אִם H0518a
Conditional particle: if, or, whether; also concessive (though) and asseverative (surely) in oaths
One of the most versatile logical connectors in Biblical Hebrew, 'im functions primarily as the conditional 'if' that introduces nearly every protasis in the Old Testament. Beyond conditionality, it branches into disjunction ('or,' especially in paired 'im...'im constructions), indirect questions ('whether'), and even rhetorical force. In oath formulas it carries an implicit negation — 'if I do this' meaning 'I surely will not' — a usage preserved in Arabic 'in and Aramaic 'en. Its 922 occurrences touch virtually every genre of biblical prose and poetry.
6. asseverative: surely, rather — Asseverative 'surely' in oath formulas (1x at Gen 15:4), where 'im carries implicit self-imprecation: 'if I do X [may God punish me],' meaning 'I surely will not.' German nur ('only') and Spanish que hint at the restrictive-emphatic flavor. This idiomatic oath usage is well attested across Semitic languages. 1×
AR["إِنَّمَا"]·ben["যদি"]·DE["nur"]·EN["rather"]·FR["plutôt"]·heb["אם"]·HI["हअन"]·ID["jika"]·IT["rather"]·jav["sanget"]·KO["다만"]·PT["se"]·RU["если"]·ES["que"]·SW["isipokuwa"]·TR["eğer"]·urd["صرف"]
▼ 5 more senses below
Senses
1. conditional particle: if — The dominant conditional use (827x), introducing protases with imperfect or perfect verbs. Spanish si, French si, and German wenn/ob all converge on the conditional reading. Key passages like Gen 4:7 ('if you do well') and Gen 13:16 ('if one could count the dust') show both real and hypothetical conditions. The cross-linguistic uniformity here confirms a single stable sense. 827×
AR["إن","إِذَا","إِنْ","إِنْ-"]·ben["আমি-বলেছি","যদি","যদি-"]·DE["ob-","wenn-"]·EN["if","if-"]·FR["si","si-"]·heb["אם"]·HI["अगर-","यदि","यदि-"]·ID["jika","jika-"]·IT["se","se-"]·jav["bilih-","menawi","menawi-"]·KO["만약","만일","만일-"]·PT["Se","Se-","que","se","se-"]·RU["если","если-"]·ES["Si","que","si","si-"]·SW["Kama","Kwamba-kutoka","akiweza-","ikiwa","kama","kwamba-huta","ukienda-","ukifanya-"]·TR["Eğer","Eğer-","eğer","eğer-"]·urd["اگر"]
2. disjunctive particle: or — Disjunctive 'or' (82x), presenting alternatives or choices. German oder and Spanish o clearly mark this as distinct from the conditional. Paired constructions 'im...'im ('whether...or') appear in Gen 24:21 and Gen 37:32, where the speaker poses two possibilities. The Arabic cognate 'am similarly serves as a disjunctive particle, confirming the Semitic pedigree of this usage. 82×
AR["أم","أَم","أَمْ","أَمْ-","أَوْ","إنْ-"]·ben["অথবা","অথবা-","কি","কি-","যদি","যদি-"]·DE["bist-oder-","ob","oder","oder-"]·EN["or","or-"]·FR["ou","ou-"]·heb["אם","אם-"]·HI["यदि","या","या-"]·ID["apakah","apakah-","atau","atau-"]·IT["o","o-"]·jav["manawi-","menapa","menapa-","menawi-","punapa","punapa-","utawi","utawi-"]·KO["(의문)짐이라도","또는","또는-","만약","만일","만일-","아니면","인지","혹시","혹은"]·PT["ou","ou-","se","se-"]·RU["или","или-"]·ES["acaso-","o","o-"]·SW["au","au-"]·TR["eğer-","mı","mı-","veya","veya-","ya-da","yoksa-"]·urd["کیا","یا","یا-"]
3. indirect question: whether — Indirect-question 'whether' (8x), introducing uncertainty after verbs of knowing or testing. German ob and Spanish si capture this epistemic nuance well. Exod 19:13 and Lev 27:26 show contexts where the outcome is genuinely unknown to the speaker. This overlaps with the conditional but is syntactically distinct in embedding under cognitive verbs. 8×
AR["إِمْ-","إِنْ","إِنْ-"]·ben["যদি-"]·DE["ob-","wenn"]·EN["whether","whether-"]·FR["si","si-"]·heb["אם","אם-"]·HI["अगर-","चाहे-"]·ID["apakah","baik-","domba","entah-","lembu","maupun-"]·IT["se","se-"]·jav["menawi-"]·KO["만약","만약-","만일","만일-"]·PT["se","se-"]·RU["будь-то-","если","если-"]·ES["sea","si","si-"]·SW["au-ni","iwe","iwe-","kama","kama-","kama-ni"]·TR["eger","eğer-","ister-"]·urd["اگر-ہو","خواہ","چاہے","چاہے-"]
4. rhetorical interrogative marker — Rhetorical interrogative marker (3x), expecting a strong affirmative or negative answer. The glosses 'indeed' and 'is it not?' reflect this force. Num 17:13 and Job 6:13 show the particle pressing the hearer toward an obvious conclusion, a pragmatic extension of the conditional into discourse-level persuasion. 3×
AR["أَلَيْسَ","أَمْ","هَلْ"]·ben["কি","কি-না"]·DE["der-wenn","tatsaechlich","wenn"]·EN["indeed","is-it-not","was-it"]·FR["en-effet","si"]·heb["אם","ה-אם"]·HI["क्या","या"]·ID["Bukankah","apakah","terhadap"]·IT["invero","se"]·jav["punapa"]·KO["(의문사)-정녕","만약","아닌가"]·PT["não","ou","porventura"]·RU["на","неужели","разве"]·ES["¿Acaso"]·SW["je"]·TR["-mi","-mı","mı-"]·urd["کیا"]
5. concessive: though, even if — Concessive 'though' or 'even if' (1x at 1Sam 15:17), where the condition is granted rather than questioned. Samuel's rebuke 'though you are small in your own eyes' acknowledges the premise while overriding it. This rare use parallels Arabic 'in with concessive force in classical rhetoric. 1×
AR["إِنْ-"]·ben["যদি"]·DE["though-"]·EN["though-"]·FR["though-"]·heb["אם"]·HI["अगर-"]·ID["meskipun-"]·IT["though-"]·jav["sanajan-"]·KO["비록-"]·PT["se-"]·RU["хотя-"]·ES["si-"]·SW["ingawa-"]·TR["eğer"]·urd["اگرچہ"]
BDB / Lexicon Reference
אִם conj. (= Aramaic ܐܶܢ if [and in ܐܶܠܴܐ, אֶלָּא = ܐܶܢ ܠܴܐ if not, except], Arabic إِنْ if [and in إِلَّا = إِنْ لَا if not, except], Ethiopic እመ if = מָה + אִם (إِنْ + مَا) [and in አላ if not, but], Assyrian šumma; SAr. hm; Arabic أَمْ (Lat. an?) = أَاِمْ, cf. הַאִם: v. NöM p. 208, ZMG 1886, p. 739; WAG i. § 367 e 𝔗Onk Jon. אִם, 𝔗Hag אין.) 1. hypoth. part. if. a. construction (v. more fully…