Back to the Original

And it was when the king of Ai saw, they hastened and rose up early, and the men of the city went out against Israel to battle, he and all his people, at a time appointed, before the plain; but he did not know that there was an ambush against him behind the city.  Joshua 8:14  Chabad

Ambush – As you recall, in the previous verse the word for “ambush” is ʿāqab (see Today’s Word, September 19, 2025).  We noticed the obvious connection to Jacob and wondered if the author had more in mind than a simple military tactic.  Now, in the very next verse, the text returns to the usual word for “ambush,” i.e., ʾōreb, a group gathered for ambush, from the root ārab, “to lie in wait.”  Here is the Hebrew text with the highlighted word:

וַיְהִ֞י כִּרְא֣וֹת מֶֽלֶךְ־הָעַ֗י וַֽיְמַֽהֲר֡וּ וַיַּשְׁכִּ֡ימוּ וַיֵּֽצְא֣וּ אַנְשֵֽׁי־הָעִ֣יר לִקְרַֽאת־יִ֠שְׂרָאֵ֠ל לַמִּלְחָמָ֞ה ה֧וּא וְכָל־עַמּ֛וֹ לַמּוֹעֵ֖ד לִפְנֵ֣י הָֽעֲרָבָ֑ה וְהוּא֙ לֹ֣א יָדַ֔ע כִּֽי־אוֹרֵ֥ב ל֖וֹ מֵאַֽחֲרֵ֥י הָעִֽיר

The fact that the alternative, ʿāqab, is used only once raises some interesting questions.  Why would the author choose to use a different word in just this one verse (v. 13) when he clearly uses the common word in all other cases?  Noticing this unusual construction, we are reminded of other occasions when an alternative word shows up just once.  For example, consider the opening of Leviticus.  In Leviticus 1:2, the word for “man” is the typical “adam” (אָדָ֗ם):

“Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: When a man from [among] you brings a sacrifice to the Lord . . .”  – Leviticus 1:2  Chabad

But in Leviticus 2:1 (“And if a person brings a meal offering to the Lord . . .”), the word isn’t adam.  It’s nephesh (וְנֶ֗פֶשׁ).  In 4:1, we find nephesh, but we return to adam in verse 13:2, and 13:9.  Why?  Why do we introduce the idea of sacrifice with adam, then shift to nephesh, then use adam only occasionally?  This isn’t a mistake and it is certainly not a synonym substitution.  Nephish and adam have linguistic crossovers, but they do not have identical meanings.  What nuances required the author to make these changes; changes that are more or less invisible to the English reader?  Have we left something important out of our translations when we systematically treat “man” and “person” (adam and nephesh) as the same?

Interestingly, the Jewish commentators acknowledge this shift, but don’t provide any reasons for it.  Perhaps it’s a demarcation on topical changes.  Perhaps it’s about gender.  Perhaps there are social issues we are unaware of these 3000 years later.  Or perhaps you have an insight that we all need to hear.  Something unusual is happening in these verses in Joshua and Leviticus, and I for one would like to know why.

Topical Index:  adam, nephesh, Joshua 8:13, Leviticus 1:2, Leviticus 2:1