, the details which are probably in perfect aspect. This is crucial in Exodus 21-22.

What this means for offerings is that what the individual does when bringing a sacrifice is not punishable. Until his offering meets the definition, which starts with min-ha-behemah in verse 2, what he does is not defined as bringing a sacrifice. Fix your mind on seeing imperfect as a definition for whether a case exists, and perfect aspect as an action that a court can rule on, and you will see how few cases came into court about sacrifices.