Numbers 27

## Summary Numbers 27 records two connected legal actions: the daughters of Zelophehad petition Moses, Eleazar, the leaders and the congregation for their father's inheritance since he died leaving no sons, and Yahweh institutes a permanent inheritance law for such cases. The chapter closes with Yahweh instructing Moses to view the land before his death and to publicly commission Joshua as his successor by the laying on of hands. ## Key words - *tik.Ravnah* ("they drew near", H7126G) — qal narrative verb, feminine plural: marks the daughters as the grammatical subject taking formal legal initiative, not passive petitioners. - *yigga.ra'* ("it will be withdrawn/diminished", H1639) — niphal (passive) imperfect: the father's name is the grammatical patient of an action with no stated agent, framing the loss of lineage as something that happens to the name rather than something someone does. - *na.cha.lah* ("inheritance", H5159) — feminine singular construct noun, repeated throughout vv.7–11 as the key legal term structuring the entire statute of succession. - *ru.ach* ("a spirit", H7307G) — feminine singular noun without article in v.18, describing Joshua as "a man in whom [is] a spirit," a qualification attached to him before any office is conferred. - *sa.makh* ("he laid", H5564) — qal sequential perfect in v.23, the physical act (hands, *yadav* H3027G) by which Moses transmits commissioned authority to Joshua "as Yahweh had spoken by the hand of Moses." ## What the text says The chapter opens with a genealogical chain of construct nouns (*bat...ben...ben...ben*, "daughter of... son of... son of...") tracing Zelophehad back four generations to Joseph, a construction that legally establishes the daughters' claim by lineage before any speech occurs. Their direct speech (vv.3–4) uses first-person plural suffixes ("our father," *avinu*) and culminates in an imperative, *tenah* ("give!", H5414G) with paragogic *he* for emphasis, addressed to Moses. Yahweh's reply in v.7 opens with the adjective *ken* ("right", H3651A) validating the women's speech, then uses the emphatic construction *naton titten* — infinitive absolute plus finite verb of the same root H5414G — to stress certainty: "you shall surely give." This absolute-infinitive intensification recurs nowhere else as strongly in the chapter, marking the case's legal weight. The succession law (vv.8–11) is built as a graduated conditional chain: daughter, then brothers, then father's brothers, then nearest kinsman (*she'ero haqqarov*, H7607/H7138), each introduced by *ve'im* ("and if there is no...", H0518A + H0369). The final clause labels this "a statute of judgment" (*chuqqat mishpat*, H2708/H4941G), formalizing it as binding law rather than a one-time ruling. In vv.12–23, the same root H5975G (qal "to stand," hiphil "to make stand") appears for both Moses viewing the land and for Joshua being made to stand before Eleazar and the congregation, linking Moses' departure and Joshua's installation through shared vocabulary. ## Differences between versions In verse 4, the Hebrew phrases the daughters' concern as a rhetorical question, *lammah yigga'ra'* ("why should it be withdrawn?"), while the LXX renders it as a prohibitive request, *mē exaleiphthētō* ("let it not be wiped out"), a jussive/imperative construction rather than an interrogative. The Vulgate diverges structurally around verses 4–7: rather than reproducing the daughters' full argument and Yahweh's separate reply as two speeches, the Vulgate compresses and displaces content, placing "Moses referred their case to the LORD's judgment" at verse 4 (where Hebrew and LXX instead give the daughters' request) and delaying God's verdict citation to verse 6. In verse 21, the Hebrew *ha'urim* ("the Urim", H0224) and the LXX *tōn dēlōn* ("the things revealed/manifest") both name the specific oracular instrument of inquiry, whereas the Vulgate generalizes this as "Eleazar the priest will consult the LORD" without a corresponding term for the Urim.