Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Leviticus 13:6

And the priest shall look on him again the seventh day: and, behold, [if] the plague [be] somewhat dark, [and] the plague spread not in the skin, the priest shall pronounce him clean: it [is but] a scab: and he shall wash his clothes, and be clean.

Somewhat dark – Rather, somewhat dim: that is, if the spot is dying away.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

If the plague be somewhat dark; which is opposed to the white colour of the leprosy. But the word may be rendered, have contracted itself, or, be restrained or confined to its former place and bigness; and thus the opposition seems to be most clear to the spreading of itself, mentioned both in the foregoing verse, and in the following clause.

He shall wash his clothes, though it was no leprosy, but a scab only; to teach us, that no sin was so small which did not need to be washed by the blood of Christ, which was the thing designed by all these washings.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

And the priest shall look on him again the seventh day,…. On the second seventh day, at the end of a fortnight from his being first presented to him, and shut up:

and, behold, [if] the plague [be] somewhat dark; the spot be not so bright, or so white as it was at first; though Aben Ezra observes, that indeed many wise men say, that is as , signifying dark, and the testimony or proof they bring is Ge 27:1 but according to my opinion, adds he, the word is the reverse of , to spread; and the sense is, if the plague does not spread itself in another place; and so some translators render it “contracted”, or “contracts itself” h: and this seems best to agree with what follows:

and the plague spread not in the skin; but is as it was when first viewed, after waiting fourteen days, and making observations on it:

the priest shall pronounce him clean; that is, from leprosy, otherwise there was an impure disorder on him, a scabious one:

it [is] but a scab; which is the name, Jarchi says, of a clean plague or stroke, that is, in comparison of the leprosy, otherwise such cannot be said with any propriety to be clean. Ben Gersom better explains it, it is a white scab, but not of the kind of leprosy, although it is found as the whiteness of the bright spot; but there are not seen in it the signs of leprosy, the hair is not turned white, nor has the plague increased:

and he shall wash his clothes, and be clean; for seeing he was obliged to be shut up, as Jarchi observes, he is called unclean, and stood in need of dipping, that is, his body and his clothes into water; so the people of God, though they are justified by the righteousness of Christ, and are pronounced clean through it, yet since they have their spots and scabs, they have need to have their conversation garments continually washed in the blood of the Lamb.

h “contracta est”, Junius Tremellius, Piscator “contraxerit sese”, some in Vatablus.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

(6) And the priest shall look on him again.If, on further examination at the end of another week, the priest finds that the bright spot looks darker, and that it has not spread, he is to pronounce the patient clean, and set him at liberty, since it was simply an ordinary scurf; but though not leprous, the eruption indicated some impurity in his blood, and he had therefore to wash his garments.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

6. Pronounce him clean Ceremonially pure, though he may have other loathsome diseases, and be morally vile. The action of the priest, literally translated, is, to make him clean, as in the third verse he is to make the leper unclean. In both cases the action is declarative and not causative or judicial. This suggests the proper meaning of the apostolic binding and loosing in Mat 16:19, and the remitting and retaining of sins in Joh 20:23.

He shall wash his clothes “As the very cause that had led to his being suspected showed that there was some impurity in his blood, a slight purification was prescribed, the moral effect of which would naturally be to teach that the very appearance of evil is an adequate ground of humiliation to any one that fears God.” Bush.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments