This is the law of him in whom is the plague of leprosy, whose hand is not able to get that which pertaineth to his cleansing.

This is the law of him in whom is the plague of leprosy, who is not able to get that which pertaineth to his cleansing.

This is the sacrifice of a leper, that is not able to have all things that appertain to his cleansing.

This is the law for him in whom is the sore of leprosy, whose hand cannot get what is regularly prescribed in his cleansing.

This is a law of him in whom is a plague of leprosy, whose hand reacheth not to his cleansing.'

This is the law of him in whom is the plague of leprosy, whose hand is not able to get that which pertains to his cleansing.

This is the law for the man who has the disease of the leper on him, and who is not able to get that which is necessary for making himself clean.

This is the law of him in whom is the plague of leprosy, whose means suffice not for that which pertaineth to his cleansing.

This is the sacrifice of a leper, who is not able to obtain all of the things concerning his cleansing.

Ita est lex ejus in quo fuerat plaga leprae, cujus manus non poterat apprehendere mundationem sui.

This [is] the (k) law [of him] in whom [is] the plague of leprosy, whose hand is not able to get [that which pertaineth] to his cleansing.
(k) This order is appointed for the poor man.

This is the law of him in whom is the plague of leprosy,.... The former part of the chapter contains an account of the laws, rites, and ceremonies of a leper who was able to bear the expenses them: this latter part respects such laws, rites, and ceremonies, that belonged to him:
whose hand is not able to get that which pertaineth to his cleansing; as the three lambs and three tenth deals of fine flour, and therefore one lamb, and one tenth deal of fine flour, and two turtles or two young pigeons, were admitted of in the room of them, in consideration of his poverty. The Jewish canons respecting the cases of a poor and rich leper are these (c): if a poor leper offers the sacrifice of a rich man, it is very well; but if a rich leper offers the sacrifice of a poor one, it is not sufficient; if a poor leper offers his sacrifice and he becomes rich, or if when rich, and he afterwards becomes poor, all goes after the sin offering; that is, as they (d) explain it, if a man when he offers his sin offering is poor, and so his offering is of a turtle or pigeon, though he should become rich he must finish the offering of the poor, by bringing for a burnt offering one of the fowls; and so if he was rich, and offered the sin offering out of the lambs, though he should become poor, he must offer the burnt offering of the same; but the trespass offering is generally pitched upon as the rule in which the poor and the rich were equal: and Maimonides (e) says, all goes after the trespass offering; as if at the time of slaying the trespass offering he is rich, he must finish the offering of a rich man, but if poor he must finish the offering of a poor man: it may be observed that a great deal of notice is taken of a leper, and strict inquiry made into the nature of leprosy, and the various signs of it given; and a great deal to do about the cleansing and expiation of him; all which shows what notice God takes of leprous sinners, and what a diligent scrutiny should be made into the evil nature of sin, and what a provision God has made for the cleansing and atonement of sinners by the blood and sacrifice of his Son; which is here typified by all sorts of offerings, the sin offering, the trespass offering, the burnt offering, and the meat offering.
(c) Misn. Negaim, c. 14. sect. 11, 12. (d) Maimon. & Bartenora in ib. (e) Hilchot Mechosre Capharah, c. 5. sect. 9.